Asbestos Cases A–Z: W

183 decisions whose name begins with W.

• Warrington v. 3M Company (U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Pennsylvania, 2023). The court granted General Electric's motion for summary judgment, dismissing all claims and crossclaims against GE with prejudice and ruling against plaintiffs Robert and Joan Warrington.
• Washington Hospital Center v. District of Columbia Department of Employment Services (District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 2004). The court affirmed the Department of Employment Services' order finding that claimant Anita Jones gave timely notice of her work-related mesothelioma, so she was eligible for compensation and Washington Hospital Center lost.
• Washington Penn Plastic Co., Inc. v. the Phoenix Insurance Company (U.S. District Court, Western District of Pennsylvania, 2024). The court granted Washington Penn Plastic's motion to compel, ordering Travelers to supplement its discovery responses and serve a more detailed privilege log within three weeks, with leave to renew the motion later.
• Watkins v. Affinia Group (Ohio Court of Appeals, 8th Appellate District, 2016). The court of appeals reversed the jury verdict for Barbara Watkins (individually and as executor of Glenn Watkins's estate) against Honeywell, because the trial court admitted the plaintiff's causation experts without holding a Daubert hearing.
• Watkins v. Fibreboard Corp. (U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit, 1993). The Fifth Circuit affirmed the district court's judgment awarding the four plaintiffs mental anguish damages against Pittsburgh Corning, rejecting Pittsburgh Corning's challenge.
• Watters v. Department of Social Services (Louisiana Court of Appeals, 4th Circuit, 2003). The appeals court granted Christine Songy's writ in part, amending the judgment to grant her partial summary judgment that she has malignant mesothelioma, and affirmed the trial court's denial of her other requested findings, so the defendants prevailed on those.
• Watts v. A & J Plumbing & Heating Corp. (New York Supreme Court, 2018). The trial court granted Dyson-Kissner-Moran Corporation's motion to dismiss (or for summary judgment), dismissing the plaintiffs' claims and RAL Supply Group's third-party claims against it, while the case continued against the remaining defendants.
• Watts v. Georgia-Pacific Corp. (Louisiana Court of Appeals, 1st Circuit, 2013). The appeals court amended the judgment to cut the Watts' damages award against Hebert Brothers to one-half (its virile share, with Dow bearing the other half) and otherwise affirmed the jury's $3,625,000 survival award for the plaintiffs, rejecting Hebert Brothers' prescription and excessive-damages arguments.
• Watts v. Pneumo Abex, LLC (California Court of Appeal, 1st Appellate District, 2nd Division, 2024). The Court of Appeal reversed the judgment, the order on settlement offsets and the amended judgment for plaintiffs against Pneumo Abex and remanded for a new trial, holding that the directed verdict on the sophisticated user defense was error.
• Webb v. 3M Company (U.S. District Court, Southern District of Mississippi, 2022). The district court denied the plaintiff's motion to remand, keeping the case in federal court, which favored Lockheed Martin, John Crane, Alfa Laval, Unisys, Eaton and Rockwell over the Watson estate.
• Webb v. General Cable Corp. (California Court of Appeal, 1st Appellate District, 1st Division, 2021). The Court of Appeal reversed the jury verdict for plaintiffs Amos and Jeannie Webb against General Cable and directed the trial court to enter judgment for General Cable, because the evidence did not show Webb was exposed to asbestos in General Cable's products.
• Webb v. Special Electric Company, Inc. (California Supreme Court, 2016). The California Supreme Court affirmed the Court of Appeal, which had reversed the trial court's judgment notwithstanding the verdict for Special Electric; the jury verdict for plaintiffs William and Jacqueline Webb against Special Electric stands.
• Webb v. Special Electric Company, Inc. (California Court of Appeal, 2nd Appellate District, 1st Division, 2013). The Court of Appeal reversed the trial court's judgment notwithstanding the verdict for Special Electric and directed that the original judgment on the jury's verdict for the Webbs be reinstated, with one justice dissenting.
• Webber v. Ford Motor Company (Pennsylvania Superior Court, 2013). The Superior Court reversed the trial court's orders opening and vacating the judgment entered for Ford, Abex and Honeywell and granting a mistrial, and denied the Webbers' motion to quash, so the defense judgment stood.
• Weber v. John Crane, Inc. (California Court of Appeal, 1st Appellate District, 1st Division, 2006). The Court of Appeal reversed the summary judgment for John Crane, Inc., holding that its evidence did not shift the burden to the Webers to show a triable issue on causation.
• Webster v. Exxonmobil Oil Corp. (California Court of Appeal, 2nd Appellate District, 4th Division, 2011). The Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court's nonsuit for ExxonMobil Oil Corp. because plaintiff's evidence did not support a finding that he was exposed to asbestos at the Torrance refinery.
• Weddle v. BP Amoco Chemical Company (Delaware Superior Court, 2020). The court granted in part the claimant estate's application for attorneys' fees for the successful appeal from the Industrial Accident Board, awarding $31,530 at rates lower than the $42,860 requested; BP Amoco, the employer, was ordered to bear the award.
