In re Silica Products Liability Litigation

In re Silica Products Liability Litigation · Texas Multidistrict Litigation Panel · June 19, 2006 · No. No. 04-0606

Summary

The Texas Multidistrict Litigation Panel dismisses GlobalSantaFe Corporation’s motion for rehearing for want of jurisdiction. The Panel holds that a remand order involving a case transferred under Texas Rule of Judicial Administration 13.11 and section 90.010(b) is not reviewable by the MDL Panel because it does not concern whether the case is a tag-along case under Rule 13.5(e). The appropriate court of appeals may review the order under Rule 13.9(b).

Court
Texas Multidistrict Litigation Panel
Writing for the Court
Bea Ann Smith, Justice; Justice Peeples; Justice Lang; Justice Hanks; Judge Steve Ables
Jurisdiction
Texas
Decision date
June 19, 2006
Docket number
No. 04-0606
Procedural posture
GlobalSantaFe sought rehearing before the Texas Multidistrict Litigation Panel after the silica pretrial court remanded Lopez's Jones Act claim to the trial court. The Panel dismissed the motion for rehearing for want of jurisdiction.
Standard of review
Jurisdictional review; the Panel determined de novo whether it possessed authority to review the pretrial court's remand order.
Precedential value
published
Parties
GlobalSantaFe Corporation v. John B. Lopez
Disposition
dismissed

Topics

appellate jurisdictionappellate procedurestatutory interpretationjones actcivil procedure

Practice areas

civil proceduremultidistrict litigationappellate jurisdictionJones Act

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the Texas Multidistrict Litigation Panel had jurisdiction under Texas Rule of Judicial Administration 13.5(e) to review the pretrial court's remand order.
  2. Whether a case involving asbestos- or silica-related injuries filed before September 1, 2003, and transferred under Rule 13.11 and Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code section 90.010(b), could be reviewed by the MDL Panel after remand.

Holdings

  1. The MDL Panel lacks jurisdiction to review a pretrial court's remand order when the case was transferred under Texas Rule of Judicial Administration 13.11 and Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code section 90.010(b), rather than as a tag-along case under Rule 13.5(e).
  2. Texas Rule of Judicial Administration 13 creates two distinct mechanisms for transferring cases to an existing MDL pretrial court: Rule 13.5(e) for tag-along cases filed on or after September 1, 2003, and Rule 13.11, together with Chapter 90, for specified asbestos- and silica-related cases filed before September 1, 2003.

Key quotations

Absent an explicit grant of authority, we lack jurisdiction to review the decision of the pretrial court.
The MDL Panel has no authority to review an order concerning the remand of a case transferred to an MDL pretrial court under section 90.010(b) and rule 13.11.

Factual background

John B. Lopez sued his former employer, GlobalSantaFe Corporation, under the Jones Act, alleging injuries from asbestos and silica exposure aboard a ship where he worked. The case was filed on July 22, 2003. GlobalSantaFe later transferred the case to a silica MDL pretrial court under section 90.010(b), and the pretrial court remanded it to the trial court after a dispute concerning the Chapter 90 medical-report requirements.

Procedural history

Lopez filed a Jones Act asbestos- and silica-exposure claim in the 55th Judicial District Court in Harris County. After the Texas MDL Panel established a silica pretrial court, GlobalSantaFe transferred the case under Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code section 90.010(b). The pretrial court remanded the case, apparently determining that the Jones Act affected the applicability of Chapter 90's report requirements and transfer provision. GlobalSantaFe moved for rehearing before the MDL Panel, which held that the remand order was not reviewable by the Panel and dismissed the motion.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…