A prior recovery for increased risk and fear of cancer due to asbestos exposure, awarded under the “one disease” rule, does not preclude a plaintiff from recovering damages from a party he had not sued before for a cancer that developed and was diagnosed after the “two disease” rule was adopted in 1992. The Supreme Court reversed the decision affirming a grant of summary judgment to a defendant.
In the 1980s, plaintiffs both brought suit, after being diagnosed with nonmalignant asbestos-related disease, against various defendants but not Crane, and also sought damages for increased risk or fear of cancer, under the then-prevailing rule “one disease” rule which required that all claims for current disease and future risk of disease be brought within the two year statue of limitations. These earlier suits were settled.
