Lung Cancer, Mesothelioma, and Other Asbestos Diseases Linked to Goodyear Floor Tiles
Though the name Goodyear is most frequently associated with tires, the company was also a major supplier of floor tiles in the 1970s and years previous to that, and as a result they’re frequently named in mesothelioma, lung cancer, and asbestosis lawsuits. That’s because many of those tiles were contaminated with asbestos. In a recent case, a man who’d spent years working with the company’s tiles blamed them for his illness, but the company attempted to have his case against them dismissed.
Asbestos-Contaminated Floor Tiles Blamed for Man’s Asbestos-Related Lung Cancer
When Paul M. Moutal was diagnosed with asbestos-related lung cancer, he filed a personal injury lawsuit against Goodyear. The former handyman had spent much of his time working with the company’s tiles, cutting and installing them. He remembered the dust that was created when he cut them, heated them, and cracked them. He did that work from 1969 to 1975, and then later worked as a laborer and carpenter, but did not learn of the danger of asbestos in the tiles until the early 1990s. At that point, he wore a mask to protect himself, but it was too late. He’d already endured significant exposure to the deadly fiber.
As often happens in mesothelioma and other asbestos lawsuits, Goodyear filed a motion for summary judgment, arguing that the case against them should be dismissed by the court. They based their argument on Mr. Moutal’s lack of specific proof that he’d worked with their branded tiles, or that if he had, that the tiles he’d worked with had contained asbestos.
New York Judge Explains Rules of Evidence Pertaining to Asbestos Claims
In response to Goodyear’s petition, Justice Adam Silvera of the Supreme Court of New York explained that the company’s argument against being required to stand trial ignored the state’s standard for such a motion to be granted. The only way that they would be successful in a mesothelioma or asbestos case would be to prove that their product absolutely did not contain asbestos and therefore could not have been responsible for his illness. It is not enough to simply say that the victim provided inadequate proof.
Because Goodyear failed to offer any such evidence, their motion for summary judgment was denied and Mr. Moutal will be able to continue presenting his case for a jury to decide.
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
