Donnelly et al v. AW Chesterton Company et al

Filing 51

CONDITIONAL REMAND ORDER transferring case from the Eastern District of Pennsylvania to the District of South Carolina. Signed by MDL Panel on 10/10/2012. (Attachments: # 1 Suggestion of Remand, # 2 Cover Letter and Envelope)(alan, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

IN RE: ASBESTOS PRODUCTS
LIABILITY LITIGATION (No. VI)
DONNELLY, et al.

Consolidated Under

MOL DOCKET NO. 875

' Ewransferred from the
Fil ~f South Carolina,
SEP:26

v.

zo1't se

District

No. 10-01409

l~I~HAe~e. KUNZ.~ PA No. 2:10-cv;"83258
A.W. CHESTERTON CO.,et a""'gJ
:
oa,;
SUGGESTION OF

REMAND

AND NOW, this 26th day of September, 2012, it is hereby
ORDERED that, upon review of the above captioned case under MDL­

875 Administrative Order No. 18, No. 01-875 (E.D. Pa. April 30,
.2009), ECF No. 6197, the Court finds that, as to the abovecaptioned case:
a.) Plaintiff has complied with MDL-875 Administrative
Orders 12 and 12A (see the MOL 875 website's Administrative
Orders page, at

http://www.paed.uscourt~.gov/md~875d.asp).

b.) Parties have completed their obligations under the Rule

16 order issued by the Court

(~

ECF No.8) .

c.) All discovery has been completed.

d.) The Court has adjudicated all outstanding motions, .

including dispositive motions. Particularly relevant rulings

include:

1

i.

Various summary judgment motions were granted
as unopposed (ECF No. 60).

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 6nthe transferor court's docket, subject
to any trial-related motions in limine (including Daubert
challenges) .
g.} The remaining viable Defendants for trial. are:
i.

A.W. Chesterton Co.

ii. General Electric Co.
iii. Industrial Holdings Corp.
iv. The Carborundum Company
v.

Metropolitan Life insurance Company

h.) Any demand for punitive damages is severed, and claims
for punitive or exemplary damages are retained by the· MDL­
875 Court. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 42(b).
Accordingly, the Court SOGGESTS that the above-captioned
,

case should be REMANDED to the United States District Court for
the District of South Carolina for resolution of all matters
pending within this case except punitive damages. 1
1
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. See In re

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.
such an event, if consent is granted, a trial will be

In

~cheduled

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.

l.:L-/.~
EDUARDO C. RO

0,': J.

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
damage claims on remand. "); see also In re Roberts, 178 F. 3d 181
(3d Cir. 1999).
3

.

SUGGESTION OF REMAND MEMORANDUM
Updated September S. 2012

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 ~ http://www,paed.uscourts.goy/mdI875d.asp).
Specific information 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.

History ofMDL 875. In re: Asbestos Products Liability Litigation
MDL 875, In re: Asbestos Products Liability Litigation, involves issues relating to personal injury
damages caused by asbestos products. It currently consists of about 6,000 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 (see http://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 available for transferor courts on the MDL 875 website
More information about the history of MDL 875 can be found on the Eastern District of
Pennsylvania's MDL 875 website at http://www.paed.uscourts.gov/md1875a,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.uscourtsteov/mdI875d.asp.

4

J

"

Also on the website is an Excel spreadsheet of all decisions issued by the Presiding Officer on
substantive and procedural matters since 2008 (see http://www.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/mdI875n.asp.
.
Contact information for tbe MDL 875 Court

The MDL 875 Court is ready, willing and able to assist the transferor court with iiny matters
relating to the transfer of the case or any substantive or procedural issues that may arise.
You may contact the Presiding Judicial Officer ([e-mail]),
the MDL 875 law clerk ([e-mail] or [phone]), or the Clerk's
.
Office «267) 299-7012) for further assistance.
Intercircuit Assi&nment Committee

. The Intercircuit Assignment Conunittee of the Judicial Conference, under the leadership of Judge
J. Frederick Motz of the 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 [e-mail]
or [phone].

5