ASBESTOS, PETROCHEMICAL, SILICA & OTHER TOXINS
The firm serves as local counsel for several clients involved in asbestos litigation. MD is currently defending over 4,000 asbestos cases in federal and state court. The firm has regularly and consistently obtained defense verdicts for manufacturers and sellers of asbestos containing products in a wide variety of factual scenarios.
The firm served as national asbestos counsel for a manufacturer of steam traps.
Our attorneys secured a defense verdict in a maritime case brought by a seaman alleging he contracted multiple myeloma resulting from benzene exposure aboard tankers.
Our attorneys also successfully defended a supplier of grinding wheels in over 800 silica cases in Ohio and West Virginia.
On April 4, 2019, after a two-week trial, a Cleveland, OH jury delivered a defense verdict in favor of John Crane, Inc. in a living pleural mesothelioma lawsuit. The jury found that the John Crane asbestos containing products were not a substantial factor in causing Mr. Sivert’s mesothelioma. MD attorneys Stephen Daniels and Sandra Sommers represented John Crane and co-counsel support was provided by Claire Weglarz of Hawkins Parnell Young.
Asbestos Litigation Highlights
MD attorneys have tried seminal cases that established and defined law favorable to defendants statewide and nationally. The following cases highlight that work:
Bartel v. John Crane, Inc. 316 F.Supp.2d 603, 610 (N.D. Ohio, 2004), aff’d, Lindstrom v. A-C Product Liability Trust, 424 F.3d 488 (6th Cir. 2005).
Obtained defense verdict in bench trial for John Crane Inc. Judge Polster wrote a very strong opinion holding that gaskets and packing were not a substantial factor in causing decedent’s peritoneal mesothelioma. Plaintiff appealed to Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals. We briefed and argued the appeal and the defense verdict was upheld, with the Sixth Circuit establishing law favorable to defendants regarding substantial factor and the insufficiency of expert affidavits used against product defendants under maritime law.
Betty Werts Executrix of the Estate of Ronald Werts, Deceased v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company, et al. in Cuyahoga County Common Pleas Court
Obtained defense verdict at trial, which plaintiff appealed. Our attorneys briefed and argued this appeal and the Ohio Eighth District Court of Appeals affirmed the defense verdict. In affirming, the court clarified confusing prior appellate decisions by confirming that defendants are permitted to have their experts testify regarding actual measurements of fiber release of products.
Barone v. GATX Corp., 167 Ohio App.3d 744 (11th Dist. 2006)
Jury verdict of $32,000 in mesothelioma case in which medical and funeral bills totaled $112,000. Trial court granted plaintiff’s Motion for New Trial on damages only and John Crane Inc. appealed. Court of Appeals not only overturned the trial court’s order, it ordered the trial court to direct a verdict for John Crane Inc.
Fisher v. Beazer East, Inc., 8th Dist. No. 99662
The Eighth District Court of Appeals decision affirmed the trial court’s ruling that permitted a jury to apportion a percentage of fault to non-party employers, even though the employers were entitled to workers compensation immunity. MD successfully argued that Ohio’s apportionment statute, RC 2307.23, permits juries to consider the fault of all entities, including employers, provided it can be shown that the entities’ tortious conduct contributed to the plaintiff’s harm. The Eighth District held that the statute “requires a jury to consider the percentage of tortious conduct attributable to each person who proximately caused the injury or loss, regardless of whether the plaintiff is seeking recovery or able to seek recovery from that person.”