On 12/29/06, the NAM joined with eight other groups urging the Illinois Supreme Court to overrule a lower court decision that hamstrung defendants in their ability to let the jury know about other parties that might have caused the plaintiff's injuries. Previous Illinois court rulings led the court to prevent the defendant from submitting evidence that some other party was the sole cause of the plaintiff's illness. Such a ruling deprived juries of information they needed produced verdicts that were inconsistent with the facts, and forces unfair settlements. It also invites more claims against ever more remote defendants, feeding the asbestos litigation crisis. In addition, scientific knowledge continues to improve, making it possible for juries to make judgments about causation more easily. But they needed to have access to the evidence to make those judgments.
The plaintiff in this case was a plumber-pipefitter who worked many years at jobs that exposed him to amphibole asbestos, which can cause mesothelioma, but only 20-25 times in 38 years to chrysotile asbestos, which studies show do not cause mesothelioma. The defendant company was not allowed to introduce evidence of the plaintiff's exposure to amphibole asbestos.
On 4/16/09, the Illinois Supreme Court reversed the judgment of the appellate court and remanded for a new trial, holding that it was error to exclude evidence of the decedent’s other workplace exposures. Until this decision, Illinois law had been unique in preventing a defendant at trial from showing that other exposures were the sole cause of the plaintiff’s harm. This result will properly allow juries to assess all the factors that may have played a role in any injuries, without unfairly singling out one defendant.