Mesothelioma: Asbestos Court Decisions

Decisions in our case-law library that involve mesothelioma: 2,859 cases, by state. Each line gives the exposure the court described, or else what it decided. For the topic itself, see Mesothelioma.

Illinois

• McNamara v. Ico Polymers North America, Inc. (1st District, 2nd Division, 2023). The appellate court reversed the denial of plaintiffs' new-trial motion because requiring a witness to testify in person was an abuse of discretion, remanded for a new trial, and affirmed exclusion of the decedent's pre-suit evidence deposition, so plaintiffs won in part and ICO Polymers won in part.
• Lishman v. Air & Liquid Systems Corporation (2022). The court granted Alfa Laval's motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction, ruling that it had not waived the defense, so the plaintiffs' claims against Alfa Laval were dismissed.
• Johnson v. Orton (2021). The district court granted Orton's motion for summary judgment against plaintiff Deborah Johnson, finding no evidence Orton knew or should have known its vermiculite packing contained asbestos, and denied Orton's Daubert motions as moot.
• Hicks v. Ford Motor Company (2020). The district court denied Roy Hicks's motion to remand, finding that non-diverse defendant John Crane was fraudulently joined, so Ford Motor Company's removal to federal court stood.
• Linder v. AW Chesterton Co. (5th District, 2020). The appellate court denied GIW's motion to dismiss or stay the appeal and affirmed the circuit court's protective order barring the Linder plaintiffs from using GIW's Bills of Material outside the litigation without consent or leave of court.
• Longobardi v. Honeywell International Inc. (2020). The court granted Pamela Longobardi's motion to remand and sent the case back to Cook County Circuit Court because Honeywell removed without the consent of remaining defendant Borg-Warner.
• Amling v. Harrow Industries LLC (2019). The Seventh Circuit affirmed the dismissal, without prejudice, of the Amlings' federal declaratory judgment action against Harrow, holding the dispute was ripe but the district court properly declined to hear it.
• Amling v. Schlage Lock Co. (2019). The court dismissed the Amlings' federal declaratory judgment suit against Schlage Lock and Harrow Industries without prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, and alternatively declined to hear it as a matter of discretion.
• Ayotte v. Boeing Co. (2018). The district court denied plaintiff Ayotte's motion to remand, holding that Boeing's federal officer removal was timely, so the case stays in federal court.
• Betzner v. Boeing Co. (2018). The Seventh Circuit reversed the district court's sua sponte remand to Illinois state court and remanded for further proceedings, holding Boeing's notice of removal was sufficient; Boeing won and the Betzners lost on this point.
• Campbell v. Acme Insulations, Inc. (1st District, 6th Division, 2018). The appellate court reversed the circuit court's denial of General Electric's motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction and remanded with directions to dismiss GE as a defendant, so GE won and the plaintiff lost on this issue.
• Harrow Industries LLC v. Nexus Corporation (2018). The court granted Nexus Corporation's motion to dismiss Harrow Industries' contract complaint for failure to plausibly allege liability, but allowed Harrow limited discovery and leave to file an amended complaint.
• McKinney v. Hobart Bros. Co. (4th District, 2018). The appellate court reversed the trial court's judgment on the jury verdict for plaintiff Charles McKinney, holding that defendant Hobart Brothers Company was entitled to judgment notwithstanding the verdict.
• Startley v. Welco Mfg. Co. (1st District, 2nd Division, 2017). The appellate court reversed the directed verdict that the trial court had entered for Welco Manufacturing Company and remanded for a new trial, which favors the Startley estate.
• Adams v. Employers Insurance Company OF Wausau (3rd District, 2016). Affirmed the circuit court's dismissal of the plaintiffs' declaratory judgment action against the insurers Wausau, TIG and Travelers, so the plaintiffs lost.
• Hubert v. General Electric Company (2016). The court found Plaintiff Patricia Hubert had not properly pleaded diversity jurisdiction against General Electric and ordered her to file an amended complaint by March 31, 2016; pending motions were denied as moot.
