U.S. District Court, District of Columbia: Asbestos Cases

Our case-law library holds 8 asbestos decisions from the U.S. District Court, District of Columbia (1981–2019). Each links to our summary and the full opinion.

• Kind of court: Federal district court

Decisions

• Jackson v. Colgate-Palmolive Company (2019). The court granted Colgate-Palmolive's Daubert motion excluding plaintiff's expert Dr. Gordon's product contamination and specific causation opinions, granted in part and denied in part Colgate's motion in limine on talc sample authenticity, and found plaintiff's motion in limine moot.
• Rocha v. Brown & Gould, LLP (2015). The district court granted summary judgment to the law firm Brown & Gould, attorney Daniel Brown and David Lipman, P.A. on all three counts and denied Nieves Rocha's cross-motion for partial summary judgment.
• Wannall v. Honeywell International, Inc. (2013). The district court struck the plaintiff's late expert declaration and granted Honeywell's motion to reconsider, entering summary judgment for Honeywell because the plaintiff could not show causation under Virginia law as stated in Ford Motor Co. v. Boomer.
• Consolidated Rail Corp. v. Ray EX rel. Boyd (2010). The court granted the estate's motion for judgment on the pleadings and denied Conrail's motion for summary judgment, holding that the Rail Act does not bar the estate from pursuing Conrail as a successor in the Ohio FELA asbestos case.
• Carey Canada Inc. v. California Union Ins. Co. (1989). After a bench trial, the court entered judgment for the excess insurers (Home, National Union, Columbia Casualty) and against Carey Canada and Celotex, holding the policies' "asbestosis" exclusions bar all asbestos-related disease claims, and dismissed the actions.
• Carey Canada v. California Union Ins. Co. (1989). The court denied the plaintiffs' (Carey Canada and Celotex) motion for partial summary judgment, holding the asbestosis exclusions in the excess insurers' policies ambiguous and allowing extrinsic evidence of the parties' intent, which favored the insurers at this stage.
• Fearson v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp. (1981). The court denied the joint motion for summary judgment by Johns-Manville and the other asbestos defendants, holding the widow's claims were neither time-barred nor barred by the workers' compensation settlement.
• Keene Corp. v. Insurance Co. of No. America (1981). The court granted Keene Corporation partial summary judgment against its insurers (INA, Aetna, Hartford, Liberty), holding that coverage is triggered by exposure to asbestos, and denied Aetna's challenge to jurisdiction.