Asbestos trials have diminished over the years as courts have applied more stringent causation tests. That might all be about to change. In the case of [i]Summers v. Certainteed Corporation, et al.[i], the Pennsylvania Supreme Court was presented with the question of whether a plaintiff was prevented in “pursuing asbestos-related causes of action…whenever breathlessness or like ailments may be attributable to both the asbestos and non-asbestors related disease(s) from which a plaintiff suffers.” Overturning precedent, the Supreme Court ruled, that, so long as a plaintiff’s expert could attribute “a plaintiff’s maladies to both an asbestos and non-asbestors related disease”, the case must survive summary judgment and thereafter be presented to a jury for a factual determination. Asbestos trials might yet again clog the state’s trial calendars.
If you have any questions about this post, please contact Bob Cosgrove at firstname.lastname@example.org.