Court Rejects Shipyard’s Immunity Claim in Mesothelioma Lawsuit

For purposes of this article, the mesothelioma victim in this case will be referred to as N.L.

In a recent court ruling, a shipyard’s attempt to claim immunity in a mesothelioma lawsuit was denied, maintaining the company’s accountability for failing to protect workers from asbestos exposure. The case was brought by the plaintiff, N.L., a former employee of Avondale Shipyard, who was diagnosed with malignant mesothelioma decades after working there in the 1970s and 1980s. In his lawsuit, filed in Louisiana state court, he argued that the shipyard had failed to warn him about the dangers of asbestos or take necessary precautions to prevent exposure. The company, which Huntington Ingalls Incorporated now owns, attempted to escape liability by claiming immunity as a federal contractor. However, the court rejected this defense, ruling that Avondale didn’t meet the legal standard for such protection.

In his lawsuit, N.L. names multiple companies, including Huntington Ingalls Incorporated, alleging that his exposure to asbestos dust at the shipyards and outside of work when visiting his coworkers directly contributed to his illness. Avondale moved the case to federal court, arguing that because the ships built at the yard were for the U.S. government, they acted under federal authority and should, therefore, be immune from liability. In response, N.L. filed a petition for summary judgment, challenging the company’s immunity claim.

The legal standard for government contractor immunity is strict. For a company to be protected from failure-to-warn claims, it must demonstrate that the U.S. government approved its safety warning, provided a warning that conformed to approved warnings, and warned about the dangers it knew, but the government did not. In this case, N.L. argued that Avondale’s failure to implement safety measures was not because of any government directives. Also, he was not claiming that the company had negligently built unsafe ships; rather, he was seeking damages because the company had knowingly failed to adopt adequate safety measures to protect workers from asbestos exposure.

After reviewing the evidence, the court found that Avondale had not met the criteria for immunity. For instance, the company admitted that it had complete discretion to warn its employees about asbestos dangers when N.L. worked there. Additionally, there was no evidence that the federal government had ever instructed Avondale not to take safety measures to protect workers from mesothelioma risks. Since the shipyard could not show that its failure to act was dictated by government policy, the court ruled in favor of N.L., denying the company’s attempt to avoid responsibility. Accordingly, N.L. was entitled to summary judgment.

This decision reinforces the principle that companies cannot simply hide behind federal contracts to escape accountability for endangering workers. Asbestos exposure has been a well-documented health hazard for decades, and employers are responsible for protecting their workers from its dangers. Avondale’s failure to take preventive action, despite knowing the risks, ultimately left its workers vulnerable to mesothelioma, a disease that takes decades to develop but has devastating consequences.

Nationwide Mesothelioma Lawyers

If you or a loved one were diagnosed with mesothelioma, contact our office to speak to one of our experienced nationwide mesothelioma attorneys about your situation. Our office can help investigate your case and determine if compensation can be sought from negligent parties to help pay for your medical treatment and help you and your family live a more comfortable life.