• Weddle v. BP Amoco Chemical Company (Delaware Superior Court, 2019). The Superior Court reversed the Industrial Accident Board's dismissal of the mesothelioma compensation petition against BP Amoco and remanded, holding the 1982 asbestosis settlement did not bar the claim.
• Wedgeworth v. Fibreboard Corp. (U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit, 1983). The Fifth Circuit affirmed the Fontenot order denying a stay and vacated the stays in Wedgeworth and Davis, so the plaintiffs' claims against the co-defendants proceed. On rehearing it held that the Wedgeworth court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to let plaintiffs add Johns-Manville's and Unarco's insurers as defendants.
• Wehmeier v. Unr Industries, Inc. (Illinois Appellate Court, 4th District, 1991). The appellate court reversed all the judgments, both those for plaintiffs Wehmeier, Bratcher, Schultz and Cochran and those for the Fund against Gray and Tynan, and remanded for a new trial.
• Weible v. Allied Signal, Inc. (Pennsylvania Superior Court, 2008). The Superior Court reversed summary judgment for Borg-Warner, Brake & Clutch Co. of Philadelphia and Carlisle and remanded for further proceedings, but affirmed summary judgment for McCord, in the suit by Sara Jane Weible over her husband's mesothelioma.
• Weihl v. Asbestos Corporation, Ltd. (Oregon Court of Appeals, 2006). The Oregon Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's summary judgment and dismissal for the defendant contractors, ruling against the plaintiff, the estate of William Weihl.
• Weinberg v. Johns-Manville Prods. Corp. (New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division, 1st Dept., 1979). The majority held that Owens-Corning Fiberglas was entitled to summary judgment, rejecting Special Term's denial of its motion as premature; Owens-Corning won and the plaintiff and Johns-Manville lost. One justice dissented and would have affirmed the denial.
• Weinberg v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp. (Maryland Court of Appeals, 1984). The Maryland Court of Appeals affirmed summary judgment for Johns-Manville, holding the New York judgment dismissing the earlier wrongful death suit barred the widow's Maryland wrongful death action.
• Weirick v. Brenntag North America, Inc. (U.S. District Court, Central District of California, 2019). The district court granted plaintiffs' ex parte application and remanded the case to Los Angeles County Superior Court on equitable grounds, rejecting Johnson & Johnson's removal based on Imerys's bankruptcy.
• Weis v. Dsm Copolymer, Inc. (U.S. District Court, Middle District of Louisiana, 2016). The court adopted the magistrate judge's recommendation, granted the plaintiffs' motion to remand, and sent the case back to state court because DSM Copolymer failed to establish federal officer removal jurisdiction.
• Welch v. Air & Liquid Systems Corporation (U.S. District Court, Western District of Washington, 2021). The district court granted the Welches' motion to remand to King County Superior Court because Velan Valve Corp.'s removal came after the plaintiffs had moved to dismiss Velan, and awarded the plaintiffs attorneys' fees and costs against Velan.
• Welch v. Brand Insulations, Inc. (Washington Court of Appeals, 1st Division, 2023). The Court of Appeals reversed the trial court's summary judgment for Brand Insulations and Haskell Corporation based on the construction statute of repose, ruling for the Welches, and remanded for further proceedings.
• Welch v. Crane Co. (U.S. District Court, Western District of Washington, 2023). The court denied the plaintiff's motion to exclude Crane's three expert witnesses, ruling their reports met Rule 26 and limiting their testimony to the opinions in their disclosed reports.
• Welch v. Crane Co. (U.S. District Court, Western District of Washington, 2023). The court granted Velan Valve Corp.'s motion for summary judgment because Plaintiff showed no evidence placing Mr. Welch near Velan equipment, and denied Crane Co.'s motion because a genuine factual dispute remained over his exposure to Crane valves.
• Welch v. Welch (Tennessee Court of Appeals, 2021). The Court of Appeals affirmed the trial court's dismissal of the petition by Charles Welch's children, who wanted the West Virginia settlement proceeds treated as wrongful death proceeds; the wife and daughter (respondents) prevailed.
• Wells v. 3M Co. (New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division, 3rd Dept., 2016). The Appellate Division reversed the Supreme Court's order granting summary judgment to defendants Genuine Parts Company and National Automotive Parts Association, and denied their motion, so plaintiff Linda Wells's claim survives.
• Wells v. BNSF Railway Company (U.S. District Court, District of Montana, 2024). The court denied BNSF Railway's motion for a mistrial, finding that its curative instruction to the jury cured any prejudice from Plaintiffs' counsel's questions.
• Wells v. BNSF Railway Company (U.S. District Court, District of Montana, 2023). The court denied BNSF's motion to stay and its motion for summary judgment on federal preemption, and granted the plaintiffs' summary judgment motion barring BNSF's nonparty and superseding-cause defenses as to W.R. Grace, Robinson Insulation, Grogan Robinson Lumber and the State of Montana.
