Dale M. Spurlin believes that his malignant mesothelioma came from having been exposed to asbestos-containing equipment during his service in the Navy. He filed suit against several manufacturers, who attempted to evade responsibility by arguing that they were entitled to “derivative sovereign immunity.” Upon review, District Judge Anthony J. Battaglia of the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California decided against the companies. The case will continue to a jury.
Mesothelioma Victim Served on Two Navy Ships
The Navy veteran’s mesothelioma lawsuit says that during his service from 1963 to 1969 onboard the USS McGinty and the USS Rowan, he had worked as a boiler tender, operating and maintaining the boilers and related equipment in the fire rooms. He blames asbestos in insulation, gaskets and packing material that he handled for his fatal illness.
The companies named by the mesothelioma victim have spent more than two years filing numerous motions to have the case against them dismissed. In the latest they argued that they are entitled to derivative sovereign immunity that warrants dismissal of Mr. Spurlin’s claims.
Companies Argue Against Mesothelioma Liability
The theory behind a derivative sovereign immunity defense in a mesothelioma case is that the contractors have ‘no discretion in the design process and completely followed government specifications.’ The defendants are blaming asbestos being present in their equipment on having to follow the orders placed by the military. But the judge denied their argument, pointing out that there was no government direction that prevented them from issuing warnings against asbestos and the risk of mesothelioma.
A naval expert testified on the mesothelioma victim’s behalf that the government’s specifications actually required manufacturers to provide ‘safety precautions as an essential part of Instruction Books for machinery and electrical equipment,’ and that when Mr. Spurlin served, a military specification was released stating that such warnings were clearly required if personal injury or loss of life was a risk.
The judge ruled that because the Navy not only authorized manufacturers to provide warnings but also relied heavily on them to identify hazards associated with their products, providing the defendants with immunity from the mesothelioma claim would unfairly reward them for their lack of due diligence.
If you or someone you love has been diagnosed with malignant mesothelioma, you need an experienced and knowledgeable team on your side. For more information, contact the Patient Advocates at Mesothelioma.net today at 1-800-692-8608.
