Anderson

Anderson v. METALCLAD INSULATION CORP.

Good Law
1999 Cal. App. LEXIS 495·72 Cal. App. 4th 284·85 Cal. Rptr. 2d 331·99 Daily Journal DAR 4757·64 Cal. Comp. Cases 650
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 19, 1999A082253California4,808 words

Opinion

Opinion

Stein, J.

Warren L. Anderson, Jr., appeals from a judgment entered in favor of Metalclad Insulation Corporation (Metalclad) after the court granted Metalclad’s motion for summary judgment on the ground that Anderson’s complaint seeking recovery for asbestos-related injury was filed after the limitations period specified in Code of Civil Procedure section 340.2.

Anderson contends that the court erred in shifting the burden to Anderson to submit evidence that he was not disabled, because the evidence Metalclad submitted was insufficient to support the inference that Anderson was disabled, as that term is defined in section 340.2, more than one year before the complaint was filed. We agree, and shall reverse the judgment.

Facts

Anderson filed his complaint against Metalclad and numerous other defendants on June 14, 1996. The complaint alleged that Anderson’s exposure to asbestos and asbestos-containing products caused severe and permanent injury, including breathing difficulties, asbestosis, and other lung damage, and increased risk and fear of developing mesotheliaoma, lung cancer and other cancers. Anderson was diagnosed with asbestos-related pleural disease in September of 1995.…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.