Wagner Electric Corporation Asbestos Exposure: Brake Products, Mechanics & Claims
Wagner Electric Corporation sold automotive and industrial brake products that used asbestos-containing friction material during much of the twentieth century. A federal bankruptcy-court opinion describes Wagner brake-block lining, brake shoes, disc-pad assemblies and clutch facings made with purchased asbestos friction material. Mechanics, brake rebuilders, assembly workers, parts handlers and people working nearby may have encountered dust when older friction products were handled, machined, installed, removed or cleaned.
This guide explains the documented Wagner product history, possible exposure routes, the Federal-Mogul trust process and evidence that may support a claim. A Wagner name in a work history does not by itself prove asbestos exposure, medical causation, liability or trust eligibility. Product, date, location, work-practice and medical evidence remain important.
📑 On This Page
🏢 Wagner Electric Company History
Wagner Electric was incorporated in Delaware in 1922 and manufactured, distributed and sold electrical and automotive products. The most detailed public account of its asbestos history appears in In re Federal-Mogul Global, Inc. The court described Wagner’s role in assembling and selling asbestos-containing brake products and traced the business through several ownership changes.
| Date | Documented event | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|
| 1922 | Wagner Electric Corporation was incorporated in Delaware. | Establishes the historical corporate identity. |
| About 1940–1968 | Wagner sold brake-block lining. | Provides a documented product period for investigation. |
| 1967–1985 | Ownership passed through Studebaker-related and McGraw-Edison entities before Cooper Industries acquired McGraw-Edison. | Older records may identify a parent rather than Wagner alone. |
| 1982 | Wagner stopped selling brake assemblies to original-equipment manufacturers. | This is a sales marker, not proof that all older products immediately left service. |
| 1994 | Wagner acquired the Abex land-vehicle friction business and assumed specified obligations. | Wagner and Abex product evidence still must be analyzed separately. |
| 1997–1998 | Wagner merged into Moog Automotive; Federal-Mogul later acquired Moog and renamed it Federal-Mogul Products. | Connects qualifying predecessor claims to the FMP Subfund. |
Corporate succession helps identify the correct record set and claims process, but it does not establish that any person used a particular product. Work history and product evidence should be matched to the dates and entities shown in the records.
🧱 Wagner Asbestos Products and Brands
The bankruptcy opinion says Wagner generally obtained chrysotile-containing friction material from other manufacturers that produced it to Wagner performance standards. Wagner then combined that material with non-asbestos parts in finished assemblies. That distinction supports describing historical Wagner products as asbestos-containing finished brake products without claiming that Wagner mined asbestos or made every friction material itself.
| Product | Documented description | Possible disturbance |
|---|---|---|
| Brake-block lining | Sold from about 1940 through 1968. | Cutting, fitting, removal or cleanup. |
| Brake shoes | Purchased friction material assembled with other components. | Drum removal, arcing, grinding or installation. |
| Disc-pad assemblies | Friction material incorporated into finished pad assemblies. | Removal, sanding, fitting or dust cleanup. |
| Clutch facings | Listed among products made with purchased friction material. | Clutch removal, fitting or resurfacing. |
| Aftermarket assemblies | Sold through replacement and service channels. | Repeated repair work in shops and garages. |
Historical records may show Comax, Wagner Comax, Wagner Lockheed, Wagner Lockheed Comax, Wagner or Chatham. The exact wording on boxes, invoices, catalogs, repair orders or photographs may help distinguish a Wagner product from another manufacturer’s friction product.
| Evidence found | What it may show | What it does not prove alone |
|---|---|---|
| Wagner name or logo | A possible brand connection. | Asbestos content, date of manufacture or personal exposure. |
| Part number or catalog listing | A product application and sales period. | That the claimant handled that exact part. |
| Old packaging or photograph | Brand and product details without disturbing material. | Fiber release or medical causation. |
| Coworker recollection | Corroboration of products and work practices. | Automatic trust approval or liability. |
Product composition changed over time, so modern Wagner-branded products should not be treated as evidence about historical products. Do not sand, drill or open suspected asbestos material merely to identify it.
