July 25, 2018 | Editor: Jen Dlugosz | Assistant Editor: Natalie Holden |
New Developments |
Delaware Supreme Court holds that Both Manufacturers and Employers can be Liable for Take-Home Exposure By Jackson Otto In Ramsey v. Georgia Southern University Advanced Development Center, et al., C.A. No. N14C-01-287 ASB, Delaware’s Supreme Court reversed the decision of the Superior Court granting summary judgment to manufacturers of asbestos-containing products in a take-home exposure case. Plaintiffs alleged that Elizabeth Ramsey, wife of Robert Ramsey, was the person who did the family’s laundry and regularly washed her husband’s asbestos covered uniform. Mrs. Ramsey died from lung cancer in 2015. [Continue Reading] |
Arizona Affirms that Employers Owe No Duty of Care to Nonemployees By Natalie Holden and Anna Choi In its recent decision, the Arizona Supreme Court affirmed the trial court’s grant of summary judgment for defendant Reynolds Metal Company (“Reynolds”), holding that under the State’s laws an employer owed no duty of care to protect an employee’s family from secondary asbestos exposure. [Continue Reading] |
Toxic Tort Monitor Archive |
June 2018
Read the full Toxic Tort Monitor Archive |
Connect with us: Blog | Twitter | LinkedIn | Instagram | YouTube |
Technology, Manufacturing & Transportation Toxic Tort Litigation Practice Companies face increasingly well‐coordinated attacks in jurisdictions across the country. These assaults are becoming more complex and costly as plaintiffs’ counsel pursue novel theories and claims to keep asbestos litigation thriving. Husch Blackwell’s team has experience in numerous jurisdictions throughout 37 states. Our attorneys can help you navigate the intricate web of plaintiffs’ firms, changing laws, evolving science and anti-defendant courts. [More information] |