Asbestos Cases A–Z: C

317 decisions whose name begins with C.

• Clemmer v. John Crane, Inc. (California Court of Appeal, 1st Appellate District, 4th Division, 2008). The Court of Appeal vacated the part of the new-trial order that required the Clemmers to accept a remittitur, and limited the new trial to apportionment of liability, so the jury's liability finding against John Crane stood; the cross-appeal was dismissed as moot.
• Clemmer v. Thorpe Insulation Company (California Court of Appeal, 1st Appellate District, 4th Division, 2009). The Court of Appeal affirmed the judgment against Thorpe Insulation Company, holding the evidence supported the jury's finding that Thorpe's asbestos insulation exposed Clemmer, so the Clemmers won and Thorpe lost.
• Clephas v. Garlock, Inc. (Kentucky Court of Appeals, 2004). The Court of Appeals vacated the judgment entered on the jury verdict for Garlock and remanded for a new trial, because Garlock's expert Dr. Sawyer's undisclosed medical and causation opinions should not have been admitted; the Clephases won this appeal.
• Clevenger v. John Crane, Inc. (Washington Court of Appeals, 1st Division, 2020). The Court of Appeals vacated the judgment for John Crane, Inc. entered on a defense jury verdict and remanded for a new trial, ruling for Era Clevenger because the proximate cause instruction was misleading and prejudicial.
• Click v. Owens-Corning Fiberglass Corp. (Texas Court of Appeals, 1995). The appeals court reversed the directed verdict for Owens-Corning Fiberglass and Pittsburgh Corning and remanded for trial, ruling that the Click family had presented enough circumstantial evidence that George Click was exposed to the companies' products.
• Clouse v. Associated Drywall Suppliers, Inc. (U.S. District Court, Western District of Kentucky, 2019). The court granted Michael Clouse's motion to remand his talc mesothelioma suit to Jefferson Circuit Court, rejecting Johnson & Johnson's bankruptcy-related removal, and denied all other pending motions as moot.
• Clutter v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp. (U.S. Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit, 1981). The Sixth Circuit reversed the district courts' rulings that the plaintiffs' claims were time-barred and remanded for a determination of when each plaintiff's disease manifested, favoring the plaintiffs Clutter, Dwiggins and McGreevey over the asbestos manufacturers.
• Coalition for Reasonable Regulation OF Naturally Occurring Substances v. California Air Resources Board (California Court of Appeal, 3rd Appellate District, 2004). The Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court's judgment upholding the Air Resources Board's 2000 regulation on asbestos-containing road-surfacing rock, rejecting the challenge by the mining and construction industry groups.
• Coates v. AC and S, Inc. (U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana, 1994). The court ruled before trial that pre-comparative-fault Louisiana law and virile-share apportionment governed the wrongful death claim, denied plaintiffs' per se unreasonably dangerous motion, admitted the OSHA and EPA publications, and denied Owens-Corning's motions on third-party medical payments, mental anguish and reverse bifurcation.
• Coates v. Ford Motor Company (Maryland Court of Special Appeals, 2020). The Court of Special Appeals affirmed the judgment for Ford Motor Company after retrial, rejecting the Coates estate's challenges to the denial of partial summary judgment, the denial of a new trial, and the refusal to apply res judicata or collateral estoppel.
• Cochran v. EI DuPont de Nemours (U.S. Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit, 1991). The Eleventh Circuit affirmed summary judgment for the coating manufacturers against ex-Navy sailor Jerry Cochran, holding maritime jurisdiction did not apply and Virginia's statute of limitations barred his claims, and affirmed the $22,118.07 costs award.
• Cockrum v. CH Murphy/clark-Ullman, Inc. (U.S. District Court, Western District of Washington, 2022). The court granted Cockrum's motion to remand to King County Superior Court, holding that Howmet failed to show North Coast was fraudulently joined, and awarded Cockrum attorney's fees and costs against Howmet.
• Cockrum v. Murphy (Washington Court of Appeals, 1st Division, 2024). Affirmed summary judgment dismissing the Cockrums' personal injury suit against Howmet Aerospace (Alcoa's successor), and denied Howmet's request for sanctions for a frivolous appeal.
• Coffin v. Ametek, Inc. (U.S. District Court, District of Maine, 2021). The district court denied Maine Central Railroad's motion for summary judgment on Victor Coffin's FELA claim, finding foreseeability of asbestos exposure and harm a jury question.
• Coffin v. Ametek, Inc. (U.S. District Court, District of Maine, 2020). The court denied Maine Central Railroad's and Honeywell's motions to exclude the plaintiff's expert witnesses Dr. Abraham (causation) and Dr. Ozonoff (state of the art), so the plaintiff Victor Coffin prevailed on the motions.
• Coffin v. Ametek, Inc. (U.S. District Court, District of Maine, 2020). The district court denied defendant Maine Central Railroad's motion for leave to implead the Maine Department of Transportation as a third-party defendant, so plaintiff Victor Coffin prevailed on the motion.