• Neumann v. Borg-Warner Morse Tec LLC (2016). The federal district court denied Neumann's motion for reconsideration and her request to amend, and granted the six remaining defendants' motions for judgment on the pleadings, ending the case.
• Neumann v. Borg-Warner Morse Tec LLC (2016). The court granted MW Custom Papers' motion to dismiss Neumann's negligence claim, holding that the company, as a manufacturer, owed no duty to her; MW Custom Papers won and Neumann lost.
• Perez v. Air and Liquid Systems Corp. (2016). The court denied plaintiff Sylvia Perez's motion to remand, holding that Crane Co. had not waived removal and had established federal officer jurisdiction, so the case stays in federal court.
• Perez v. Air and Liquid Systems Corporation (2016). The court granted General Electric's motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction (without prejudice) and denied the motions by Air & Liquid Systems, Warren Pumps and John Crane to dismiss the loss of consortium count.
• Folta v. Ferro Engineering (2015). The Illinois Supreme Court reversed the appellate court and affirmed the circuit court's dismissal, so Ferro Engineering won and Ellen Folta's wrongful death action against it was barred.
• Hasenberg v. Asbestos Corporation Ltd. (2015). The district court denied the summary judgment motions of Air and Liquid Systems Corporation (successor to Buffalo Pump) and Warren Pumps LLC, so plaintiff William Hasenberg's claims against both proceed.
• Quirin v. Lorillard Tobacco Company (2015). The court granted summary judgment to Lorillard and Hollingsworth & Vose on the wife's loss of consortium claim because his exposure to their products ended before the marriage, but denied it to Georgia-Pacific.
• Speedy v. 3M Company (2015). The court granted the plaintiffs' motion and remanded the case to Madison County, Illinois state court because defendant Solar Turbines Incorporated filed its notice of federal officer removal after the 30-day deadline.
• Burns v. All Acquisitions, LLC (2014). The court granted plaintiff Michael Burns's motion to remand and sent the case back to the Circuit Court of Madison County, Illinois, after the federal-officer basis for removal by United Technologies no longer supported keeping it.
• Horrie v. AW Chesterton Company (2014). The court granted the Horries' motion to remand to the Circuit Court of Cook County, rejecting Crane Company's removal based on the government contractor defense.
• Mohler v. Air & Liquid Systems Corporation (2014). The court denied plaintiff Elaine Mohler's motion to remand, keeping the case in federal court because defendant Crane Company showed a colorable government contractor defense under the federal officer removal statute.
• Quirin v. Lorillard Tobacco Co. (2014). The district court denied Lorillard and Hollingsworth & Vose's motion for summary judgment, so the estate of Ronald Quirin's negligence claims against them go forward.
• Quirin v. Lorillard Tobacco Company (2014). The court denied Georgia-Pacific's motion to exclude plaintiff's expert Dr. Millette's testimony and work practice studies, and granted it only as to the Tyndall lighting videotapes, which plaintiff agreed not to use.
• Quirin v. Lorillard Tobacco Company (2014). The court granted in part and denied in part both Daubert motions: it barred defense experts from relying on the Killian and Laboratory of Industrial Hygiene tests, allowed reliance on the Armour tests, required a hearing for the Kendall and Fullam tests, and let plaintiff's expert Pauly testify about the 1950s testing but not endorse the Millette and Longo studies.
• Quirin v. Lorillard Tobacco Company (2014). The court denied Georgia-Pacific's motion to exclude plaintiff's expert testimony and argument that each and every exposure to asbestos caused Mr. Quirin's mesothelioma (as moot for Dr. Brody), so the plaintiff estate prevailed on the motion.
• Quirin v. Lorillard Tobacco Company (2014). The district court denied Lorillard and Hollingsworth & Vose's motions to bar the expert reports and testimony of Dr. Millette and Dr. Brodkin, so the plaintiff's expert evidence was admitted.
• Quirin v. Lorillard Tobacco Company (2014). The district court denied Crane Co.'s motion for summary judgment, so the estate of Ronald Quirin may proceed with its negligence claims against Crane Co., except that Crane Co. had no duty to warn about insulation, pipe covering or cement it did not supply.
