Maryland Court of Appeals Says Pump Manufacturer Had Duty to Warn of Mesothelioma Risk

Many mesothelioma victims have traced their asbestos exposure back to the days when they maintained equipment onboard Navy ships. Pursuing justice against manufacturers that knew their products were dangerous seems like it would be easy, but victims often end up having to appeal lower court decisions repeatedly until their claims can be heard by a jury.

Navy ship engine room

Mesothelioma Victim’s Widow Files Repeated Appeals to Have Her Case Heard

When Ruth Belch May’s husband Philip died of malignant mesothelioma, she filed suit against several pump manufacturers that she said failed to warn him of the dangers of asbestos. Her late husband had been exposed to asbestos-contaminated replacement parts for engine room pumps during his twenty years in the U.S. Navy. The companies all successfully argued that the case against them should be dismissed. They said that they had not placed the replacement parts into the stream of commerce, and therefore they should not be held responsible for the damage that those parts caused.

After having her mesothelioma claim dismissed by the circuit court and the Court of Special Appeals, the widow took her argument to the Maryland Court of Appeals, which agreed with her and reversed the lower courts’ decisions.

Court Points to Low Cost of Printing Warning and Knowledge of Mesothelioma Risk

In reviewing the case, the Maryland Court of Appeals noted that the mesothelioma victim had consulted instruction manuals provided by the defendants, and that those manuals contained no warnings despite companies’ knowledge of asbestos’ dangers. While the companies argued that it was not their responsibility to warn about the effects of products made by other companies, and pointed out that they made no profit on those parts, the court agreed with the widow that it was foreseeable that anyone who replaced the original parts, which clearly needed to be changed out periodically, would be exposed to asbestos.

The court also noted that there was a connection between the company’s failure to warn and the victim having been diagnosed with mesothelioma, and that the cost of placing a warning in their instruction manual would have been minimal. Finally, they noted that though the original parts were not included in the mesothelioma widow’s claim, the manufacturers’ original equipment had contained asbestos, and that the asbestos-contaminated replacement parts that it needed did not constitute a modification of their original design. The lower courts’ decisions were reversed and the case will be heard by a jury.

If you or someone you love has been diagnosed with malignant mesothelioma and you need help, contact the Patient Advocates at Mesothelioma.net today at 1-800-692-8608.

Terri Heimann Oppenheimer

Terri Oppenheimer

Writer
Terri Heimann Oppenheimer is the head writer of our Mesothelioma.net news blog. She graduated from the College of William and Mary with a degree in English. Terri believes that knowledge is power and she is committed to sharing news about the impact of mesothelioma, the latest research and medical breakthroughs, and victims’ stories.

Learn More About And Contact Terri
Get Help Contacting Mesothelioma.net
This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
24/7 Live Chat
Online Now