U.S. Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit: Asbestos Cases

Our case-law library holds 7 asbestos decisions from the U.S. Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit (1975–2006). Each links to our summary and the full opinion.

• Kind of court: Federal appeals court

Decisions

• Conwed Corp. v. Union Carbide Corp. (2006). The Eighth Circuit affirmed the district court's subrogation judgment for Conwed against Union Carbide in most respects, rejecting Union Carbide's collateral estoppel and damages challenges but correcting a double reduction and remanding to enter judgment of $23,878.36.
• Harder v. ACandS (1999). The Eighth Circuit reversed the district court's denial of summary judgment to General Electric, holding Iowa's statute of repose barred the Harders' claims against GE, and remanded for further proceedings.
• Chism v. WR Grace & Co. (1998). The Eighth Circuit affirmed summary judgment for W.R. Grace against the widow and children of Glenwood Chism, because they offered no evidence that Grace's Zonolite vermiculite contained asbestos that caused his mesothelioma.
• Jackson v. Anchor Packing Co. (1993). The Eighth Circuit affirmed summary judgment for all defendants (Owens-Corning, Owens-Illinois, Fibreboard, Keene, Anchor, Chesterton, Garlock, John Crane, Rexnord and Georgia Talc) against the ten Mohawk tire plant workers, because the workers lacked sufficient proof that a particular defendant's products caused their injuries.
• Kraciun v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp. (1990). The Eighth Circuit reversed summary judgment for the asbestos-product manufacturers on limitations grounds as to plaintiffs Kraciun, Kennedy, Snook, Lilly and Loehndorf, and remanded; it affirmed summary judgment against plaintiff Kenney.
• Karjala v. Johns-Manville Products Corp. (1975). The Eighth Circuit affirmed the $200,000 jury judgment for plaintiff Karjala against Johns-Manville, finding the jury instructions on strict liability/duty to warn and on the statute of limitations consistent with Minnesota law.
• Reserve Min. Co. v. Environmental Protection Agcy. (1975). The Eighth Circuit, en banc, affirmed the injunction against Reserve Mining's air and water discharges but modified it to give Reserve a reasonable time to switch to on-land tailings disposal and cut air emissions, and otherwise affirmed in part and reversed in part (for example, rejecting the asbestos emission rule APC 17 as applied to Reserve).