Misunderstanding of Law Leads to Denial of Company’s Attempt to Evade Mesothelioma Claim
When asbestos companies are named as defendants in claims filed by mesothelioma victims, they have a few options. They can concede that the victim’s case is strong and settle out of court. They can choose to go to court and begin gathering evidence in support of their position. Or they can ask to have the claim against them dismissed by filing a petition for summary judgment. For the last approach to be successful, the defense must prove that the case is baseless, with no issues of fact to be decided. These attempts frequently fail, and in a recent case, it did so in part because the attorneys for the defense entirely misstated the law.
HVAC Company Files Motion to Stop Mesothelioma Claim Against Them
The lawsuit was filed by the adult children of a man who died of malignant mesothelioma years ago. Michelle Togher and Peter Vincent filed suit against multiple companies whose products they blamed for his illness, and one of them, SPX Cooling Technologies, filed a petition for summary judgment to have the case against them dismissed.
In its motion, the company suggested that the victim’s family had failed to provide evidence of causation and that as a result they should be dismissed from the mesothelioma claim. To support their argument, they pointed to a recent court decision. But that decision pertained specifically to jury verdicts rather than pre-trial cases. The rules regarding dismissing a case rather than having it heard are entirely different.
Judge Denies Asbestos Company’s Petition and Allows Mesothelioma Claim to Proceed
In denying the company’s petition for summary judgment, Justice Adam Silvera provided a basic tutorial on what is required for an asbestos company to successfully have a mesothelioma claim dismissed. He noted that defendants have to prove there is no conflict in evidence and that they must present evidence that shows that there is no way that they could have been responsible for the illness. The judge also pointed out that when there is a question as to which way to lean before a case goes to a jury, the benefit goes to the victim by law.
When SPX Cooling filed its motion for summary judgment, it entirely failed to provide evidence showing that it would have been impossible for the victim to have been exposed to asbestos from their products. Instead, they pointed to what they viewed as weaknesses in the case presented by the mesothelioma victim’s family, and that falls well below the bar that they would have needed to have the case dismissed. For their part, the victim’s family had provided a significant amount of testimony supporting their assertion of blame against the company. As a result, the petition was denied and the case will move forward to trial.
Paquete de compensación financiera GRATUITO
- Información sobre despachos de abogados que recuperarán su INDEMNIZACIÓN MÁS ALTA
- Aprenda cómo cobrar en 90 días
- Solicite su parte de $30 mil millones en fondos fiduciarios
