Malignant mesothelioma does not develop until decades after an individual has been exposed to asbestos, and this extended period of time makes pursuing legal actions a challenge. Identifying contaminated products encountered fifty years earlier can be difficult, especially when the victim is undergoing aggressive medical treatment. Fortunately, the courts have adopted compassionate rules that allow evidence to be viewed in the light most favorable to those pursuing justice as long as the evidence is reasonable.
Pennsylvania Court Considers Widow’s Mesothelioma Claims
A Pennsylvania court hearing a case filed by a mesothelioma widow recently addressed the challenges faced by those bringing asbestos-related lawsuits. Darlene Data filed her lawsuit following the death of her husband Michael, who had served in the U.S. Navy from 1969 to 1973, worked at the Crane company from 1973 through 1974 and Mesta Machine from 1974 to 1982, and finally at the West Pittsburgh Power Station from 1983 to 2009.
Pennsylvania law requires plaintiffs to present sufficient evidence that injuries were caused by a particular manufacturer or supplier, but also allows a “less stringent test” in cases involving mesothelioma. Mrs. Data named multiple asbestos companies she believes were connected to her late husband’s death. One, Joy Global Underground Mining, filed a motion for summary judgment arguing that she had provided insufficient evidence of their role or that her husband had encountered their asbestos-contaminated air compressors.
Mesothelioma Widow’s Evidence Deemed Sufficient to Defeat Summary Judgment
In response to the asbestos company’s motion to dismiss her case, Mrs. Data submitted several points of evidence that her husband had worked with Joy Global’s equipment, including discovery responses from previous asbestos cases, documents from her husband’s previous workplaces indicated the purchase of Joy’s air compressors, and Mr. Data’s own testimony.
Though Joy responded that the presence of their equipment at the power plant did not equate to Mr. Data having worked with it, the judges decided to allow the mesothelioma claim against them to move forward, saying that the widow had provided enough evidence for them to view it in the light most favorable to Mrs. Data.
If you or someone you love has been sickened by asbestos, proving how exposure occurred can be a challenge. The Patient Advocates at Mesothelioma.net have the resources and information you need to get the justice you deserve. Contact us today at 1-800-692-8608.
