“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… read it below or add one }

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?


Leave a Comment

You can use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>