Asbestos & Mesothelioma Law Blog
For purposes of this article, the mesothelioma victim in this case will be referred to as T.W. and his wife as J.W.
In a recent court decision, a judge denied a defendant’s motion for summary judgment and allowed a widow to proceed with her mesothelioma wrongful death claim. After J.W.’s husband died of malignant mesothelioma, a rare and aggressive form of cancer, she filed a wrongful death claim against the companies she blames for negligently exposing her husband to the asbestos that caused his illness. Among the many companies named in the lawsuit was Crosby Valve, LLC. This defendant tried to have the case dismissed by filing a motion for summary judgment. However, the judge presiding over the case denied that request.
According to Mrs. J.W.’s lawsuit against Crosby Valve, her husband suffered asbestos exposure in gaskets the company had recommended using together with their valves. The defendant argued that the widow had failed to prove that her late husband had been directly exposed to any asbestos products they had manufactured. Crosby argued that it was not obligated to warn about the dangers of third-party products used in combination with their valves.
Despite these arguments, the judge presiding over the case made it clear that New York law required otherwise. The judge referred to previous rulings in toxic tort cases like those involving mesothelioma. In one of the cases, the judge found that manufacturers are legally obligated to warn users about the risks associated with the reasonably foreseeable use of their products alongside third-party products, which is necessary to ensure the manufacturer’s products function as intended. In this case, the judge determined that Crosby Valve’s recommendation to use asbestos-contaminated gaskets alongside its valves created a duty to warn users about the potential risks.
Mrs. J.W. presented testimony from her late husband’s former co-worker. According to the testimony, Mr. T.W.’s work, which involved using Crosby’s valves, exposed him to asbestos. The widow also presented previous testimony from Crosby’s representatives indicating that the company had indeed recommended using asbestos gaskets with its valves. The judge found this evidence compelling. According to the judge, Mrs. J.W. had presented enough evidence to show that Crosby knew about the use of asbestos gaskets or insulation together with its valves and of her late husband’s work with its valves. According to the judge, this evidence raised issues of fact that needed to be addressed by a jury.
In this case, the decision emphasizes that companies cannot ignore the dangers associated with the foreseeable use of their products, even when products from other companies are involved. If a company knows that its products are used together with asbestos-contaminated products manufactured by another company, it still has a duty to warn users of the dangers associated with third-party products.
For Mrs. J.W., this decision is a step closer to her holding the companies she believes are responsible for her husband’s death accountable.
Nationwide Mesothelioma Lawyers
If you or a loved one were diagnosed with mesothelioma, contact our office to speak to one of our experienced nationwide mesothelioma attorneys about your situation. Our office can help investigate your case and determine if compensation can be sought from negligent parties to help pay for your medical treatment and help you and your family live a more comfortable life.