Louisiana Asbestos Case Law

Asbestos decisions from Louisiana's courts and the federal courts there: 582 cases in our library so far. For what the law requires today, see Louisiana asbestos laws; for where exposure happened, see Louisiana asbestos exposure sites.

Federal district courts

U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana

• Legendre v. Louisiana Ins. Guaranty Association (2024). The court denied both the defendants' motion to limit or exclude plaintiff Eleanor Legendre's experts and Legendre's motion to exclude Dr. Bruce Case's opinion, so all the experts may testify at trial.
• Legendre v. Louisiana Ins. Guaranty Association (2024). The court granted in part and denied in part Hopeman Brothers' summary judgment motion (granted on intentional tort, alter ego and manufacturer claims; denied on professional vendor liability) and denied SPARTA's motion to stay; the expedited-consideration motion was denied as moot.
• Legendre v. Louisiana Ins. Guaranty Association (2024). The court granted Eleanor Legendre's motions (mesothelioma and its cause established; Avondale barred from government contractor defenses on failure-to-warn and safety claims), granted Liberty Mutual's motion on the professional vendor and commercial supplier claims, and granted Avondale's motion dismissing the intentional tort and fraud claims.
• Lewis v. Taylor-Seidenbach, Inc. (2024). The court granted Bayer's unopposed motion for summary judgment and dismissed Avondale's third-party complaint against Bayer with prejudice, because the plaintiffs' 2001 release covered the current asbestos lung cancer claims, while preserving Avondale's right to seek a virile share credit at trial.
• Lyles v. K&b Louisiana Corporation (2024). The magistrate judge denied plaintiff Pamela Davis Lyles's motion for leave to amend her complaint to add non-diverse insurer Fireman's Fund as a defendant, ruling for the defendants.
• Marcella v. Huntington Ingalls Inc. (2024). The court denied the plaintiffs' motion to remand, so the case stays in federal court, because Avondale (with Hopeman and Wayne) raised colorable federal defenses under the federal-officer removal statute.
• Matherne v. Huntington Ingalls Incorporated (2024). The court denied Westinghouse's motion for partial summary judgment on its sophisticated user defense, so the failure-to-warn claims against it over Micarta remained for trial.
• Matherne v. Huntington Ingalls Incorporated (2024). The court granted Avondale's motion and quashed the trial subpoenas that Plaintiffs and Defendants General Electric, Foster Wheeler and Paramount Global had directed to Avondale as a corporate entity.
• Matherne v. Huntington Ingalls Incorporated (2024). The court granted Hopeman Brothers' motion for partial summary judgment on the plaintiffs' intentional tort, alter ego and manufacturer strict liability claims, ruling against the plaintiffs and Avondale.
• Matherne v. Huntington Ingalls Incorporated (2024). The court granted the plaintiffs' motion for partial summary judgment that Roseanna Matherne had mesothelioma and that it caused her death, over the defendants' off-topic oppositions.
• Matherne v. Huntington Ingalls Incorporated (2024). The court granted the plaintiffs' motion for partial summary judgment, so Avondale (Huntington Ingalls) and its insurers could not use the government contractor defense against the failure-to-warn and failure-to-enact-safety-measures claims.
• Matherne v. Huntington Ingalls Incorporated (2024). The court granted Avondale's motion for partial summary judgment and dismissed plaintiffs' claims that Avondale assumed its insolvent insurers' obligations under the buy-back agreements; the plaintiffs lost this claim.
• Matherne v. Huntington Ingalls Incorporated (2024). The court granted in part and denied in part the plaintiffs' motion to compel a Rule 30(b)(6) deposition of Huntington Ingalls: Huntington need not present a witness, but must give the plaintiffs its litigation listing of prior cases within 14 days.
• McElwee v. Anco Insulations, Inc. (2024). The magistrate judge granted Huntington Ingalls' motion to compel and ordered plaintiff Robert McElwee to appear for deposition on April 1, 2024, as scheduled.
• Palermo v. Eagle Inc. (2024). The court granted in part and denied in part Avondale's motion to quash, narrowing the subpoena and requiring Avondale to produce relevant personnel records of Valmont and Glen Landry under a protective order, so plaintiffs largely prevailed.
• Ragas v. Taylor-Seidenbach, Inc. (2024). The court granted Gulf Engineering Company's unopposed motion for partial summary judgment, dismissing Ellery Ragas's manufacturer, professional vendor and intentional concealment claims against it.
