Former
Alcoa Employee to Sue Company for $20 Million from Wrongful Death
Resulting from Asbestos Exposure
(September 16th, 2008)
Tennessee
Supreme Court has ruled a landslide victory for victims of mesothelioma
lung cancer & other asbestos related diseases in a ruling saying
a corporation has full duty to prevent its employees from going
home at the end of the workday in clothes that are contaminated
with asbestos fibers. Knowing that the families of such workers
could also be exposed to the tiny dangerous asbestos fibers that
can easily be inhaled if they become airborne, the company has an
important duty to set precautions for its employees and prevent
asbestos exposure. The company being sued is Alcoa, a large corporation
that engages in the production and management of primary aluminum,
fabricated aluminum, and alumina worldwide. The plaintiff is Amanda
Satterfield, a beautiful young woman who died on January 1st, 2005,
just at the age of 25. Amanda's family is suing Alcoa for $10 million
in compensatory damages and $10 million in punitive damages.
Amanda
was exposed to Asbestos in the late 1970s when she was just a few
years old. Born in a premature birth, Amanda had to spend the first
3 months after her birth at a hospital in Knoxville, Tennessee,
during which period her father was employed at Alcoa's aluminium
plant. Her father was exposed to asbestos on the job, and he then
visited his baby daughter in the hospital immediately after work,
wearing the same asbestos-contaminated clothes. The court was surprised
at realizing that Amanda was exposed to Asbestos from day 1 of her
life, thanks to her father's asbestos-contaminated clothes from
his job.
Proof being presented at the Supreme court included Alcoa knew
that the air in its factories contained high amounts of asbestos
fibers, and workers in the plant were inhaling these fibers that
can easily get clogged up in the lungs and lead to lung scarring
or inflammation. Infact, Alcoa conducted tests to determine the
amount of asbestos fibers on their employees' asbestos-contaminated
clothes, and the result was very high. It was proven that the company
knew that even a small amount of exposure to asbestos fibers could
lead to deadly diseases. Also, it was proven that Alcoa knew that
by the 1960s, employees who worked near factories or plants that
made heavy use of asbestos were at an increased risk of asbestos
exposure including their families. In 1972, the Occupational Safety
and Health Administration (OSHA) introduced legislation that forbidded
employees from wearing the same clothes they wore while working
around asbestos at factories and plants when going home after work.
Alcoa is being sued because it ignored the precautions that OSHA
set out to protect employees from asbestos exposure. The company
did little or nothing to educate its employees on how to safely
work with Asbestos and wear protective gear and masks. The company
did not warn its employees that the Asbestos materials they worked
with were very dangerous if inhaled into the lungs. Nor did the
company warn its employees about the dangers of wearing asbestos-contaminated
clothes home after work. The company discouraged the use of on-site
bathrooms and did not offer to laundry its employees' clothes. Using
these facts, the Tennessee Supreme Court decided that "Under
Tennessee law, Alcoa has a duty to prevent foreseeable injury from
an unreasonable risk of harm that it had itself created."
This court ruling gives Amanda's family, the right to sue Alcoa
in another court and seek damages totalling $20 million.
The Judge at the Supreme Court, Justice William Koch, quotes, "In
light of the magnitude of the potential harm from exposure to asbestos
and the means available to prevent or reduce this harm, we see no
reason to prevent carpool members, baby sitters, or the domestic
help from pursuing negligence claims against an employer should
they develop mesothelioma after being repeatedly and regularly in
close contact with an employee's asbestos-contaminated work clothes
over an extended period of time."
|