Asbestos and Lung Cancer: Asbestos Court Decisions

Decisions in our case-law library that involve lung cancer: 256 cases, by state. Each line gives the exposure the court described, or else what it decided. For the topic itself, see Asbestos and Lung Cancer.

Louisiana

• Thomas v. AP Green Industries, Inc. (4th Circuit, 2006). The appeals court amended the judgment to cut the surviving spouse's wrongful death award against Entergy Louisiana from $2.75 million to $1 million, and otherwise affirmed the jury verdict for the plaintiffs, including the directed verdict for McCarty and the jury's finding of no fault by Johns Manville.
• Adams v. Asbestos Corp. Ltd. (2nd Circuit, 2005). The court of appeal affirmed summary judgment for Eaton Corporation, dismissing the survival action of Walter Counts' heirs because workers' compensation was their exclusive remedy.
• Kemp v. Armstrong World Industries (1st Circuit, 2003). The appeals court affirmed the trial court's partial summary judgment for Philip Morris, which limited the Kemp family's claims against the tobacco company to those available under the Louisiana Products Liability Act.
• Brunet v. Avondale Industries, Inc. (5th Circuit, 2000). The court affirmed the judgment dismissing the Brunet family's claims against Avondale Industries, holding that workers' compensation was their exclusive remedy, and it dismissed the appeal as to Avondale's executive officers and their insurers.
• Asbestos v. Bordelon, Inc. (4th Circuit, 1998). The court affirmed the jury verdicts for the plaintiffs against Owens-Corning Fiberglas (Kaylo insulation) and Rock Wool (One Shot cement), reversed the judgments against Garlock, A.W. Chesterton and Flexitallic, affirmed the judgments against Abadie, Naquin and Terrebonne and the dismissal of Plaisance's claim as prescribed, and ordered a virile-share reduction for Avondale's settlement that, on rehearing, applies only to Duronslet.
• Re' v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp. (4th Circuit, 1998). The Court of Appeal affirmed the trial court's transfer of Diana Re's Orleans Parish suit to Jefferson Parish, ruling for defendants Garlock and W.R. Grace over her objection; one judge dissented.
• Gautreaux v. Rheem Mfg. Co. (4th Circuit, 1996). The court of appeal granted Rheem's writ application but affirmed the trial court's denial of Rheem's exception of no cause of action, so the plaintiffs' tort suit against Rheem continued (two judges dissented).
• Thomas v. Armstrong World Industries (1st Circuit, 1996). The appeals court reversed the dismissal of Royce Thomas's claim against his employer Anco Insulations, which had won on an exception of no cause of action, and remanded for further proceedings.
• Atkinson v. Celotex Corp. (3rd Circuit, 1994). The court affirmed the jury verdicts and judgment, finding no manifest error or abuse of discretion, so the nine plaintiffs who appealed (or their heirs) and Faye Myers did not get higher damages or a consortium award against Owens-Illinois, Keene and INA.

Maine

• 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.

