Mesothelioma and other asbestos-related cancers have long been linked to earlier work at Navy shipyards, but winning compensation from that type of occupational exposure has had its challenges. That’s why a new federal ruling is offering those affected by these diseases so much hope. U.S. District Judge Bartle denied a motion to block testimony from a victim’s expert set to present his assessment of the financial toll a Philadelphia Naval Shipyard worker’s death had caused his family. The decision could make it easier for families of civilian shipyard workers to recover appropriate compensation for their losses.
Mesothelioma and Lung Cancer Risks at the Shipyard
Mesothelioma is the cancer most closely associated with asbestos, but lung cancer is another deadly consequence of exposure. David Cox worked as a pipefitter and insulator at the Philadelphia Naval Shipyard from 1974 to 1987. He was diagnosed with lung cancer in August 2022 and died less than two weeks later.
Personal injury and wrongful death lawsuits related to mesothelioma and lung cancer often center on the same asbestos-containing products. In this case, the victim’s widow and administrator of his estate alleges that his death resulted from exposure to asbestos in John Crane Inc.’s packing and gasket materials. Her claim cites strict liability, negligence, breach of warranty, and negligent misrepresentation.
Mesothelioma Defendants Push Maritime Law Limits
Mesothelioma and asbestos defendants frequently argue that federal maritime law prevents shipyard families from recovering the same types of compensation that are available in other workplace environments. In its response to Mrs. Cox’s claim, John Crane asked the court to exclude testimony from economist Royal A. Bunin, MBA, whose calculation was based on Pennsylvania law and included lost retirement income, lost household services, and medical expenses. The company argued that because the case falls under maritime law, those state-law calculations did not fit the case. I pointed to previous Supreme Court decisions limiting recovery for seamen to support its argument.
In his rejection of the company’s reasoning, Judge Bartle explained that the restrictions referenced in the Supreme Court’s decisions apply to seamen rather than to every maritime worker, and that, when the person harmed was not a seaman, appellate rulings have allowed state-law remedies. This is an extremely important ruling for shipyard workers affected by mesothelioma and lung cancer.
Mesothelioma Cases and the Seaman Question
Maritime law determinations involving mesothelioma and lung cancer often hinge on whether the victim was a seaman or shipyard worker. To be classified as a seaman and therefore subject to maritime law, there must be a substantial connection to a vessel in navigation. Ships undergoing major overhauls do not count. In Mr. Cox’s case, nothing in the record showed that he’d gone to sea, served as a crew member, or worked on ships in navigation. As a result, the judge said treating him as a seaman would be mere speculation, leading to the motion being denied. The ruling confirms that working on ships does not automatically place a civilian worker under maritime law’s narrower damages rules – an important decision for future claims.
If you or someone you love has been diagnosed with mesothelioma or asbestos-related lung cancer after working in a shipyard, the Patient Advocates at Mesothelioma.net are here to help. Contact us today at 1-800-692-8608 to learn more.