Pennsylvania Superior Court: Asbestos Cases

Our case-law library holds 95 asbestos decisions from the Pennsylvania Superior Court (1982–2024). Each links to our summary and the full opinion.

• State: Pennsylvania
• Kind of court: State appeals court

Decisions

• Estate of Hicks v. Dana Companies, LLC (2009). The en banc Superior Court affirmed the judgment for the Estate of Louis Hicks against Dana Companies and John Crane, rejecting both defendants' challenges to the verdict, the evidence rulings, the jury instructions and the reverse-bifurcated trial.
• Gregg v. VJ Auto Parts Co. (2009). On remand from the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, the Superior Court affirmed summary judgment for V-J Auto Parts and denied the estate's motion to amend the complaint.
• Johnson v. American Standard (2009). The Superior Court affirmed the summary judgments for Crown Cork & Seal, holding that the estates' representatives (Johnson, Mauger and Stea) lacked standing to raise their constitutional challenges to the statute that shielded Crown.
• Vanaman v. Dap, Inc. (2009). The en banc Superior Court affirmed the trial court's summary judgment for Crown Cork & Seal and DAP, ruling against Robert Vanaman and the estate of Violet Vanaman.
• Bednar v. Dana Corp. (2008). The Superior Court reversed the judgment entered on the jury verdict for Dana Corporation and remanded for a new trial, because the plaintiff was limited to three peremptory challenges instead of four.
• Sedlacek v. AO Smith Corp. (2008). The Superior Court affirmed summary judgment for ALCOA, holding that the workers' compensation and occupational disease acts barred the estates' negligence suits by the families of Frank Crooks and Edward Sedlacek.
• Weible v. Allied Signal, Inc. (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.
• Wright v. Allied Signal, Inc. (2008). The Superior Court reversed the trial court's summary judgment for Asten and remanded, holding the record was enough for a jury to infer that Mr. Wright's mesothelioma was caused by exposure to Asten's dryer felts; Theresa Wright won and Asten lost.
• Abrams v. Pneumo Abex Corp. (2007). The en banc Superior Court affirmed summary judgment for John Crane, Inc. against the executrices of Kenneth Abrams and John Shaw, holding the lung cancer claims time-barred.
• Bugosh v. Allen Refractories Co. (2007). The Superior Court of Pennsylvania affirmed the $1,400,000 judgment for Judith Bugosh against Taylored Industries, I.U. North America and Surface Combustion, rejecting each defendant's challenges.
• Bugosh v. Allen Refractories Company (2007). The Superior Court affirmed the $1,400,000 judgment for the plaintiff widow and estate against Taylored Industries, I.U. North America and Surface Combustion, rejecting each defendant's challenges.
• Donoughe v. Lincoln Elec. Co. (2007). The Superior Court affirmed the denial of Lincoln Electric's and Hobart Brothers' motions for JNOV and a new trial, so the Donoughes kept the verdict against them, but it vacated the judgment and remanded because the trial court wrongly treated the Manville Trust settlement as a pro rata set-off instead of pro tanto.
• Abrams v. Pneumo Abex Corporation (2006). The Superior Court reversed the orders granting summary judgment to John Crane, Inc. on statute of limitations grounds, ruling for the Abrams and Shaw estates, and remanded the cases.
• Chenot v. AP Green Services, Inc. (2006). The Superior Court reversed the trial court's summary judgment for Beazer East (successor to Koppers) and remanded for further proceedings, siding with plaintiff Joanne Chenot.
• Rudy v. A-Best Products Company (2005). The Superior Court affirmed summary judgment and final judgment for the TMI Defendants (Metropolitan Edison and affiliated GPU and power companies) against Rudy's estate and his wife.
• Summers v. Certainteed Corp. (2005). The en banc Superior Court was evenly divided, so the trial court's summary judgment for the asbestos defendants (CertainTeed and Union Carbide) against plaintiffs Summers and Nybeck was affirmed.
• Gilbert v. Monsey Products Co. (2004). The Superior Court reversed the trial court's summary judgment for Monsey Products and IPA Systems, vacated the judgments, and remanded the case to the plaintiff's estate's benefit for trial.
• Gilbert v. Monsey Products Company (2004). The Superior Court reversed the orders granting summary judgment for Monsey Products Co. and IPA Systems, vacated the judgments, and remanded, ruling for the plaintiff (Gilbert).
• Jessop v. Acf Industries, LLC (2004). The Superior Court affirmed the trial court's order dismissing Janet Jessop's asbestos suit on forum non conveniens grounds, so the defendants won and she must re-file in Kansas.
• Smalls v. Pittsburgh-Corning Corp. (2004). The Superior Court rejected John Crane's evidentiary challenges but held the $2,000,000 award to Oscar Smalls and $500,000 consortium award to Lizzie Smalls excessive, vacating the judgment and remanding for a new trial on damages only.
• Harahan v. AC & S, Inc. (2003). The Superior Court reversed summary judgment for Amchem Products (Benjamin Foster Division) and remanded for further proceedings, ruling for the plaintiff widow.
• Andaloro v. Armstrong World Industries, Inc. (2002). The Superior Court vacated the judgments because the trial court applied a pro rata setoff for the unsettled Manville Trust claims, remanded for a pro tanto setoff, and otherwise affirmed the rulings against John Crane, Inc. on judgment n.o.v., new trial and remittitur.
• Gatling v. Eaton Corp. (2002). The Superior Court affirmed summary judgment for Uniroyal and the other defendants, holding the Gatlings' second suit for symptomatic nonmalignant asbestos disease barred by res judicata and the statute of limitations.
• Gutteridge v. AP Green Services, Inc. (2002). The Superior Court reversed the summary judgments for Hercules Chemical, Pecora and PECO, which had been entered against Mrs. Gutteridge, and remanded the case for further proceedings.