• Ragusa v. Louisiana Insurance Guaranty Association (2024). The court granted the Louisiana Insurance Guaranty Association's motion for summary judgment and dismissed the Ragusa family's wrongful death claims as not timely "covered claims"; LIGA won and the plaintiffs lost on those claims.
• Rivet v. Huntington Ingalls, Inc. (2024). The court granted the plaintiffs' (Janet and Kayla Rivet) motion for summary judgment that Tommy Rivet had mesothelioma, that asbestos caused it, and that it caused his death, over the opposition of Eagle and Travelers, while leaving the source of the asbestos open.
• Sentilles v. Huntington Ingalls Incorporated (2024). The court denied plaintiff Sentilles's motion in limine to exclude Avondale's expert Christopher Herfel, finding him qualified and his opinions relevant and reliable.
• Sentilles v. Huntington Ingalls Incorporated (2024). The court granted Avondale's Rule 12(c) motion dismissing with prejudice Sentilles's reasserted claims about post-June 1969 Avondale work and his father's and brother's Avondale employment, denied his motion for reconsideration, and barred him from using Pelnor's experts Pierce and Roggli at trial.
• Wilson v. Ham (2024). A magistrate judge granted Wilson leave to file a second amended complaint and recommended dismissing his § 1983 claims against Dr. Ham, Warden Fleischman, Sheriff Smith and Dr. Gore in his official capacity, and the reimbursement claim, while letting the medical-indifference claim against Dr. Gore individually go forward.
• Cadiere v. Huntington Ingalls, Inc. (2023). The magistrate judge granted plaintiff Bradley Cadiere's motion for leave to file an amended complaint adding a direct asbestos exposure claim against Huntington Ingalls (Avondale), and rejected Avondale's judicial estoppel argument.
• Crossland v. Huntington Ingalls, Inc. (2023). The court granted Woodward Design & Build's summary judgment motion on the strict liability claim and on exposure to products other than joint compound and pipe insulation, denied it on the negligence claim based on those two products, and denied Woodward's motion to exclude the two causation experts.
• Crossland v. Huntington Ingalls, Inc. (2023). The court granted defendant Burmaster Land and Development Co.'s unopposed motion for summary judgment against plaintiff Linda Crossland because she identified no evidence of exposure to asbestos from Burmaster's activities.
• Fiffie v. Taylor-Seidenbach (2023). The court granted plaintiff Monique Mohammed's motion and remanded the case to Orleans Parish Civil District Court over the opposition of defendant IMTT-Geismar.
• Gooding v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Company (2023). The court denied Swiftships, Inc.'s motion to reconsider its earlier denial of summary judgment, so the plaintiffs (Decedent's heirs) prevailed on the motion and the claims against Swiftships remain for trial.
• Hernandez v. Huntington Ingalls, Inc. (2023). The court granted the plaintiffs' (Hernandez's wife and daughter) motion to remand, declined supplemental jurisdiction over the remaining state-law claims, and sent the case back to the Orleans Parish Civil District Court over St. Joseph's opposition.
• Hotard v. Avondale Industries, Inc. (2023). The court denied Hopeman Brothers and Liberty Mutual's motion to reconsider the order letting SeaRiver and Exxon Mobil file a third-party demand, and denied their alternative motion to dismiss, so SeaRiver's contractual indemnity claim goes forward.
• Hotard v. Avondale Industries, Inc. (2023). The court granted SeaRiver and Exxon's motion for reconsideration and for leave to file a cross-claim and third-party demands against Avondale, Hopeman and Liberty Mutual, finding the motion timely, finding Avondale had waived arbitration, and finding an intervening change in controlling law.
• Hutchins v. Anco Insulations, Inc. (2023). The court granted summary judgment to Huntington Ingalls (as successor to Ingalls Shipyard), Redco, Sank, Inc. and Bayer CropScience for lack of evidence that Mr. Hutchins was exposed to their asbestos, and denied John Crane's motion, so claims involving John Crane's gaskets and packing proceed.
• Hutchins v. Anco Insulations, Inc. (2023). The district court denied the Hutchins plaintiffs' motions for partial summary judgment on exposure and causation as to A.W. Chesterton, Babcock & Wilcox, Combustion Engineering, Dixie Machine, Foster Wheeler and International Paper, so Continental Insurance and Avondale (Huntington Ingalls) prevailed on the motions.
• King v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co. (2023). The court granted Union Carbide's unopposed motion for summary judgment and dismissed plaintiff Glen King's claims against it, because he could not link any asbestos exposure to a Union Carbide product.
• Lebeau v. Huntington Ingalls Inc. (2023). The court denied the plaintiffs' motion to remand, holding that Avondale (with Lloyd's and Hopeman Brothers joining) timely removed the case under the federal officer removal statute, so the case stays in federal court.
