PSI Energy v. Roberts: Robert’s Mesothelioma Diagnosis

In this section of the Opinion in PSI Energy v. Roberts, Mr. Roberts’ diagnosis of mesothelioma is detailed.

Roberts was diagnosed with peritoneal mesothelioma in July 2001.

The Robertses filed their complaint against PSI and sixty other defendants in 2001, naming PSI as a “premises defendant” that “failed to take the reasonable and necessary precautions to protect the health and safety of individuals such as [Roberts], thus contributing to [Roberts’s] asbestos exposure.” Appellant’s Appendix at 221-222.

A ten-week jury trial was held on the Robertses’ claims against PSI and thirty-three other defendants.

The Robertses argued that PSI was liable based upon a premises liability theory and based upon two exceptions to the general rule that PSI would not be vicariously liable for the negligence of ACandS, its independent contractor.

The trial court denied PSI’s motions for judgment on the evidence at the close of the Robertses’ case and again at the close of all evidence. PSI argued, in part, that it was not liable under Section 343 or 343A of the Restatement (Second) of Torts because it had the right to expect that ACandS, as an experienced asbestos insulating company, would protect its workers.

Courtesy of the Indiana Court of Appeals and the State of Indiana

Other helpful links:

Asbestos Asbestos
Asbestos and lung cancer Asbestos and lung cancer
Mesothelioma attorney Mesothelioma attorney
Mesothelioma Lawyer Mesothelioma lawyer
Asbestos attorney Asbestos attorney