HOME STORY OF OUR FIRM SEARCH
ASBESTOS DRUGS POLLUTANTS ACCIDENTS MALPRACTICE
English En Français

FREE LEGAL REVIEW

First Name
Last Name
Home Phone
Work Phone
City and State
Email
Were you diagnosed with Asbestosis? Yes
Were you diagnosed with lung cancer? Yes
Were you diagnosed with Mesothelioma? yes
What is your date of diagnosis?
Additional Comments
Best time to call?

JUSTICE KENNEDY ON:
How asbestos litigation affects businesses

Opinion of Justice Kennedy on the subject of asbestos litigation in Norfolk & Western Railway Company, Petitioner v. Freeman Ayers et al.

Asbestos litigation has driven 57 companies, which employed hundreds of thousands of people, into bankruptcy, including 26 companies that have become insolvent since January 1, 2000. See RAND Institute for Civil Justice, S. Carroll et al., Asbestos Litigation Costs and Compensation: An Interim Report 71 (2002) Petitioner’s Supplemental Lodging, p. SL82.

With each bankruptcy the remaining defendants come under greater financial strain, see Edley & Weiler, Asbestos: A Multi-Billion-Dollar Crisis, 30 Harv. J. Legis. 383, 392 (1993); M. Plevin & P. Kalish, What’s Behind the Recent Wave of Asbestos Bankruptcies? 16 Mealey’s Litigation Report: Asbestos 35 (Apr. 20, 2001), and the funds available for compensation become closer to exhaustion, see Schuck, The Worst Should Go First: Deferral Registries in Asbestos Litigation, 15 Harv. J. L. & Pub. Pol’y 541, 547 (1992).

In this particular universe of asbestos litigation, with its fast diminishing resources, the Court’s wooden determination to allow recovery for fear of future illness is antithetical to FELA’s goals of ensuring compensation for injuries. Cf. Consolidated Rail Corporation v. Gottshall, 512 U. S. 532, 555 (1994) (describing FELA’s “central focus on physical perils”); Metro-North, supra, at 430 (noting that Gottshall relied upon cases involving “a threatened physical contact that caused, or might have caused, immediate traumatic harm”).

As a consequence of the majority’s decision, it is more likely that those with the worst injuries from exposure to asbestos will find they are without remedy because those with lesser, and even problematic, injuries will have exhausted the resources for payment. Today’s decision is not employee-protecting; it is employee-threatening.

Mesothelioma Mesothelioma Home Page
head Mesothelioma: An Overview
kleio The Clock Is Ticking
asbestos Our Toughest Cases
head Diagnosis
treatment Symptoms, Stages, Treatment
kleio Latest News
New York Numbers
Asbestos
Real Stories


Mesothelioma
Mesothelioma Resource Center
Asbestos
Asbestos Exposure Dangers
Asbestos Help
News & Warnings
Official Documents
Norfolk v. Ayers
IN THIS SECTION
Justice Kennedy’s Opinion: Part I
Fear of cancer
Mesothelioma Patients
Compensation in Norfolk vs. Ayers
Justice Kennedy opinion
Justice Kennedy's Opinion: Part II
Justice Kennedy’s Opinion: Part II A
Applying FELA
Emotional Distress
The Majority Opinion
Fear of Cancer Not Compensable
Pennsylvania Supreme Court Ruling
Pennsylvania Law Applied In Other Jurisdictions
Common Law Analysis
Responsibility Under FELA
Justice Kennedy’s Opinion: Part II B
The Respondents’ Claims
The Asbestos Jury's Analysis
Fear Must Be “Genuine and Serious”
Justice Kennedy’s Opinion: Part III

Mesothelioma Lawyer

Asbestos Lawyer

Mesothelioma Attorney

Asbestos Attorney

For legal help anywhere in the U.S. call:

1 - 800 - 476 - 6070

Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.

ATTORNEY ADVERTISING

see also:

Common Law Analysis Justice Kennedy's common law analysis of the case
Norfolk v. Ayers: Review of common law in the case

Pennsylvania Supreme Court Ruling The Pennsylvania Supreme Court standard in fear of cancer cases
Norfolk v. Ayers: Justice Kennedy discusses Pennsylvania Court ruling

Justice Kennedy's Opinion Justice Kennedy concurs in part and dissents in part
Read Justice Kennedy's Opinion in the Norfolk v. Ayers case