New Jersey Asbestos Case Law

Asbestos decisions from New Jersey's courts and the federal courts there: 118 cases in our library so far. For what the law requires today, see New Jersey asbestos laws; for where exposure happened, see New Jersey asbestos exposure sites.

State supreme court

New Jersey Supreme Court

• Fowler v. Akzo Nobel Chemicals, Inc. (2022). The New Jersey Supreme Court reversed the Appellate Division, reinstated the jury's verdict and $2,380,000 award for the Edenfield estate against Union Carbide, and remanded for any remaining issues.
• Rowe v. Bell & Gossett Company (2019). The New Jersey Supreme Court reversed the Appellate Division and reinstated the trial court's judgment, holding for Universal (Hilco) against the plaintiffs that the settling defendants' interrogatory answers and corporate depositions were admissible and the jury could allocate fault to those defendants.
• Whelan v. Armstrong International Inc. (2019). The New Jersey Supreme Court affirmed the Appellate Division's reversal of summary judgment for the seven defendant manufacturers and distributors (Armstrong, Burnham, Carrier, Cleaver-Brooks, Crown, Ford, Johnson Controls), ruling for plaintiff Whelan and remanding to the trial court.
• Continental Insurance Company v. Honeywell International, Inc. (2017). The New Jersey Supreme Court affirmed the Appellate Division, upholding the trial court's partial summary judgments for Honeywell: New Jersey allocation law applied to the excess policies, and Honeywell had no allocation share for years after 1987, when insurance became unavailable.
• Olivo v. Owens-Illinois, Inc. (2006). The New Jersey Supreme Court affirmed the Appellate Division's reversal of summary judgment for Exxon Mobil and remanded for further proceedings on whether the hazard-incident-to-the-work exception applies, so plaintiff Olivo's claim continued.
• Becker v. Baron Bros. (1994). The New Jersey Supreme Court reversed the Appellate Division's affirmance of a jury verdict for plaintiff Edith Becker against General Motors and Englewood Brake and remanded for retrial, because the jury was wrongly told that all asbestos products sold without warnings are defective.
• Owens-Illinois, Inc. v. United Ins. Co. (1994). The New Jersey Supreme Court reversed the Appellate Division's allocation ruling, which had favored Owens-Illinois, and remanded to the Chancery Division for a special master to allocate asbestos defense and indemnity costs among the insurers and Owens-Illinois for its uninsured periods; the continuous-trigger holding stood.
• Coffman v. Keene Corp. (1993). The New Jersey Supreme Court affirmed the Appellate Division, which had upheld the jury verdict for plaintiff George Coffman against Keene Corporation, holding that the jury was properly told to presume a warning would have been heeded.
• Landrigan v. Celotex Corp. (1991). The New Jersey Supreme Court reversed the Appellate Division, set aside the directed verdict for Owens-Corning and Owens Illinois, and remanded for retrial, so plaintiff Angelina Landrigan won.
• Mauro v. Raymark Industries, Inc. (1989). The New Jersey Supreme Court affirmed the judgment for plaintiff Roger Mauro, holding that the trial court properly kept his enhanced-risk-of-cancer damages claim from the jury and properly limited his expert's testimony, so the defendants prevailed on those issues.
• Fischer v. Johns-Manville Corp. (1986). The New Jersey Supreme Court affirmed the judgment for James and Geneva Fischer, upholding the $240,000 punitive damages award against the Johns-Manville defendants.
• Beshada v. Johns-Manville Products Corp. (1982). The New Jersey Supreme Court reversed the trial court's denial of the plaintiffs' motion for partial summary judgment and struck the state-of-the-art defense, ruling for the worker plaintiffs and against the asbestos manufacturer defendants.

