Labor & Employment Law

Mesothelioma: Employer had duty to protect employee's family

Annette Simpkins died of mesothelioma cancer after being exposed to asbestos fibers brought home on the work clothes of her husband. The trial court dismissed an action by her estate against the husband's former employers, holding that an employer has no duty to protect the family of its employee from the dangers of asbestos brought home on the work clothes of the employee.

The Illinois Court of Appeals reversed, finding that such a duty does exist. Simkins v. CSX Corp (Illinois Ct App 06/10/2010).

The complaint alleged (1) that both employers negligently failed to take precautions to protect the husband's family from take-home asbestos exposure, (2) that both employers were strictly liable for engaging in an ultrahazardous activity, and (3) willful and wanton conduct on the part of both employers. All three claims involved allegations that the risk of harm to Simpkins was foreseeable.

The court found that "it takes little imagination to presume that when an employee who is exposed to asbestos brings home his work clothes, members of his family are likely to be exposed as well. Thus, the general character of the harm to be prevented was reasonably foreseeable."

The court also found that there was a substantial likelihood of serious or fatal injury, and the employers could have taken preventive measures that were not unduly burdensome.

Full post as published by Ross' Employment Law Blog on June 11, 2010 (boomark / email).