Maryland

• RJ Reynolds Tobacco v. Stidham (2016). The Court of Appeals of Maryland held there was a final judgment but dismissed the plaintiffs' appeal as moot, so the tobacco companies' dismissal from the asbestos case stood; it also commented on joinder for guidance in future cases.
• Wallace & Gale Asbestos Settlement Trust v. Carter (2013). The Court of Special Appeals reversed and vacated the judgments for the fifteen use plaintiffs against the Wallace & Gale Trust as time-barred, reversed the Hewitt judgments and remanded for a new trial on apportionment, and affirmed the plaintiffs' judgments in the Carter, James and Lawrence cases.
• Scapa Dryer Fabrics, Inc. v. Saville (2011). The Court of Appeals affirmed the judgment for Mr. Saville against Scapa on causation, the cross-claim JNOV and the effect of his admissions, but reversed on bankruptcy trust offsets and remanded for discovery of the trust settlement agreements so the verdict could be reduced.
• Scapa Dryer Fabrics, Inc. v. Saville (2010). The Court of Special Appeals affirmed the Baltimore City judgment for Carl Saville against Scapa Dryer Fabrics and the Wallace & Gale Asbestos Settlement Trust, and upheld the denial of their cross-claims against the settling defendants.
• Scapa Dryer Fabrics, Inc. v. Saville (2009). The Court of Special Appeals affirmed the judgment for Carl Saville against Scapa Dryer Fabrics and the Wallace & Gale Asbestos Settlement Trust, and upheld the denial of their JNOV and new-trial motions and of Scapa's request for a further reduction for bankruptcy trust payments.
• Owens Corning v. Walatka (1999). The court reversed the trial court's refusal to apply Maryland's noneconomic damages cap to the Walatka verdicts, ruling for Owens Corning and Owens-Illinois, and remanded to apply the cap to all claims; it affirmed the Adams judgments against Owens Corning, ruling for the Adams plaintiffs.
• Porter Hayden Company v. Wyche (1999). The Court of Special Appeals vacated the judgment for the Wyches against Porter Hayden and remanded with instructions to apply the statutory cap on noneconomic damages, because the Wyches failed to show the cancer arose before the cap's effective date.
• Adams v. Owens-Illinois (1998). The Court of Special Appeals affirmed the Baltimore City jury verdicts, which were for the defendants in seven cases and for the plaintiffs in the Parsons and Drebing mesothelioma cases, and ordered the appellants to pay costs.
• ACandS, Inc. v. Asner (1995). The Court of Special Appeals affirmed the Baltimore City jury judgments for the Asner, Wilson and Payne plaintiffs against insulation contractors ACandS and Porter Hayden, including the punitive damages and the consortium and solatium awards.
• Pierce v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp. (1983). The Court of Appeals of Maryland reversed the summary judgment for Johns-Manville and the other defendants and remanded, holding the estate's survival and wrongful death actions for lung cancer were not time-barred.

Michigan

• Grand Trunk Western Railroad, Inc. v. 37th Circuit Court Judge (2008). On remand from the Michigan Supreme Court, the Court of Appeals denied Grand Trunk Western Railroad's complaint for superintending control, so the trial court could try the two asbestos cases at once before separate juries; one judge dissented.
• Jaqua v. Canadian Nat. RR, Inc. (2007). The Court of Appeals reversed the trial court's denial of summary disposition and held that the release Jaqua signed barred his estate's FELA claim against Canadian National Railroad for his lung cancer, so the railroad won.
• Brisboy v. Fibreboard Corp. (1988). The Michigan Supreme Court upheld the denial of Fibreboard's motion for directed verdict, but held the lower courts wrongly disregarded the jury's finding that Rand was 55% negligent, and remanded for judgment with damages apportioned under the jury's verdict.
• Larson v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp. (1986). The Michigan Supreme Court affirmed the dismissal of all four wrongful death suits to the extent they rested on asbestosis, because they were filed too late, but held that the Glazier and Revard cancer claims against the asbestos manufacturers could proceed.
• Larson v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp. (1985). The Michigan Court of Appeals affirmed summary judgment for the defendants (Johns-Manville Sales Corp. and Fibreboard Corp.) in all four wrongful death actions, holding them time-barred and leaving the plaintiffs without recovery.

Mississippi

• Illinois Central Railroad Company v. Oakes EX rel. Hagan (2018). The Mississippi Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeals and the circuit court, holding Illinois Central Railroad entitled to a pro tanto setoff for asbestos trust payments, and remanded for a hearing on whether the payments covered the same injuries.
• Garlock Sealing Technologies, LLC v. Pittman (2010). The Mississippi Supreme Court reversed the circuit court's denial of summary judgment and rendered judgment for the defendants (Garlock, Trane, Rapid-American and the other appellants) against Mary Pittman, because the original complaint was a nullity and her 2005 amended complaint was time-barred.

Montana

• Atchley v. Louisiana Pacific Corp. (2018). The Montana Workers' Compensation Court held Louisiana Pacific Corp. liable to Hazel Atchley for death benefits for her husband's asbestos-related disease, and awarded her costs but denied attorney fees and a penalty.

New Jersey

• 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.
• 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.

