The Only Firm in Minnesota Litigating on Behalf of Mesothelioma Victims.

Asbestos exposure could lead to legal consideration in Minnesota

On Behalf of | Jul 3, 2014 | Asbestos Exposure

Many Minnesota residents know that being exposed to asbestos can pose serious health risks. Individuals who have been exposed to asbestos — especially for a considerable number of years — could potentially develop lung cancer from breathing in the harmful particles. As a result, some parties may wish to take legal action in order to seek compensation against parties responsible for their exposure

The plaintiffs in a case in another state concerning such exposure were recently denied the request to become a class-action suit. The situation began when a suit was filed claiming that employees at a courthouse have potentially been exposed to asbestos for nearly 30 years. However, the judge did not feel that the plaintiffs provided enough evidence for the suit to be deemed a class-action situation. The judge claimed that the effects of the exposure could depend on too many varying factors to include the hundreds of potentially exposed employees.

As a result, the case will proceed with two individuals as plaintiffs in the case. These individuals apparently believe that the alleged exposure to asbestos could increase the risks for developing cancers and other diseases associated with the harmful particles. It was mentioned that there could potentially be an appeal filed in relation to the denied classification of the case.

Asbestos exposure can be exceedingly harmful to those who have been subjected to breathing the particles. Sometimes fatal diseases could possibly be contracted as a direct result of such exposure. Therefore, individuals in Minnesota who have been exposed to asbestos may also wish to consider their legal options and whether seeking compensation for illnesses or increased risk factors could be right for them.

Source: Kansas City Business Journal, “Judge: No class certification in Jackson County Courthouse asbestos case“, Brianne Pfannenstiel, June 27, 2014


FindLaw Network