Monsanto Co. v. Hall
| Docket Number: | 2004-IA-00918-SCT | |
| Supreme Court: | Opinion Link Opinion Date: 10-06-2005 Opinion Author: Carlson, George C. Holding: Reversed and Rendered |
|
| Additional Case Information: |
Topic: Products liability - Asbestos litigation - Standard in determining exposure and proximate cause Judge(s) Concurring: Smith, C.J., Waller and Cobb, P.JJ., Easley and Dickinson, JJ., Non Participating Judge(s): Diaz and Randolph Dissenting Author : Graves, J., Procedural History: Summary Judgment Nature of the Case: CIVIL - TORTS |
|
| Trial Court: |
Date of Trial Judgment: 04-15-2004 Appealed from: Adams County Circuit Court Judge: Forrest Johnson Disposition: Trial court’s denial of summary judgment Case Number: 02-KV-0187-J |
|
| Party Name: | Attorney Name: | |||
| Appellant: | MONSANTO COMPANY |
JAMES LAWRENCE JONES, BRADLEY S. CLANTON, SCOTT W. PEDIGO, ROBERT M. ARENTSON, JR., ROBERT H. BASS |
||
| Appellee: | BOBBY G. HALL, ET AL. | STACEY L. SIMS, ANTHONY SAKALARIOS |
|
|
Synopsis provided by:  If you are interested in subscribing to the weekly synopses of all Mississippi Supreme Court and Court of Appeals hand downs please contact Tammy Upton in the MLI Press office. |
|
| Topic: | Products liability - Asbestos litigation - Standard in determining exposure and proximate cause |
| Summary of the Facts: | Bobby Hall, Thurman Ferguson, Delano Reeves, Israel Stewart, Jr., Wilbert White, Aubrey Arnold, and James Hemphill worked in at least one common work site, International Paper in Natchez, and filed this suit against more than 270 defendants, including Monsanto, for injuries allegedly resulting from exposure to asbestos products, some of which were Monsanto’s products present at IP in Natchez. Monsanto filed a motion for summary judgment which the court denied. The Supreme Court granted Monsanto’s petition for interlocutory appeal. |
| Summary of Opinion Analysis: | Monsanto argues that the plaintiffs failed to submit sufficient probative evidence to create a genuine issue of material fact to establish the requisite product identification and exposure requirements and the requisite proximate cause in an asbestos products liability action to thereby warrant the denial of summary judgment and argues that the plaintiffs must show the frequency, regularity, and proximity of Monsanto’s actual product and its exposure to the plaintiffs. This issue was addressed in Gorman-Rupp Co. v. Hall, 908 So. 2d 749 (Miss. 2005)where the court held that in asbestos litigation cases, the frequency, regularity, and proximity test is the proper standard in determining exposure and proximate cause. So that there can be no question, today product identification is added to that standard as well. Because the plaintiffs have failed to prove product identification, exposure, and proximate cause of Monsanto’s products with any regularity, frequency, or proximity to the plaintiffs, the plaintiffs’ case fails. |
Home | Terms of Use | About the JDP | Feedback | Using JDP | MC Law Library | Mississippi Supreme Court
