U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Virginia: Asbestos Cases

Our case-law library holds 15 asbestos decisions from the U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Virginia (1981–2025). Each links to our summary and the full opinion.

• Kind of court: Federal district court

Decisions

• Llt Management LLC v. Emory (2025). The court granted the doctors' motion to dismiss LLT Management's fraud claim (time-barred) and Lanham Act false advertising claim (failure to state a claim), but denied it as to the trade libel/product disparagement claim, which goes forward.
• Gehant v. Foster Wheeler Energy Corporation (2022). The court denied Foster Wheeler's motion for summary judgment, finding triable issues of fact on duty to warn, the government contractor defense, and causation, so the plaintiff's estate may proceed.
• Mullinex v. John Crane, Inc. (2022). The court granted Patricia Mullinex's Rule 12(c) motion for judgment on the pleadings on liability against John Crane, Inc., deeming the wrongful death allegations admitted, and set the case for a trial on damages.
• Mullinex v. John Crane, Inc. (2022). The district judge sustained in part the plaintiff's objection and vacated in part the magistrate judge's order, ruling that John Crane must show the Navy knew of the asbestos hazard of its gaskets and packing, while still barring evidence of Navy negligence.
• Mullinex v. John Crane, Inc. (2020). The court denied John Crane, Inc.'s motion to dismiss the plaintiffs' maritime law claims, finding that admiralty jurisdiction exists, so the Mullinexes prevailed on the motion.
• Goodrich v. John Crane, Inc. (2018). The court granted in part and denied in part the plaintiffs' motions to limit defense experts McCloskey and Henshaw, granted the plaintiffs' motion to bar fiber potency ratio testimony, denied the plaintiffs' motion on dose reconstruction, and denied John Crane's motion on regulatory statements without prejudice.
• Goodrich v. John Crane, Inc. (2018). The magistrate judge granted plaintiffs' motion in limine, barring John Crane, Inc. from offering evidence that the Navy's knowledge or negligence was a superseding cause or part of the state of the art.
• Hopeman Brothers, Inc. v. Continental Cas. Co. (2018). The court granted in part and denied in part both sides' summary judgment motions, ruling for Hopeman Brothers on all-sums allocation, vertical exhaustion and most non-cumulation clause issues, and for Continental and Lexington on the meaning of "loss" and the 1971-74 Lexington defense-cost coverage.
• Parker v. Hunting Point Apartments, LLC (2015). The district court granted the landlord defendants' motion to dismiss the pro se tenant's amended complaint, including his asbestos injury claim, and also dismissed his claim against the EPA Administrator.
• Wilson v. AC&S, Inc. (2015). The federal magistrate judge granted Westinghouse's motion for summary judgment against plaintiff Rorie Wilson, finding no evidence that its arc chutes released asbestos fibers at levels that caused his disease, and denied as moot a motion to limit another expert's testimony.
• Contreras v. Thor Norfolk Hotel, LLC (2003). The court granted the hotel owner Thor Norfolk Hotel's motion to dismiss the amended complaint, ruling against plaintiff Contreras because he alleged no asbestos-related disease or physical injury.
• Anderson v. Crown Cork & Seal (2000). The district court granted the plaintiff's motion to remand and sent the case back to Portsmouth Circuit Court, rejecting the defendants' federal enclave removal theory.
• McCormick v. CE Thurston & Sons, Inc. (1997). The court granted the plaintiffs' motion to remand and sent the case back to the Newport News state circuit court, rejecting C.E. Thurston & Sons' federal enclave and federal officer removal grounds.
• Saunders v. HK Porter Co., Inc. (1986). The court granted summary judgment to the defendants against Grimes and Saunders because their claims were time-barred, dismissing their cases with prejudice, and denied summary judgment against Pruden because defendants did not show he was injured more than two years before suing.
• Large v. Bucyrus-Erie Co. (1981). The court granted the power shovel manufacturers Bucyrus-Erie and Northwest Engineering partial summary judgment, holding the plaintiff's respiratory injury claims time-barred; his hearing loss claim was not challenged.