New Law In
Asbestos

Two new cases further defining the rights of asbestos victims to sue recently have been issued by California courts. One was decided by the Supreme Court of California. Barr v. AC and S Inc., 1st, Nos.A074293, and A0773961, Sept. 1997, by Ruvolo, J., The California First District Court of Appeal said that asbestos victims cannot voluntarily dismiss their actions and then wait until years later when their injuries become apparent before filing their cases again.

The court reasoned that California Code of Civil Procedure section 340.2 allows victims to file as late as one year from the time they either know or should have known of their asbestos-related disabilities, and that merely filing an asbestos case shows the victim's knowledge of the disability. The court refused to add any more years to the time limit even though the plaintiff voluntarily dismissed his case.

To avoid the harshness of Barr, potential plaintiffs and their medical professionals should carefully document any asbestos injuries or illnesses and should consult with legal counsel as soon as possible.

However, the court lightened the burden of Plaintiffs so that they only need show a "reasonable medical probability" that the defendant's asbestos was a substantial factor in the Plaintiff's injuries or illnesses.

Justice Baxter, writing for the majority, added that a jury should be informed that a defendant's asbestos was a "substantial factor" in a Plaintiff's injury if the Plaintiff can show by "reasonable medical certainty" that exposure to the asbestos contributed to his risk of injury.

Smoking And
Asbestos - A
Double Hit

Government reports show that those who both smoke cigarettes and work around asbestos suffer a much higher rate of lung cancer, mesothelioma, or asbestosis than those who either work around asbestos or smoke cigarettes.

The study, The Health Consequences of Smoking and Chronic Lung Disease in the Workplace, a report of the Surgeon General, 1985, published by the

See ASBESTOS HIT page 4

WORKPLACE

tion of helping make a victim's families whole again, and like the proposed tobacco legislation, insures that the responsible parties ultimately

pay the significant medical expenses.

Mr. Montgomery received his Juris Doctorate degree from the University of San Diego School of Law in 1989. Since then, he has worked primarily in asbestos related injury matters. He has helped hundreds of asbestos victims and their families obtain compensation.

  In Rutherford v. Owens Illinois Inc., 97 D.A.R. 11233, the court admitted that because of the many manufacturers of the product, the many times a victim may be exposed, and the length of time after exposure before the onset of a fatal illness, the ruling "will cause inherent practical difficulties."

Above: This Cloth like materials woven asbestos and was used by workers to wrap steam pipes and provide other types of insulation. Years after working with the material the works often became ill with asbestos, lung cancer or mesothelioma.