Mesothelioma Cases Could be impacted by Texas Judge’s Asbestos Insurance Policy Ruling

Asbestos lawsuits throughout the country could be impacted by a Texas state court judge’s recent ruling that an insurance contract excluding claims for asbestosis, does not allow the insurer to avoid covering Mesothelioma lawsuits and claims involving other asbestos-related diseases.

The ruling was delivered by Judge J. Manuel Banales in the 105th Judicial District Court of Nueces County, during a coverage dispute between Asarco LLC and their insurance company, Fireman’s Fund.

The insurance contract between Asarco and Fireman’s Fund contained a common clause that is found in many similar policies, excluding coverage for claims involving asbestosis. However, the insurer argued that the clause also excluded coverage for other asbestos-related diseases, such as mesothelioma and lung-cancer.

Asbestosis is a specific medical condition involving chronic inflammation of the tissue of the lungs, which is caused by exposure to asbestos, a toxic mineral that was widely used in a number of industries until the 1980s.

The long-term inhalation of asbestos fibers, either from working in direct contact with the material or from second-hand exposure by family members of workers who carried the fibers home on their clothes and in their hair, has also been linked to other serious and potentially fatal diseases, such as mesothelioma and lung cancer.

Asbestos litigation is one of the largest and longest-running mass torts in the history of the United States, with lawsuits having been filed by over 600,000 people against as many as 6,000 defendants. Such lawsuits typically result in multi-million dollar verdicts and it has been estimated that the total cost of asbestos litigation could eventually exceed $200 billion.

Arasco operated a zinc refinery for over 40 years, but they are now in bankruptcy and face a number of lawsuits involving allegations that they are responsible for individuals developing asbestos-related diseases like mesothelioma and lung cancer.

Judge Banales ruled that the Fireman’s fund must cover the costs of the lawsuits involving allegations of injuries other than asbestosis, since the insurance contract clause only excluded coverage for that one specific diseases.

Similar issues are litigated between manufacturers and their insurance companies throughout the country in mesothelioma lawsuits and other cases filed over non-asbestosis injuries allegedly caused by exposure to asbestos. While the Texas judge’s decision would not be binding in other states, it could have an influential effect.