The Texas Supreme Court has handed plaintiffs in asbestos-related personal injury suits a setback. The high court reversed a decision that had affirmed a $169,000 award to a retired brake mechanic, and held that exposure to "some" asbestos fibers is not sufficient to show that an asbestos-containing product was a substantial factor in causing asbestosis. Attorneys, including the plaintiff's appellate attorney, said the ruling will make it harder for plaintiffs bringing asbestos-related claims.
June 20, 2007 at 12:00 AM
1 minute read
The original version of this story was published on Law.Com
The Texas Supreme Court has handed plaintiffs in asbestos-related personal injury suits another setback.
In an 8-0 decision, the high court reversed a 13th Court of Appeals decision affirming $169,000 in damages awarded to a retired brake mechanic in Corpus Christi, Texas, holding that Arturo Flores failed to present sufficient evidence to show that his inhalation of asbestos fibers on the job caused him to develop asbestosis. The June 8 decision came in Borg-Warner Corp. v. Flores.
Presented by BigVoodoo
Join the industry's top owners, investors, developers, brokers & financiers at THE MULTIFAMILY EVENT OF THE YEAR!
Law firms & in-house legal departments with a presence in the middle east celebrate outstanding achievement within the profession.
The premier educational and networking event for employee benefits brokers and agents.
Atlanta s John Marshall Law School is seeking to hire one or more full-time, visiting Legal WritingInstructors to teach Legal Research, Anal...
Lower Manhattan firm seeks a premises liability litigator (i.e., depositions, SJ motions, and/or trials) with at least 3-6 years of experien...
At NJM, a top-rated insurance company, we are seeking an Attorney on our Workers Compensation legal team with between 3 and 5 years of expe...
MELICK & PORTER, LLP PROMOTES CONNECTICUT PARTNERS HOLLY ROGERS, STEVEN BANKS, and ALEXANDER AHRENS