👷 Workers and Job Sites Linked to Possible Wagner Exposure
Wagner sold brake assemblies to more than 75 original-equipment manufacturers through 1982 and also served aftermarket channels. Broad distribution does not mean every vehicle, shop or worker encountered an asbestos-containing Wagner product. A useful investigation narrows the work to a product, supplier, vehicle application and period.
| Worker | Possible contact | Helpful records |
|---|---|---|
| Automotive mechanic | Removing, cleaning, fitting or installing brakes and clutches. | Repair orders, invoices, employer history and coworkers. |
| Fleet or heavy-truck mechanic | Servicing repeated brake jobs on buses, trucks or equipment. | Fleet logs, vehicle makes and parts-room records. |
| Brake rebuilder or reliner | Handling used shoes and machining friction material. | Supplier lists, catalogs and shop-equipment records. |
| Assembly or parts worker | Handling friction components, assemblies or dusty inventory. | Department, line, job classification and work dates. |
| Household member | Handling dusty clothing brought from work. | Shared-residence dates and laundry practices. |
| Setting | Questions to ask |
|---|---|
| Independent shop or dealership | Which makes were serviced, who supplied parts and how brake dust was cleaned? |
| Fleet garage | Were parts standardized, and do maintenance or purchasing logs survive? |
| Brake-rebuilding shop | Were shoes ground, arced or relined, and what dust controls were used? |
| Assembly or warehouse operation | Which department handled friction products and during what years? |
| Home garage | Who performed the work, how often and where parts were purchased? |
Household exposure allegations also require evidence connecting clothing or belongings to an asbestos-containing source. A shared address alone is not enough. See the site’s guide to secondhand asbestos exposure.
Need help now? Call 800.291.0963
Live chat is available 24/7, 365 days a year.
Submit your case
🌫️ How Wagner Brake and Clutch Exposure May Have Occurred
The principal concern was dust released by servicing, machining or cleaning older friction material. People working nearby could also have encountered airborne dust, but a claim still needs credible details about distance, frequency, duration and the product involved.
| Task | Possible dust release | Details to document |
|---|---|---|
| Opening a brake drum | Accumulated wear dust could be released. | Vehicle, frequency, visible dust and ventilation. |
| Compressed-air cleaning | Air could disperse settled dust through the work area. | Nozzle use, room size and nearby workers. |
| Grinding, sanding or arcing | Mechanical finishing could abrade friction material. | Machine, duration and dust collection. |
| Dry sweeping | Cleaning could resuspend settled dust. | Frequency and whether wet methods were used. |
| Laundering clothes | Work dust could transfer during handling or washing. | Storage, laundry routine and the worker’s tasks. |
| Category | Specific details |
|---|---|
| Work | Employer, shop address, department, occupation and dates. |
| Product | Brand, part type, packaging, supplier and vehicle application. |
| Task | Removal, installation, grinding, cleaning and frequency. |
| Conditions | Visible dust, ventilation, compressed air and protective measures. |
| Witnesses | Coworkers, supervisors, parts employees and household members. |
Also document other asbestos products, employers, military service and job sites. Do not disturb an old brake, clutch or unidentified dusty component to create evidence. Photograph visible labels, preserve existing documents and consult a qualified asbestos professional when material assessment is necessary.
⚖️ Wagner Asbestos Claims and Compensation
The Federal-Mogul Asbestos Personal Injury Trust has four subfunds. Its FMP Subfund evaluates qualifying claims involving Federal-Mogul Products and listed predecessors, including Wagner Electric. Filing does not guarantee approval or payment. The Trust applies its Trust Distribution Procedures (TDP), medical rules, exposure requirements and claim-review process.
| Item | Official information |
|---|---|
| Trust | Federal-Mogul Asbestos Personal Injury Trust |
| Relevant route | FMP Subfund |
| Wagner status | Named FMP predecessor in the TDP |
| Claims acceptance | Began September 17, 2018 |
| Review choices | Expedited Review or Individual Review, depending on the claim |
| Current percentage | 12.2% of scheduled value for Expedited Review and 12.2% of gross settlement value for Individual Review |
The Trust’s official website listed the FMP payment percentage as 12.2% when this page was updated in September 2026. The percentage and procedures can change, so confirm current information before relying on any estimate.
