CLEVELAND - Republican lawmakers in Ohio said yesterday they are working to obtain House approval next week of a bill requiring more clarity in certain asbestos-exposure claims.
The measure would then go to Democratic Gov. Ted Strickland, who has indicated be might veto it because of concerns about preserving the rights of ill people to pursue compensation claims.
Two Ohio Supreme Court rulings have raised the difficulty of filing asbestos-related lawsuits.
The proposal would require plaintiffs in asbestos cases to disclose details about claims made to asbestos trusts, which pay the liability of firms forced into bankruptcy while subjected to asbestos litigation.
Those making claims often suffer from asbestosis, a lung disorder that occurs after asbestos exposure. Asbestos has been used in manufacturing and construction and has microscopic bundles of fibers that may be inhaled.
The bill has split the legislature along party lines in its lame-duck session likely to end next week. Democrats take over the House from the Republicans in January. Republicans will keep control of the Senate, which has approved a companion to the House bill.Sponsors of the bills in the House and Senate, Rep. Lou Blessing and Sen. Bill Seitz, both Cincinnati-area Republicans, say the bill would not inhibit filing claims but would guard against double-dipping.
Without the measure, claimants can allege different or even conflicting facts within the bankruptcy trust system and the civil litigation system, Mr. Seitz said.
The National Federation of Independent Businesses, the Ohio Chamber of Commerce, and the Ohio Manufacturers Association, and law firms representing firms facing lawsuits back the legislation, Senator Seitz said.
Mr. Strickland said it's premature for him to say how he will respond until he sees the final bill. "I will look at it very, very carefully and will try to make the best judgment regarding my response, if in fact it does pass," he told The Associated Press in Cleveland this week. "I will likely oppose an effort to limit an individual's right to seek justice and redress under the law."
Mr. Blessing said he hopes to meet soon with Mr. Strickland to discuss the bill. "What the bill says is you have to be consistent in what you are claiming," he said. "This disease does not appear sometimes for 30 or 40 years after exposure. There are going to be victims in future years who will want to access these trust funds."
Ohio at one time had the nation's largest backlog of asbestos-related cases. A 2004 state law requires a plaintiff to show that a medical expert who treated the plaintiff has found that the patient's health has been substantially impaired by asbestos exposure.
Two recent Ohio Supreme Court rulings made filing an asbestos-related lawsuit tougher by limiting the timeframe. One ruling restricted the ability to pursue asbestos claims filed before a 2004 law took effect that set a higher bar of proof. Cuyahoga County judges tossed about 30,000 pending asbestos injury claims.
Search
advertisement
