Cases

SMITH, Chief Judge. Decades after the filing of maritime asbestos injury cases in the Northern District of Ohio, the District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania-which was by then presiding over a nationwide asbestos products multidistrict litigation *101(MDL)-dismissed claims against numerous defendants for lack of personal jurisdic

OPINION OF THE COURT HARDIMAN, Circuit Judge. Peggy Hassell, on behalf of herself and her deceased husband’s estate, appeals an order of the District Court dismissing her civil suit against The Budd Company and Resco - Holdings LLC. Hassell asserted state law causes of action arising from her husband’s exposure to asbestos during the forty years he worked f

EXPLANATION and ORDER DAVID R. STRAWBRIDGE, United States Magistrate Judge. AND NOW, this 3rd day of April, 2013, upon consideration of “Owens-Illinois, Inc.’s Motion to Strike Plaintiffs’ Amended Statement on Expert Witness Reports” e.g. (08-92210 Doc. 212), “Plaintiffs’ Response in Opposition to Owens-Illinois, Inc.’s Motion to Strike Garza/Kenoyer Amended Report” e.g. (08-9221

OPINION RENDELL, Circuit Judge: This appeal comes to us from Multidis-trict Litigation case number 875 (“MDL 875”), otherwise known as the “Asbestos MDL,” involving asbestos cases from around the country, pending before Judge Robreno in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. The District Court, overseeing several thousand

ORDER PER CURIAM AND NOW, this 26th day of October, 2017, the Petition for Certification of Question of Law submitted by the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit is GRANTED. This Court shall consider the following issues: Whether, under Pennsylvania law, a manufacturer has a duty to warn about the asbestos-related hazar

ORDER PER CURIAM AND NOW, this 26th day of October, 2017, the Petition for Certification of Question of Law submitted by the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit is GRANTED. This Court shall consider the following issues: Whether, under Pennsylvania law, a manufacturer has a duty to warn about the asbestos-related hazar

ORDER PER CURIAM AND NOW, this 26th day of October, 2017, the Petition for Certification of Question of Law submitted by the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit is GRANTED. This Court shall consider the following issues: Whether, under Pennsylvania law, a manufacturer has a duty to warn about the asbestos-related hazar

ORDER PER CURIAM AND NOW, this 26th day of October, 2017, the Petition for Certification of Question of Law submitted by the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit is GRANTED. This Court shall consider the following issues: Whether, under Pennsylvania law, a manufacturer has a duty to warn about the asbestos-related hazar

*267MEMORANDUM EDUARDO C. ROBRENO, District Judge. MDL no. 875 involves issues relating to personal injuries allegedly caused by asbestos products. It currently consists of about 59,000 cases and 3.5 million claims consolidated for pretrial proceedings by the Judicial Panel on Multidistriet Litigation and transferred to the Eastern District of Penns

*152MEMORANDUM EDUARDO C. ROBRENO, District Judge. I. INTRODUCTION In 2005 and early 2008, certain Defendants issued subpoenas to physicians seeking the production of certain documents from the physicians who had issued a number of diagnosing reports or opinions produced by *153

(2008) In re: ASBESTOS PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION (NO. VI). MDL No. 875. United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation. April 8, 2008. TRANSFER ORDER D. LOWELL JENSEN, Acting Chairman. Before the entire Panel[*]: Plaintiffs in five actions listed on Schedule A and pending in the District of Connecticut, Northern District of I

(2008) In re: ASBESTOS PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION (No. VI). MDL No. 875. United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation. June 6, 2008. TRANSFER ORDER D. LOWELL JENSEN, Acting Chairman. Before the entire Panel[*]: Plaintiffs in eight actions listed on Schedule A and pending in the Central District of California (three actions),

OPINION OF THE COURT VANASKIE, Circuit Judge These asbestos cases involve the availability of the “bare-metal defense” under maritime law. The defense’s basic idea is that a manufacturer who, delivers a product “bare metal”—that is without the insulation or other material that must be added for the product’s proper operation—is not generally liable for

OPINION OF THE COURT SCIRICA, Circuit Judge Steven Frankenberger, on behalf of the estate of Howard Frankenberger, appeals an order of the District Court dismissing his civil suit against CBS Corporation. He asserts state law causes of action arising from Howard Frankenberger’s exposure to asbestos during his forty-five years working as a pipefitter at va

EDUARDO C. ROBRENO, District Judge. Before the Court is the motion to dismiss filed by Defendant Huntington Ingalls Incorporated ("HIC"). The Court will grant the motion as it concludes that it lacks personal jurisdiction over HIC. In 2014, the Supreme Court decided the case of Daimler AG v. Bauman 1 which brought about a sea change in the jurisprudence of exercising general pers

ORDER ADOPTING SUGGESTION TO THE PANEL CONCERNING FUTURE TAG-ALONG TRANSFERS JOHN G. HEYBURN II, Chairman. Before the Panel: On November 23, 2011, the Honorable Eduardo C. Robreno, the transferee judge overseeing this MDL, issued a Suggestion that, subject to certain limited exceptions, the Panel cease transferring tag-along actions to the centralized proceedings after January 1, 2012. The judge’s Suggestio

614 F.Supp.2d 550 (2009) In re: ASBESTOS PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION (NO. VI). This Document Relates to All Actions. MDL Docket No. 875, Civil Action No. 2:01-md-875. United States District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania. April 30, 2009. MEMORANDUM EDUARDO C. ROBRENO, District Judge. I. INTRODUCTION MDL no. 875 involves claims relati

771 F.Supp. 415 (1991) In re ASBESTOS PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION (NO. VI). MDL No. 875. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation. July 29, 1991. *416 Before JOHN F. NANGLE, Chairman, S. HUGH DILLIN,[*] MILTON POLLACK,[*] LOUIS H. POLLAK, HALBERT O. WOODWARD, ROBERT R. MERHIGE, Jr., and WILLIAM B. ENRIGHT, Judge

(2008) In re: ASBESTOS PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION (NO. VI) Robert L. Moeller, et al. v. Garlock Sealing Technologies, LLC, et al., W.D. Kentucky, 3:07-65. MDL No. 875. United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation. June 5, 2008. SEPARATION OF CLAIMS AND REMAND ORDER D. LOWELL JENSEN, Acting Chairman. Before the entire Panel[*]<

60 F.3d 813 In re Asbestos Products Liability Litigation (No. VI); In reDavid Weinfeld Client Files; Randy H. Kaplan NO. 94-2074 United States Court of Appeals,Third Circuit. May 24, 1995 Appeal From: E.D.Pa., No. MDL 875 1 AFFIRMED.