Bartel v. John Crane, Inc.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• finding Dr. Frank’s single fiber theory to be inconsistent with prevailing scientific evidence, including the testimony of Drs. Lemen and Hammar
• finding Dr. Frank's single fiber theory to be inconsistent with prevailing scientific evidence, including the testimony of Drs. Lemen and Hammar
• coupling “hard evidence” that exposure levels were below background with expert consensus “that exposure to asbestos at or below background levels does not cause disease”
• “The prevailing scientific and medical view is that amphibole asbestos fibers have significantly greater propensity to cause disease than chrysotile asbestos.”
• rejecting the any-exposure theory as unsupported by medical literature

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).