Newsletter RSS

Mealey's Asbestos

  • November 05, 2025

    Expert Opposes Sanction For Asbestos-Talc Study Email Destruction

    NEWPORT NEWS, Va. — There was no way to know that defendants would want an expert’s emails about a study, more than three years before the filing of a trade libel case, and even if the originals were deleted, Pecos River Talc LLC never investigated whether it could obtain the evidence through other means, an asbestos-talc expert tells a federal judge in Virginia in opposing sanctions for evidence spoliation.

  • November 04, 2025

    Plaintiff/Defense Experts Testifying Since Jan. 1, 2002

    The following is a listing of plaintiff and defense experts who testified in trials covered by Mealey's Litigation Report: Asbestos since Jan. 1, 2002.

  • November 04, 2025

    Special Master: Hospital Must Comply With Subpoena On Mesothelioma-Talc Study

    NEW YORK — A medical provider already ordered to comply with a subpoena seeking information related to the identities of individuals in expert Jacqueline Moline’s mesothelioma-talc studies cannot avoid compliance with an identical subpoena in a different case, a special master in New York said in recommending that the court grant a motion to compel.

  • November 04, 2025

    Judge Awards Insured $348,000 In Asbestos Indemnity Coverage Case

    NEW ORLEANS — A federal judge in Louisiana, declining to reconsider his decision holding an insurer liable for defense costs in an asbestos case, said he would award $348,000 for breach of contract but rejected arguments that the insurer’s conduct constituted bad faith or misrepresentations about the policy.

  • November 03, 2025

    Oil Company Disputes Need For Rehearing In Appeal Of Dismissed Asbestos Case

    JACKSON, Miss. — An oil company told a Mississippi appellate court that a woman merely rehashes already rejected arguments about why she didn’t pursue her asbestos personal injury case that was pending for nine years and isn’t entitled to reconsideration of a ruling affirming dismissal for lack of prosecution while she litigated parallel bankruptcy-related issues.

  • November 03, 2025

    Woman Disputes Need For Stay During Appeal Of Asbestos Case Remand Ruling

    LOUISVILLE, Ky. — A woman tells a federal judge in Kentucky that General Electric Co. is unlikely to prevail on its claims of entitlement to federal jurisdiction and would not be harmed by allowing the case to proceed while it appeals a remand order.

  • October 31, 2025

    Woman To N.C. Top Court: Ignore Attempt To Undo Workers’ Comp Case Revival

    RALEIGH, N.C. — Neither the results of a bellwether trial nor a consent decree governing how those asbestos cases should proceed binds a workers’ compensation case filed during the pendency of the trial, a widow tells the North Carolina Supreme Court in urging it to deny a petition challenging a ruling allowing her to present evidence.

  • October 31, 2025

    J&J Appeals After New Trial Effort Denied In $25M Asbestos-Talc Case

    BRIDGEPORT, Conn. — Johnson & Johnson filed a notice that it would appeal a Connecticut verdict in which the judge awarded $10 million in punitive damages and declined to grant a new trial in the wake of a $25 million asbestos-talc verdict against the company and various related entities.

  • October 30, 2025

    Florida Jury Awards $20 Million In Asbestos-Talc Mesothelioma Case Against J&J

    FORT LAUDERDALE, Fla. — A Florida jury awarded $20 million to a man for his father’s death from mesothelioma caused by exposure to asbestos in Johnson & Johnson talc-based consumer products, sources told Mealey Publications.

  • October 30, 2025

    New York Top Court Turns Away Causation, Damages Challenge In Asbestos Case

    NEW YORK — The New York Court of Appeals denied a motion for leave to appeal in a case in which a lower court found that testimony from an industrial hygienist and thoracic surgeon satisfied the specific causation standard in New York and that precluding a boiler company from cross-examining the surgeon about exposures for which it had not established liability was not an error.

  • October 30, 2025

    Judge Dismisses Claims In Asbestos Liability Suit Against Guaranty Association

    BATON ROUGE, La. — After parties filed a status report indicating a resolution of claims, a Louisiana federal judge dismissed claims against certain of the parties in an asbestos liability suit against individuals and multiple entities, including the Louisiana Guaranty Association (LIGA), alleging that a man’s workplace exposure to asbestos particles resulted in his lung disease and death.

  • October 29, 2025

    Delaware Vice Chancellor Allows Challenge To Asbestos Trust Record Rules

    WILMINGTON, Del. — Companies frequently named in asbestos litigation likely have only one avenue to obtain information on plaintiffs’ asbestos trust claims crucial to the defense of suits and may continue with their challenge to trust rules that would preserve those filings for only a year, a Delaware vice chancellor said in denying a motion to dismiss.

