Ever since his mesothelioma diagnosis, nearly a decade ago, Elise Angelini has been pursuing justice on behalf of her husband John. This week, a decision from the Rhode Island Superior Court dismissed several of her claims against the company she blames for his occupational exposure to asbestos, but allowed a significant portion of the case to move forward, leaving the door open for a jury to provide her with the chance to achieve her goal.
Occupational Exposure to Foster Wheeler’s Asbestos Blamed for Man’s Mesothelioma
The original complaint seeking compensatory damages and loss of consortium was filed by the mesothelioma victim and his wife in July 2017, but by December 2018, Elise Angelini amended the complaint to remove her husband from the claim following his death. The claim described how Mr. Angelini had worked at several different power companies over the course of his career, including approximately 20 years at the Brayton Point, Massachusetts, station operated by New England Power Company. His responsibilities included maintaining all equipment at the facility.
The defendant in the mesothelioma lawsuit is Foster Wheeler, which designed and furnished several asbestos-containing feedwater heaters and water pumps for the facility in the 1960s and 1970s, which Mr. Angelini worked on. The company also regularly sent its representatives to provide technical expertise and training for repairs of the equipment. Mrs. Angelini’s claim raised several issues and claims, including whether Rhode Island or Massachusetts law should apply to the claim, whether the Sophisticated User Doctrine could be used as a defense, whether the statute of limitations had been exceeded, and whether Foster Wheeler owed Mr. Angelini a contractual duty to warn him of the dangers of the asbestos in the equipment they’d supplied.
Partial Rejection of Asbestos Company’s Motion Allows Mesothelioma Case to Proceed
In its review of the applicable law and precedent, the Rhode Island Supreme Court handed down a mixed decision, including concurring with Foster Wheeler’s argument that the statute of limitations had passed regarding the design and installation of the equipment and that the sophisticated user status in the case was the mesothelioma victim’s employer rather than the manufacturer of the equipment.
However, on the question of whether Foster Wheeler had a contractual duty to warn Mr. Angelini about the dangers of working with its equipment, the court agreed with the widow that, because the company had assumed responsibility for engineering and technical direction and safety, a contractual relationship did exist. That portion of her claim will remain, and the case will move forward.
If you or someone you love has been diagnosed with mesothelioma, the Patient Advocates at Mesothelioma.net are here to help. For information, contact us today at 1-800-y692-8608.
