Take-Home Exposure

News & Analysis as of

Employers’ Asbestos Liabilities Do Not Extend to Workers’ Spouses

Two federal judges recently dismissed the claims of the spouses of workers who purportedly carried asbestos fibers home from their workplaces. In July 2014, the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Oklahoma...more

Take-Home Exposure Claims Under Review by California's High Court

On August 20, 2014, the California Supreme Court granted petitions for review in two published decisions that reached different conclusions on whether a defendant owed a duty for take-home exposures. Both matters (Haver v....more

Pennsylvania Does Not Recognize Duty to Warn an Employee’s Spouse

District court predicts that Pennsylvania will not recognize a duty to protect or warn the spouse of an employee in “take home” or “household” asbestos exposure cases. On August 26, Judge Eduardo C. Robreno of the U.S....more

Update: California Supreme Court to Review Secondary Asbestos Exposure Cases

In Sedgwick’s June 2014 Toxic Tort and Environmental Law Update, we reported on two conflicting decisions from different California appellate courts regarding companies’ duty to prevent “take home exposures” to asbestos...more

Asbestos Alert: Kesner v. Pneumo Abex, LLC

Employers Now Have Duty to Take-Home Exposure Plaintiffs - On May 15, 2014, the Court of Appeal answered a question which has been asked repeatedly since the Second District Court of Appeal published a decision in...more

Ninth Circuit Affirms Dismissal of Asbestos “Take-Home” Exposure Case Against Premises Owner Finding No Foreseeability

On September 10, 2013, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the dismissal of an asbestos lawsuit brought against the owner of a shipyard in Puget Sound on the basis that “no reasonable fact finder could conclude that...more

6 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 1