  • October 27, 2025

    Kentucky Top Court: Carrier Liable For Workers’ Claim Despite Late Date Switch

    FRANKFORT, Ky. — Kentucky workers’ compensation law binds the carrier responsible for the last injurious exposure to asbestos in a workers’ compensation case, even though that insurer did not participate in previous proceedings as a result of a change to the last date of exposure, the Kentucky Supreme Court said in affirming a lower appellate court ruling.

  • October 27, 2025

    Asbestos Defendant Points To Recent Rulings In Defending Expert Subpoena

    NEW YORK — A trio of courts recently affirmed the validity of subpoenas targeting asbestos expert Jacqueline Moline, and those rulings support the conclusion that a previous effort to subpoena the expert was not sanctionable conduct, a defendant tells a federal judge in New York in opposing a hospital’s motion for sanctions.

  • October 23, 2025

    Judge Stays Remand Of Asbestos Case As GE Appeals Ruling

    LOUISVILLE, Ky. — A federal judge in Kentucky stayed a remand order and reopened an asbestos case against General Electric Co. for briefing on an emergency motion for stay as the defendant launched an appeal of the ruling finding that a disclaimer stripped federal officer issues from the case.

  • October 22, 2025

    Louisiana High Court Won’t Review Asbestos Liability Row With Guaranty Association

    NEW ORLEANS — The Louisiana Supreme Court denied a petition for a writ of certiorari filed by the Louisiana Insurance Guaranty Association (LIGA) seeking review of an appellate court’s reversal of a ruling granting summary judgment to an insurer and to LIGA but denying a motion for partial summary judgment filed by family members in a dispute over their deceased relative’s death purportedly from asbestos exposure.

  • October 21, 2025

    Judge: J&J Won’t Get Access To Asbestos Expert’s Lab But Can Depose Employee

    TRENTON, N.J. — Allowing Johnson & Johnson entities to inspect expert William Longo’s laboratory at this stage would be too burdensome, but they may depose one of his employees on past testing methods, the judge overseeing the federal multidistrict talc litigation in New Jersey said Oct. 20 in partially sustaining objections to a special master’s ruling.

  • October 21, 2025

    Plaintiff/Defense Experts Testifying Since Jan. 1, 2002

    The following is a listing of plaintiff and defense experts who testified in trials covered by Mealey's Litigation Report: Asbestos since Jan. 1, 2002.

  • October 21, 2025

    California Asbestos-Talc Bellwether Parties Brief General Causation

    LOS ANGELES — Plaintiffs in consolidated talc litigation in California told the judge that their experts’ general causation opinions involving talc and asbestos are supported by the evidence and regulatory bodies and should not be excluded.  Johnson & Johnson and Red River Talc LLC filed replies arguing that the plaintiffs are misrepresenting the situation.

  • October 21, 2025

    J&J Fails In Bid To Secure New Trial After $25M Asbestos-Talc Verdict

    BRIDGEPORT, Conn. — A Connecticut judge turned away challenges to expert testimony, jury instructions and a bevy of other issues in denying Johnson & Johnson entities’ request for a new trial or to set aside a $25 million asbestos-talc verdict.

  • October 20, 2025

    South Carolina Jury Finds For J&J In Asbestos-Talc Case

    COLUMBIA, S.C. — A South Carolina jury returned a verdict for Johnson & Johnson entities in an asbestos-talc mesothelioma trial, finding that the companies were not negligent or strictly liable for the man’s disease .

  • October 17, 2025

    Family Secures Summary Judgment On Mesothelioma Diagnosis, Asbestos As Cause

    NEW ORLEANS — The family of a man who died of mesothelioma is entitled to summary judgment on the issue of his diagnosis and that asbestos exposure causes the disease, but the defendants may continue to challenge specific causation, a federal judge in Louisiana said Oct. 16.

  • October 16, 2025

    Asbestos Screening Firm Judgment Case To Remain In Federal Court, Judge Says

    MISSOULA, Mont. — A federal judge in Montana denied the United States’ request for remand of a portion of a writ of execution in a case against a Montana asbestos screening firm, saying the government’s “unusual and conflicting arguments” did not persuade him to alter the established plan for resolving the case.

  • October 15, 2025

    Judge Won’t Remand Asbestos Case After Dismissal Of Federal Claims

    NEW ORLEANS — Dismissal of the grounds that gave rise to removal of an asbestos case does not strip a federal court of jurisdiction, and nothing requires the court to decline to exercise supplemental jurisdiction, a federal judge in Louisiana said in denying a motion to sever and remand.

  • October 15, 2025

    Judge Again Remands Goodyear Asbestos Case, This Time With Attorney Fees

    NEW ORLEANS — A federal judge in Louisiana once again remanded an asbestos case involving Goodyear Tire and Rubber Co. and awarded $1,000 in costs and attorney fees after finding no objectively reasonable basis for the second removal.