The advocacy of Brayton Purcell, L.L.P lawyers is not limited to the trial courts. We also promote the public good by championing a variety of consumer and worker issues in appeals courts.

Selected reported and unpublished appellate opinions are listed below for 2011, 2009, 2008, 2000–2002, 1999, and 1998, For a list of our trials, see Court Successes.

2011

尼基·普什诉菲利普·莫里斯

(May 5, 2011)
The California Supreme Court weighed in on the question of whether the earliest injury from tobacco use started the statute of limitations running for all future injuries as well.

2009

Brayton Purcell LLP 诉 Recordon & Recordon

(August 5, 2009)
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit affirmed the decision of the district court that Northern California was the proper venue for Brayton Purcell’s copyright infringement suit against the law firm of Recordon & Recordon.

Ronald 和 Esther Lunsfor 诉 Saberhagen Holdings

(June 4, 2009)
The Washington State Supreme Court, in a landmark decision, ruled that strict product liability applied retroactively in a case where asbestos exposure occurred prior to Washington State’s adoption of strict product liability law under the Restatement (Second) of Torts § 402A.

2008

维琪·沃伦诉美国钢铁公司等人。

(December 8, 2008)
The Utah Court of Appeals denied US Steel Corp’s Petition for Permission to Appeal an Interlocutory Order. US Steel based its Petition on having no legal duty to plaintiff Vickie Warren.

凯瑟琳·拉夫特诉美国比尔特里特案

(June 9, 2008)
A summary judgment in favor of defendant American Biltrite, Inc. was vacated and the case sent back for trial in the Washington State Superior Court in King County. The summary judgment was based on a witness’ testimony being excluded as a contradiction.

马克斯林·卡德洛等人。诉 Metalclad Insulation Corp.

(June 4, 2008)
Maxlyn Cadlo successfully appealed a summary judgment in favor of Metalclad Insulation Corp. The Appellate Court’s decision vacated the judgment and sent the case back to the lower court for trial on the issue of damages.

约瑟夫和玛丽加尔萨诉石棉公司有限公司。

(March 28, 2008)
The San Francisco First District Court of Appeals rejected an appeal by Asbestos Corporation, LTD. (“ACL”), and affirmed the jury verdict in favor of the plaintiff.

James T. Butler 和 Kathleen Butler 诉 Domco Products

(February 21, 2008)
The Washington State Court of Appeals reversed the summary judgment in favor of Domco and reinstated Mr. and Mrs. Butler’s case.

2000–2002

莎朗·麦金尼等。等人。诉加州波特兰水泥公司、Amcord, Inc.

(March 18, 2002)
Asbestos manufacturers lose on appeal; the amount of damages to plaintiffs considered appropriate.

瓦格纳诉 Apex Marine Ship Management Corporations 等人。

(October 4, 2000)
Appeals Court reaffirms the rights of asbestos victims to file a second lawsuit when they develop additional injuries from asbestos.

Charles Munoz 诉 Western Water Works Supply Co, Inc.

(July 11, 2000)
Not to be published in official reports. Reversed a trial court’s order and granted a retired pipefitter suffering from asbestosis a new trial against an asbestos defendant.

琳达·汉密尔顿等人。诉石棉公司

(May 15, 2000)
CA Supreme Court reaffirms that statute of limitations did not bar the right to file claims when asbestos-related cancers were discovered.

1999

路易斯·杜邦诉匹兹堡康宁公司

(October 28, 1999)
Not to be published in official reports. Reinstated plaintiffs’ case after grant of summary judgment for defense; strengthens a plaintiff’s case when the plaintiff has evidence that a defendant’s products could have caused the injury.

离婚诉 Dinwiddie Construction Co.

(January 11, 1999) 69 Cal.App.4th 64, 99 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 348
Strengthened plaintiffs’ right to trial by jury by clarifying what a defendant must show before being granted “summary judgment.”

上诉