Asbestos Cases A–Z: P

179 decisions whose name begins with P.

• Phelps v. CBS Corporation (U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York, 2021). The court granted Foster Wheeler's motion for summary judgment on all claims because plaintiff Phelps failed to show it had a duty to warn under maritime law, and administratively denied Foster Wheeler's four Daubert motions.
• Phelps v. CBS Corporation (U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York, 2020). The court granted in part and denied in part Crane Co.'s motions to exclude plaintiff's experts (excluding part of the lost-earnings and fringe-benefit testimony) and denied Crane Co.'s motion for summary judgment, so the estate's claim against Crane Co. goes forward.
• Phillips v. Abb Combustion Engineering, Inc. (U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana, 2013). The court denied, without prejudice, the motions for summary judgment by CenterPoint Energy and Associated Electric Cooperative seeking dismissal of Carol Phillips's claims as time-barred, because the choice-of-law issue was raised first in her opposition and was inadequately briefed.
• Phillips v. Abb Combustion Engineering, Inc. (U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana, 2013). The court denied Associated Electric Cooperative's Rule 12(e) motion for a more definite statement and granted its Rule 12(b)(6) motion, dismissing the Estate of Robert Lee Phillips as an improper party, while Carol Phillips's claims continued.
• Phillips v. Abb Combustion Engineering, Inc. (U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana, 2013). The court granted the motions of the City of Grand Island and Nebraska Public Power District to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction, dismissing the plaintiffs' claims against them.
• Phillips v. Exxon Chemical Louisiana, LLC (Louisiana Court of Appeals, 1st Circuit, 2023). The appeals court dismissed the plaintiffs' appeal from the judgment on the jury verdict for Exxon Mobil because the appeal was filed too late and the court lacked jurisdiction.
• Phillips v. Honeywell International Inc. (California Court of Appeal, 5th Appellate District, 2017). The Court of Appeal affirmed the judgment of about $5.88 million, including $3.5 million in punitive damages, for Phillips's wife and children against Honeywell (successor to Bendix), rejecting all of Honeywell's claims of error.
• Phillips v. Pneumo Abex LLC (U.S. District Court, Western District of North Carolina, 2016). The court denied the plaintiffs' motion for a new trial against Pneumo Abex LLC, leaving in place the jury verdict for Abex and Reddaway Manufacturing.
• Phillips v. Pneumo Abex, LLC (U.S. Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit, 2017). The Fourth Circuit affirmed the judgment for Pneumo Abex, holding the jury's special verdict was consistent and the denial of Phillips' new trial motion was proper.
• Phipps v. Copeland Corporation LLC (California Court of Appeal, 2nd Appellate District, 7th Division, 2021). The Court of Appeal affirmed the judgment for William and Linda Phipps against Copeland Corporation, upholding the 60 percent fault allocation, the denial of Copeland's new trial/remittitur motion, and the $25 million noneconomic damages award.
• Pichon v. Asbestos Defendants (Louisiana Court of Appeals, 4th Circuit, 2010). The Louisiana Court of Appeal affirmed summary judgment for Detroit Diesel Corporation, dismissing the Pichon family's asbestos claims against it; one judge dissented.
• Pickard v. Dap, Inc. (U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Missouri, 2014). The court rejected Union Carbide's claim that Missouri defendant Welco was fraudulently joined, found no removal jurisdiction, and remanded the case to the St. Louis City circuit court, a win for the plaintiffs.
• Pierce v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp. (Maryland Court of Appeals, 1983). The Court of Appeals of Maryland reversed the summary judgment for Johns-Manville and the other defendants and remanded, holding the estate's survival and wrongful death actions for lung cancer were not time-barred.
• Pierre v. Northrop Grumman Shipbuilding, Inc. (Louisiana Court of Appeals, 4th Circuit, 2012). The court of appeal affirmed the trial court's judgment sustaining the exceptions of no cause and no right of action and dismissing the intervention by Robin Lawyer and the Roussel law firm, so the St. Pierre Children and the defendants prevailed.
• Pifer v. Irwin Industrial Tool Co. (Maryland Court of Special Appeals, 2021). The Court of Special Appeals reversed the order excluding the Estate's eBay chalk samples, vacated the summary judgment for Irwin Industrial Tool Co., and remanded for further proceedings.
• Pike v. Dempster Industries, Inc. (U.S. District Court, Middle District of North Carolina, 2024). The court granted Defco, Inc.'s motion for summary judgment and dismissed the plaintiffs' claims, including punitive damages, against it because Mr. Pike's exposure to Defco pumps was too infrequent to show causation.
• Pine v. John Crane, Inc. (U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Pennsylvania, 2023). The court denied John Crane Inc.'s summary judgment motion on causation, granted it on non-pecuniary and punitive damages, and denied its motion to strike Lydia Pine's jury demand.
