Minnesota Couple Succeeds Against Former Employer in Mesothelioma Case
A Minnesota appeals court recently ruled in favor of a mesothelioma victim and his wife in their personal injury claim against the man’s previous employer. Though the company sought dismissal from the proceedings based on the state’s Workers’ Compensation Act, the couple effectively argued that his asbestos exposure in their facility occurred years before the company employed him. Based on evidence of his work history with different employers, the court upheld a previous trial court ruling and allowed the claim to move forward.
Individual’s Mesothelioma Attributed to Decades of Workplace Exposure
After Allan N. Anderson Jr.’s malignant mesothelioma diagnosis in 2023, he and his spouse initiated an injury lawsuit targeting 34 defendants they held responsible for his asbestos exposure. From the 1960s through the mid-1990s, Mr. Anderson had progressive worked progressively as a pipefitter apprentice, pipefitter, journeyman welder, and supervisor. He additionally oversaw asbestos removal projects conducted by external contractors.
The defendants in the Anderson family’s mesothelioma case included Waldorf Corporation, a company that he’d worked for over a five-year period. In response to being named, the corporation asked to be dismissed from the case, arguing that they were protected from legal action under the state’s Workers’ Compensation Act. In response, the couple demonstrated that Mr. Anderson had only been employed by the company between 1985 and 1988, and asserted that his exposure to Waldorf’s asbestos occurred during the years he’d been in their facility while working for others, before his employment with them.
Appeals Court Affirms Trial Court’s Ruling on Mesothelioma Case
The trial court that originally heard the case had sided with the couple, agreeing that Waldorf was not entitled to Workers’ Compensation Act protection because of the brief duration of the mesothelioma victim’s employment with them. Following this decision, the company filed an appeal, but the appellate court concurred with the lower court that substantial factual disputes existed that prevented summary judgment. The case will move forward for a jury to hear.
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