• Legendre v. Louisiana Insurance Guaranty Association (2023). The court granted the Louisiana Insurance Guaranty Association's motion for summary judgment, ruling that plaintiff Legendre's claim was not a covered claim because it was filed after the December 31, 2021 deadline.
• Marsh v. Continental Insurance Company (2023). The magistrate judge granted Continental Insurance's motion to quash plaintiff's 1,459 requests for admission and its motion for a protective order limiting the corporate deposition topics, and denied plaintiff's motion to compel as moot.
• Marsh v. Continental Insurance Company (2023). The court denied Continental Insurance Company's motion for summary judgment seeking a dollar-for-dollar (pro tanto) credit for settlements and trust payments, ruling for the plaintiff estate administrator.
• Matherne v. Huntington Ingalls Incorporated (2023). The court denied LIGA's motion for entry of a Rule 54(b) final judgment on the earlier summary judgment in its favor, so LIGA must wait until the whole case ends to appeal; the plaintiffs prevailed on this motion.
• Ports America Gulfport, Inc. v. Johnson (2023). The court denied state Judge Rachael Johnson's Rule 11 motion for sanctions against Ports America Gulfport, Inc., because the court had ruled on the challenged claim before the 21-day safe harbor period ended.
• Ragusa v. Louisiana Guaranty Insurance Association (2023). The court granted the premises-owner defendants' partial summary judgment on strict liability under former article 2317 for crane exposures in 1996 or earlier, and denied it for any later years; Ragusa lost on the earlier years.
• Ragusa v. Louisiana Guaranty Insurance Association (2023). The court denied the defendants' Daubert motion to exclude plaintiff Frank Ragusa's experts Dr. Kraus and Dr. Landreneau, so plaintiff's specific-causation testimony on his mesothelioma may be presented at trial.
• Ragusa v. Louisiana Guaranty Insurance Association (2023). The court denied all nine summary judgment motions by premises owners and product companies, so Ragusa's asbestos claims against Pharmacia, Legacy Vulcan, Syngenta, Marathon, Murphy Oil, International Paper, Westinghouse and Riley Power continue.
• Ragusa v. Louisiana Guaranty Insurance Association (2023). The court denied plaintiff Frank Ragusa's motion to remand the case to state court, keeping it in federal court against Avondale (Huntington Ingalls) and the other defendants.
• Ragusa v. Louisiana Guaranty Insurance Association (2023). The court granted Avondale's motion for partial summary judgment on strict liability, direct negligence and intentional tort claims for the 1989 exposures, and denied it on vicarious liability, so Ragusa lost on three theories and won on one.
• Ragusa v. Louisiana Guaranty Insurance Association (2023). The court granted plaintiff Frank Ragusa Jr.'s motion for summary judgment that he has mesothelioma and that asbestos caused it, over opposition from Amdura, Syngenta, Rubicon and FMC.
• Ragusa v. Louisiana Guaranty Insurance Association (2023). The court granted summary judgment to Avondale (Huntington Ingalls) and to Travelers as insurer of Avondale's alleged executive officers, dismissing Ragusa's negligence and intentional tort claims as barred by the LHWCA.
• Ragusa v. Louisiana Guaranty Insurance Association (2023). The court granted LIGA's summary judgment motion as to coverage of Avondale itself, because Avondale is a high net worth insured, and denied it without prejudice as to coverage of Avondale's executive officers.
• Rivet v. Huntington Ingalls Incorporated (2023). The district judge granted the Rivet plaintiffs' objection to the magistrate judge's order, allowing them to amend their complaint to add Sparta and further claims against Pennsylvania Insurance Company, and stayed the claims against PIC and Sparta pending the Massachusetts litigation.
• Robichaux v. Huntington Ingalls Inc. (2023). The court granted Avondale's motions to expedite and to continue the trial, and stayed and administratively closed the case pending the outcome of Avondale's certiorari petition in Barrosse; the Robichaux plaintiffs lost their opposition.
• Robichaux v. Huntington Ingalls Inc. (2023). The court denied the summary judgment motions of Uniroyal Holdings and Foster Wheeler, leaving the survivors' and Avondale's claims against them for trial.
• Robichaux v. Huntington Ingalls Inc. (2023). The court denied the plaintiffs' motion to exclude Avondale's corporate representative Danny Joyce as a factual witness, and denied Avondale's motion to compel disclosure of settlements and trust submissions as moot or, to the extent not moot, as an improper attempt to reopen discovery.