Case ID: so2d_709/html/0470-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "HOUSTON, Justice.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Vernon Maximillian CHESTANG, Jr. v. W.R. GRACE & CO.-CONN., et al.
    1961592.
    Supreme Court of Alabama.
    Jan. 16, 1998.
    Cecil Gardner of Gardner, Middlebrooks, Fleming & Hamilton, Mobile; and Janice Pennington and Misty A. Farris of Baron & Budd, P.C., Dallas, TX, for appellant.
    Vincent A. Noletto, Jr., of Brown, Hud-gens, P.C., Mobile; and J. Ford Little of Woolf, McClane, Bright, Allen & Carpenter, P.L.L.C., Knoxville, TN, for appellee W.R. Grace & Co.-Conn.
    F. Grey Redditt, Jr., of Adams & Reese, L.L.P., Mobile, for appellee Rapid American.
    Edward B. McDonough, Jr., and Kevin D. Graham of Edward B. McDonough, Jr., P.C., Mobile, for appellees Garlock, Inc., and Anchor Packing Company.
    Judson W. Wells and Susan Gunnells Smith of Janecky, Newell, Potts, Wells & Wilson, P.C., Mobile, for appellee Georgia-Pacific Corporation.
    James W. Tarlton III of Hamilton, Butler, Riddick, Tarlton & Sullivan, P.C., Mobile, for appellee Flinkote Company.
    James A. Philips, Mobile, for appellee Syn-koloid Company.
    J. Glynn Tubb of Eyster, Key, Tubb, Weaver & Roth, Decatur, for appellee M.H. Detrick Company.
    R. Bruce Barze, Jr., of Balch & Bingham, L.L.P., Birmingham, for appellee North American Refractories Company.
    David M. Smith and Carole A. Golinski of Maynard, Cooper & Gale, P.C., Birmingham, for amicus curiae Business Council of Alabama.
   HOUSTON, Justice.

Vernon Maximillian Chestang, Jr., sued, among others, W.R. Grace & Co.-Conn.; Anchor Packing Company; Garlock, Inc.; Flin-kote Company; Foster Wheeler Energy Corporation; Rapid American Corporation; Georgia Pacific Corporation; Metropolitan Life Insurance Company; M.H. Detrick Company; Proko Industries, Inc.; Uniroyal, Inc.; Synkoloid Company; and North American Refractories Company, for damages, based on asbestos-related personal injury. The trial court entered a summary judgment for the defendants based on its conclusion that the action was barred by the applicable statute of limitations and that 42 U.S.C. § 9658, the federal statute of limitations contained in the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (“CERCLA”), was not applicable because, it held, § 9658 did not preempt the state statute of limitations in this case.

This case is factually similar to Becton v. Rhone-Poulenc, Inc., 706 So.2d 1134 (Ala.1997), decided recently, and the arguments presented in this case are basically the same as those presented in that case. Thus, based on the authority of Becton v. Rhone-Poulenc, Inc., we affirm the summary judgment.

AFFIRMED.

HOOPER, C.J., and MADDOX, ALMON, KENNEDY, and SEE, JJ., concur.