“Texas Supreme Court requires proof of causation in asbestos cases”

by Walter Olson on July 12, 2014

While the court did not endorse “but-for” causation standard favored by the defense, it did rule against the ultra-accommodating position that “any exposure” to asbestos should result in liability even if far greater exposure came from a different source. The court instead hinged liability on whether a defendant’s product or activity was a “substantial factor,” which it defined “as one that more than doubles the risk of injury to the plaintiff.” [Deborah La Fetra, PLF]

{ 1 comment }

1 Boblipton 07.13.14 at 9:02 am

“The court explained that a less demanding standard for causation in mesothelioma cases would impose “absolute liability against any company whose asbestos-containing product crossed paths with the plaintiff throughout his entire lifetime.””

But, isn’t that the dream? Don’t we want to live in a world in which if anything ever goes wrong, anyone with money can be held responsible to the tune of billions of dollars? What’s wrong with these people?


Comments on this entry are closed.