Hodjera v. BASF Catalysts LLC (W.D. Wash., July 31, 2017)

Our plain-English summary of Hodjera v. BASF Catalysts LLC (U.S. District Court, Western District of Washington, July 31, 2017).

Matthew Hodjera and his wife Sylvia sued a long list of companies in King County Superior Court, Washington, in December 2016. Mr. Hodjera was diagnosed with mesothelioma in May 2016, and the complaint alleged he was exposed to asbestos or asbestos-containing products in Toronto, Ontario, between 1986 and 1994. Volkswagen Group of America removed the case to federal court in January 2017. The court had already dismissed several defendants because the original complaint did not allege enough facts to support specific jurisdiction in Washington. This order addressed only the plaintiffs' request for a priority trial date under a Washington statute that lets a court prioritize cases involving a terminal illness. Mr. Hodjera's doctor said the disease might affect his memory and that depositions and trial should happen soon. The plaintiffs asked for a trial seven months after the ruling. Trial was already set for March 5, 2018, about seven months and one week away, so the court denied the motion as moot.

We wrote this summary from the court's opinion with the help of AI. It is not the court's wording, and it is not legal advice. The full opinion is below.

The decision

• Court: U.S. District Court, Western District of Washington
• Decided: July 31, 2017
• Docket: Case No. C17-48RSL
• Stage: Other
• State: Washington

Outcome. The court denied as moot the plaintiffs' motion for a priority trial setting, because the existing March 5, 2018 trial date already matched the seven-month timeline they requested.

Issues decided: Trial Procedure and Discovery.

The people and their exposure

• Matthew Hodjera: mesothelioma

The defendants

• BASF Catalysts LLC (manufacturer)
• BorgWarner Morse Tec Inc. (manufacturer)
• DAP Products, Inc. (manufacturer)
• Johnson & Johnson (manufacturer)
• Johnson & Johnson Consumer Companies, Inc. (manufacturer)
• Pneumo Abex LLC (manufacturer)
• Union Carbide Corporation (manufacturer)
• Vanderbilt Minerals LLC (manufacturer)
• Volkswagen Group of America, Inc. (manufacturer)

Other decisions in this case

Other rulings from the same court in the same case, in our library:

• Hodjera v. BASF Catalysts LLC (May 17, 2017). The court granted Volkswagen AG's motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction, dismissing the Hodjeras' claims against it without prejudice and allowing them to move to amend by June 2, 2017.
• Hodjera v. BASF Catalysts LLC (May 17, 2017). The court granted Volkswagen Group Canada, Inc.'s motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction and dismissed the plaintiffs' claims against it without prejudice, with leave to seek amendment by June 2, 2017.
• Hodjera v. BASF Catalysts LLC (May 17, 2017). The court granted Volkswagen Group of America's motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction, dismissing the Hodjeras' claims against it without prejudice and allowing them to move to amend by June 2, 2017.
• Hodjera v. BASF Catalysts LLC (May 17, 2017). The court granted Whittaker, Clark & Daniels, Inc.'s motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction, dismissing the Hodjeras' claims against it without prejudice and allowing them to move to amend by June 2, 2017.
• Hodjera v. BASF Catalysts LLC (May 23, 2017). The court granted Dana Companies, LLC's motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction, dismissing the Hodjeras' claims against it without prejudice and allowing them until June 2, 2017 to move to amend.
• Hodjera v. BASF Catalysts LLC (July 31, 2017). The court granted Honeywell International's motion for judgment on the pleadings for lack of personal jurisdiction, dismissing the Hodjeras' claims against Honeywell with prejudice and denying leave to amend.
• Hodjera v. BASF Catalysts LLC (July 31, 2017). The court granted Imerys Talc America Inc.'s motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction, dismissing the Hodjeras' claims against it with prejudice and denying leave to amend and Imerys's request for attorney's fees.
• Hodjera v. BASF Catalysts LLC (July 31, 2017). The court denied the Hodjeras' motion to amend their complaint as futile and dismissed with prejudice the claims against Whittaker, Clark & Daniels, the Volkswagen entities, the Dana entities, Imerys Talc America and Honeywell for lack of specific jurisdiction in Washington.

The court's opinion

The text below is Google Scholar's copy of the court's opinion, a public record. Numbers in brackets, such as [*921], mark where each page of the printed reporter begins.

MATTHEW HODJERA and SYLVIA HODJERA, Plaintiffs,

v.

BASF CATALYSTS LLC, etal., Defendants.

Case No. C17-48RSL.

July 31, 2017.

United States District Court, W.D. Washington, Seattle.

Matthew Hodjera, Plaintiff, represented by Alexandra B. Caggiano, WEINSTEIN COUTURE PLLC.

Matthew Hodjera, Plaintiff, represented by Benjamin Robert Couture, WEINSTEIN COUTURE PLLC, Brian Weinstein, WEINSTEIN COUTURE PLLC, Charles Stein Siegel, WATERS & KRAUS LLP, pro hac vice & Patrick J. Wigle, WATERS & KRAUS LLP, pro hac vice.

