Dismissal of Electrician’s Mesothelioma Claim Reversed After His Death
Though it was too late for the mesothelioma victim to see it happen, an appeals court reversed the dismissal of his negligence claim, allowing the man’s son to continue seeking justice on his father’s behalf. The case involved electrician Charles Curtis, whose death was blamed on asbestos exposure endured over the course of his career.
Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma Blamed on Asbestos in Electrical Products
The Curtis family first pursued legal action when Charles was initially diagnosed with malignant pleural mesothelioma. In recalling the various products he’d worked with over the years, he recalled ABB, Inc., Eaton Corporation, and Schneider Electric USA as their manufacturers, noting specifics of each products branding, including colors and logos. He provided deposition testimony in which he said that he’d worked with those products “many, many times,” and when asked to quantify the number of exposures he’d had, he’d responded that it was “too many to count.”
Despite the mesothelioma victim’s clear testimony about having worked with their products, the three companies filed a motion for summary judgment saying he’d provided no proof that it had been their products he’d worked with, and arguing that he hadn’t raised a triable issue of fact regarding his asbestos exposure. Despite the rules of summary judgment indicating that their decision should be made using the facts most favorable to the plaintiff, the trial court granted the defense’s petition and dismissed the case.
Mesothelioma Victim’s Son Continues Seeking Justice
Following Mr. Curtis’ mesothelioma death, his son Christopher asked the appellate court to review the lower court’s decision, asserting that the victim’s testimony should have been enough to defeat the motion for summary judgment. His attorneys pointed to the detailed testimony Mr. Curtis had provided, and argued that the lower court had been wrong when it wrote he hadn’t come into contact with any asbestos-contaminated parts of the companies’ products: Mr. Curtis had specifically noted that he’d repaired and sanded those parts of the companies’ products, a process which created dust that he’d inhaled.
After close analysis of the district court’s decision, the appellate court reversed its decision and sent the mesothelioma case back to them for further consideration. It said that the lower court had erred in its finding, and noted that it had further failed to address the issue of causation. The court also awarded court fees to the mesothelioma victim’s son.
FREE Financial Compensation Packet
- Info on law firms that will recover your HIGHEST COMPENSATION
- Learn how to get paid in 90 days
- File for your share of $30 billion in trust funds