State appeals courts

New Jersey Superior Court, Appellate Division

• Barden v. Brenntag North America, Inc. (2023). The Appellate Division reversed the judgments for the four plaintiffs (about $37.3 million compensatory and $186.5 million punitive) against Johnson & Johnson and Johnson & Johnson Consumer, Inc., and remanded for new trials.
• McDERMID v. 3M Company (2023). The Appellate Division affirmed summary judgment for General Electric and CBS Corp. (successor to Westinghouse) against the McDermid plaintiffs' negligent supervision claims and held the remaining claims time-barred by the statute of repose.
• Marino v. Abex Corporation (2022). The Appellate Division affirmed the judgment for plaintiff Deborah Marino against Ford Motor Company, upholding the discovery sanctions; it found one hearsay ruling erroneous but harmless.
• Fowler v. Akzo Nobel Chemicals, Inc. (2021). The Appellate Division reversed the judgment against Union Carbide, vacated the $2,380,000 verdict for plaintiff, and remanded for a new trial because of erroneous jury instructions on the duty to warn and on medical causation.
• Lanzo v. Cyprus Amax Minerals Company (2021). The Appellate Division reversed the $117 million judgment for Stephen and Kendra Lanzo against Johnson & Johnson Consumer Inc. and Imerys Talc America and remanded for new, separate trials, so the defendants prevailed on appeal.
• Fishbain v. Colgate-Palmolive Company (2019). The Appellate Division affirmed the jury verdict and final judgment for Shulton, Procter & Gamble, Wyeth and Whittaker, Clark & Daniels against plaintiff David Fishbain, and dismissed the defendants' cross-appeals as moot.
• Huff v. Cyprus Amax Minerals Company (2019). The Appellate Division vacated its order granting leave to appeal as improvidently granted, dismissed Cyprus Amax's interlocutory appeal, and remanded, leaving in place the trial court's denial of the motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction in favor of the Huff plaintiffs.
• Rebbeck v. Honeywell International, Inc. (2019). The Appellate Division affirmed the trial courts' dismissals on forum non conveniens grounds in favor of Honeywell, and remanded so the Gardner order would be amended to a conditional dismissal without prejudice like the others.
• Brandecker v. E&b Mill Supply Co. (2018). The appellate court reversed the trial court's denial of plaintiffs' Rule 4:50-1 motion, vacated the final judgment dismissing the case, and remanded, ruling for the Brandecker plaintiffs against The Scotts Company.
• Condon v. Advance Thermal Hydronics, Inc. (2018). The Appellate Division vacated the judgment against Pecora Corporation and reversed the denial of Pecora's summary judgment motion, ruling for Pecora over plaintiffs William and Debbie Condon.
• Rowe v. Bell & Gossett Company (2018). The Appellate Division reversed and remanded for a new trial on apportionment only, leaving in place the jury's finding of liability against Hilco (successor to Universal) and the damages amount, because the trial court wrongly admitted settling defendants' evidence; plaintiff won on that point and lost on her other arguments.
• Whelan v. Armstrong International Inc. (2018). The Appellate Division reversed the summary judgments for Armstrong, Burnham, Carrier, Cleaver-Brooks, Crown Boiler, Ford, Johnson Controls, NIBCO and Oakfabco, and remanded for trial in favor of plaintiff Whelan.
• Fowler v. Akzo Nobel Chemicals, Inc. (2017). The Appellate Division reversed the trial court's summary judgment for Union Carbide, finding enough evidence for a jury to infer Edenfield was exposed to Union Carbide's asbestos, and ruled for the plaintiff widow.
• Seymoure v. AO Smith Water Products Company (2016). The appellate court reversed the trial court's order denying Union Carbide's request for a protective order over its employees' workers' compensation medical records and remanded for a more protective order, siding with Union Carbide over plaintiff Seymoure.
• Whelan v. Armstrong Int'l (2016). The Appellate Division reversed the summary judgments the trial court had granted to Armstrong, Burnham, Carrier, Cleaver-Brooks, Crown Boiler, Ford, Johnson Controls, NIBCO and Oakfabco, and remanded for trial in plaintiff Whelan's favor.
• Estate OF Brust v. Acf Industries, LLC (2015). The Appellate Division affirmed summary judgment for the railroad defendants (PATCO, DRPA, Railroad Friction Products, Pneumo-Abex) on federal preemption and for the automotive defendants (Honeywell, Abex, Pep Boys) on insufficient exposure, against the Brust plaintiffs.
• Kaenzig v. Charles B. Chrystal Company, Inc. (2015). The Appellate Division affirmed the jury's $1.6 million verdict and the denial of JNOV and a new trial, ruling against defendant Whittaker, Clark & Daniels and for plaintiffs Steven and Linda Kaenzig.
• Latter v. 3M Company (2015). The Appellate Division reversed the trial court's summary judgment for Weeks Marine and American Atlantic Company and sent the case back, finding a triable issue on whether Latter was exposed to asbestos on their dredges.
• Barile v. 3M Company, Inc. (2013). The court reversed the jury's $1.78 million verdict against Foster Wheeler because the statute of repose barred all claims against it, and affirmed the rulings and verdict in favor of Exxon Mobil on the plaintiff's cross-appeal.
• Commissioner of Insurance v. Integrity Insurance Company (2012). The Appellate Division affirmed the liquidation court's disallowance of W.R. Grace's proofs of claim against the liquidated Integrity Insurance Company, so the Commissioner of Insurance prevailed and Grace lost.
