Lunsford Mesothelioma Case:  Analysis of the Application Standard

Read about the Lunsford mesothelioma case and how the application standard is applied in asbestos cases. Exposure to asbestos is known to cause serious diseases such as mesothelioma, asbestos-related lung cancer and asbestosis.

To the extent this court finds strict liability applicable to asbestos claims, Saberhagen seeks purely prospective application of any new rule, or selective prospective application of any existing rule. But after Beam Distilling, courts are left with only two choices: purely prospective application of a new principle or rule of law overruling past precedent or deciding an issue of first impression, or purely retroactive application of such a principle or rule of law.

The Washington Supreme Court first applied Chevron Oil in Taskett v. King Broad. Co., 86 Wn.2d 439, 448, 546 P.2d 81 (1976). This was to determine whether a new state rule, announced in that case, should be applied retroactively. But in 1992 in Robinson v. City of Seattle, the court rejected the Chevron Oil test. 119 Wn.2d 34, 830 P.2d 318 (1992). Finding that "[t]he practice of retroactive application is ‘overwhelmingly the norm’" the Robinson court adopted Beam Distilling’s rejection of selective prospectivity. Id., at 79.