New York

• Keller v. Exxonmobil Oil Corporation (2025). The court excluded the testimony of plaintiff's causation expert Dr. Kradin and granted summary judgment to defendant ExxonMobil Oil Corporation, dismissing Keller's Jones Act asbestos lung cancer claim; the other expert motions were denied as moot.
• Munna v. American Honda Motor Co., Inc. (2023). The court granted plaintiff Joseph Munna's motion for a joint trial with Lamonica v AO Smith Water Products Co., over the opposition of several defendants, and set trial for October 10, 2023.
• Petro v. Aerco Intl., Inc. (2023). The court denied the motions by Tishman, Mario & Dibono and Port Authority to set aside the jury verdict for plaintiff James Petro, to enter judgment for them, to order a new trial, or to reduce the damages.
• Rullo v. Abb, Inc. (2023). The court granted plaintiff Giuseppe Rullo's motion for a joint trial with Scandaliato v ABB, Inc., over the opposition of Triangle PWC, Kennedy Electrical Supply and the other defendants.
• Servedio v. AO Smith Water Prods. Co. (2023). The trial court granted the plaintiffs' motion for joint trials, joining fifteen New York asbestos actions into six groups of two or three cases each, over the defendants' opposition.
• Badamo v. Chevron USA Inc. (2022). The court denied the summary judgment motions of Farrell Lines, Chiquita and Chevron, so the executor's Jones Act claim over Badamo's lung cancer goes forward.
• Moutal v. AO Smith Water Prods. Co. (2022). The court denied defendant Mannington Mills' motion for summary judgment because Mannington did not make a prima facie showing that its sheet flooring was not a substantial cause of plaintiff Paul Moutal's lung cancer.
• Niedert v. Amchem Prods., Inc. (2022). The court denied Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company's motion for summary judgment, so plaintiff Edith Niedert's claim against Goodyear continues.
• Pomponi v. AO Smith Water Prods. Co. (1st Dept., 2022). The Appellate Division reversed the trial court's order and granted American Biltrite Inc.'s motion for summary judgment, dismissing the plaintiff's complaint and cross claims against it.
• Esposito v. Abb, Inc. (2021). The trial court denied defendant William Powell Company's motion for summary judgment, so the plaintiff's complaint and all cross-claims against Powell remain.
• Lamenta v. American Biltrite (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (2020). The trial court granted American Biltrite's summary judgment motion and dismissed the plaintiffs' claims and all crossclaims against it, because the plaintiffs did not raise a fact issue on general or specific causation.
• Schrank v. Amchem Prods., Inc. (2020). The trial court granted Ford Motor Company's motion for summary judgment and dismissed the complaint and cross claims against Ford, finding the plaintiffs' experts failed to show specific causation.
• Surace v. American Biltrite (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (2019). The trial court denied American Biltrite, Inc.'s motion for summary judgment dismissing the Surace plaintiffs' complaint and all cross-claims, finding fact issues on general and specific causation.
• Albin v. Mannington Mills (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (2019). The court denied Mannington Mills, Inc.'s motion for summary judgment dismissing the Albins' complaint and all cross-claims against it, so the plaintiffs prevailed on the motion.
• Christy v. A.O. Smith Water Prods. Co. (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (2019). The court granted the plaintiffs' motion in part, consolidating eight lung cancer cases into four pairs for trial and ordering the other FIFO cases tried individually over the defendants' opposition.
• ALBIN v. AJAX MAGNETHERMIC CORPORATION (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (2019). The court granted the plaintiffs' motion in part, consolidating 18 of the in extremis asbestos cases into eight groups for joint trial over the defendants' opposition and ordering the remaining six cases tried individually.
• Knudsen v. Air & Liquid Systems Corp. (In re New York City Asbestos Litigation) (2019). The court granted the plaintiffs' motion to consolidate for trial and ordered eight of the eighteen in extremis cases tried jointly in four pairs over the defendants' opposition, with the remaining cases to be tried individually.
• Temperino v. Amchem Prods. (2019). The court denied American Honda's motion for summary judgment, denied the other defendants' motions to preclude plaintiff's causation experts and for summary judgment, and denied the Frye hearing requests without prejudice to renewal at trial; Ford's motion was marked withdrawn.
• Bucci v. Air & Liquid Sys. Corp. (2018). The trial court denied the plaintiffs' motion to consolidate the Bucci, Johnsen and Palmeri asbestos cases for a joint trial, ruling for the defendants who opposed it.
• Matter of Adesso v. AO Smith Water Prods. Co. (2018). The court granted plaintiffs' motion in part, ordering joint trials for Cerato/Lynch, McCormick/Munnelly, Kalachman/Rothman, Hickey/Litz, George/Toy, Hutnick/Soto and Hill/Lipari, and denied joinder for Swanson/Whitaker, Hiddie/Rose, Costa/Endelmann, Lehanka/Snider, Bascomb/Gallagher and for adding Scott to Hill and Lipari, over the defendants' opposition.