Asbestos Cases A–Z: F

126 decisions whose name begins with F.

• Fowler v. Akzo Nobel Chemicals, Inc. (New Jersey Superior Court, Appellate Division, 2021). The Appellate Division reversed the judgment against Union Carbide, vacated the $2,380,000 verdict for plaintiff, and remanded for a new trial because of erroneous jury instructions on the duty to warn and on medical causation.
• Fowler v. Akzo Nobel Chemicals, Inc. (New Jersey Superior Court, Appellate Division, 2017). The Appellate Division reversed the trial court's summary judgment for Union Carbide, finding enough evidence for a jury to infer Edenfield was exposed to Union Carbide's asbestos, and ruled for the plaintiff widow.
• Fox v. Alcoa, Inc. (Washington Court of Appeals, 1st Division, 2005). The Court of Appeals affirmed the defense verdict for Alcoa, holding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to enter default or give an adverse inference instruction as sanctions for Alcoa's discovery violations, so plaintiffs Dawna and Travis Fox lost.
• Francis v. Union Carbide Corporation (Louisiana Court of Appeals, 4th Circuit, 2013). The appeals court reversed the trial court's summary judgment for Continental Insurance Company (Pendleton Shipyard's insurer) and remanded for further proceedings, ruling for plaintiff Rendon Francis.
• Frank v. Honeywell International Inc. (U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Pennsylvania, 2015). The court granted non-party expert Dr. Arthur Frank's motion and quashed the subpoena served by Honeywell (joined by Ford), because they had not shown a need for the documents or deposition.
• Franklin v. Usx Corp. (California Court of Appeal, 1st Appellate District, 3rd Division, 2001). The Court of Appeal reversed the judgment against USX Corporation, holding USX was not the successor in interest to Western Pipe & Steel, so the Franklins' verdict of over $5 million could not stand against USX.
• Frastaci v. Vapor Corporation (California Court of Appeal, 1st Appellate District, 4th Division, 2007). The Court of Appeal affirmed the judgment dismissing the survivors' state tort claims against locomotive manufacturer Vapor Corporation, holding them preempted by the Locomotive Boiler Inspection Act; Vapor won and the plaintiffs lost.
• Frazier v. Jackson (U.S. Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit, 2014). The Sixth Circuit affirmed summary judgment for the defendant attorneys and law firms, holding that Donna Frazier's legal malpractice suit was filed too late under Tennessee's one-year limitations period.
• Freitas v. AO Smith Water Products Corporation (Rhode Island Superior Court, 2024). The court granted defendant PBV Inc.'s motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction, ruling against the plaintiff estate co-executors.
• French v. AW Chesterton Company (U.S. District Court, Northern District of Ohio, 2017). The court granted Green Tweed & Company's motion to strike Donald French's deposition testimony identifying its Palmetto product and its motion for summary judgment, dismissing all claims against Green Tweed and ruling against plaintiff Charlene French.
• French v. AW Chesterton Company (U.S. District Court, Northern District of Ohio, 2016). The court denied the Frenches' motion to remand, holding that GE and CBS/Westinghouse properly removed the case under the federal officer removal statute and did so on time.
• Frieder v. Long Is. RR (New York Supreme Court, 2013). The court denied the Long Island Railroad and Metropolitan Transportation Authority's motion for summary judgment, finding the LIRR owed Mr. Frieder a duty of care and that fact questions remained on exposure, so the plaintiffs prevailed on the motion.
• Friedman v. AI Friedman, LP (New York Supreme Court, 2011). The trial court denied defendant DAP Inc.'s motion for summary judgment in its entirety, so plaintiff Roberta Friedman's claims against DAP go forward.
• Friedman v. AI Friedman, LP (New York Supreme Court, 2010). The trial court denied defendant United Gilsonite Laboratories' motion for summary judgment, so plaintiff Roberta Friedman's claims against it proceed.
• Friedman v. AO Smith Corp. (New York Supreme Court, 2013). The court granted Graybar Electric Co.'s motion for summary judgment and dismissed the action and cross-claims against it, while the case continued against the remaining defendants.
• Friedman v. AO Smith Wter Prod. Co. (New York Supreme Court, 2014). The court denied defendant Appleton Electric LLC's motion for summary judgment, finding a triable issue whether Appleton's fiber fillers contained asbestos, so plaintiffs Stanley and Phyllis Friedman prevailed on the motion.
• Froud v. Celotex Corp. (Illinois Supreme Court, 1983). The Illinois Supreme Court reversed the appellate court and affirmed the circuit court's dismissal of the plaintiffs' common law punitive damages claims against the asbestos defendants, including Celotex, because those claims did not survive the decedents' deaths under the Survival Act.
• Froud v. Celotex Corporation (Illinois Appellate Court, 1st District, 1982). The appellate court reversed the trial court's dismissal of the punitive damages counts and remanded, ruling for the plaintiff administrators and against the asbestos defendants including Celotex.
• Fullen v. 3M Company (U.S. District Court, District of Maryland, 2019). The court granted Velan Valve's unopposed summary judgment motion on cross-claims, denied plaintiffs' motion to strike Lockheed's late-designated fact witness, and granted Lockheed's motion, ruling that plaintiffs waived English law and Maryland law applies.
• Fuller v. AW Chesterton, Inc. (U.S. District Court, Southern District of Illinois, 2009). The district court remanded Barbara Fuller's wrongful death suit against Electro-Motive Diesel and others to the Madison County, Illinois circuit court, rejecting Electro-Motive's bankruptcy-based removal on permissive abstention and equitable remand grounds.
• Fuller-Austin Insulation Co. v. Bilder (Texas Court of Appeals, 9th District, 1998). The court of appeals affirmed most of the judgment for Kay and Frank Bilder against Fuller-Austin Insulation, but sustained Fuller's points on the settlement credit and prejudgment interest and remanded for recalculation of the judgment.
• Funk v. AW Chesterton, Inc. (U.S. District Court, Southern District of Illinois, 2009). The district court remanded Tammy Funk's wrongful death and survival claims to Illinois state court under permissive abstention and equitable remand, rejecting Detroit Diesel's bankruptcy-based removal.
• Fuoco v. 3M Company (U.S. District Court, District of New Jersey, 2015). The court granted Warren Pumps, LLC's motion for summary judgment against plaintiff Josephine Fuoco, finding no evidence that Mr. Fuoco was exposed to asbestos from a Warren pump.
• Fusaro v. Porter-Hayden Co. (New York Supreme Court, 1989). The trial court denied the motions by newly added defendants Asbestospray, APM, ACOA and Dana to dismiss the amended complaint as untimely, and denied the motions by H & A, Spraycraft, National Gypsum and Armstrong to strike the successor-liability allegations, so the plaintiff estate won and the amended complaint was deemed served.
• Fusco v. Asbestos Corporation (U.S. District Court, District of New Jersey, 2011). The court granted the plaintiffs' motion and remanded the case to the Superior Court of New Jersey because the defendants failed to establish diversity or alienage jurisdiction; the plaintiffs' request for costs and fees was denied.
• Fusco v. Johns-Manville Products Corp. (U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit, 1981). The Fifth Circuit affirmed summary judgment for Johns-Manville and the other manufacturers, holding Albert Fusco's asbestos injury suit was barred by the statute of limitations.