The family of a man who died of malignant mesothelioma in 2012 will have another chance at justice after an appeals court agreed that the trial court hearing their original claim abused its discretion in ruling that an elderly witness had to testify in person. The Appellate Court of Illinois ruled that refusing the witness to testify via Zoom while others had been permitted to do so was arbitrary and as a result, the case will be remanded for a new trial.
Truck Driver’s Mesothelioma Blamed on Exposure to Asbestos in Products He Transported
The original mesothelioma claim was filed by Margarett Ann McNamara on her own behalf and on behalf of the estate of her late husband Donald and their three children. Mr. McNamara was diagnosed with mesothelioma in January 2012 and died six months later. Mr. McNamara believed his asbestos exposure occurred when he worked as a truck driver and picked up deliveries from Wedco, a company that operated a plastics grinding facility.
According to evidence collected for the trial, Wedco had grinding facilities in several states, but not all ground asbestos-contaminated plastic. The only surviving employee who could testify to the fact that the Elk Grove Illinois plant that the mesothelioma victim traveled to was Leo Sinclair. Though Mr. Sinclair was willing to testify about the presence of asbestos at the plant, he requested that his testimony be given over Zoom because he was in the midst of medical treatment, was 79 years old, and was concerned about traveling during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Trial Court Denies Witness in Mesothelioma Case Ability to Testify Remotely
Although several other witnesses in the mesothelioma case were permitted to testify remotely, the fact that Sinclair’s evidence was only introduced days before the trial created some legal objections, and the judge decided that the only way that Sinclair’s testimony would be admitted would be if he testified in person. With his travel too risky to his health, Mr. Sinclair did not appear, and the defense used his absence to indicate a lack of proof that Mr. McNamara had been exposed to asbestos-contaminated products. The jury entered a defense verdict and the family filed an appeal.
Upon reviewing the facts of the mesothelioma case, the Illinois Appellate Court agreed with the McNamaras that the court’s decision not to allow Mr. Sinclair to testify via Zoom was arbitrary, exceeded the bounds of reason, and an abuse of its discretion. It ruled that the case deserved to be reheard.
If you or someone you love has been diagnosed with malignant mesothelioma, it’s important that you have experienced people standing up for your rights. For information on how the Patient Advocates at Mesothelioma.net can help, contact us today at 1-800-692-8608.