• Wells v. BNSF Ry. Co. (U.S. District Court, District of Montana, 2024). The court denied BNSF's motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict and for a new trial on the strict liability claims, leaving the $4,000,000 per-plaintiff verdicts for the Wells and Walder estates in place.
• Welsh v. Ford Motor Co. (Ohio Court of Appeals, 8th Appellate District, 2011). The court of appeals affirmed the jury verdict and the denial of directed verdict, JNOV and new trial, so the widow Sylvia Welsh won and Ford Motor Company lost.
• Werts v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. (Ohio Court of Appeals, 8th Appellate District, 2009). The appellate court affirmed the judgment on a jury verdict for John Crane, Inc., rejecting Betty Werts's challenges to expert fiber-release testimony and to admission of a proof-of-claim form, which was error but harmless.
• West v. Allied Signal, Inc. (Oregon Court of Appeals, 2005). The Court of Appeals reversed the summary judgment granted to La Grand Industrial Supply Co. and remanded, ruling the plaintiff (the estate of Wendell West) had enough evidence for a jury to find La Grand supplied the asbestos gloves.
• Westfall v. Whittaker, Clark & Daniels (U.S. District Court, District of Rhode Island, 1983). The court granted summary judgment to Omya and Windsor Minerals, ruling that the estate's claims against them failed because they were not duly served within a reasonable time, and the estate lost.
• Westinghouse Airbrake Co. v. Indus. Com'n (Illinois Appellate Court, 3rd District, Industrial Commission Division, 1999). The court dismissed the Brook appeal for want of a valid Commission decision and remanded it, held that Lyle Heller's claims could not proceed under the Workers' Compensation Act (dismissed them) while Bertha Heller's death-benefit claim could and was remanded to the Commission, and found the circuit court had jurisdiction over Bertha's appeal.
• Weyerhaeuser Company v. Fireman's Fund Insurance Company (U.S. District Court, Western District of Washington, 2008). The federal district court granted Fireman's Fund's cross-motion and denied Weyerhaeuser's cross-motion, ruling that the earliest triggered policy year for the Anderson and Reed claims is 1965, the first year of exposure to Weyerhaeuser's asbestos-containing products.
• Whalen v. General Electric Corporation (U.S. District Court, Northern District of California, 2014). The court denied General Dynamics' motion to dismiss the plaintiffs' strict products liability claim and denied its motion to strike the punitive damages prayer as moot, so the Whalens' claims proceeded.
• Whatley v. Armstrong World Industries, Inc. (U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit, 1988). The Fifth Circuit affirmed the verdict for Whatley against Raymark and the $120,000 future medical award, but modified the judgment to raise Raymark's share from 9.09% to 27.27% of damages because Raymark failed to prove fault by settling defendants Owens-Illinois and Armstrong.
• Whatley v. Eagle, Inc. (U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana, 2014). The court dismissed the third-party claims against the Veterans Administration Medical Center for lack of subject matter jurisdiction and remanded the case to Orleans Parish Civil District Court, granting the plaintiffs' motion; it did not reach Local 141's and Somdal's motions to dismiss.
• Whelan v. Armstrong Int'l (New Jersey Superior Court, Appellate Division, 2016). The Appellate Division reversed the summary judgments the trial court had granted to Armstrong, Burnham, Carrier, Cleaver-Brooks, Crown Boiler, Ford, Johnson Controls, NIBCO and Oakfabco, and remanded for trial in plaintiff Whelan's favor.
• Whelan v. Armstrong International Inc. (New Jersey Supreme Court, 2019). The New Jersey Supreme Court affirmed the Appellate Division's reversal of summary judgment for the seven defendant manufacturers and distributors (Armstrong, Burnham, Carrier, Cleaver-Brooks, Crown, Ford, Johnson Controls), ruling for plaintiff Whelan and remanding to the trial court.
• Whelan v. Armstrong International Inc. (New Jersey Superior Court, Appellate Division, 2018). The Appellate Division reversed the summary judgments for Armstrong, Burnham, Carrier, Cleaver-Brooks, Crown Boiler, Ford, Johnson Controls, NIBCO and Oakfabco, and remanded for trial in favor of plaintiff Whelan.
• White v. Cardinal Industrial Insulation Co., Inc. (Kentucky Court of Appeals, 2007). The Court of Appeals vacated the summary judgment that had dismissed Alice White's claims against Cardinal Industrial Insulation and remanded for further proceedings, ruling for the White estate.
• White v. CBS Corp. (Texas Court of Appeals, 3rd District, 1999). The court of appeals reversed the summary judgment for Westinghouse (CBS) and remanded, holding the statute of repose did not bar Pauline White's claims as a matter of law.
• White v. Celotex Corp. (U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit, 1990). The Ninth Circuit affirmed summary judgment for Celotex and the other asbestos defendants against the widow and son of Edward White, and upheld the denial of certification of the market share liability question to the Arizona Supreme Court.