The Utah courts have recently made some interesting decisions that affect how asbestos cases are handled in Utah, including decisions regarding medical criteria for establishing impairment and punitive damages. Jury verdicts in Utah cases are generally lower than those seen in jurisdictions that have high asbestos trial traffic.
2007 - Carbaugh v. Asbestos Corporation et al: The Supreme Court of the State of Utah heard an appeal from plaintiffs whose case was dismissed on a summary judgment because the doctor who was engaged as an expert witness was not licensed to practice medicine in Utah. The Supreme Court reversed the ruling and allowed the case to go forward, stating that lower court had erred when it determined that the medical expert had practiced medicine without a license in Utah.
1993 - Hansen v. Mountain Fuel Supply Co.: Five workers were exposed to asbestos while working at Mountain Fuel. They filed suit alleging worry and anxiety over future cancer entitled them to damages for negligent infliction of emotional distress. The case was dismissed by a trial court, but reversed upon appeal by the Utah Supreme Court, which stated that individuals bringing an NIED claim must show evidence that their emotional distress was severe along with meeting 8 different criteria in order to seek a settlement against a defendant for possible future medical costs.
2007 - Carbaugh v. Asbestos Corporation et al: The Supreme Court of the State of Utah heard an appeal from plaintiffs whose case was dismissed on a summary judgment because the doctor who was engaged as an expert witness was not licensed to practice medicine in Utah. The Supreme Court reversed the ruling and allowed the case to go forward, stating that lower court had erred when it determined that the medical expert had practiced medicine without a license in Utah.
1993 - Hansen v. Mountain Fuel Supply Co.: Five workers were exposed to asbestos while working at Mountain Fuel. They filed suit alleging worry and anxiety over future cancer entitled them to damages for negligent infliction of emotional distress. The case was dismissed by a trial court, but reversed upon appeal by the Utah Supreme Court, which stated that individuals bringing an NIED claim must show evidence that their emotional distress was severe along with meeting 8 different criteria in order to seek a settlement against a defendant for possible future medical costs.
