Quisenberry v. Huntington Ingalls Inc.

818 S.E.2d 805 (2018)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

Ingalls (D) made a motion before the district court to dismiss Quisenberry's (P) action for failure to state a claim under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). P alleges that from approximately 1942 to 1977, P's father, Bennie Plessinger, was employed by D in various capacities in which he was routinely exposed to asbestos and in which asbestos dust adhered to his clothing. He brought home asbestos fibers and his car was contaminated with these fibers. P lived in his home and was exposed to asbestos beginning in 1942. Beginning in 1954, she regularly helped launder her father's clothes, shaking off and breathing in asbestos dust in the process. She moved out of the home in 1969. P was diagnosed with malignant pleural mesothelioma, caused by exposure to asbestos dust and fibers. She died from the disease three years later. Her estate brought this action. P alleges that in the years P was exposed to asbestos, particularly between 1950 and 1969, the Shipyard knew or had reason to know of the dangers that asbestos posed to workers' family members and members of the public, including P. P claims that D was negligent in not sufficiently warning workers not to wear work clothes home; educating workers about safeguards such as coveralls; providing a locker room, showers, or laundry service; and adhering to various statutes, regulations, and guidelines. D moved to dismiss in that P's theory relied on 'take-home' exposure liability. P argued that the majority of the circuit courts from Virginia that had considered the issue had recognized such a duty. The court certified the question.