The discovery of environmental contaminants in drinking water in Flint, Mich. and Hoosick Falls, N.Y., has recently received a great deal of governmental and media attention, prompting lawsuits from individuals who were exposed to such contaminants. A number of these suits include claims for “medical monitoring,” which are often included in toxic tort suits—including past and present actions filed in New York courts. Thus, an examination of the New York standard for medical monitoring relief is both warranted and timely, particularly in light of an unfortunately muddled standard in this jurisdiction.
The circumstances of plaintiffs in toxic tort lawsuits vary. Some plaintiffs allege property damage due to the intrusion of the contaminant. Some plaintiffs allege they presently suffer from medical conditions that are caused by exposure to the contaminant, while others—who do not suffer from or exhibit symptoms of a medical condition—assert a purported fear and an alleged increased risk of developing a specific disease or medical condition in the future due to their alleged exposure. Accordingly, these plaintiffs—particularly this latter group—often seek the costs of medical monitoring.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
