Kotarsky v. General Electric Company

Filing 24

CONDITIONAL REMAND ORDER (MDL 875) by MDL Panel remanding case back to the Northern District of CA; Case reopened. (slh, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 8/13/2012)

Download PDF

UNITED STATES JUDICIAL PANEL on MULTIDISTRICT LITIGATION IN RE: ASBESTOS PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION (NO. VI) MDLNo.875 (SEE ATTACHED SCHEDULE) CONDITIONAL REMAND ORDER The transferee court in this litigation has, in the actions on this conditional remand order: (I) severed all claims for punitive or exemplary damages; and (2) advised the Panel that coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings with respect to the remaining claims have been completed and that remand to the transferor court(s), as provided in 28 U.S.C. §1407(a), is appropriate. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that all claims in the action(s) on this conditional remand order except the severed damages claims be remanded to its/their respective transferor court(s). IT IS ALSO ORDERED that, pursuant to Rule 10.2 of the Rules of Procedure of the United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation, the transmittal ofthis order to the transferee clerk for filing shall be stayed 7 days from the date of this order. If any party files a notice of opposition with the Clerk of the Panel within this 7- day period, the stay will be continued until further order of the Panel. This order does not become effective until it is filed in the office of the Clerk for the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, pursuant to Rule lO.4(a), the parties shall furnish the Clerk for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania with a stipulation or designation of the contents of the record to be remanded and all necessary copies of any pleadings or other matter filed so as to enable said Clerk to comply with the order of remand. FOR THE PANEL: '61¥. ji Inasmuch as no objection is pending at this time, the stay is lifted. Jeffery N. LUthi Clerk of the Panel Ju105,2012 CLERK'S OFFICE UNITED STATES JUDICiAl PANEL ON MULTIDISTRICT LITIGATION .. TRUE COpy CEjlTi I)AffD: TO FROM THE AEDIAI b O/;? 7/5 I IN RE: ASBESTOS PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION (NO. VI) MDLNo.875 SCHEDULE FOR CRO TRANSFEREE TRANSFEROR DlSl: lllYa C.A.NO. DlSl: lllYa C.A.NO. PAE 2 09-62913 CAN 3 05-01533 PAE PAE 2 2 09-62917 CAN 09-62918 CAN 3 3 05-04084 05-04085 PAE 2 09-63699 CAN 3 05-04347 PAE 2 09-62921 CAN 3 05-04947 PAE 2 09-62922 CAN 3 05-04998 PAE PAE PAE 2 2 2 09-63700 CAN 09-62924 CAN 09-62925 CAN 3 3 3 05-05293 06-00692 06-00843 PAE 2 09-62926 CAN 3 06-01634 PAE 2 09-62928 CAN 3 06-02901 PAE 2 09-62931 CAN 3 06-03287 PAE 2 09-62936 CAN 3 06-06949 PAE 2 09-62939 CAN 3 08-00229 PAE 2 09-62941 CAN 3 08-00980 PAE 2 09-62942 CAN 3 08-00981 PAE 2 09-62943 CAN 3 08-00982 PAE 2 09-64299 CAN 3 08-02704 PAE 2 09-62910 CAN 3 08-04656 PAE 2 09-63702 CAN 3 08-04926 PAE 2 09-63703 CAN 3 08-05185 PAE 2 09-66188 CAN 3 09-00364 CASE CAPTION SETTERBERG v. NEWPORT NEWS SHIPBUILDING AND DRY DOCK COMPANY et a1 CLEMMER v. VIAD CORP. et al COURIS et al v. VIAD CORP. et al MARCELJA et al v. TODD SHIPYARDS CORPORATION et at BARTHOLOMEW v. GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY et at RICE et al v. GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY PIERCE et al v. GENERAL ELECTRIC CO. TAYLOR v. VIAD CORP. et at CODY v. GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY MATHEWS v. GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY et al TOL VA v. GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY KOTARSKY v. GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY CERVENKA et at v. GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY Betty Rabener, etc. v. General Electric Co., et aL HANNA v. GENERAL ELECTRIC COMP ANY et al TAYLORv.GENERALELECTRIC COMPANY et al Donald Cantlin, Jr. v. General Electric Co., et al. COLLINS et al v. GENERAL ELECTRIC CORPORATION et at LUNSFORD et al v. GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY etal CONNER et al v. GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY et at MORILLAS et al v. GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY MCCURTIS v. FOSTER WHEELER LLC et al PAE 2 09-66189 CAN 3 09-00365 PAE PAE 2 2 09-67105 09-70107 CAN CAN 3 3 09-00709 09-01269 PAE 2 09-70109 CAN 3 09-01322 PAE 2 09-74740 CAN 3 09-02245 PAE 2 09-74742 CAN 3 09-02248 PAE 2 09-74743 CAN 3 09-02282 PAE 2 09-74747 CAN 3 09-02433 PAE PAE PAE PAE PAE 2 2 2 2 2 09-80020 09-80021 09-80024 09-80025 09-80027 CAN CAN CAN CAN CAN 3 3 3 3 3 09-02691 09-02692 09--{)2757 09--{)2806 09-02864 PAE 2 09-90812 CAN 3 09-03185 PAE PAE 2 2 09-90817 10-83237 CAN CAN 3 3 09-03245 10-04022 PAE 2 11-60067 CAN 3 10--{)5932 PAE 2 11-63528 CAN 3 11-00424 PAE 2 09-62998 CAN 4 05-05235 PAE 2 09-63001 CAN 4 07-01274 PAE 2 09-63000 CAN 4 08-00969 PAE 2 09-62905 CAN 4 08-04925 PAE 2 09-70112 CAN 4 09-02012 PAE 2 11-60035 CAN 4 10--{)5096 • PAE • PAE • PAE 2 2 2 09-63985 09-63997 09-64005 CAN CAN CAN 3 3 3 05-01461 05-01461 05-04510 • PAE 2 09-64008 CAN 3 05--{)4945 • PAE 2 09-64010 CAN 3 05-04945 • PAE 2 09-64011 CAN 3 05-04945 • PAE 2 09-64012 CAN 3 05-04946 • PAE 2 09-64013 CAN 3 05--{)4946 • PAE 2 09-64016 CAN 4 06-02134 STONE v. GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY et al Daniel Riedinger v. General Electric Co., et al. Richard Close v. General Electric Co., et al. WOODY et al GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY, ET AL VALDEZv. GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY ANAYA v. GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY et al John McCollister v. General Electric Co., et al. BRYANT et al v. GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY et al Rex Hancock v. General Electric Co., et al. Robert Pennington v. General Electric Co. Charley Brown v. General Electric Co. Jack Reynolds v. General Electric Co., et al. John Otto v. General Electric Co., et al. BULLOCK v. GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY et al WERT v. GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY Fong et al v. General Electric Company et al TURNER v. GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY et al ADAMSON et al v. GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY CALDERONv.GENERALELECTRIC COMPANY FINKELSTEIN v. GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY PRICE et al v. GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY et al ROOD v. GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY et al Barbara Hulsen, et al. v. General Electric Co., et al. GOTTSCHALL et al v. GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY et al Karl Nylund v. Viacom Inc., et al. William Palma v. Viacom Inc., et al. Erlinda Riker v. General Electric Co., et al. Stanley Sparks v. Lockheed Martin Corporation, et al. Denzile Evans v. Lockheed Martin Corporation, et al. Philip Thornburg v. Lockheed Martin Corporation, et al. Jennifer Oxford, et al. v. General Electric Co., et al. Carolyn Ann Williams, et al. v. General Electric Co., et al. Richard Smid v. General Electric Co., et al. 