Sylvia Hodjera, Plaintiff, represented by Alexandra B. Caggiano, WEINSTEIN COUTURE PLLC, Benjamin Robert Couture, WEINSTEIN COUTURE PLLC, Brian Weinstein, WEINSTEIN COUTURE PLLC, Charles Stein Siegel, WATERS & KRAUS LLP, pro hac vice & Patrick J. Wigle, WATERS & KRAUS LLP, pro hac vice.

BASF Catalysts, LLC, Defendant, represented by Anthony Todaro, DLA PIPER US LLP.

BorgWarner Morse Tec, Inc, Defendant, represented by Richard D. Ross, SELMAN BRIETMAN LLP & Michael J. Madderra, SELMAN BRIETMAN LLP.

DAP Products, Inc., Defendant, represented by Peter K. Renstrom, JACKSON JENKINS RENSTROM LLC, pro hac vice, Robert J. Bugatto, JACKSON JENKINS RENSTROM LLC, pro hac vice, Joan L. Roth, JACKSON JENKINS RENSTROM LLP & Todd M. Thacker, JACKSON JENKINS RENSTROM LLP.

Johnson & Johnson, Defendant, represented by Benjamin Walther, SHOOK HARDY & BACON LLP, pro hac vice, Jennifer Gannon Crisera, BENNETT BIGELOW & LEEDOM & William James Leedom, BENNETT BIGELOW & LEEDOM.

Johnson & Johnson Consumer Companies, Inc., Defendant, represented by Benjamin Walther, SHOOK HARDY & BACON LLP, pro hac vice, Jennifer Gannon Crisera, BENNETT BIGELOW & LEEDOM & William James Leedom, BENNETT

BIGELOW & LEEDOM.

Pneumo Abex LLC, Defendant, represented by Diane J. Kero, GORDON THOMAS HONEYWELL.

Union Carbide Corporation, Defendant, represented by Kevin J. Craig, GORDON & REES & Mark B. Tuvim, GORDON & REES.

Vanderbilt Minerals LLC, Defendant, represented by Alice Coles Serko, SEDGWICK LLP, Barry Neal Mesher, SEDGWICK LLP & Rachel Tallon Reynolds, SEDGWICK LLP.

ORDER DENYING AS MOOT PLAINTIFFS' MOTION FOR PRIORITY TRIAL

SETTING

ROBERT S. LASNIK, District Judge.

This matter comes before the Court on plaintiffs' motion for priority trial setting. Dkt. # 117. Having reviewed the memoranda of the parties and the remainder of the record, the Court denies as moot plaintiffs' motion for the reasons that follow. According to the original complaint, Mr. Hodjera was exposed to asbestos or asbestos-containing products in Toronto, Ontario, between 1986 and 1994. Dkt. # 1-1 at 4. On May 20, 2016, Mr. Hodjera was diagnosed with mesothelioma. Id. On December 2, 2016, plaintiffs filed suit in King County Superior Court, alleging that Mr. Hodjera's mesothelioma had been proximately caused by the manufacture, sale, and/or distribution of asbestos-containing products by the following

defendants: BASF Catalysts LLC; BorgWarner Morse Tec Inc.; Central Precision Limited; Charles B. Chrystal Company, Inc.; Dana Companies, LLC; Dana Canada Corp.; DAP Products, Inc.; Felt Products Mfg. Co.; Honeywell International Inc.; Imerys Talc America, Inc.; Johnson & Johnson; Johnson & Johnson Consumer Companies, Inc.; Pneumo Abex LLC; Union Carbide Corporation; Vanderbilt Minerals LLC; Volkswagen Aktiengesellschaft; Volkswagen Group of Canada; Volkswagen Group of America, Inc.; Whittaker, Clark & Daniels, Inc.; and Does 1-350, inclusive. Dkt. # 1-1 at 2-3. On January 11, 2017, defendant Volkswagen Group of America, Inc. removed the case. Dkt. # 1. The Court has granted various motions to dismiss on the grounds that plaintiffs' original complaint lacked sufficient factual allegations to establish specific jurisdiction in Washington.

Plaintiffs move for a priority trial setting pursuant to RCW 4.44.025, which provides that "[w]hen setting civil cases for trial. . . upon motion of a party, the court may give priority to cases in which a party is frail and over 70 years of age or is afflicted with a terminal illness." Plaintiffs introduce a declaration from Mr. Hodjera's treating physician, Dr. Somasundaram Subramaniam, who testifies that Mr. Hodjera's mesothelioma may affect his ability to recall events and accordingly that "any deposition or trial which will require Mr. Hodjera to accurately recall events should take place expeditiously and as soon as possible, while he has physical stamina to participate in the process and the ability to think cogently and communicate effectively." Dkt. # 119, ¶ 4.

Balancing these medical concerns with their interest in preparing sufficiently for trial, plaintiffs specifically request a trial date seven months after their motion is adjudicated. Dkt. # 117 at 3. Trial is currently scheduled for March 5, 2018, Dkt. # 79, which is seven months and one week from the date of this order. Accordingly, plaintiffs' motion is denied as moot. For the foregoing reasons, plaintiffs' motion for priority trial setting (Dkt. # 117) is DENIED as moot.

Sources

• The opinion on Google Scholar
• Washington asbestos laws
• Washington asbestos exposure sites