• Coffman v. Armstrong International, Inc. (Tennessee Supreme Court, 2021). The Tennessee Supreme Court reversed in part the Court of Appeals, reinstated the trial court's summary judgment for the equipment manufacturers on failure-to-warn claims about asbestos products made and sold by others, and remanded, so the Coffmans lost on this issue.
• Coffman v. Armstrong International, Inc. (Tennessee Court of Appeals, 2019). The Tennessee Court of Appeals vacated all the summary judgments the trial court had granted to Daniel International, John Crane and the equipment makers, so the Coffmans won on appeal, and it remanded the case for further proceedings.
• Coffman v. Dept. OF Rehab. & Corr. (Ohio Court of Appeals, 10th Appellate District, 2013). The court of appeals affirmed the Court of Claims' dismissal of inmate William Coffman's complaint against the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Correction for failure to state a claim, so the Department won.
• Coffman v. Keene Corp. (New Jersey Supreme Court, 1993). The New Jersey Supreme Court affirmed the Appellate Division, which had upheld the jury verdict for plaintiff George Coffman against Keene Corporation, holding that the jury was properly told to presume a warning would have been heeded.
• Cohen v. Air & Liquid Sys. Corp. (New York Supreme Court, 2023). The court granted plaintiff Daniel Cohen's motion for a joint trial of his case with the Valletti action, over the opposition of defendants Superior Lidgerwood Mundy Corporation and Blackmer Pump.
• Cohen v. American Biltrite (New York Supreme Court, 2018). The court largely denied Colgate-Palmolive's motion to preclude plaintiff's expert Dr. Webber, but barred any opinion on what the law requires or allows, without prejudice to objections at trial.
• Cohen v. American Biltrite Inc. (New York Supreme Court, New York County, 2018). The court granted in part the plaintiff's motion to preclude Colgate-Palmolive's expert, Dr. Brooke Mossman, from giving certain testimony, and otherwise denied it without prejudice to objections at trial.
• Cohen v. American Biltrite Inc. (New York Supreme Court, 2018). The court granted plaintiff Steven Cohen's motion in part, precluding evidence of what laws govern FDA regulation of talc and evidence that the FDA classified talc as "generally recognized as safe" or "generally regarded as safe", and otherwise denied the motion without prejudice to objections at trial; Colgate-Palmolive lost the ruling in part.
• Cohen v. American Biltrite Inc. (New York Supreme Court, 2018). The court denied Colgate-Palmolive's motion for summary judgment because it failed to meet its initial burden to show the absence of asbestos in its talc, and in any event plaintiff raised factual issues on causation.
• Cole v. Celotex Corp. (Louisiana Supreme Court, 1992). The Louisiana Supreme Court affirmed the court of appeal: pre-comparative-fault (virile share) law governed, the nine executive officers counted as nine separate shares, and the insurer INA's annual policies could be stacked, so INA owed each of the three plaintiff workers $135,000 plus interest.
• Cole v. Norfolk Southern Railway Company (Virginia Supreme Court, 2017). The Supreme Court of Virginia affirmed the circuit court's grant of Norfolk Southern's plea in bar, holding the 2000 release barred the executor's FELA lung cancer claim, so the estate lost.
• Coleman v. Anco Insulations, Inc. (U.S. District Court, Middle District of Louisiana, 2017). The magistrate judge granted in part and denied in part the Coleman plaintiffs' motion to compel Pilkington North America to produce a Rule 30(b)(6) corporate representative, granting topic 52 and topic 40 (pre-1972 only) and denying the general dust and post-employment topics.
• Coleman v. Anco Insulations, Inc. (U.S. District Court, Middle District of Louisiana, 2017). The magistrate judge granted the unopposed motion by defendant Pilkington North America to run destructive fiber burden testing on up to 50% of the decedent's pathology materials, against the plaintiffs.
• Coleman v. Anco Insulations, Inc. (U.S. District Court, Middle District of Louisiana, 2017). The magistrate judge granted the plaintiffs' motion to substitute Pamela Coleman and Jody Coleman Nolte for the deceased William Coleman and to file an amended complaint, over Pilkington North America's objection.
• Coleman v. Anco Insulations, Inc. (U.S. District Court, Middle District of Louisiana, 2017). The magistrate judge ordered the plaintiffs' heirs to file a new motion to substitute with a proposed amended complaint that properly alleges the citizenship of all parties, and to state whether the defendants consent.
• Coleman v. Anco Insulations, Inc. (U.S. District Court, Middle District of Louisiana, 2016). The court denied insurer Safety National's motion for summary judgment without prejudice as premature, because Pilkington had not yet had discovery on whether Safety National insured the plant.
• Collantes v. Elementis Chemicals, Inc. (California Court of Appeal, 2nd Appellate District, 7th Division, 2020). The Court of Appeal reversed the summary judgments for Union Carbide and Elementis, holding they had not shown that Collantes lacked sufficient evidence of exposure, and directed the trial court to deny their motions.