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 09-64019 09-64020 09-64024 09-64025 09-64026 09-64027 09-64028 09-64029 09-64032 CAN CAN CAN CAN CAN CAN CAN CAN CAN 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 06-03724 06-03724 07-02542 07-02542 07-02542 07-02542 07-02542 07-02542 07-02543 ·PAE 2 09-64033 CAN 3 07-02543 • PAE • PAE • PAE • PAE • PAE 2 2 2 2 2 09-64035 09-64039 09-64040 09-64041 09-64042 CAN CAN CAN CAN CAN 3 3 3 3 3 07-02543 08-04400 08-04400 08-04400 08-04401 • PAE 2 09-64045 CAN 3 08-04401 • PAE 2 09-64046 CAN 3 08-04401 • • • • • • 2 2 2 2 2 2 09-64047 09-64048 09-64049 09-64050 09-64051 09-64059 CAN CAN CAN CAN CAN CAN 3 3 3 3 3 3 08-04401 08-04415 08-04415 08-04415 08-04415 08-04461 • PAE 2 09-64303 CAN 3 08-03181 2 2 2 2 2 09-64310 09-64312 09-64314 09-64315 09-64316 CAN CAN CAN CAN CAN 3 3 3 3 3 08-00228 08-00228 08-00228 07-04352 07-04352 2 09-64317 CAN 3 08-00230 • PAE 2 09-68010 CAN 3 09-00363 • PAE 2 09-68013 CAN 3 09-00363 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • PAE PAE PAE PAE PAE PAE PAE PAE PAE PAE PAE PAE PAE PAE PAE PAE PAE PAE PAE PAE • PAE • - denotes that the civil action has been severed. David Daniels v. General Electric Co., et al. Wilfred Jodoin v. General Electric Co., et al. James Guthrie v. General Electric Co., et al. Tony Davidson v. General Electric Co., et al. Ronald Zerangue v. General Electric Co., et al. Samuel Rester v. General Electric Co., et al. John Gray v. General Electric Co., et aL Elmer Parolini v. General Electric Co., et al. Michael Halseth v. General Electric Co., et al. Robert Wagenman v. General Electric Co., et al. Donald Hunter v. General Electric Co., et al. Jerry Peal v. General Electric Co., et al. Donald Salisbury v. General Electric Co., et al. Oscar Sunken v. General Electric Co., et al. Albert Hutto v. General Electric Co., et al. Lynn Patrick Schmidt v. General Electric Co., et al. Michael Steinberger v. General Electric Co., et al. Barry Burnham v. General Electric Co., et aL Larry Yabarra v. General Electric Co. Norman Carveth v. General Electric Co. Charles Sarver v. General Electric Co. Bland Burks v. General Electric Co. Joseph Murray v. General Electric Co., et al. Jeffery Mccue, et al. v. General Electric Co., et at. John L. Davis v. General Electric Co., et al. John L. Davis v. General Electric Co., et al. John L. Davis v. General Electric Co., et al. Gillian Carolan, et al. v. General Electric Co. Gillian Carolan, et al. v. General Electric Co. Naomi Beaurman-white, et al. v. General Electric Co., et al. Wesley Joe Embrey, et al. v. General Electric Co. Clair Yarbrough, et al. v. General Electric Co. IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA IN RE: ASBESTOS PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION (No. VI) Consolidated Under MDL DOCKET NO. 875 v. FILE[); Transferred from the Northern District of California MAY -82012:. VARIOUS PLAINTIFFS Cases listed in Exhibit "A," attached VARIOUS DEFENDANTS MlCHAELE.KUNL,'l:::; na... By----"".." .Ct-·· ..... SOGGESTION OF REMIND AND NOW, this 8th day of May, 2012, it is hereby ORDERED that, upon review of the above captioned case under MDL 875 Administrative Order no. 18 (Ol-md-875, doc. no. 6197), the Court finds that, as to the above-captioned case: a.) Plaintiff has complied with MDL-875 Administrative Orders 12 and l2A (see the MDL 875 website's Administrative Orders page, at http;/lwww.paed.uscourts.gov/md1875d.asp). b.) Parties have completed their obligations under the Rule 16 order issued by the Court. c.) All discovery has been completed. d.) The Court has adjudicated all outstanding motions, including dispositive motions. Particularly relevant rulings include: i. Plaintiffs and Defendant General Electric Company ("GE") in this case agreed to be bound by certain rulings on motions for summary judgment filed in similar cases. In