Beeman v. Manville Corp. Asbestos Disease Compensation Fund
Supreme Court of Iowa
1Opinion of the Court
McGIVERIN, Chief Justice.
Defendants appeal and plaintiffs cross-appeal from a district court judgment after a jury verdict in favor of plaintiffs in this asbestos litigation. We affirm.
I. Background facts and proceedings. Based on the record, a jury could find the following facts. Plaintiff Joseph Beeman, age sixty-two, had a work history since 1953 as a plumber and pipefitter, installing copper piping and gas appliances. Although not an insulator himself, Beeman worked closely with pipe insulators throughout his career. At trial Beeman and several of his co-workers testified about the dusty…
2Cases cited34 opinions
- Clarence Borel v. Fibreboard Paper Products Corporation, Nationalsurety Corporation, Intervenor-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1973
- James Leroy Jackson v. Johns-Manville Sales Corporation and Raybestos-Manhattan, Inc., DefendantsCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1986
- Lockwood v. a C & S, Inc.Washington Supreme Court · 1987
- Eagle-Picher Industries, Inc. v. BalbosCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1992
- Thacker v. U N R Industries, Inc.Illinois Supreme Court · 1992
29 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by64 opinions
- Norfolk & Western Railway Co. v. AyersSupreme Court of the United States · 2003
- Simmons v. Pacor, Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1996
- McClure v. Walgreen Co.Supreme Court of Iowa · 2000
- Hockenberg Equipment Co. v. Hockenberg's Equipment & Supply Co. of Des Moines, Inc.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1993
- Spaur v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1994
59 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.