Thibodeaux v. General Electric Company (2025)

Our plain-English summary of Thibodeaux v. General Electric Company (U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana, April 10, 2025).

Reed Thibodeaux and his wife, Cynthia Thibodeaux, sued General Electric Company and other defendants, including Huntington Ingalls Incorporated (Avondale). The case concerns Reed's employment-related asbestos exposure and his later mesothelioma diagnosis. Avondale asked the court for summary judgment dismissing Cynthia as a plaintiff. The plaintiffs, who had lawyers, filed no opposition by the deadline. The court granted the motion because it was unopposed and appeared to have merit. It noted that Cynthia brought no claims of her own against any defendant. It also noted that Reed's asbestos exposure was alleged to have happened before 1982, and that Louisiana law allows no loss of consortium claim for asbestos exposure before that year. Cynthia Thibodeaux was dismissed as a plaintiff.

We wrote this summary from the court's opinion with the help of AI. It is not the court's wording, and it is not legal advice. The full opinion is below.

The decision

• Court: U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Louisiana
• Decided: April 10, 2025
• Docket: Civil Action No. 24-1111
• Stage: Summary judgment
• State: Louisiana

Outcome. The court granted Avondale's unopposed motion for summary judgment and dismissed Cynthia Thibodeaux as a plaintiff.

What the court held. Under Louisiana law, there is no loss of consortium claim for asbestos exposure that occurred before 1982.

Issues decided: Loss of Consortium, Trial Procedure and Discovery.

The people and their exposure

• Reed Thibodeaux: mesothelioma

The defendants

• Huntington Ingalls Incorporated (Avondale) (employer)
• General Electric Company (manufacturer)

Decisions this opinion cites

Earlier decisions in our library that the court cited:

• Landry v. Avondale Industries, Inc. (Louisiana Supreme Court, 2003). The Louisiana Supreme Court reversed the lower courts' denial of the exceptions of no cause of action, granted the defendants' exceptions, dismissed Mrs. Landry's pre-death loss of consortium claim with prejudice, and remanded; the employers, executive officers and manufacturing defendants won on that claim and Mrs. Landry lost.

The court's opinion

The text below is Google Scholar's copy of the court's opinion, a public record. Numbers in brackets, such as [*921], mark where each page of the printed reporter begins.

REED THIBODEAUX, etal.,

v.

GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY, etal.

Civil Action No. 24-1111.

April 10, 2025.

United States District Court, E.D. Louisiana.

SECTION M (1)

BARRY W. ASHE, District Judge.

ORDER & REASONS

Before the Court is a motion for summary judgment seeking dismissal of Cynthia Thibodeaux as a party plaintiff filed by defendant Huntington Ingalls Incorporated ("Avondale").[1] The motion is set for submission on April 17, 2025.[2] Local Rule 7.5 of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana requires that a memorandum in opposition to a motion be filed no later than eight days before the noticed submission date, making the deadline in this instance April 9, 2025. Plaintiffs Reed Thibodeaux and Cynthia Thibodeaux, who are represented by counsel, did not file an opposition to the motion. Accordingly, because the motion is unopposed and appears to have merit,[3]

IT IS ORDERED that Avondale's motion for summary judgment seeking dismissal of Cynthia Thibodeaux as a party plaintiff (R. Doc. 135) is GRANTED, and Cynthia Thibodeaux is DISMISSED as a plaintiff in this case.

[1] R. Doc. 135.

[2] R. Doc. 135-3.

[3] This case involves claims related to plaintiff Reed Thibodeaux's employment-related asbestos exposure and subsequent mesothelioma diagnosis. R. Doc. 1-2. Cynthia Thibodeaux, Reed's wife, is named as a plaintiff but brings no claims of her own against any defendant. Id. Further, as Avondale points out, Reed's asbestos exposure is alleged to have occurred prior to 1982. R. Doc. 135-1. Under Louisiana law, there is no loss of consortium claim for asbestos exposure that occurred prior to 1982. See Landry v. Avondale Indus., Inc., 864 So. 2d 117, 124 (La. 2003). Thus, Avondale's motion must be granted.

Sources

• The opinion on Google Scholar
• Louisiana asbestos laws
• Louisiana asbestos exposure sites