People who are exposed to asbestos are at high risk for a wide range of serious and deadly illnesses, including asbestosis and malignant mesothelioma. Faced with a terminal diagnosis, many seek justice in the form of compensation from the companies responsible for their exposure. Though asbestos companies frequently argue against being held responsible, the court system has established rules to protect victims’ rights. In a recent case, an asbestos supplier’s attempt to evade liability was denied by the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania.
Union Carbide’s Asbestos Blamed for Man’s Terminal Illness
According to testimony presented in the case, Alfred Broderick died of pulmonary asbestosis after being exposed to the carcinogenic material multiple times throughout his career. His exposure was similar to that of many mesothelioma victims: he’d worked with asbestos-contaminated vinyl tiles, cutting and breaking them and cleaning the dust left behind. The asbestos in those tiles was exclusively supplied by Union Carbide.
As they have done to so many mesothelioma victims who filed suit against them, Union Carbide filed a motion for summary judgment to have the asbestosis case against them dismissed. They argued that the victim had provided no proof that it had been their asbestos that Mr. Broderick had been exposed to, and which had caused his illness and death. They pointed to the fact that multiple suppliers of asbestos were involved in his case.
Judge Rejects Asbestos Company’s Argument
Judge John Milton Younge of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania decided against Union Carbide, noting that the rules surrounding proof of causation established that when there are multiple sources of asbestos exposure, what is required is that the victim proves both ‘frequent, regular, and proximate’ exposure to the defendant’s product and competent medical testimony establishing substantial factor causation. With those two elements present, he said, it is up to a jury to decide the case.
The judge also noted that Mr. Broderick’s testimony regarding having laid a specific brand of tile for which Union Carbide was the exclusive supplier was sufficient to establish the appropriateness of them remaining as defendants in the case.
If you or someone you love has been diagnosed with malignant mesothelioma, asbestosis, or any other asbestos-related disease, the Patient Advocates at Mesothelioma.net can help. Contact us today at 1-800-692-8608 to learn more.
