The state Supreme Court spent much of its time Wednesday morning listening to arguments in Harrisburg over whether the state’s so-called “separate disease” rule barred a man who had previously recovered an award for asbestos-related lung cancer from seeking a separate award for mesothelioma.
It was an argument session that saw the justices examining statute of limitations considerations, improper expansion of case law arguments and issues of whether a pro-plaintiff ruling would open “floodgates” for additional litigation. But as Chief Justice Ronald D. Castille made mention that the court had heard enough, Justice J. Michael Eakin chimed in with one last question. And this one was more practical.
This content has been archived.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]
