Maine Asbestos Case Law

Asbestos decisions from Maine's courts and the federal courts there: 12 cases in our library so far. For what the law requires today, see Maine asbestos laws; for where exposure happened, see Maine asbestos exposure sites.

State supreme court

Maine Supreme Judicial Court

• Godbout v. WLB Holding, Inc. (2010). The Maine Supreme Judicial Court affirmed the Superior Court's dismissal of the Godbouts' complaint against WLB Holding, Inc., holding it was barred by the three-year statute of repose for dissolved corporations.
• Bernier v. Raymark Industries, Inc. (1986). Answering questions certified by the federal district court, the Maine court held that state-of-the-art evidence is admissible in a failure-to-warn claim under section 221, that wrongful death damages are recoverable in a section 221 action, and that section 221 applies to pre-1973 inhalation only if the disease manifested after October 3, 1973; this was a partial win for each side, with two justices dissenting on the third question.
• Austin v. Raybestos-Manhattan, Inc. (1984). Answering a question certified by the federal district court, the Maine high court held that the comparative negligence statute applies to the strict liability claim against Raybestos-Manhattan, but only to compare the decedent's fault in voluntarily and unreasonably encountering a known danger.

Federal appeals courts

U.S. Court of Appeals, First Circuit

• Austin v. Unarco Industries, Inc. (1983). The First Circuit affirmed that admiralty law did not apply, upheld the denial of a new trial on the comparative negligence finding for Raybestos-Manhattan and Unarco, but vacated the dismissal of the plaintiff's Maine strict liability count and remanded for further proceedings.

Federal district courts

U.S. District Court, District of Maine

• Coffin v. Ametek, Inc. (2021). The district court denied Maine Central Railroad's motion for summary judgment on Victor Coffin's FELA claim, finding foreseeability of asbestos exposure and harm a jury question.
• Coffin v. Ametek, Inc. (2020). The court denied Maine Central Railroad's and Honeywell's motions to exclude the plaintiff's expert witnesses Dr. Abraham (causation) and Dr. Ozonoff (state of the art), so the plaintiff Victor Coffin prevailed on the motions.
• Coffin v. Ametek, Inc. (2020). The district court denied defendant Maine Central Railroad's motion for leave to implead the Maine Department of Transportation as a third-party defendant, so plaintiff Victor Coffin prevailed on the motion.
• Soucy v. Briggs & Stratton Corporation (2014). The court denied Toro Company's Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss, so the plaintiff's asbestos claims against Toro go forward.
• In re All Maine Asbestos Litigation (1986). The court granted the United States' motion to dismiss the Longshore Act vessel-owner part of Count VI, but denied it as to the Maine-law land-based theories because factual issues remained on whether Navy conduct was discretionary.
• In re Moorenovich (1986). The district court denied the defendants' motion in limine and ruled that the asbestos plaintiffs could mention fear of cancer in opening statements and offer evidence of it at trial.
• Austin v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp. (1981). The court granted Bath Iron Works' motion for summary judgment, dismissing Armstrong Cork's third-party complaint for contribution and indemnity because the LHWCA exclusive liability provision barred it.
• Linnell, Choate & Webber v. Heyde (1971). The court granted the law firm's motion for summary judgment, denied the Deputy Commissioner's, and set aside the $1,450 attorneys' fee award in a widow's death-benefit case as arbitrary and an abuse of discretion, directing an amended award of at least $2,500 plus $675.93 in disbursements.