• Collin v. Calportland Company (California Court of Appeal, 3rd Appellate District, 2014). The court affirmed summary judgment for CalPortland and Kaiser Gypsum against plaintiff Collin, and reversed summary judgment for J-M Manufacturing and Formosa, so Collin's claims against them go forward.
• Collins v. Plant Insulation Company (California Court of Appeal, 1st Appellate District, 1st Division, 2010). The Court of Appeal reversed the judgment against Plant Insulation Company and remanded for a retrial limited to apportioning fault, with the Navy to be included among the entities to which fault may be allocated, so Plant won and the Collins family lost on that point.
• Colombo v. Johns-Manville Corp. (U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Pennsylvania, 1984). The court granted the United States' motion to dismiss Pittsburgh-Corning's third-party complaint on all claims except the sixth claim (negligence as vessel owner), which survived, and applied the same ruling to the Raymark and Eagle-Picher motions for leave to file similar complaints.
• Columbus Bd. of Edn. v. Armstrong World (Ohio Court of Appeals, 1993). The appeals court reversed summary judgment for Pfizer, finding the school board's claim accrued in 1981 and was timely, but affirmed summary judgment for Basic, Inc., because the amended complaint adding it did not relate back, and remanded.
• Colvin v. Eaton Corporation (Maryland Court of Special Appeals, 2019). The Court of Special Appeals reversed the circuit court's dismissal with prejudice of Carole Colvin's wrongful death and survival action against Eaton, PACCAR and others, ruling for Ms. Colvin, and remanded for a new discovery plan and scheduling order.
• Comardelle v. Pennsylvania General Ins. Co. (U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana, 2015). The district court granted Amchem's (Bayer CropScience's) motion and barred plaintiffs' expert Dr. Hammar from giving "every exposure" specific-causation testimony that Comardelle's mesothelioma was caused by Benjamin Foster 81-27 or any other particular exposure.
• Comardelle v. Pennsylvania General Insurance Company (U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana, 2015). The court granted Amchem's (Bayer CropScience) motion and excluded plaintiffs' expert Dr. Hammar's "every exposure" specific-causation testimony, including as to Benjamin Foster 81-27, while allowing his diagnosis and general-causation opinions.
• Comardelle v. Pennsylvania General Insurance Company (U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana, 2014). The court denied Union Carbide's motion to exclude plaintiffs' pathology expert Dr. Hammar and for summary judgment on causation, so plaintiffs' claims against Union Carbide continued.
• Comardelle v. Pennsylvania General Insurance Company (U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana, 2014). The court granted P2S, LLC's motions for summary judgment, dismissing with prejudice the plaintiffs' claims and the Avondale Interests' crossclaims against P2S, and dismissed P2S's alternative motion as moot.
• Comardelle v. Pennsylvania General Insurance Company (U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana, 2014). The court granted partial summary judgment to the Avondale executive officers and their insurers and dismissed plaintiffs' Article 2317 strict liability claims against them with prejudice.
• Comardelle v. Pennsylvania General Insurance Company (U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana, 2014). The court granted Avondale's (Huntington Ingalls') motion for partial summary judgment and dismissed with prejudice the plaintiffs' Louisiana Civil Code Articles 1821-1823 claims based on the insurance buy-back agreements.
• Comardelle v. Pennsylvania General Insurance Company (U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana, 2014). The court granted all defendants' motions for partial summary judgment and dismissed with prejudice the family's claims for bystander (Lejeune) damages for watching Comardelle's illness and death.
• Comardelle v. Pennsylvania General Insurance Company (U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana, 2014). The court denied plaintiff Comardelle's motion to remand, holding that Westinghouse (joined by Foster Wheeler and GE) properly removed the case to federal court under the federal officer removal statute.
• Combs v. Albert Kahn Associates, Inc. (Kentucky Court of Appeals, 2006). The Kentucky Court of Appeals affirmed summary judgment for Albert Kahn & Associates and Turner Construction, holding the Combses' lung cancer claims against them were time-barred.
• Commercial Union Ins. Co. v. Sepco Corp. (U.S. Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit, 1985). The Eleventh Circuit affirmed the district court's partial summary judgment for Sepco and the other insurers, holding that the injurious exposure theory governs the insurance policies and rejecting Commercial Union's manifestation theory.
• Commissioner of Insurance v. Integrity Insurance Company (New Jersey Superior Court, Appellate Division, 2012). The Appellate Division affirmed the liquidation court's disallowance of W.R. Grace's proofs of claim against the liquidated Integrity Insurance Company, so the Commissioner of Insurance prevailed and Grace lost.
• Conda v. Honeywell International, Inc. (Minnesota Court of Appeals, 2018). The Court of Appeals affirmed the judgment for Jenella Conda (trustee for the heirs of Ronald Conda) against Honeywell International, rejecting Honeywell's challenges to the expert testimony, the special-verdict form, the misconduct ruling and the fault reallocation.