Virginia Asbestos Case Law

Asbestos decisions from Virginia's courts and the federal courts there: 37 cases in our library so far. For what the law requires today, see Virginia asbestos laws; for where exposure happened, see Virginia asbestos exposure sites.

State supreme court

Virginia Supreme Court

• Quisenberry v. Huntington Ingalls Incorporated (2018). On a question certified by a federal district court, the Supreme Court of Virginia answered that an employer owes a duty of care to an employee's family member allegedly exposed to asbestos from the employee's work clothes, favoring the estate of Wanda Quisenberry over Huntington Ingalls (the Shipyard); three justices dissented.
• Cole v. Norfolk Southern Railway Company (2017). The Supreme Court of Virginia affirmed the circuit court's grant of Norfolk Southern's plea in bar, holding the 2000 release barred the executor's FELA lung cancer claim, so the estate lost.
• Anheuser-Busch Companies, Inc. v. Cantrell (2015). The Supreme Court of Virginia reversed the circuit court's order allowing Cantrell to nonsuit his claims, ruling for the appealing defendants (twelve premises defendants and Huntington Ingalls), and remanded for further proceedings.
• Exxon Mobil Corporation v. Minton (2013). The Supreme Court of Virginia reversed the jury verdict for Minton against Exxon Mobil and remanded for further proceedings, because the trial court wrongly excluded evidence of the Shipyard's knowledge and safety measures. It also reversed the punitive damages award and entered final judgment on that claim for Exxon.
• Ford Motor Co. v. Boomer (2013). The Supreme Court of Virginia reversed the jury verdict and judgment for the estate against Ford and Honeywell (Bendix) because of the "substantial contributing factor" jury instructions, and remanded for further proceedings under a multiple-sufficient-causes standard.
• Kiser v. AW Chesterton Co. (2013). Answering a question certified by the Third Circuit, the Supreme Court of Virginia held that the executrix's mesothelioma wrongful death claim accrued at the earlier asbestosis diagnosis, not the mesothelioma diagnosis, which favored the defendants (two justices dissented).
• Gibbs v. Newport News Shipbuilding and Drydock Company (2012). The Supreme Court of Virginia reversed the circuit court's dismissal, which had sustained Newport News Shipbuilding's plea in bar, and remanded; the estate of Kenneth Gibbs won and the Shipyard lost.
• John Crane, Inc. v. Hardick (2012). On rehearing, the Supreme Court of Virginia reinstated the $2 million award to Hardick's estate for his pre-death pain and suffering against John Crane, Inc., while the $1.15 million loss of society award stayed vacated.
• John Crane, Inc. v. Hardick (2012). The Supreme Court of Virginia held that the jury could not award nonpecuniary damages ($2 million for pain and suffering and $1.15 million for loss of society) because Hardick was a seaman, vacated those awards in John Crane's favor, and otherwise affirmed the judgment for Mrs. Hardick, including the exclusion of John Crane's Navy expert.
• John Crane, Inc. v. Jones (2007). The Supreme Court of Virginia affirmed the judgment for the Estate of Garland Jones against John Crane, Inc., rejecting all four of Crane's challenges.
• Garlock Sealing Technologies, LLC v. Little (2005). The Supreme Court of Virginia affirmed the judgment for the estate of Zebulon Little against Garlock Sealing, holding maritime tort law governed and refusing to review Garlock's complaint about apportionment of damages.
• Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp. v. Watson (1992). The Supreme Court of Virginia affirmed the judgment for Watson's estate against Owens-Corning, upholding the compensatory and punitive damages awarded by the jury.
• Roller v. Basic Const. Co. (1989). The Supreme Court of Virginia reversed the Court of Appeals, which had affirmed the Industrial Commission's dismissal of Mrs. Roller's claim as time-barred, and remanded for further proceedings limited to the subrogation question, so Mrs. Roller won on limitations and Basic Construction lost.
• Locke v. Johns-Manville (1981). The Supreme Court of Virginia reversed the trial court's summary judgments for Johns-Manville and the other defendants, holding the mesothelioma suit was not time-barred, and remanded for further proceedings.
• Caudle-Hyatt, Inc. v. Mixon (1979). The Supreme Court of Virginia affirmed the Industrial Commission's award of death benefits to Lucille Mixon (and her stepchild), rejecting the employer Caudle-Hyatt and its insurer Aetna's challenges on dependency and injurious exposure.

State appeals courts

Virginia Court of Appeals

• National College OF Business and Technology, Inc. v. Malveaux (2012). The Court of Appeals of Virginia affirmed the circuit court's ruling that the College's asbestos-related workplace safety violations were "other than serious" with no penalty, not "de minimis," so the Commissioner prevailed over the College.
• National College OF Business and Technology, Inc. v. Davenport (2011). The Court of Appeals affirmed the circuit court's finding that the College's employees were exposed to the asbestos hazard, but reversed the finding that the violations were "serious" and remanded for the Commissioner to re-determine the penalty, so the College won in part and the Commissioner won in part.
• Robertson v. DuPONT (2002). The Court of Appeals of Virginia affirmed the Workers' Compensation Commission, which had denied the widow's claim for temporary total disability benefits and set the permanent partial disability benefits using the wage Mr. Robertson earned at DuPont twenty-six years earlier, so DuPont prevailed and the widow lost.
• Chesapeake & Potomac Tel. v. Williams (1990). The Court of Appeals of Virginia affirmed the Industrial Commission's award to claimant Williams, rejecting Chesapeake & Potomac Telephone Company's argument that the weekly wage should be based on his lower later earnings at Frederick County Electric.

