Legal Opinion
Comardelle v. Pennsylvania General Insurance
District Court, E.D. Louisiana
Decided January 5, 2015No. Civil Action No. 13-6555PublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
*630 ORDER AND REASONS
LANCE M. AFRICK, District Judge.
Before the Court is a motion1 filed by defendant, Bayer CropScience, Inc. (“Am-chem”), seeking “to exclude causation opinions regarding Benjamin Foster products based on the ‘each and every exposure’ theory.”2 Plaintiffs oppose the motion.3 For the following reasons, the motion is GRANTED.
BACKGROUND
Plaintiffs allege that decedent, Michael Comardelle (“Comardelle”), was “exposed to asbestos and asbestos-containing products manufactured, distributed, and sold” by defendants during the course of his employment from 1963 through 1979.4 Plaintiffs…
2Cases cited24 opinions
- Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1993
- Kumho Tire Co. v. CarmichaelSupreme Court of the United States · 1999
- General Electric Co. v. JoinerSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
- Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. HavnerTexas Supreme Court · 1997
- Thomas Pipitone, and Bonnie Pipitone v. Biomatrix, Inc., Biomatrix, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 2002
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Yates v. Ford Motor Co.District Court, E.D. North Carolina · 2015
- Crane Co. v. DeLisleDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2016
- Vedros v. Northrop Grumman Shipbuilding, Inc.District Court, E.D. Louisiana · 2015
- Juni v. A.O. Smith Water ProductsNew York Supreme Court · 2015
- Rockman v. Union Carbide Corp.District Court, D. Maryland · 2017
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.