Respirator manufacturers may be liable for asbestos exposure 
Published: August 17, 2012
Tags: asbestos litigation, failure to warn, mesothelioma, product liability
The manufacturers of respirators may be liable for failing to warn a shipyard worker of the risk of exposure to asbestos dust while cleaning the devices, the Washington Supreme Court has ruled.
Asbestos victim’s family awarded $2.86 million
Published: August 10, 2012
Tags: asbestos, mesothelioma
A Delaware jury has awarded $2.86 million to the family of a factory worker who died from mesothelioma allegedly caused by exposure to talcum powder laced with asbestos fibers.
Family wins $3 million over father’s mesothelioma death
Published: July 31, 2012
Tags: asbestos, Delaware, mesothelioma, New York, Ohio, product liability, wrongful death
An Ohio family has won a $2.86 million jury award against a New York mining company which produced the asbestos which resulted in the death of Michael Galliher.
$48M for mesothelioma victim with no direct asbestos exposure
By:
Correy Stephenson
Published: July 5, 2012
Tags: asbestos, asbestos litigation, mesothelioma
Despite never having worked directly with asbestos products, a general contractor diagnosed with mesothelioma has been awarded $48 million by a California jury.
Exposure rule doesn’t bar spouse’s asbestos claim
Published: June 18, 2012
Tags: asbestos litigation, loss of consortium, mesothelioma, product liability
The wife of an asbestos victim could proceed with a claim for loss of consortium, even though her husband’s exposure to the defendant’s product occurred years before the marriage, the California Court of Appeal has ruled in reversing a dismissal.
Wife of asbestos victim can sue for loss of consortium
Published: June 5, 2012
Tags: asbestos, loss of consortium, mesothelioma
The wife of a man diagnosed with mesothelioma can maintain a claim for loss of consortium against an asbestos manufacturer – even if her husband’s exposure to the toxic product predated the marriage, the California Court of Appeal has ruled in reversing a summary judgment.
Asbestos expert can’t advance ‘any dose’ theory
Published: May 31, 2012
Tags: expert witness, mesothelioma, product liability
A plaintiff’s expert in a product liability case could not testify that each and every fiber of inhaled asbestos is a substantial contributing factor to any asbestos-related disease, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court has ruled in affirming judgment.
Ford isn’t liable for ‘take-home’ asbestos
Published: May 24, 2012
Tags: mesothelioma, product liability, take-home asbestos
Ford Motor Co. isn’t liable for injury allegedly caused by exposure to asbestos carried home on the clothes of independent contractors who worked at one of the auto maker’s plants, the California Court of Appeal has ruled in reversing a $40,000 jury verdict.
Defendant’s negative net worth doesn’t bar punitive award
Published: April 25, 2012
Tags: asbestos, mesothelioma, product liability, punitive damages
Evidence that a defendant has a negative net worth doesn’t preclude an award of punitive damages against it, the California Court of Appeal has ruled in upholding a $4.5 million punitive award.
Take-home asbestos plaintiff didn’t show duty of care
Published: March 27, 2012
Tags: duty of care, mesothelioma, product liability, take-home asbestos
A take-home asbestos plaintiff failed to alleged sufficient specific facts for the recognition of a duty of care, the Illinois Supreme Court has ruled.
