Opinion
CASE NO. 2:12-cv-01220-WGY-DTB
10-14-2015
PATRICIA ANN LIVINGSTON, et al., Plaintiffs, v. 3M COMPANY, et al., Defendants.
JUDGMENT GRANTING DEFENDANT EATON CORPORATION, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS SUCCESSOR-IN-INTEREST TO CUTLER-HAMMER, INC.'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Having read and considered all papers filed in support of and in opposition to the motion for summary judgment of defendant Eaton Corporation, individually and as successor-in-interest to Cutler-Hammer, Inc. ("Eaton/Cutler-Hammer"), all admissible evidence filed in support of and in opposition to the motion, and arguments of counsel, the Court finds that:
1. There is no genuine issue of material fact that decedent Gerald Livingston ("Mr. Livingston") was exposed to asbestos-containing products manufactured, supplied, distributed or sold by Eaton/Cutler-Hammer;
2. There is no admissible evidence that Mr. Livingston was exposed to asbestos fibers released from any Eaton/Cutler-Hammer product in a manner that constituted a "substantial factor" in causing Mr. Livingston's disease; and
3. Defendant Eaton is therefore entitled to judgment as a matter of law.
Good cause appearing therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows:
1. Defendant Eaton's Motion for Summary Judgment is granted;
2. Judgment shall be entered forthwith in favor of defendant Eaton and against plaintiffs Patricia Livingston, et al.; and
3. Defendant Eaton, as the prevailing party on the Complaint, shall recover its costs against plaintiffs. DATED: October 14, 2015
By: /s/ William G. Young
Judge William G. Young