• Pinner v. Pinner (Maryland Court of Appeals, 2020). The Court of Appeals of Maryland affirmed the Court of Special Appeals, which had reversed the default judgment against Mona Pinner for lack of personal jurisdiction, so Mona won and her stepson Randy Pinner lost.
• Pinner v. Pinner (Maryland Court of Special Appeals, 2019). The appeals court vacated the roughly $100,000 default judgment against Mona Pinner for lack of personal jurisdiction and affirmed the dismissal of Randy Pinner's claims against her former attorneys, so Randy lost on both the appeal and the cross-appeal.
• Pira v. Air & Liquid Sys. Corp. (New York Supreme Court, 2024). The court denied defendant Steel Grip, Inc.'s motion for summary judgment in its entirety, so the estate's claims against Steel Grip continue.
• Pistone v. American Biltrite, Inc. (New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division, 2nd Dept., 2021). The Appellate Division reversed the order granting summary judgment to American Biltrite, Inc. and Mannington Mills, Inc., and denied their motions, so the plaintiffs' claims against them continue.
• Pistone v. American Biltrite, Inc. (New York Supreme Court, 2018). The trial court granted summary judgment to Mannington Mills and American Biltrite, dismissing Victoria Pistone's complaint and all cross-claims against them, because she did not show that chrysotile causes peritoneal mesothelioma or that she was exposed to enough of it from their products.
• Pitman v. Crane Co. (U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana, 2013). The court granted June Pitman's motion to remand to Orleans Parish civil court, finding Georgia-Pacific failed to show the Louisiana defendants Eagle and Taylor-Seidenbach were improperly joined, and denied Georgia-Pacific's motion for limited discovery.
• Pittsburgh Corning Corp. v. James (Maryland Court of Appeals, 1999). The Court of Appeals of Maryland affirmed the Court of Special Appeals' dismissal of Pittsburgh Corning's and Owens Corning's appeals, holding that denial of their motions to dismiss for inconvenient forum could not be appealed immediately, so the Virginia plaintiffs (James and Wise) prevailed on the appealability question.
• Pittsburgh Corning Corp. v. Walters (Texas Court of Appeals, 13th District, 1999). The court of appeals affirmed the judgment, entered on a jury verdict of about $8.8 million, for Cecile Walters and the estate of Douglas Walters against Pittsburgh Corning Corporation, overruling all seven of its issues.
• Pizarro v. Astra Flooring Company (U.S. District Court, Northern District of California, 2020). The court denied plaintiffs Renato and Mercedita Pizarro's motion to remand, holding that defendant NASSCO timely removed and established a colorable government contractor defense under the Federal Officer Removal Statute.
• Pizarro v. National Steel and Shipbuilding Company (U.S. District Court, Northern District of California, 2021). The court denied NASSCO's motion for summary and partial summary judgment, granted Pep Boys' motion on the negligent misrepresentation and fraud by nondisclosure claims because plaintiffs waived them, and denied Pep Boys' motion on punitive damages, so the case went forward for plaintiffs.
• Plumb v. AC and S., Inc. (New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division, 3rd Dept., 2003). The Appellate Division affirmed the order setting aside the jury's apportionment of 98% of fault to General Electric, a ruling that left Sears, Roebuck, the appellant, responsible for the verdict; two justices concurred and one dissented.
• Plympton v. American Standard (inc.) (Rhode Island Superior Court, 2008). The court denied Kaiser Gypsum Company's motion for summary judgment based on the statute of repose, finding genuine issues of material fact, so plaintiff Elaine Plympton's claims continued.
• Poage v. Crane Co. (Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, 2nd Division, 2017). The Missouri Court of Appeals affirmed the judgment for Jeanette Poage against Crane Co., rejecting Crane's challenges to liability, the $10,000,000 punitive award, and the settlement offset.
• Poce v. O & G Industries, Inc. (Connecticut Appellate Court, 2021). The Appellate Court affirmed the summary judgment for O & G Industries, adopting the trial court's decisions that granted O & G's motion to strike in part and its motion for summary judgment against the five mason laborers.
• Poche v. Eagle, Inc. (U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana, 2015). The district court granted the Poches' motion to remand to Louisiana state court because Eagle, a Louisiana defendant stayed in bankruptcy, was not voluntarily dismissed and so destroyed diversity; it denied the Poches' request for $3,000 in attorneys' fees, so Foster Wheeler lost on removal but avoided a fee award.
• Podedworny v. American Insulated Wire Corp. (Rhode Island Superior Court, 2014). The Superior Court denied T&N's motion for summary judgment, holding the plaintiff's estate's claims were not time barred because T&N's bankruptcy discharge was conditioned on exhaustion of the Hercules Policy.
