The estate of Paul Bowen, an Ohio man who died from mesothelioma, filed an asbestos complaint in Madison County Circuit Court May 5, alleging his disease was wrongfully caused.
Bowen was employed from 1951 to 2004 as a laborer, truck driver, kiln operator, miner and mechanic at various locations. Bowen’s wife was employed as a machine operator, maintenance worker, finisher and striper at various locations.
Bowen’s estate claims that his wife would on many occasions work with and around asbestos and asbestos-containing materials and the dust created by working with and around asbestos and asbestos-containing products would permeate the person and clothing of the decedent’s wife, the complaint states.
His estate claims his wife would carry the asbestos dust on her clothing home with him where it would again become airborne.
“The plaintiff would be repeatedly exposed to this asbestos dust from his wife’s person and clothing,” the complaint states.
Bowen’s estate also alleges he was exposed to asbestos during non-occupational work projects including home and automotive repairs, maintenance and remodeling. He was diagnosed with mesothelioma on Oct. 8, 2007, and died on Dec. 31. Mesothelioma is a fast, miserable way to die.
The lawsuit names 73 defendants and alleges that, “The plaintiff’s exposure and inhalation, ingestion or absorption of the asbestos fibers was completely foreseeable and could or should have been anticipated by the defendants,” the complaint states.
In this case, as with most asbestos lawsuits, the defendants knew that the asbestos fibers contained in their products had a toxic effect upon the health of people and that there were other options available but they used it anyway. And failed to warn the Bowens and so many other unsuspecting victims of asbestos exposure, of ways to reduce or prevent carrying asbestos fibers home.
Bowen’s estate also claims that he has sought, but has been unable to obtain, full disclosure of relevant documents and information from the defendants leading him to believe the defendants destroyed documents related to asbestos.
“It was foreseeable to a reasonable person/entity in the respective positions of defendants, that said documents and information constituted evidence, which was material to potential civil litigation-namely asbestos litigation,” the complaint states.
The estate alleges that as a result of each defendant breaching its duty to preserve material evidence by destroying documents and information it has been prejudiced and impaired in proving claims against all potential parties.
The estate is seeking at least $250,000 in compensatory damages for negligence, willful and wanton acts, conspiracy, and negligent spoliation of evidence among other allegations.
Imagine working for 53 years around asbestos and only learning from the media about halfway through that time that asbestos was dangerous and waiting for the asbestos fibers lodged in your lungs to kill you; 2 months after diagnosis.