those other cases, GE's motions for summary 1 judgment were granted in part and denied in part. 1 e.) Rule 18 settlement discussions have been exhausted at this time as to the remaining viable defendants. f.) The Court finds that this case is prepared for trial without delay once on the transferor court's docket, subject to any motions trial-related in limine (including paubert challenges). g.) The remaining viable Defendants for trial are listed on Exhibit "A," attached. h.) Any demand for punitive damages is severed, and claims for punitive or exemplary damages are retained by the MDL 875 Court. ~ Fed. R. Civ. P. 42(b). Accordingly, the Court SUGGESTS that the above-captioned case should be REMANDED to the United States District Court for the Northern Distriot of California for resolution of all matters pending within this case except punitive damages. 2 The relevant opinion by Judge Robreno is available here: http://www.paed.uscourts.gov/documents/MDL/MDL875/opinions/4.3.12 %20Memo%20opinion%20re%205%20cal%20cases.pdf 2 The Court finds that the issue of punitive damages must be resolved at a future date with regard to the entire MDL 875 action, and therefore any claims for punitive or exemplary damages are hereby SEVERED from this case and retained by the MDL-875 Court in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. ~ In re Collins, 233 F.3d 809, 810 (3d Cir. 2000) ("It is responsible public policy to give priority to compensatory claims over exemplary punitive damage windfalls; this prudent conservation more than vindicates the Panel's decision to withhold punitive 2 Alternatively, parties in the below-listed cases have seven (7) days within which to consent to a trial before an Article III or Magistrate Judge in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. In such an event, if consent is granted, a trial will be scheduled within sixty (60) days, on a date convenient to the parties in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, and the Suggestion of Remand will be vacated. AND IT IS SO ORDERED. EDUARDO C. ROBRENO, J. damage claims on remand. H } ; see also In re RQberts, 178 F.3d 181 (3d Cir. 1999). 3 EXHIBIT A NDCal. IDPANo. No. District I Caption I I Rood v. General Electric Coq>any et at PeadiDI Derell.... 1s CENERAL ELECTRIC I COMPANY CENERAL 09-62910 08-04656 CA·N , tunsford et al v. General Electric Coq>any et at ELECTRIC COMPANY I GENERAL Settemerg v. Newport News Shipbuilding And Dry 09-62913 05-01533 CA-N ELECTRIC Dock Coq>any et al COMPANY ALSTOM POWER. INC.; <ENERAL 09-62917 05.04084 CA-N CJelllller v. Vl8d Corp., et al. ELECTRIC COMPANY <ENERAL 09-62918 ' 05.04085 . CA-N Couris et al v. VUld Corp. et al ELECTRIC COMPANY l CENERAL 09-62921 . 05.049471 CA·N Bartholom:w v. General Electric Coq>any et a1 ELECTRIC . COMPANY CEN'ERAL 09-62922 05·04998 CA·N Rice, et a!. v. General Electric Co., et al. ELECTRIC I I COMPANY CENERAL 09-62924 06-00692 CA·N Taylorv. VlIld Corp.et al ELECTRIC COMPANY CENERAL 09-62925 06-00843 CA-N Cody v. General Electric Coq>any ELECTRIC I COMPANY CENERAL Mathews v. General Electric Coq>any et al 09-62926 06-01634 CA·N ELECTRIC COMPANY <EN£RAL Tolva v. General Electric Coq>any ELECTRIC 09-62928 06-02901 CA·N COMPANY <ENERAL ELECTRIC Kotarsky v. General Electric Coq>any 09-62931 06-03287 CA-N COMPANY CENERAL ELECTRIC CA-N Cervenlca et ,al v. General Electric Coq>any 09-62936 06-06949 COMPANY CRAMP SHIPBUILDING ANDDRYDOCK COMPANY; Rabener v. General Electric Coq>any et al 09-62939 08-00229 CA-N CENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY <EN£RAL ELECTRIC Hanna v. General Electric Coq>any et al 09-62941 08-00980 CA-N COMPANY 09-62905 08.04925 CA·N ! ! I ! , i 4 , 09-62942 I 08-00981 CA·N Taylor v. General Electric Company et al 09-62943 08-00982 CA-N Cantlin v. General Electric Company, et al. 09-62998 05-05235 CA-N Calderon v. General Electric Company I 09-63000 08-00969 CA·N Price et al v. General Electric Company et a1 09-63001 07-01274 CA·N Finkelstein v. General Electric Company CA-N Man:elja et al v. Todd Shipyards Corporation et al CA·N Pien:e et 81 v. General Electric Co. CA-N Conner et al v. General Electric Company et al 09-63699 ' 05-04347 I I Q9.63700 05-05293 Q9.63702 08-04926 I 09-63703 08-05185 CA-N Morillas et al v. General Electric Company 09-63985 I 05-01461 CA·N Nylund v. Vl8com Inc. et al 09-63997 I 05-01461 CA·N Palma v. VJaCom Inc. et al 09-64005 05-04510 CA-N Riker v. General Electric Company et 81 09-64008 05-04945 CA·N Sparks v. Lockheed Martin Corporation et al 09-64010 I 05-04945 CA·N Evans v. General Electric Company 09-64011 05-04945 CA-N Thornburg v. Lockheed Martin Corporation et al I I I I L 5 I GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY CRAMP SHIPBUJlDlNG ANDDRYDOCK COMPANY; GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY; NEW YORK SHIPBUJlDlNG CORP. GENERAL ELECrRIC COMPANY GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY GENERAL FLECfRlC COMPANY GENERAL FLECfRlC COMPANY GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY GENERAL ELECfRlC COMPANY GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY CENFRAL ELECTRIC COMPANY GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY GENERAL FLECfRIC COMPANY 09·64012 I OS-04946 I CA.N . I ()9.64013 Oxford v. Genel'lll FJectric Co., et al. 05-04946 CA-N 06-02134 CA-N , 06-03714 CA-N Daniels v. General Electric Corqlany et al 09-64020 ) 06-03714 CA-N Jodoin v. General Electric Corqlany et al 09-64024 CA·N 09-64016 ()9.64019 ! i 07-02542 I Williams v. Genel'lll FJectric Cofl1tany et al Smid v. Genel'lll Electric Company et al I Glthrie v. General Electric Company et al I CA-N , Davidson v. Genel'lll Electric Company et al CA-N Zel'llngue v. General Electric Company et al 07-02542 CA-N Resterv. Genel'lll Electric Company et al 09-64028 07-02542 CA-N (by v. Genel'lll Electric Company et al 09-64029 07-02542 O\·N Parolini v. General Flectric Company, et al. 09-64032 07-02543 o\-N 09-64033 07-02543 CA-N Wagenman v. Genel'lll Electric Company et al ()9.6403S 07-02543 CA·N Hunter v. General Electric Company et al 09-64039 08-04400 o\·N Peal v. General Electric Cofl1tany et al 09-64040 08-04400 CA-N Salisbury v. General Electric Company et al 09-64041 08-04400 CA-N Sunken v. Genel'lll Electric Cofl1tany et al ()9.6402S 07-02542 09-64026 07-02542 09-64027 I I i Halseth v. Genel'lll Electric Co~any et al 6 I GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY GENERAL ELF..CTRlC COMPANY GENERAL ELF..CTRlC COMPANY GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY GENERAL ELF..CTRlC COMPANY GENERAL ELF..CTRlC COMPANY GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY sm CARPENTER MARINE CONTRACfOR. INC.; GENERAL ELECTRIC GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY CA-N Hutto v. General Electric Company et al CA-N Schmidt v. General Electric Company et al 08-04401 CA-N Steinberger v. General Electric Company et al 09-64047 08-04401 CA-N Burnham v. General Electric Company et al 09-64048 08-04415 CA-N Yabarra v. General Electric Company 09·64049 OS·04415 CA-N Carveth v. General Electric Company 09-64050 OS-04415 CA-N Sarver v. General Electric Company 09-64051 08-04415 CA-N Burks v. General Electric Company ()9.64059 OS.Q4461 CA-N Murray v. General Electric Company et aI ()9..64299 OS-02704 CA-N Collins et al v. General Electric Corporation et al ()9..64303 OS-03181 CA-N Lindsey et al v. General Electric Company et al 09-64310 OS-00228 CA-N Schoel2l:1 v. General FJectric Company et al 09-64312 OS-00228 CA-N Watson v. General Electric Company et al 09-64314 OS-00228 CA-N Eddy v. General Electric Company et al 09-64315 07-04352 CA·N Carolan et al v. General Electric Company 09-64316 07-04352 CA-N Pretty man et al v. General Electric Company 09-64317 08-00230 CA-N Beaurman-White et al v. General Electric Company et al 09-64042 OS-04401 09-64045 0f!..04401 ()9.64046 I I I I 7 GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY GENERAL ELECrRIC COMPANY GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY GENERAL ELECI'RIC COMPANY GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY GENERAL ELECI'RIC COMPANY GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY 09-66188 09-00364 CA-N Mccurtjs v. Foster Wheeler LIe et al 09-66189 09-00365 CA-N Stone v. General Electric Company et al 09-67105 09-00709 CA-N Riedinger v. General Electric Company, et a!. 09-68010 09-00363 CA-N Embrey et al v. General Electric Company. et al. 09-68013 09-00363 CA-N Yarbrough et al v. General Electric Company, et al. 09-70107 09-01269 CA·N 09-70109 09-01322 CA·N Woody et al General Electric Company, et al 09·70112 09-02012 CA-N Hu Isen et al v. General Electric Company et al 09·74740 09-02245 CA-N Valdez v. General Electric Company 09-74742 09-02248 CA-N Anaya v. Gen eral Electric Comp any et al 09-74743 09-02282 CA·N McCollister v. General Electric Company, et at 09-74747 09-02433 CA-N Bryant et al v. General Electric Company et al 09-80020 09-02691 CA-N Hancock v. General Electric Company, et a!. 09-80021 09-02692 CA-N Pennington v. General Electric Company. et a!. 09-80024 09-02757 CA·N Brown v. General Electric Company, et al. 09-8002S 09-02806 CA·N Reynolds v. General FJectric Co .• et al. I Close v. General Electric Co.• et al. I I 8 NEWPORT NEWS SHIPBUILDING AND DRY DOCK COMPANY; GENERAL ELECTRIC GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY GENFRAL ELECTRIC COMPANY GENFRAL ELECTRIC COMPANY GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY GENERAL FLECfRlC COMPANY GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY GENFRAL ELECTRIC COMPANY GENFRAL ELECTRIC COMPANY GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY GENERAL ELECfRlC COMPANY GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY NORTHROP GRUMMAN SHIPBUlLDING, INC.; GENFRAL ELECfRlC 09-80027 09-02864 09-90812 09-03185 I CA-N Otto v. General Electric Company, et aI. CA-N Bullock v. General Electric Company et aI I 09-90817 09-03245 CA-N Wert v. General Electric Company 10-83237 1().()4022 CA-N Fong, et al. v. General Electric Company, et aL 1l-M035 lO-OS096 CA-N G:>ttschall v. General Electric Company, et al. I~05932 CA-N Turner v. General Electric Company, et a!. 11·00424 CA-N Adamson v. General Electric Cofl1lany, et al. 11-60067 , I 11-63528 9 <ENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY GNERAL El..ECTRIC COMPANY GENERAL El..ECTRIC COMPANY CENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY GENERAL El..ECTRIC COMPANY GENERAL El..ECTRIC COMPANY <ENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY SUGGESTION OF REMAND MEMORANDUM Updated November 4,20] 1 To: Transferor Judge From: Judge Eduardo C. Robreno, Presiding Judicial Officer, MDL 875 Re: Asbestos case that has been transferred to your court Status of the case that has been transferred from the Eastern District of Pennsylvania This case has been transferred back to the transferor court, from the MDL 875 Court in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. Cases that are remanded to transferor courts