U.S. District Court, Southern District of Mississippi: Asbestos Cases

Our case-law library holds 11 asbestos decisions from the U.S. District Court, Southern District of Mississippi (1980–2023). Each links to our summary and the full opinion.

• Kind of court: Federal district court

Decisions

• Simpson v. American International Industries (2023). The district court denied the plaintiffs' motion to remand, holding that the removal was procedurally proper and that the three Mississippi seller defendants were improperly joined, so the removing defendant American International Industries prevailed.
• Webb v. 3M Company (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.
• Dickens v. A-1 Auto Parts & Repair Inc. (2021). The court denied the Dickens plaintiffs' motion to reconsider its earlier grant of summary judgment to Ford Motor Co. on causation and punitive damages, so Ford won and the plaintiffs lost.
• Dickens v. A-1 Auto Parts & Repair Inc. (2021). The court granted Ford Motor Co.'s motions for summary judgment on causation and punitive damages, dismissing the Dickens plaintiffs' claims against Ford with prejudice.
• Dickens v. A-1 Auto Parts & Repair Inc. (2020). The court granted Trinity Marine Products' motion for summary judgment, ruling that Delaware or Tennessee law governs successor liability and neither recognizes the product line theory, so plaintiffs William and Karla Dickens lost their claim against Trinity.
• Dickens v. A-1 Auto Parts & Repair (2019). The court granted Edelbrock's unopposed motion for summary judgment and dismissed the Dickens plaintiffs' claims against Edelbrock with prejudice.
• Dickens v. A-1 Auto Parts & Repair Inc. (2019). The court granted A-1 Auto Parts & Repair's Rule 12(b)(6) motion on its innocent seller defense and dismissed the Dickenses' claims against A-1 without prejudice, with 14 days to seek leave to amend.
• Dickens v. A-1 Auto Parts & Repair, Inc. (2019). The court granted Detroit Diesel's Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss the plaintiffs' market-share-type causation theories, fraud/concealment/conspiracy claims and aiding-and-abetting claim, with leave for the Dickenses to seek to amend.
• Dickens v. A-1 Auto Parts & Repair, Inc. (2018). The court granted Ford Motor Company's Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss the plaintiffs' alternative-causation claims with prejudice and their fraud, concealment and aiding-and-abetting conspiracy claims without prejudice, and allowed the Dickenses to seek leave to amend.
• Everitt v. Pneumo Abex, LLC (2009). The district court granted Pneumo Abex's motion for summary judgment and denied the plaintiffs' cross-motion, ruling that the plaintiffs' contract and fraud claims over the asbestos settlement were time-barred in part and otherwise without merit.
• McCarty v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp. (1980). The district court denied the plaintiffs' motion for partial summary judgment based on collateral estoppel, so the asbestos product defendants were not barred from relitigating product defect and state-of-the-art issues decided in Borel.