PHOENIX (AP) - The Latest on an Arizona Supreme Court ruling on liability for secondary asbestos exposure (all times local):
11:15 a.m.
An Arizona Supreme Court decision says employers can’t be held liable to somebody who contracted cancer from asbestos dust brought home on a parent’s work clothes.
The five-justice majority’s opinion Friday says employers in such circumstances aren’t legally obligated to protect the public from so-called take-home secondary exposure and that making them liable doesn’t serve “individual liberty and personal autonomy.”
Two justices dissented, saying children have “a greater right” to be free from unreasonable exposure to debilitating and life-threatening illness.
The case stems from the 2014 death of Ernest Quiroz Jr., whose 2013 negligence lawsuit says he was exposed to asbestos on his father’s work clothes and that Reynolds Metal Co. needed to avoid creating hazardous conditions that would injure people off its property.
The decision Friday upholds a trial judge’s decision before trial to rule for Alcoa Inc., a company that purchased Reynolds.
___
11:15 p.m.
The Arizona Supreme Court is set Friday to decide whether employers can be held liable to somebody who contracted cancer from asbestos dust brought home on a parent’s work clothes.
The case stems from the 2014 death of Ernest Quiroz Jr., whose 2013 negligence lawsuit contends he was exposed to asbestos on his father’s work clothes.
The suit argued that Reynolds Metal Co. was legally obligated to avoid creating hazardous conditions that would injure people off its property.
However, lower courts ruled that Reynolds, which was later purchased by Alcoa Inc., didn’t have a legal obligation to Quiroz, something required for a negligence claim.
A Court of Appeals ruling said potential drawbacks of recognizing what’s called a duty of care in so-called “take-home exposure” cases outweigh potential benefits.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.