| Disease level | Scheduled value | Average / maximum value |
|---|---|---|
| VIII — Mesothelioma | $100,000 | $125,000 / $300,000 |
| VII — Lung Cancer 1 | $21,250 | $30,000 / $62,500 |
| VI — Lung Cancer 2 | Individual Review only | $6,000 / $20,000 |
| V — Other Cancer | $7,375 | $9,750 / $45,000 |
| IV — Severe Asbestosis | $21,250 | $27,250 / $62,500 |
| III — Asbestosis/Pleural Disease | $4,000 | $4,250 / $7,000 |
| II — Asbestosis/Pleural Disease | $2,000 | $2,100 / $2,500 |
At 12.2%, a $100,000 mesothelioma scheduled value produces an illustrative $12,200 calculation. This is arithmetic, not a promised payment. Review type, eligibility, releases, deductions, offsets and later percentage changes may affect an actual result.
| Area | What the TDP may require |
|---|---|
| Diagnosis | Medical evidence meeting the applicable disease-level criteria. |
| Exposure | Evidence of qualifying Federal-Mogul exposure. |
| Latency | Generally at least ten years from first exposure to diagnosis. |
| Higher disease levels | Additional occupational, timing or medical criteria may apply. |
| Review route | Expedited and Individual Review use different valuation methods. |
Trust compensation is separate from a court verdict. Other claims may interact through disclosure duties, releases, setoffs and state law. Review the current official documents rather than assuming that a prior claimant’s result applies to another case.
📚 Documented Wagner Electric Asbestos Cases
Court records establish that Wagner asbestos allegations existed and preserve useful historical descriptions. They do not prove another person’s exposure or entitlement. Procedural results must also be stated accurately: an appeal, remand or bankruptcy ruling is not the same as a final liability verdict.
| Record | What it documents | Important limit |
|---|---|---|
| In re Federal-Mogul Global, Inc. | Wagner history, products, brands, assembly role, corporate succession and historical claim counts. | Does not decide an individual reader’s exposure or claim. |
| Richie v. Bridgestone/Firestone, Inc. | Allegations involving a mechanic and Wagner or Firestone brake products. | The appellate decision reversed and remanded; it should not be described as a final award. |
| In re Hawaii Federal Asbestos Cases | A mechanic’s brake-and-clutch allegations naming Wagner among defendants. | The worker recalled Raybestos, illustrating the importance of product identification. |
| In re Asbestos Litigation | Wagner and Abex in the Federal-Mogul bankruptcy setting. | Naming an entity does not prove exposure, causation or liability. |
The Federal-Mogul bankruptcy opinion reported more than 51,000 asbestos personal-injury or wrongful-death claims filed against Wagner, Moog Automotive or Federal-Mogul Products from October 1, 1998 through the bankruptcy petition date, with about 33,000 then pending. These are historical filing counts—not current approvals, verdicts or payments.
| Record may support | Record does not automatically support |
|---|---|
| Historical product names and corporate dates | That every Wagner product contained asbestos |
| Existence of prior asbestos allegations | That a new claimant was exposed |
| Description of a court’s procedural ruling | A guaranteed settlement or verdict |
| Questions for further investigation | Medical causation in another person’s case |
🗂️ Evidence for a Wagner Asbestos Claim
A focused investigation asks three questions: Is there a qualifying diagnosis? Does reliable evidence connect the person to an asbestos-containing Wagner product during a relevant period? Does the evidence satisfy the chosen trust or legal route? Because records may be decades old, claim reviews often combine several independent sources.
| Category | Examples | Purpose |
|---|---|---|
| Medical | Pathology, imaging, pulmonary tests and physician reports. | Documents diagnosis and disease level. |
| Employment | Earnings records, personnel files, union or pension records. | Establishes employer, occupation and dates. |
| Product | Invoices, catalogs, boxes, photographs and repair orders. | Connects work to a Wagner product line. |
| Witness | Coworker, supervisor, distributor or family testimony. | Corroborates brands, tasks and frequency. |
| Work site | Address, department, equipment and maintenance procedures. | Places the person where the activity occurred. |
| Exposure detail | Duration, visible dust, grinding, compressed air and ventilation. | Explains how contact may have occurred. |
| Unsupported shortcut | Why it is excluded |
|---|---|
| Average Wagner settlement | Public records do not establish one reliable universal amount. |
| Estimated number exposed | Distribution and claim counts are not worker-exposure counts. |
| Guaranteed trust payment | Eligibility and payment depend on current trust review. |
| Automatic exposure from a brand name | Product, date, task and identity evidence are still needed. |
Start with medical and employment records, then create a dated list of employers, locations, vehicles, brake tasks and remembered brands. Preserve catalogs, repair orders, invoices, photographs and packaging without disturbing suspected material. Identify coworkers or parts employees who can explain normal practices. Then compare the evidence with current FMP criteria and applicable filing deadlines.
