Taylor v. Celotex Corp.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that sufficient nexus between exposure to asbestos and manufacturer’s product may be shown through testimony of coworkers that establishes that plaintiff worked with, or was in the vicinity of, a manufacturer’s asbestos product
• to preserve an issue for appellate review, appellant must make timely objection at appropriate stage of proceedings and must specifically raise issue in post-trial motions
• circumstantial evidence that defendant’s products present on ships where plaintiff worked sufficient to show causation
• court properly refused to instruct jury on apportionment when experts did not attempt to apportion the cause of plaintiff's illness among cigarette smoking, asbestos exposure and heart disease
• court properly refused to instruct jury on apportionment when experts did not attempt to apportion the cause of plaintiffs illness among cigarette smoking, asbestos exposure and heart disease
• in applying New Jersey law, Pennsylvania Superior Court concluded that although worker was unable to identify any of the products manufactured by the defendants, testimony of co-workers was admissible to establish that he had worked in close proximity to the products

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).