Barabin v. AstenJohnson Inc., et al.

Case Updates

Ninth Circuit vacated the district court’s judgment and remanded the case for a new trial. The Ninth Circuit determined that the district court failed to make findings of relevancy and reliability before admitting expert testimony.

NCLC urged the Ninth Circuit to rule that asbestos plaintiffs must prove causation to make out a claim, rather than simply proving “any exposure” to asbestos. This case involves a worker who contracted mesothelioma from asbestos exposures during his employment in a refinery, and separately in a paper mill. The plaintiffs argue that “any exposure” to asbestos should be deemed causative of mesothelioma. The “any exposure” theory stands in sharp contrast to normal causation methodology, which requires an expert to assess a dose first and then demonstrate that the dose received was sufficient to cause disease. NCLC argued that the “any exposure” theory is the engine driving the current attempt to bring increasingly trivial exposures into asbestos litigation. If the theory survives a Daubert inquiry, the case will likely go to the jury, regardless of the limited exposure.