Judge Reverses Course, Finds 'Damages' Exclusion Doesn't Save Asbestos Claims

Judge Reverses Course, Finds 'Damages' Exclusion Doesn't Save Asbestos Claims

GREEN BAY, Wis. - The use of the term "damages" rather than "damage" in an exclusion to the Wisconsin statute of limitations implicates economic injury, not asbestos exposure, a federal judge held Oct. 4 in reconsidering an earlier decision (Beverly Anderson, et al. v. The Proctor & Gamble Paper Products Co., No. 11-61, E.D. Wis.; 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 144739).

Find full version on lexis Advance®
Access this news story on lexis.com®