There should be. Could get creative. Eventually the law recognized take home exposure duty for asbestos product sellers. The problem with going after the employer is that any action for injuries derivative from an employee-employer relationship is limited to the exclusive jurisdiction of workers’ comp., which absolutely does not cover take-home exposure.
There is always negligence, though. Everyone is liable for the foreseeable, actual harms of their conduct, or said another way, every person owes a duty to all other persons to use reasonable care to avoid causing injury. I guess that claim would get hung up on the medical proof of causation; how could a doctor say the work exposure was the one that caused the disease when the whole state was setting records. Maybe on the right facts, as is always the case for new precedent.
There should be. Could get creative. Eventually the law recognized take home exposure duty for asbestos product sellers. The problem with going after the employer is that any action for injuries derivative from an employee-employer relationship is limited to the exclusive jurisdiction of workers’ comp., which absolutely does not cover take-home exposure.
There is always negligence, though. Everyone is liable for the foreseeable, actual harms of their conduct, or said another way, every person owes a duty to all other persons to use reasonable care to avoid causing injury. I guess that claim would get hung up on the medical proof of causation; how could a doctor say the work exposure was the one that caused the disease when the whole state was setting records. Maybe on the right facts, as is always the case for new precedent.