EDUARDO C. ROBRENO, District Judge.
The transferee court in this litigation has, in the actions on this conditional remand order: (1) 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 of this 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 10.4(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.
Accordingly, the Court
Alternatively, parties have
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 (
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.
MDL 875, In re: Asbestos Products Liability Litigation, involves issues relating to personal injury damages caused by asbestos products. It currently consists of about 3,000 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 (
More information about the history of MDL 875 can be found on the Eastern District of Pennsylvania's MDL 875 website at
Also on the website is an Excel spreadsheet of all decisions issued by the Presiding Officer on substantive and procedural matters since 2008 (see
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
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 law clerk (Christopher_Lucca@paed.uscourts.gov or (267) 299-7422), or the Clerk's Office ((267) 299-7012)) for further assistance.
The Intercircuit Assignment Committee of the Judicial Conference, under the leadership of Judge Royce C. Lamberth of the District of Columbia, 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 Lamberth at
The Court has designated Professor Francis McGovern to act as special master for remand purposes to assist the trial and/or transferor court in any manner deemed appropriate by those courts to insure the smooth and consistent remand of cases from MDL 875. If appropriate, please contact Professor McGovern at
The Presiding Judicial Officer has written an extensive article on the history and current status of MDL 875 which may be helpful to the transferor judge.
Accordingly, the Court
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 (
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.
MDL 875, In re: Asbestos Products Liability Litigation, involves issues relating to personal injury damages caused by asbestos products. It currently consists of about 3,000 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 (
More information about the history of MDL 875 can be found on the Eastern District of Pennsylvania's MDL 875 website at
Also on the website is an Excel spreadsheet of all decisions issued by the Presiding Officer on substantive and procedural matters since 2008 (
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
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 law clerk (Christopher_Lucca@paed.uscourts.gov or (267) 299-7422), or the Clerk's Office ((267) 299-7012)) for further assistance.
The Intercircuit Assignment Committee of the Judicial Conference, under the leadership of Judge Royce C. Lamberth of the District of Columbia, 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 Lamberth at
The Court has designated Professor Francis McGovern to act as special master for remand purposes to assist the trial and/or transferor court in any manner deemed appropriate by those courts to insure the smooth and consistent remand of cases from MDL 875. If appropriate, please contact Professor McGovern at
The Presiding Judicial Officer has written an extensive article on the history and current status of MDL 875 which may be helpful to the transferor judge.
On September 4, 2014, Defendant Weyerhaeuser Company concurrently filed a Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings and a Motion to Stay in the instant three cases. Weyerhaeuser asserts that Plaintiffs' claims are barred by the strict exclusivity provision of the Wisconsin Worker's Compensation Act. Weyerhaeuser also asserts that the Western District of Wisconsin recently dismissed Weyerhaeuser with prejudice from six "nearly identical companion cases, all involving former Weyerhaeuser employees." Weyerhaeuser requested that the Court stay all discovery and proceedings until the Court resolved its motions for judgment on the pleadings. After a telephone conference, Judge Strawbridge granted Weyerhaeuser's motion to stay on September 17, 2014.
On September 26, 2014, Plaintiffs filed renewed motions for a suggestion of remand. Plaintiffs assert that circumstances have changed and remand to the transferor court would now promote the just and efficient resolution of their cases. Particularly, Plaintiffs assert that in the event there are appeals of this Court's orders, the appeals should be heard by a single circuit. Defendant Weyerhaeuser submitted a "Statement of No Opposition" in response to Plaintiffs' motions to remand. Defendant Owens-Illinois also filed a "Statement of No Opposition." No other defendant responded to Plaintiffs' motions. Accordingly, Plaintiffs' motions for a suggestion of remand are unopposed.
This MDL Court is charged under 28 U.S.C. § 1407 to coordinate or consolidate (i.e., simplify) pre-trial issues. The Western District of Wisconsin is familiar with the issues raised in these cases and remand at this time would facilitate the just and efficient resolution of Plaintiffs' claims. For the sake of consistency, and because Defendants do not oppose Plaintiffs' motions, the Court deems it appropriate to remand the cases in their entirety to the transferor court in Wisconsin. Accordingly, all other pending motions are denied, with leave to refile in the transferor court after remand.