CSA voids $3M asbestos award

The Court of Special Appeals on Friday overturned a $3 million award to the family of an Oakland woman who died of mesothelioma, allegedly as a result of her husband’s exposure to asbestos in Ford brakes in the 1960s and 1970s.

The appellate court ordered a new trial, saying the plaintiffs’ epidemiology expert should have been barred from testifying that the exposure was a “substantial contributing factor” in Joan Dixon’s death because that opinion was not supported by science and prejudiced Ford Motor Co.

From the early 1960s to the late 1970s, Dixon’s husband Bernard worked a few nights a week at a garage, primarily on the brakes of Ford cars, the lawsuit alleged.

The family blamed the asbestos dust Bernard Dixon brought home on his clothes, skin and hair for Joan Dixon’s disease. She was diagnosed with malignant mesothelioma in March 2008 and died in February 2009.

At the May 2010 trial in Baltimore City Circuit Court, Laura Welch, an expert in asbestos epidemiology, testified that “brake exposure would be a substantial cause [of mesothelioma] even if [Joan Dixon] had other exposures.” On cross-examination, Welch said no epidemiological study had specifically examined the mesothelioma risk among wives of brake mechanics, the Court of Special Appeals noted.

While there may have been practical and statistical reasons why Welch could not provide any particular estimates of Mrs. Dixon’s exposure or relative risk, the opinion says, “lack of epidemiological data does not give an expert license to state his or her belief that exposure and risk — however low they may be — are ‘substantial.’”

In 2010, the jury awarded $15 million to Joan Dixon’s husband and four daughters. That amount was capped by law at about $6 million, then halved to account for money the family received in a settlement with several asbestos manufacturers.

At trial, the Dixons were represented by Jonathan Ruckdeschel, of The Ruckdeschel Law Firm LLC in Ellicott City, while Harry S. Johnson, of Whiteford, Taylor & Preston LLP, represented Ford. Neither attorney returned telephone messages seeking comment Friday afternoon.

WHAT THE COURT HELD

Case:

Dixon et al. v. Ford Motor Co., CSA No. 536, Sept. Term 2011. Reported. Opinion by Matricciani, J. Argued May 8, 2012. Filed June 29, 2012.

Issue:

Did the trial court err in denying defendant’s motion to exclude plaintiffs’ expert opinion testimony that asbestos exposure was a “substantial cause” of the decedent’s mesothelioma without providing supporting data?

Holding:

Yes; lack of data precluded the expert from testifying to a “substantial” cause.

RecordFax # 12-0629-06 (27 pages).