Arizona Asbestos Case Law

Asbestos decisions from Arizona's courts and the federal courts there: 14 cases in our library so far. For what the law requires today, see Arizona asbestos laws; for where exposure happened, see Arizona asbestos exposure sites.

State supreme court

Arizona Supreme Court

• Quiroz v. Alcoa Inc. (2018). The Arizona Supreme Court affirmed summary judgment for Reynolds Metal, Alcoa and Reywest, holding they owed no duty to Quiroz for take-home asbestos exposure; it vacated the court of appeals opinion in part because it disagreed with some of its reasoning.
• City of Phoenix v. Glenayre Electronics, Inc. (2017). The Arizona Supreme Court affirmed dismissal of the City of Phoenix's contract-based indemnity claims against the eight Contractors as barred by the statute of repose, but reversed dismissal of its claims against the Developers and remanded.
• Pounders v. Enserch E & C, Inc. (2013). The Arizona Supreme Court held that New Mexico substantive law, including its statute of repose, governed Mrs. Pounders' wrongful death claim, affirmed summary judgment for Enserch, BW/IP and Riley Power, and vacated parts of the court of appeals' opinion.
• Nelson v. Industrial Com'n of Arizona (1982). The Arizona Supreme Court vacated the court of appeals decision, set aside the Industrial Commission award that dismissed the widow's claim as untimely, and remanded, so the widow won over the employers and carriers.

State appeals courts

Arizona Court of Appeals

• City of Phoenix v. Glenayre Electronics, Inc. (1st Division, 2016). The Court of Appeals affirmed dismissal of the City of Phoenix's third-party indemnification complaint against developers and contractors as barred by the eight-year statute of repose, and affirmed attorneys' fee awards to the developers who sought them.
• Quiroz v. Alcoa Inc. (1st Division, 2016). The Arizona Court of Appeals affirmed summary judgment for Reynolds Metal Company, holding it owed no duty of care to the Quirozes for Dr. Quiroz's take-home asbestos exposure.
• Pounders v. Enserch E & C, Inc. (1st Division, Dept. A, 2012). The Arizona Court of Appeals affirmed summary judgment for Enserch, Riley and BW, holding that New Mexico law applied and its statute of repose barred Mrs. Pounders' wrongful death claims.
• Perez v. Southern Pacific Transp. Co. (2nd Division, Dept. A, 1993). The Arizona Court of Appeals reversed the trial court's judgment for the plaintiff on strict liability for an abnormally dangerous activity against Southern Pacific, and also reversed the ruling that the products liability claim was barred by the statute of repose, remanding for further proceedings on both.
• Burns v. Jaquays Min. Corp. (2nd Division, Dept. A, 1987). The Arizona Court of Appeals reversed summary judgment for the defendants (Jaquays and the government defendants) on the residents' nuisance and medical surveillance claims, and affirmed it on the remaining claims, including enhanced risk of cancer and emotional distress.
• DeStories v. City of Phoenix (1st Division, Dept. A, 1987). The Arizona Court of Appeals affirmed summary judgment for the City of Phoenix and Liberty Builders, rejecting the exposed workers' claims for increased risk of disease, emotional distress and future medical surveillance costs.

Federal appeals courts

U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

• City of Phoenix v. First State Insurance Company (2018). The Ninth Circuit affirmed summary judgment for the Hartford insurers against the City of Phoenix, holding Hartford owed the City neither indemnity nor defense costs for its $500,000 settlement of the Tarazon asbestos claims.
• Coulbourn v. Crane Co. (2018). The Ninth Circuit affirmed the jury verdict and the denial of judgment as a matter of law, leaving Crane Co. liable for $1.8 million in compensatory damages and $5 million in punitive damages to the Coulbourn plaintiffs.

Federal district courts

U.S. District Court, District of Arizona

• Hatten v. Grobet USA (2020). The district court granted plaintiff Renee Hatten's motion to remand and sent the case back to Pima County Superior Court, because defendant Grobet did not show fraudulent joinder of the Arizona defendant Posner's or that the events occurred on a federal enclave.
• Leabo v. Allied Signal, Inc. (2011). The federal district court granted General Electric's Rule 12(c) motion, joined by MetLife, and dismissed the plaintiffs' wrongful death action with prejudice as barred by res judicata, so the plaintiffs lost.