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
No
Were you diagnosed with lung cancer? Yes
No
Were you diagnosed with Mesothelioma? yes
no
What is your date of diagnosis?
Additional Comments
Best time to call?

Brumley vs. FDCC Asbestos Case Discussion: The Lamont v. Wolfe Case

Read the discussion of the Lamont v. Wolfe in the appellate decision in Brumley, et. al vs. FDCC California, Inc. In this decedent asbestos cancer case, the plaintiffs appeal the lower court’s decision on the wrongful death claim filed on behalf of the widow and children and the widow’s loss of consortium.

The only case defendants cite on the issue of relation back is Lamont v. Wolfe (1983) 142 Cal.App.3d 375, in which a wife who was the alleged victim of medical malpractice filed claims for personal injury. Her husband joined in the suit with a claim for loss of consortium growing out of the same injuries. (Lamont, at p. 377.) After the wife’s death, the husband filed an amended complaint alleging claims for wrongful death, but his filing occurred after the expiration of the year afforded the filing of such claims. (Id. at pp. 377–378.) The court of appeal dismissed the wrongful death claims as time-barred, reasoning that the wrongful death claims related back to the husband’s original claim for loss of consortium because they alleged the same type of injuries as a loss of consortium claim. (Id. at pp. 381–382.) The case is inapplicable here because neither Mrs. Brumley nor Brumley’s children filed claims in the original lawsuit, and their claims in the amended complaint alleged a different type of injury than those that had been alleged by Brumley in the original complaint.

Because plaintiffs’ wrongful death claims and Mrs. Brumley’s loss of consortium claim do not relate back to Brumley’s original personal injury claims, under Barrington these claims should not have been dismissed pursuant to section 583.360.

If you or a loved one has been diagnosed with an asbestos illness like mesothelioma, lung cancer or asbestosis, complete the form on this page to get a FREE and prompt review of your case by a leading asbestos attorney. Weitz & Luxenberg is a leading mesothelioma law firm with a substantial history of success in asbestos exposure cases.

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


IN THIS SECTION
Asbestos: San Diego
Asbestos: Brumley, Quiroz
Lamont: Brumley Asbestos Case
Disposition: Brumley Asbestos Case
Counsel: Brumley asbestos case
Brumley California asbestos decision


RETURN BACK TO
Mesothelioma
Asbestos
Asbestos Lawsuit
Asbestos Litigation
Books and other resources
Brumley asbestos case

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:

Lamont: Brumley Asbestos Case Lamont v. Wolfe case discussed in Brumley asbestos decision
Discussion of Lamont v. Wolfe in Brumley asbestos case

Counsel: Brumley asbestos case Counsel of record in asbestos case of Brumley vs. FDCC California
Brumley vs. FDCC California asbestos case; Counsel of record listed

Procedural issues: Brumley asbestos case Procedural delays in asbestos case of Brumley vs. FDCC California
Read about the procedural delays of the Brumley vs. FDCC asbestos case