• Gaskill v. Abex Corporation (2012). The Appellate Division affirmed the Law Division's dismissal of Michael Gaskill's asbestos complaint with prejudice for lying in discovery, so defendants Abex, Honeywell, Volkswagen and Ford prevailed.
• Andreoli v. State Insulation Corporation (2011). The Appellate Division reversed the trial court's denial of Hess Corporation's motion to dismiss and remanded for dismissal of the estate's claims against Hess with prejudice as time-barred.
• Buttitta v. Allied-Signal, Inc. (2011). The Appellate Division affirmed the judgment requiring defendant Asbestos Corporation, Ltd. to pay plaintiff Susan Buttitta's costs, litigation expenses, attorneys' fees and eight percent prejudgment interest under the offer of judgment rule.
• Anderson v. AJ Friedman Supply Co. (2010). The Appellate Division affirmed the judgment for Bonnie and John Anderson against Exxon Mobil, including the $7 million and $500,000 awards from the second damages trial, and rejected all of Exxon's arguments.
• Buttitta v. Allied Signal, Inc. (2010). The Appellate Division affirmed the jury verdict and judgment for plaintiff Susan Buttitta against Borg-Warner and Asbestos Corporation Ltd., rejecting all of their challenges.
• Sarkozy v. AP Green Industries, Inc. (2008). The Appellate Division affirmed the jury judgments for plaintiffs Patton, the Wilson estate and the Grube estate against Scapa Dryer Fabrics, rejecting Scapa's challenges to the damages, the lack of apportionment, and the claimed trial errors.
• Olivo v. Exxon Mobil Corporation (2005). The Appellate Division reversed summary judgment for Exxon Mobil, which had been granted on the ground that it owed no duty to the decedent, and remanded for further proceedings, so plaintiff Anthony Olivo prevailed on the appeal.
• Kurak v. AP Green Refractories Co. (1997). The Appellate Division reversed the judgment against Owens-Illinois, holding it was entitled to judgment in its favor. It affirmed the finding of liability against Owens-Corning Fiberglas, but ordered a new trial on damages, or on liability and damages at the Kuraks' choice, because of an error in the jury instruction.
• Thalman v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas (1996). The appellate court affirmed the jury's damages award against Owens-Corning Fiberglas, reversed the trial judge's remittitur of the loss of consortium and wrongful death awards, and remanded for an amended judgment reflecting the full jury awards.
• Higgins v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas (1995). The Appellate Division reversed the judgment against Owens-Corning Fiberglas and remanded for a new trial in favor of plaintiff Higgins, and dismissed Owens-Corning's cross appeal on the medical monitoring award as moot.
• Jadlowski v. Owens Corning (1995). The Appellate Division reversed the punitive damages award (as remitted to $2,500,000 from a $15,000,000 jury verdict) against Owens-Corning and remanded for a new trial on punitive damages, rejecting the plaintiff's cross-appeal from the remittitur.
• Ripa v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas (1995). The appellate court affirmed liability and compensatory damages for plaintiff Pauline Ripa against Owens-Corning, but cut Owens-Corning's share to thirty percent and reversed the $5.5 million punitive award, remanding for a new trial on punitive damages only.
• Schiavo v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas (1995). The Appellate Division affirmed the compensatory and punitive damage awards against Owens-Corning in favor of the Schiavo plaintiffs, finding the Saranac document error harmless given the small punitive award.
• Goss v. American Cyanamid Co. (1994). The Appellate Division affirmed the judgment for plaintiffs Goss and the Patullos against Porter Hayden, but vacated the judgment based on the second jury verdict, reinstated the original verdicts (which assigned part of the fault to Madsen & Howell), and remanded for amended judgments.
• Owens-Illinois, Inc. v. United Ins. Co. (1993). The court affirmed in part the Chancery Division's summary judgment for Owens-Illinois, upholding coverage, a single deductible per policy period, the continuous trigger and joint and several liability, but reversed and remanded for trial on expected or intended losses, waiver of fraud defenses and fraud or concealment by Owens-Illinois against its insurers and reinsurers.
• Stevenson v. Keene Corp. (1992). The Appellate Division affirmed the trial judge's in limine ruling for plaintiff Muriel Stevenson that asbestos tort cases fall within the 'environmental tort action' exception, so defendant Porter-Hayden remains jointly and severally liable, and remanded for further proceedings.
• Jenkins v. Johns-Manville Products (1990). The Appellate Division reversed all five judgments of the judge of compensation and remanded: special adjustment benefits were wrongly allowed in Bognar and Kacsmar, properly allowed in Jackson, Jenkins and Shimanowitz but to be recalculated, and the 450-week waiting period was rejected, partly favoring the Commissioner of Labor and partly the claimants.
• Sholtis v. American Cyanamid Co. (1989). The Appellate Division held the trial judge erred in refusing the plaintiffs' supplemental proofs, reinstated the claims against Porter Hayden, remanded the claims against the other Wellington defendants for reconsideration under new exposure standards, and affirmed summary judgment for John Crane.