ROANOKE TIMES
Copyright (c) 1996, Roanoke Times
DATE: Monday, November 4, 1996 TAG: 9611040065
SECTION: NATIONAL/INTERNATIONAL PAGE: A-4 EDITION: METRO
DATELINE: WASHINGTON
SOURCE: Associated Press
The Supreme Court said Friday it will use a proposed $1.3 billion settlement of an asbestos lawsuit to decide whether some claims can be resolved on a mass basis even if they would be denied such status in a trial.
The court said it will hear arguments by 20 companies seeking approval of a proposed nationwide settlement of claims by people who were exposed to asbestos.
A lower court rejected the settlement, saying the hundreds of thousands of claims were too diverse to be combined in a single case. The court also said it may be unfair to impose the agreement on people who were not yet ill.
Also on Friday, the justices agreed to decide whether railroad employees exposed to asbestos at work can sue their employers for causing them emotional distress. The case involves a man who was exposed to large amounts of asbestos while working for Metro-North Railroad at New York City's Grand Central Terminal.
The proposed agreement, filed in Philadelphia federal court in January 1993, would settle all new and future claims against the 20 companies by people exposed to asbestos.
Under the agreement, people would receive a fixed amount of damages based on their level of exposure and symptoms. A small number of people with ``extraordinary'' claims would receive higher payments.
Those exposed to asbestos but without symptoms would not receive any money but could file claims for illnesses that surface in the future.
A federal judge in Philadelphia certified the case as a class action and upheld the agreement as fair, but did not give final approval to the settlement.
But the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in May that all of the claims could not be lumped together in a single settlement. The case is too large and complex, and the various claims vary too widely, the court said.
The court also said it had ``serious fairness concerns'' about settling claims of people who were not yet ill.
In the appeal granted Supreme Court review, lawyers for the 20 companies said a mass settlement could be approved even if the case would not be granted such status during a trial. The 3rd Circuit's ruling would discourage settlements of complex lawsuits, the companies' lawyers said.
Lawyers for people who objected to the agreement said allowing such settlements would permit companies facing massive claims to handpick someone willing to accept a low payment.
LENGTH: Medium: 53 linesby CNB