• Shipley v. Hoke (4th District, 2014). The appellate court affirmed the dismissal of the judgment creditor's enforcement motions against Hoke, Shine and Cooney & Conway: Hoke and Shine won on the affirmative defense that the supplementary proceedings had terminated, and Cooney won because the court had no personal jurisdiction over it.
• Smith v. AW Chesterton Company (2014). The court denied the plaintiffs' motion to remand, so Crane Co.'s federal officer removal stood and the case stayed in federal court.
• Smith v. Crane Co. (2014). The court granted Crane Co.'s and Ingersoll-Rand's motion to dismiss Diane Smith's loss of consortium claim (Count III), because she married Kenneth after his alleged asbestos exposure.
• Totten v. Crane Co. (2014). The district court denied William Totten's motions to remand to state court and to strike the notice of removal, holding that Crane Co. properly removed the case under the federal officer removal statute.
• Gillenwater v. Honeywell Intern., Inc. (4th District, 2013). The appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment notwithstanding the verdict for Honeywell, Owens-Illinois and Pneumo Abex on Charles Gillenwater's conspiracy claims, and affirmed summary judgment for them on Donita Gillenwater's loss-of-consortium claims.
• Stanley v. Ameren Illinois Co. (2013). The court granted summary judgment to all four defendants (Ameren, MidAmerican, EECI and Sargent & Lundy) and against plaintiff Christine Stanley, on no-duty grounds for MidAmerican and EECI and the statute of repose for Ameren and Sargent & Lundy.
• Adams v. Armstrong International, Inc (2012). The court granted Plaintiffs Leonard and Marian Adams' motion to remand and returned the case to the Madison County, Illinois Circuit Court, finding General Electric had not shown federal officer removal jurisdiction.
• Buckles v. Hopkins Goldenberg, PC (5th District, 2012). The appellate court affirmed summary judgment for Simmons and the partial summary judgment for the Hopkins firm on the Pittsburgh Corning settlement, but reversed the June 18, 2010 partial summary judgment for the Hopkins firm and remanded, so plaintiff Buckles won in part.
• Ruppel v. AO Smith Corporation (2012). The court granted plaintiff Henry Ruppel's motion to remand and sent the case back to Madison County, Illinois state court, rejecting CBS Corporation's federal officer removal.
• Simpkins v. CSX Transp., Inc. (2012). The Illinois Supreme Court affirmed the appellate court's reversal of the dismissal of the complaint against CSX Transportation on different grounds, held the complaint's duty allegations insufficient, and remanded so plaintiff could amend.
• Glein v. Boeing Company (2011). The court granted Betty Glein's motion to remand and sent the case back to the Madison County, Illinois circuit court, because Northrop Grumman Systems Corp. failed to prove federal officer removal jurisdiction.
• Rodarmel v. Pneumo Abex, LLC (4th District, 2011). The appellate court reversed the trial court's judgment on the jury verdict for plaintiffs, holding that defendants Honeywell and Pneumo Abex were entitled to judgment notwithstanding the verdict.
• Sublett v. Air & Liquid Systems Corporation (2011). The court granted Joseph and Virginia Sublett's motion to remand and sent the case back to the Madison County, Illinois circuit court, finding General Electric had not established federal officer removal jurisdiction.
• Tkk USA Inc. v. Safety National Casualty Corporation (2011). The court granted Thermos's motion for summary judgment, holding Safety National must reimburse Thermos's defense costs in the Perkins lawsuit, denied Safety National's cross-motion, and denied Thermos's motion for attorney fees under Section 155.
• Vickroy v. AW Chesterton, Inc. (2011). The court granted Debra Vickroy's motion and remanded the case to the Madison County, Illinois circuit court, rejecting General Electric's federal officer removal for lack of federal subject matter jurisdiction.
• Zickuhr v. Ericsson, Inc. (1st District, 6th Division, 2011). The appellate court affirmed the denial of Ericsson's motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict or a new trial, leaving the plaintiffs' jury verdict for Campbell's estate in place.
• Glein v. Boeing Company (2010). The court granted Betty Glein's motion to remand and sent the case back to Madison County, Illinois state court, rejecting United Technologies Corporation's federal officer removal.