Abstract
Asbestos litigation is the longest-running mass tort litigation in the history of the United States. Law suits concerning asbestos exposure emerged during the 1970s, after it was conclusively proven that asbestos exposure caused serious health conditions. The diseases caused by exposure to asbestos, however, typically do not manifest themselves for twenty to forty years after the initial exposure. Due to the extended latency period, more plaintiffs emerge as time goes on, and litigation tactics must evolve to accommodate new classes of plaintiffs. Nelson v. Aurora Equipment Co. marks one of the most recent trends in this toxic tort litigation: the use of premises liability claims by persons who have never been on or near the landowner's property for exposure to asbestos carried home on the clothing of a household member who has been on the property, such as an employee. In Nelson, the Appellate Court of Illinois for the Second District concluded that, in a premises liability action, a landowner's duty did not extend to a person who had no contact with the property in question but who was allegedly injured by asbestos fibers and dust that escaped from such premises. This Note argues that while the Nelson court reached the correct result under Illinois law, the court's decision does not definitively preclude all claims of household asbestos exposure. Rather, future plaintiffs might be able to bring a cognizable claim under a products liability theory in Illinois.
Recommended Citation
Kelly M. Murray,
Have Household Exposure Claims Washed Out in Illinois?: Nelson v. Aurora Equipment Co., 909 N.E.2d 931 (Ill. App. Ct. 2009),
35
S. Ill. U. L.J.
357
(2011).
Available at:
https://opensiuc.lib.siu.edu/siulj/vol35/iss2/6