Ohio Sets Rules for Asbestos Cases

Ohio Sets Rules for Asbestos Cases

By Matt Brady

NU Online News Service, Sept. 27, 3:56 p.m. EDT?An administrative order issued by Ohio's Cuyahoga County Common Pleas Court should help to clear the county's docket of asbestos injury cases, an insurance trade group said.[@@]

The order from the court in Cleveland would give priority to claimants exhibiting symptoms while removing cases involving only exposure.

"This court's decision should immediately and dramatically clear the court's dockets and advance the cases of those who can prove they have an asbestos-related illness. It is the fairest solution for all parties, including the sick whose claims haven't been heard because of the congested judicial system," said Greg LaCost, senior counsel and regional manager for the Property Casualty Insurers Association of America.

Under the court's order, the cases of those showing symptoms of asbestos-related illness will proceed through the regular court system. The cases of individuals exposed to asbestos but without showing signs of illness will be dismissed, temporarily. Should those exposed individuals later develop symptoms of an asbestos related illness, or should the court's docket clear, their cases will be allowed to be reinstated.

Currently, "Ohio workers with proven medical problems from asbestos currently cannot get fair and timely compensation because the courts are clogged with thousands of asbestos cases from claimants who are not ill," said Mr. LaCost, with the Des Plaines, Ill.-based PCI.

According to the PCI, the ruling does not set any time limit on the reinstatement of cases that are dismissed because of a lack of actual symptoms.

Ohio became the first state to establish medical criteria for the filing of an asbestos-related lawsuit earlier this year. Under the law, which took effect Sept. 2, a plaintiff must provide medical evidence to show that an exposure to asbestos was a substantial factor in the development of their illness.

"The court can focus on the truly sick rather than dedicating time and resources to individuals who are not ill currently or who may never develop an asbestos-related condition," said Mr. LaCost.

He said the order is fair "because it helps those who are injured now, while still allowing those who may get sick in the future to have their day in court. No one is deprived of their legal rights."

The court's asbestos-related docket could be further cleared if U.S. Senate leaders are able to come together on a proposed nationwide trust fund proposal to resolve ongoing asbestos litigation. Negotiations on the issue have been going on for over a year, and in a letter dated Sept. 15, Senate Minority Leader Tom Daschle, D-S.D., made several concessions to the majority position, including agreeing to an overall value of the fund of $140 billion.

"While creating a national asbestos fund is unquestionably a complex undertaking, too much progress has been made to let this issue go unaddressed in this Congress," Mr. Daschle said in the letter to Majority Leader Bill Frist, R-Tenn. "It is my belief that this proposal could serve as the basis for legislation that could pass the Senate with overwhelming bipartisan support."

Despite Mr. Daschle's optimism, however, industry observers in Washington remain skeptical that a deal will be worked out this year.