Utah Mesothelioma Lawer and Legal Information

Utah Mesothelioma Lawyer and Legal Information

Currently there are no asbestos personal injury or product liability suits in the Utah trial courts, though there have been suits in the past. This may be surprising since Utah is home to a site that processed vermiculite from the asbestos-contaminated W.R. Grace mine in Libby, Montana. In 2004, the EPA warned that asbestos contamination in the area surrounding the Utah site could possibly put nearby neighbors at risk of asbestos exposure.

Determination of Liability

Utah courts follow a modified comparative liability - 50 percent rule in determining whether to award damages in a case involving asbestos liability. Under the 50 percent modification, a plaintiff can only recover damages if they are found 49 percent or less responsible in causing their own injuries. If the plaintiff is determined to be 50 percent or greater at fault for their own injuries, they recover no damages. In cases where the plaintiff is found to be partly at fault but less than 50 percent at fault in their own injuries, any damages determined by the jury are reduced proportionate to the percentage of fault. In other words, in a case where the plaintiff is determined to be 30 percent at fault and the damages are judged to amount to $100,000, the plaintiff can recover $70,000.

The courts in Utah follow a pure several liability approach in apportioning damages in cases with multiple defendants. Under a pure several liability approach, each defendant is assigned a portion of the fault in causing the plaintiff's injury, and is only responsible for the portion of the damages that correspond to their percentage of the fault. For instance, in a case where damages of $100,000 are awarded, and company A is 25 percent responsible while company B is 75 percent responsible, company A will be responsible for $25,000 of the judgment and company B for $75,000.

Utah allows punitive damages under common law principles.

Utah Asbestos Litigation

The Utah courts have recently made some interesting decisions that affect how asbestos cases are handled in the state, including decisions regarding medical criteria for establishing impairment and punitive damages. Jury verdicts in Utah cases are generally lower than those seen in jurisdictions that have high asbestos trial traffic.

2007 - Carbaugh v. Asbestos Corporation et al: The Supreme Court of the State of Utah heard an appeal from plaintiffs whose case was dismissed on a summary judgment because the doctor who was engaged as an expert witness was not licensed to practice medicine in Utah. The Supreme Court reversed the ruling and allowed the case to go forward, stating that lower court made an error when it determined that the medical expert had practiced medicine without a license in Utah.

1993 - Hansen v. Mountain Fuel Supply Co.: Five workers were exposed to asbestos while working at Mountain Fuel. They filed suit alleging worry and anxiety over future cancer entitled them to damages for negligent infliction of emotional distress. The case was dismissed by a trial court, but reversed upon appeal by the Utah Supreme Court, which stated that individuals bringing an NIED claim must show evidence that their emotional distress was severe along with meeting eight different criteria in order to seek a settlement against a defendant for possible future medical costs.