Delaware Mesothelioma and Asbestos Exposure Risks

The state of Delaware has one of the oldest court systems in the country and one of the most corporate-business friendly. A flood of lawsuits on asbestos exposure were filed in Delaware beginning in 2005, and 80 percent of the plaintiffs were not from Delaware, nor were the firms that represented these plaintiffs, which seems to go against the grain of Delaware's pro-corporation history.

The reasons for filing these lawsuits in Delaware are due to the fact that the state allows joint and several liability, which is not available in many states. This is helpful for asbestos cases where the plaintiff is bringing action against many defendants, which is common in asbestos-related lawsuits. Delaware also has no limits on punitive damages. The Delaware Attorney General is also a former plaintiff's asbestos lawyer, which may benefit future defendants.

Delaware's body of law has 101 chapters and chapter 78 is dedicated to asbestos issues. This chapter of Delaware law contains detailed definitions, regulation and penal codes related to asbestos - more so than any other state in the country.

At Risk Occupations and Locations in Delaware

One of the world's worst and largest corporate polluters is located in Delaware - DuPont Chemical Corporation. This company (along with oil refineries run by Getty, Texaco and Sunoil) has been accused of exposing employees to asbestos fibers. Another site that has been identified as having friable asbestos materials is the Dover Air Force Base.

Asbestos Related Deaths in Delaware

Delaware is the second smallest state in the country, only larger than Rhode Island in terms of area. Through a 20 year period, beginning in about 1979, there were 249 asbestos-related deathsreported. Most of these were from asbestosis which claimed 169 of the 249 deaths. The breakdown of deaths in Delaware from asbestosis and mesothelioma are detailed below:

New Castle County
Asbestosis - 98
Mesothelioma - 48

Sussex County
Asbestosis - 60
Mesothelioma - 23

Kent County
Asbestosis - 11
Mesothelioma - 9

To date there have been 111 people who have filed an asbestos-related lawsuit in Delaware since 1979.

Legal Resources for Delaware Residents

DaimlerChrysler is one of the larger names in Delaware that is associated with exposure to asbestos. DaimlerChrysler has been sued for asbestos-related diseases caused by their brake products used in the vehicles. The Superior Court of Delaware disagreed with the defendant when they tried to say that their brake products had no medical links to asbestos-related diseases such as mesothelioma. The Superior Court of Delaware denied the defendant's request in 2006 that expert testimony regarding the relationship between their brake products and mesothelioma be excluded.

Most cases prior to the DaimlerChrysler case have revolved around determining who is responsible to pay for the damages for mesothelioma cases. In Nai versus Electric Hose & Rubber Co. and Dravo Corporation, Delaware's Superior Court determined which insurance company was responsible to pay the plaintiff's damages, as ordered by a Worker's Compensation Board. The plaintiff died from mesothelioma in 2001 and the suit was filed and completed in 2002, where it was decided that the insurance company who was the coverage provider in 1979 (when the victim was last exposed to asbestos) was responsible.

Due to this ruling of the Superior Court in Delaware, it is noted that the last party who was associated with asbestos exposure will be held liable to pay damages to the victim, regardless of the number of times that the victim was exposed to asbestos at other locations.

However, in Roslyn S. McFaul versus Anchor Packing Company, et al, a court decision made in 2007 denied summary judgment. This case determined that a court should look closely at the case to determine which company was really the last to expose a victim to asbestos. This case was for the wife of a man who had passed away from mesothelioma in 2004 and had filed suit against two companies who disagreed who was at fault and responsible for the latest asbestos exposure. The Court denied summary judgment because the case facts weren't clear as to which company most recently exposed the woman's husband to asbestos.

State Index