• Pogacnik v. AO Smith Water Prods. Co. (New York Supreme Court, 2018). The court granted the Port Authority's motion to dismiss in part, dismissing claims based on exposure at JFK Airport in 1976-1979 because the notice of claim did not cover them, and denied it for exposure in 1972-1975.
• Pogacnik v. AO Smith Water Products Co. (New York Supreme Court, 2018). The court denied defendant Mannington Mills's motion for summary judgment, so plaintiff's claims over Leon Pogacnik's mesothelioma and death continued.
• Polanco v. Asbestos Corp., Inc. (Ohio Court of Appeals, 3rd Appellate District, 2007). The Ohio Court of Appeals dismissed Connie Polanco's appeal from summary judgment for Maremont Corporation for lack of a final appealable order, because 16 defendants remained in the case and the judgment had no Civ.R. 54(B) certification.
• Polanco v. Asbestos Corp., Ltd. (Ohio Court of Appeals, 3rd Appellate District, 2009). The court of appeals reversed the trial court's summary judgment for Maremont Corporation and remanded for trial, so Connie Polanco, the widow, won on appeal.
• Polar-Mohr Maschinenvertriebsgesellschaft Gmbh, Co. KG v. Zurich American Insurance Company (U.S. District Court, Northern District of California, 2018). The court granted Polar-Mohr's motion for summary judgment and denied Zurich's, holding Zurich must pay all sums of the Huwe settlement plus defense costs, with 7% prejudgment interest, in Euros.
• Pomponi v. AO Smith Water Prods. Co. (New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division, 1st Dept., 2022). The Appellate Division reversed the trial court's order and granted American Biltrite Inc.'s motion for summary judgment, dismissing the plaintiff's complaint and cross claims against it.
• Porter Hayden Company v. Wyche (Maryland Court of Special Appeals, 1999). The Court of Special Appeals vacated the judgment for the Wyches against Porter Hayden and remanded with instructions to apply the statutory cap on noneconomic damages, because the Wyches failed to show the cancer arose before the cap's effective date.
• Porter Hayden v. Bullinger (Maryland Court of Appeals, 1998). The Court of Appeals of Maryland vacated the trial court's apportionment of damages in the Grimshaw and Granski cases, ruling for Owens Corning and Porter Hayden against the plaintiffs, and remanded for further proceedings.
• Porter v. American Optical Corp. (U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit, 1981). The Fifth Circuit affirmed the jury verdict against American Optical and the ruling that Continental owed no coverage, but reversed the ruling that Hartford alone was liable and remanded for Aetna and Hartford to share coverage pro rata.
• Portland General Electric Company v. Ebasco Services, Inc. (Oregon Court of Appeals, 2012). The Court of Appeals reversed the denial of Lexington Insurance Company's motion to set aside the default judgment, holding the judgment void, and vacated the supplemental fee judgment in favor of Portland General Electric.
• Ports America Gulfport, Inc. v. Johnson (U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana, 2023). The court denied state Judge Rachael Johnson's Rule 11 motion for sanctions against Ports America Gulfport, Inc., because the court had ruled on the challenged claim before the 21-day safe harbor period ended.
• Ports America Gulfport, Inc. v. Johnson (U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana, 2022). The federal district court denied Ports America's motion for a preliminary injunction against the ongoing Louisiana state-court mesothelioma case and enforcement of any resulting judgment, ruling for Judge Johnson and the state-court plaintiffs.
• Potter v. Crane Co. (U.S. District Court, District of Nevada, 2022). The court granted summary judgment to defendants Arrowhead Products and Industrial Manufacturing Company, ending the case as to them, because the plaintiff, who did not oppose, produced no evidence linking his mesothelioma to their products.
• Potter v. Crane Co. (U.S. District Court, District of Nevada, 2021). The magistrate judge granted in part plaintiff Potter's motion to serve expert disclosures late and extend the scheduling deadlines, granted in part Hexcel's motion for leave to file a surreply, and sanctioned plaintiff's law firm $500.
• Potter v. Patterson (Louisiana Court of Appeals, 4th Circuit, 1997). The appeals court granted the plaintiffs' motion for new trial and vacated the 1992 dismissal with prejudice except as to settling defendant MSA, so the case was reinstated against the other defendants and remanded, against the defendants who appealed.
• Potts v. 3M Co. (Ohio Court of Appeals, 8th Appellate District, 2007). The appeals court affirmed partial summary judgment for The Edward R. Hart Company, holding it was not vicariously liable as a supplier for the bankrupt asbestos manufacturers, and Evelyn Potts lost.
• Potts v. Celotex Corp. (Tennessee Supreme Court, 1990). Answering questions certified by the Sixth Circuit, the Tennessee Supreme Court held that the one-year limitations period did not bar Elizabeth Potts's mesothelioma claim against Celotex and the other asbestos product defendants, so the plaintiff prevailed on the limitations question.