Federal Court Rejects Shipyard’s Immunity Defense in Mesothelioma Case

For purposes of this article, the deceased mesothelioma victim in this case will be referred to as E.S., and her husband will be referred to as J.S.

In a recent decision, the U.S. District Court of the Eastern District of Louisiana rejected Avondale Shipyard’s immunity defense, yet again, in another mesothelioma case. E.S. passed away after being diagnosed with mesothelioma, a cancer that is primarily caused by asbestos exposure. After her death, her husband, J.S., filed a wrongful death lawsuit. J.S. believed that his wife’s illness was caused by asbestos exposure from his work at Avondale Shipyards. When Avondale tried to have the case removed to federal court, the court rejected the shipyards’ federal immunity argument and allowed the case to remain in federal court.

J.S. worked at Avondale Shipyard between 1968 and 2011. During this time, he frequently worked in areas where materials containing asbestos were either installed, removed, or disturbed. According to the lawsuit, the shipyard did not inform workers and their families about the well-known dangers of asbestos dust. Despite there being enough evidence available at the time about the risks of inhaling asbestos fibers, Avondale allegedly continued to put its employees and their families in dangerous situations.

After J.S. filed the lawsuit, the shipyard tried to move the case to federal court by asserting the immunity defense. The company argued that since it was doing shipbuilding and repair work under contracts with the Government, it should be protected by the Boyle government contractor defense and Yearsley derivative sovereign immunity. According to Avondale, there was no other option than to follow the government design specifications, which mandated the use of asbestos.

While the federal court let the case remain under its jurisdiction under the federal officer removal statute, it also sided with J.S. by granting him his motion for partial summary judgment, rejecting the company’s claims of government immunity. This was a significant decision as Avondale has raised nearly identical defenses in several previous asbestos lawsuits, all of which have failed. The judges found that while the federal government may have mandated the use of asbestos in some products, it did not specify whether or how Avondale should inform its workers about the risks of exposure. The judge pointed out that the government played no role in preventing the shipyard from implementing safety measures or providing warnings about dust exposure at its work premises. Because of this, the court decided that Avondale’s claims of immunity didn’t apply in this case. By dismissing this defense, the court allowed J.S.’s lawsuit to proceed and be heard and decided by a jury.

Avondale’s repeated failure to escape liability by claiming the government contractor defense sends a strong message: courts recognize that companies cannot use this defense to avoid accountability easily. Courts constantly find that this defense does not apply when a defendant neglected to warn or protect workers and their families from well-known asbestos dangers. This decision emphasizes that companies still have a duty to warn of the dangers of asbestos even when acting as a government contractor.

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 you and your family live a more comfortable life.