When a person is diagnosed with malignant mesothelioma or any other asbestos-related cancer, they immediately focus on where their illness came from. Those who decide to pursue justice file suit against manufacturers and others who negligently exposed them to the carcinogen, and those companies generally take steps to defend themselves or to minimize their liability. In a recent case, a shipyard’s legal action to be excused from a case filed by a lung cancer victim spurred another defendant to file a cross-claim against them and their other co-defendants to ensure that they all shared liability. The judge agreed and denied the precipitating motion.
Man’s Asbestos Lung Cancer Blamed on Shipyard Exposures
The original asbestos lawsuit was filed by Shelton A. Boutte, Jr., and his wife Arlene. Mr. Boutte was diagnosed with asbestos-related lung cancer in February of this year, and believes it was caused by exposure to the mineral during his own career as well as when he was a child and handled the work clothes belonging to his father and his four brothers who worked at Avondale Shipyard, McDermott Shipyard, and M.A. Patout Sugar Mill.
Mr. Boutte named the shipyards and the sugar mill as defendants in his premises liability and negligence claim as well as his own employer, arguing that all failed to properly ventilate the area in which their employees worked, that they failed to warn or provide proper safety appliances, that they failed to institute adequate safety procedures, and that they failed to warn of the dangers of malignant mesothelioma, asbestos lung cancer, and other asbestos-related diseases.
Asbestos Defendant Files Exception of Vagueness
In response to the lawsuit, the McDermott Shipyard filed an exception of vagueness, and in response, Avondale asserted cross-claims against McDermott and all of the other defendants, adopting all of Mr. Boutte’s assertions. McDermott insisted that the cross-claim needed more specification about where each of Mr. Boutte’s family members worked, what their job had been, and how long they had worked for them.
Avondale opposed the motion, pointing out that more definite information about the victim’s asbestos exposure was outlined within the original claim and would be further revealed during the discovery process. The judge hearing the case agreed and denied McDermott’s motion.
If you or someone you love has been diagnosed with an asbestos-related disease like mesothelioma or lung cancer, the Patient Advocates at Mesothelioma.net are here to help. Contact us today at 1-800-692-8608.
