HOME  |  CONTACT US  |  SUBSCRIBE  |  SUPPORT WLF

Case Detail


Crane Co. v. Superior Court
On July 8, 2009, the California Supreme Court declined to review an asbestos product liability case that sought clarification of the standards for determining when a defendant is entitled to summary judgment. In a brief requesting that review be granted, WLF had argued that many California courts have adopted overly strict standards for granting such motions. WLF noted that defendants who lose a summary judgment motion often are forced to settle even unmeritorious claims to avoid the prohibitive costs of trial. In most states, if a plaintiff at his deposition fails to recall any exposure to a defendantís products, the defendant can prevail on summary judgment unless, in response, the plaintiff comes forward with some evidence of exposure. But in a rule unique to California, many of its courts deny summary judgment even if the plaintiff fails to come forward with exposure evidence, unless the plaintiff at his deposition has provided testimony ruling out all possibility of exposure.
Case Status:
Review denied.
More Information and Downloads:
6/25/2009: Download the Brief
Press Release: Court Urged to Set Rules for Granting Summary Judgment in Asbestos Cases
  • Welcome to the Washington Legal Foundation
  • 2009 Massachusetts Ave., NW
    Washington, DC 20036
  • info@wlf.org  |  ph. 202-588-0302
    ©2017 WLF All Rights Reserved