Federal appeals courts

U.S. Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit

• Brinkman v. General Dynamics Corporation (2016). The Fourth Circuit vacated the district court's order remanding the case to state court and sent it back for further proceedings, in light of its new ruling that the government contractor defense is available in failure-to-warn cases; this favored General Dynamics and Electric Boat over the Brinkmans.
• Ripley v. Foster Wheeler LLC (2016). The Fourth Circuit reversed the district court's order remanding the case to Virginia state court, ruling for Foster Wheeler, and remanded for the district court to decide whether Foster Wheeler offered enough proof to support federal officer removal.

Federal district courts

U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Virginia

• Llt Management LLC v. Emory (2025). The court granted the doctors' motion to dismiss LLT Management's fraud claim (time-barred) and Lanham Act false advertising claim (failure to state a claim), but denied it as to the trade libel/product disparagement claim, which goes forward.
• Gehant v. Foster Wheeler Energy Corporation (2022). The court denied Foster Wheeler's motion for summary judgment, finding triable issues of fact on duty to warn, the government contractor defense, and causation, so the plaintiff's estate may proceed.
• Mullinex v. John Crane, Inc. (2022). The court granted Patricia Mullinex's Rule 12(c) motion for judgment on the pleadings on liability against John Crane, Inc., deeming the wrongful death allegations admitted, and set the case for a trial on damages.
• Mullinex v. John Crane, Inc. (2022). The district judge sustained in part the plaintiff's objection and vacated in part the magistrate judge's order, ruling that John Crane must show the Navy knew of the asbestos hazard of its gaskets and packing, while still barring evidence of Navy negligence.
• Mullinex v. John Crane, Inc. (2020). The court denied John Crane, Inc.'s motion to dismiss the plaintiffs' maritime law claims, finding that admiralty jurisdiction exists, so the Mullinexes prevailed on the motion.
• Goodrich v. John Crane, Inc. (2018). The court granted in part and denied in part the plaintiffs' motions to limit defense experts McCloskey and Henshaw, granted the plaintiffs' motion to bar fiber potency ratio testimony, denied the plaintiffs' motion on dose reconstruction, and denied John Crane's motion on regulatory statements without prejudice.
• Goodrich v. John Crane, Inc. (2018). The magistrate judge granted plaintiffs' motion in limine, barring John Crane, Inc. from offering evidence that the Navy's knowledge or negligence was a superseding cause or part of the state of the art.
• Hopeman Brothers, Inc. v. Continental Cas. Co. (2018). The court granted in part and denied in part both sides' summary judgment motions, ruling for Hopeman Brothers on all-sums allocation, vertical exhaustion and most non-cumulation clause issues, and for Continental and Lexington on the meaning of "loss" and the 1971-74 Lexington defense-cost coverage.
• Parker v. Hunting Point Apartments, LLC (2015). The district court granted the landlord defendants' motion to dismiss the pro se tenant's amended complaint, including his asbestos injury claim, and also dismissed his claim against the EPA Administrator.
• Wilson v. AC&S, Inc. (2015). The federal magistrate judge granted Westinghouse's motion for summary judgment against plaintiff Rorie Wilson, finding no evidence that its arc chutes released asbestos fibers at levels that caused his disease, and denied as moot a motion to limit another expert's testimony.
• Contreras v. Thor Norfolk Hotel, LLC (2003). The court granted the hotel owner Thor Norfolk Hotel's motion to dismiss the amended complaint, ruling against plaintiff Contreras because he alleged no asbestos-related disease or physical injury.
• Anderson v. Crown Cork & Seal (2000). The district court granted the plaintiff's motion to remand and sent the case back to Portsmouth Circuit Court, rejecting the defendants' federal enclave removal theory.
• McCormick v. CE Thurston & Sons, Inc. (1997). The court granted the plaintiffs' motion to remand and sent the case back to the Newport News state circuit court, rejecting C.E. Thurston & Sons' federal enclave and federal officer removal grounds.
• Saunders v. HK Porter Co., Inc. (1986). The court granted summary judgment to the defendants against Grimes and Saunders because their claims were time-barred, dismissing their cases with prejudice, and denied summary judgment against Pruden because defendants did not show he was injured more than two years before suing.
• Large v. Bucyrus-Erie Co. (1981). The court granted the power shovel manufacturers Bucyrus-Erie and Northwest Engineering partial summary judgment, holding the plaintiff's respiratory injury claims time-barred; his hearing loss claim was not challenged.

U.S. District Court, Western District of Virginia

• Joyce v. AC & s., Inc. (1984). The court granted summary judgment to Celotex and the joining defendants (Owens-Corning, Armstrong, Eagle-Picher, Keene, Pittsburgh Corning), holding all of plaintiff Joyce's asbestos-related claims barred by Virginia's two-year statute of limitations.