Court Victory for Mine Workers with Mesothelioma
It is nearly impossible to determine exactly how much harm the W.R. Grace & Company did by failing to control the asbestos in their mines, or how many cases of malignant mesothelioma and other asbestos-related diseases resulted from their negligence. But the blame for those illnesses went far beyond the single company — there were others who worked with the company, who turned their heads and ignored the problem or stayed silent. A recent court decision against W.R. Grace’s insurance company, the Maryland Casualty Company, makes clear how many others contributed to the problem, and how many lives might have been saved had companies just done the right thing.
Insurance Company Failed to Warn of Mesothelioma Health Risks
The case, which involved more than 800 W.R. Grace & Co. mine workers afflicted with asbestosis, malignant mesothelioma, or other enfermedades relacionadas con el amianto, was heard by the Montana Supreme Court. At issue was the question of whether the insurance company charged with advising the company on the health of their miners had a duty to warn the men of the dangers posed by asbestos.
According to evidence presented at trial, part of Maryland Casualty Company’s contract with W.R. Grace & Co. included medical monitoring of the workers for signs of mesothelioma and other diseases. According to the Montana Supreme Court judges, as the exclusive provider of medical evaluations of the employees, the company had a greater responsibility than simply to advise the company of the risks posed by asbestos. They also owed a duty of care to the men.
Judges Make Clear That Insurance Company Had a Duty to Warn Workers of Asbestos Risk
The decision by the high court followed a similar ruling by Montana’s Asbestos Claims Court, which had also sided with the mesothelioma victims. Though the insurance company argued that it was exclusively W. R. Grace’s responsibility to act on the information that they’d been given, the judges rejected that assertion, saying that the company’s knowledge of asbestos’ dangers had created a duty to warn and that the company’s failure had increased the men’s risk of harm.
Speaking of the company’s conduct, Justice Dirk M. Sandefur wrote, “Regardless of whether or how Grace ultimately acted on the worker-specific medical monitoring evaluations and recommendations provided by MCC, Grace in fact relied on MCC to perform that distinct aspect of the workplace safety and risk management precautions that Grace deemed necessary to take.” Following this decision, damages owed by the insurer will be determined by the Asbestos Claims Court and paid to the victims and their families.
This ruling significantly expands accountability in asbestos litigation by confirming that insurers and third-party safety consultants cannot escape responsibility when they possess knowledge of asbestos dangers and fail to act. By recognizing that Maryland Casualty Company owed a direct duty of care to the miners, the court made clear that liability is not limited to employers alone. The decision reinforces that any entity involved in monitoring worker health, managing risk, or controlling safety information may be held accountable for mesotelioma and other asbestos-related diseases. For mine workers and their families, the ruling strengthens future claims by closing a long-used loophole that allowed insurers to profit from dangerous conditions while avoiding responsibility for preventable harm.
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
