Court Rejects Summary Judgment Motion In an Asbestos Case

Court Rejects Summary Judgment Motion In an Asbestos Case

Introduction

In an order issued on January 7, a Louisiana federal Court Judge denied summary judgment requests filed by two asbestos defendants and concluded that the plaintiff involved would furnish admissible expert testimony linking the defendants' products to his alleged mesothelioma. The order concluded that "whether to credit this testimony is a question of fact for the jury.”

In the lawsuit filed in the state court against the defendants, the plaintiff asserted that he was exposed to asbestos while working as a mechanic and generator service technician, which caused him peritoneal mesothelioma. The defendants moved the action to the Eastern District of Louisiana, and a joint motion for summary judgment was filed by defendants, Ford and Cummins Inc., in which they argued that the plaintiff was unable to prove that their products were the reason for mesothelioma. Defendants requested summary judgment and urged the court to exclude the plaintiff's experts. However, the court found the causation opinions admissible and allowed expert testimonials to be included to testify that the asbestos exposure from defendants' products can cause peritoneal mesothelioma and that the plaintiff's cancer was caused by his exposure to those products.

Asbestos exposure has been the major reason for a growing number of mesothelioma lawsuits across the U.S. Another product involved in asbestos exposure is talcum powder, which has been blamed for causing ovarian cancer and mesothelioma in several individuals.