❓ Frequently Asked Questions
Did Wagner Electric brake products contain asbestos?
Historical court records describe asbestos-containing Wagner brake products, including brake shoes, disc-pad assemblies, clutch facings and brake-block lining. A specific part’s composition still requires evidence.
Did Wagner manufacture the asbestos friction material?
The Federal-Mogul bankruptcy opinion says other manufacturers made friction material to Wagner performance standards, and Wagner incorporated it into finished products.
Which Wagner brand names may appear in old records?
The opinion lists Comax, Wagner Comax, Wagner Lockheed, Wagner Lockheed Comax, Wagner and Chatham. A brand alone does not establish composition or personal exposure.
Who may have encountered dust from historical Wagner products?
Potentially relevant groups include mechanics, brake rebuilders, assembly and parts workers, nearby employees and household members. The product, task, dates and frequency matter.
Is there an asbestos trust route for Wagner claims?
Yes. The Federal-Mogul Trust’s FMP Subfund evaluates eligible claims involving listed predecessors that include Wagner Electric.
What is the scheduled value for an eligible Wagner mesothelioma claim?
The TDP lists a $100,000 mesothelioma scheduled value for the relevant non-Pneumo Abex category. At 12.2%, $12,200 is an illustrative Expedited Review calculation, not a guarantee.
Can a claim be reviewed without the exact part number?
Yes. Invoices, repair orders, catalogs, fleet records, packaging, photographs and witnesses may help establish identity, but the Trust or court evaluates the evidence.
Can a Wagner trust claim accompany other claims?
Possibly. Multiple trust or legal routes may apply, but disclosure duties, releases, setoffs, deadlines and state law can affect how claims interact.
📋 Wagner Electric Company Summary
| Topic | Key point |
|---|---|
| Documented products | Historical brake-block lining, brake shoes, disc-pad assemblies and clutch facings. |
| Documented brands | Comax, Wagner Comax, Wagner Lockheed, Wagner Lockheed Comax, Wagner and Chatham. |
| Potential workers | Mechanics, rebuilders, assembly workers, parts handlers and nearby workers. |
| Claim route | Federal-Mogul Trust FMP Subfund when current criteria are met. |
| Core evidence | Medical, employment, product, witness and task-specific records. |
| Main caution | A brand name or corporate link alone does not prove exposure or eligibility. |
🔗 Confirmed Primary, Government and Court Sources
- Federal-Mogul Asbestos Personal Injury Trust — current payment percentage, subfund overview and official notices.
- Federal-Mogul Trust Distribution Procedures — FMP predecessor, disease-value, exposure and review rules.
- In re Federal-Mogul Global, Inc. — court account of Wagner products, brands and corporate history.
- Richie v. Bridgestone/Firestone, Inc. — California appellate record.
- In re Hawaii Federal Asbestos Cases — federal court record involving brake-product identification.
- U.S. EPA brake and clutch repair guidance — government work-practice information.
- National Cancer Institute asbestos fact sheet — health information and historical automotive uses.
☎️ Submit Your Wagner Electric Case
If you or a family member developed an asbestos-related disease after work involving historical Wagner brake products, a free review can help organize product, work-history and medical evidence and identify possible claim routes.
Call 800.291.0963
Live chat is available 24/7, 365 days a year.
Submit Your Case
Have the diagnosis date, employer and location, work dates, vehicle types, brake tasks, remembered brands, witness names and surviving records available if possible.
Disclaimer: General information only; not legal or medical advice. Consult qualified professionals about treatment, rights and deadlines.