• Wilson v. AP Green Industries, Inc. (2002). The Superior Court affirmed the trial court's grant of summary judgment to Flintkote Co. against the administratrix of Dolly Chase's estate, finding no sufficient evidence that she was exposed to Flintkote Fibrex Cement.
• Lonasco v. A-Best Products Co. (2000). The Superior Court affirmed the denial of judgment notwithstanding the verdict to Owens-Corning and Garlock on Phase I, and affirmed the grant of a new Phase II trial on Garlock's liability, so the Lonascos and the Collinses prevailed.
• Baker v. AC&S, Inc. (1999). The Superior Court reversed the trial court's reduction of the verdict by a pro rata share for the Manville Trust, holding the Trust's pro tanto release must be enforced so that AC&S bears the shortfall. It affirmed the denial of AC&S's motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict and remanded to Mrs. Baker's benefit.
• Coward v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp. (1999). The Superior Court affirmed the trial court's denial of Owens-Corning's motions for judgment n.o.v. and a new trial, leaving the plaintiffs' verdicts and the judgment entered for them in place.
• McCauley v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp. (1998). The Superior Court reversed the trial court's refusal to remove a compulsory nonsuit entered against plaintiff Bradley McCauley on statute of limitations grounds, and remanded for a new trial, ruling against the defendants.
• Busfield v. AC & S., Inc. (1994). The Superior Court affirmed the trial court's order excluding evidence of Alva Busfield's fear of developing cancer, so the plaintiffs lost against the asbestos defendants.
• DiDio v. Philadelphia Asbestos Corp. (1994). The court stayed Keene's appeal because of its bankruptcy, vacated the judgment against Fibreboard because asymptomatic pleural thickening and asbestosis based on fear of cancer were not compensable, and affirmed the $900,000 judgment against Owens-Illinois and the severance of its cross-claims.
• Dempsey v. Pacor, Inc. (1993). The Superior Court vacated the judgments entered for the six plaintiff couples against Owens-Illinois, Keene and Fibreboard and remanded for a new trial on damages only, with no fear or increased-risk-of-cancer elements.
• Giffear v. Johns-Manville Corp. (1993). The Superior Court affirmed the trial court's judgment n.o.v. for Keene and Fibreboard, setting aside the jury's $300,000 award to William Giffear, because asymptomatic pleural thickening and fear or risk of cancer are not compensable injuries.
• Higginbotham v. Fibreboard Corp. (1993). The Superior Court vacated the judgment for Nathan and Jean Higginbotham against Fibreboard Corporation and remanded for a new trial limited to Mr. Higginbotham's present injuries, so Fibreboard prevailed on appeal.
• Today's Exp., Inc. v. Barkan (1993). The Superior Court affirmed summary judgment for the sellers (the Barkans and Taubergs) and their real estate agent Howard Hanna Company, holding the buyers' fraud and negligence suit over asbestos in an apartment building was barred by the statute of limitations.
• Marinari v. Asbestos Corp., Ltd. (1992). The en banc Superior Court reversed summary judgment for the defendants, holding that Marinari's lung cancer action was not time-barred by the earlier discovery of pleural thickening.
• Taliferro v. Johns-Manville Corp. (1992). The Superior Court reversed the trial court's compulsory nonsuit for defendants Pittsburgh Corning and Fibreboard on James Taliferro's lung cancer and pleural thickening claims and remanded for further proceedings.
• United Nat. Ins. Co. v. JH France Refractories Co. (1992). The Superior Court affirmed the trial court's compulsory non-suit, holding that United National Insurance's suit to rescind the policy was time-barred, so the insured refractory manufacturers (J.H. France and others) prevailed.
• Lilley v. Johns-Manville Corp. (1991). The Superior Court affirmed the judgment against Fibreboard Corporation for one-eighth of the Lilleys' verdict plus delay damages, and also rejected the Lilleys' cross-appeal over the directed verdict on Fibreboard's cross-claims against Garlock and Eagle-Picher.
• Manzi v. HK Porter Co. (1991). The Superior Court affirmed the judgment for defendant H.K. Porter against plaintiff James Manzi, holding the jury instruction that Manzi could sue again if he later developed a compensable asbestos injury was correct (Celotex was severed due to bankruptcy stay); one judge dissented.
• Moran v. G. & WH Corson, Inc. (1991). The Superior Court reversed the order that marked the compensatory verdict satisfied, reinstated the compensatory verdict for the plaintiff estate against the appellee suppliers, and remanded for a delay damages hearing, but affirmed the striking of the punitive damages award against Corson and Penn's Valley.
• Normann v. Johns-Manville Corp. (1991). The Superior Court reversed the denial of Owens-Illinois' post-trial motion for a new trial and remanded for a liability trial under New York law, a win for Owens-Illinois over the executrix, Francine Normann.
• Bushless v. GAF Corp. (1990). The Superior Court affirmed the trial court's summary judgments for GAF and the other defendants against plaintiffs Bushless, Barber, Kelly and Edmond, because the plaintiffs could not link any defendant's product to their work areas.
• Eckenrod v. GAF Corp. (1988). The Superior Court affirmed summary judgment for A-Best, Porter, Raymark, Owens-Corning and Garlock, because the widow and co-defendant Pittsburgh Gage did not show the decedent was exposed to those defendants' asbestos products.
• Staiano v. Johns-Manville Corp. (1982). Affirmed summary judgment for the asbestos product manufacturer defendants, holding the Staianos' claims were barred by the two-year statute of limitations.