Justice Saliann Scarpulla
Plaintiffs’ counsel moved to consolidate four personal injury/wrongful death actions for a joint trial arguing common questions of law and fact existed. The court noted three of the plaintiffs were deceased, but found all four suffered from mesothelioma. Counsel set forth certain commonalities, including each plaintiff was exposed to asbestos starting from the 1950s and the 1960s, with the range of exposure from the 1950s through the 1980s, and the four cases shared common defendants. Defendants argued the cases’ dissimilarities outweighed their commonalities, including none of the four plaintiffs had similar occupations or similar asbestos exposures. The court noted the Malcolm v. National Gypsum Co. factors, including similar time of exposure, type of disease, and common worksite, must be considered in their totality, but no single factor was dispositive. It found certain commonalities existed including plaintiffs were represented by the same firm, ruling the Malcolm factors did not require plaintiffs share identical occupations or time periods of exposure. The court found there were sufficient similarities, and "jury innovations" should avoid any confusion for the jury in sorting out respective liabilities and damages attributable to each plaintiff. Hence, the motion was granted.