are ordinarily ready for trial, pursuant to this Court's Administrative Order No. 18 (see http;//www.paed.uscourts.goylmdI875d.asp). Specific infonnation regarding the history of a specific case while it was in the MDL 875 Court can be found in the Suggestion of Remand (above) that the MDL Court submitted to the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation in connection with its Order. Histor:y of MDL 875. In re: Asbestos Products Liabilib' Litiaation MDL 875, In re: Asbestos Products Liability Litigation, involves issues relating to personal injury damages caused by asbestos products. It currently consists of about 12,000 cases transferred by the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation, which has been transferring cases to the Eastern District of Pennsylvania since 1991. Each case typically consists of claims by multiple plaintiffs against multiple defendants. Since its inception, the litigation has involved more than 100,000 cases and up to ten million claims, including land-based and maritime claims ("MARDOC"). Beginning with Administrative Order No. 12 ~ hUp://www.paed.uscourts.gov/mdI875d.asw in 2008, the Court initiated an aggressive~ pro-active policy to facilitate the processing of cases. The policy involves giving newly transferred cases scheduling orders; setting cases for settlement conferences; having motion hearings; and remanding trial-ready cases to transferor courts, or, in the alternative~ holding trials in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania (if so requested by the parties). Resources ayailable for transferor courts On the MDL 875 website More infonnation about the history ofMDL 875 can be found on the Eastern District of Pennsylvania~s MDL 875 website at http://www.paed,],IScourts.goy/mdI875a,asp. Additionally, all Administrative Orders issued in this litigation (including current Orders and those no longer in effect) can be found at http://www.paed.uscourts.gov/mdI875d.asp. Also on the website is an Excel spreadsheet of all decisions issued by the Presiding Officer on 10 substantive and procedural matters since 2008 (see h11J):llwww.paed.uscourts.gov/mdI875n.asp). This spreadsheet is updated regularly, and it can be sorted by jurisdiction, case caption, subject matter, party name, etc. It is also word searchable. The MDL-875 Court intends this spreadsheet to be a helpful resource for transferor courts addressing issues similar to those already addressed by the MDL-875 Court. Other options available to assist the Transferor Court with legal research include searchable databases created by LexisNexis and Westlaw. Directions on how to access these databases can be found on http://www.paed.uscourts.gov/md1875n.asp. Contact information for the MDL 875 Court The MDL 875 Court is ready, willing and able to assist the transferor court with any matters relating to the transfer of the case or any substantive or procedural issues that may arise. You may contact the Presiding Judicial Officer (Judge_Eduardo_Robreno@paed.uscourts.gov), the MDL 875 asbestos law clerk (Michele_Ventura@paed.uscourts.gov or (267) 299-7422), or the Clerk's Office ((267) 299-7012) for further assistance. IDtercircuit Assipment Committee The Intercircuit Assignment Committee of the Judicial Conference, under the leadership ofJudge 1. Frederick Motz ofthe District of Maryland, can assist in the identification and assignment of a senior judge from another District who is ready, willing and able to preside over the trial of this case. If appropriate, please contact Judge Motz at Judge_J_Frederick_Motz@mdd.uscourts.gov or (41 0) 962-0782. 11

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?