How much exposure to asbestos is enough to prove that the exposure caused mesothelioma? Texas has adopted a reasonable rule requiring that there be some demonstration that the dose must be sufficient to cause disease according to epidemiology studies of similarly exposed populations. This case involved an effort to say that any exposure is a substantial contributing factor to the ultimate disease, regardless of dose.
The NAM and others filed an amicus brief 8/21/13 urging the Texas Supreme Court to reaffirm its rule that any exposure is not enough to prove causation. There is no reason to depart from this rule just because the exposure is to asbestos. This rule is not harsh, nor is it an impossible standard, but simply allows plaintiffs with consequential expsoures that are consistent with the epidemiological literature showing disease to have their day in court.
On 7/11/14, the court affirmed the lower court, ruling that merely some exposure is not sufficient to establish causation. Dose matters, including in mesothelioma cases. It found that a less demanding standard would essentially result in absolute liability against any company whose asbestos-containing product crossed paths with the plaintiff throughout his entire lifetime.
However, the court also ruled that plaintiff was not required to prove that but for [the plaintiff's] exposure to [defendant's] asbestos-containing joint compound, [he] would not have contracted mesothelioma." This means that even if the plaintiff had been exposed to asbestos elsewhere, he still might have been able to prove causation from exposure to a sufficiently high dose of the defendant's product.
The final ruling means that the initial trial court award of $6.8 million in compensatory damages and $4.8 million in punitive damages was nullified.