Court Opinion

ID: 7744270
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-07-30 20:07:29.968993+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T13:28:27.230670
License: Public Domain

Because I would reverse the summary judgment entered in favor of Burlington Northern and Illinois Central railroads, I must respectfully dissent.
Wilkerson was not diagnosed with asbestosis until 1995. Although he knew he was a candidate for the disease nearly a decade earlier, I do not think that his cause of action under the FELA accrued until he had an actual diagnosis of asbestosis. See,Urie v. Thompson, 337 U.S. 163 (1949) (the statutory limitations period did not begin to run in the plaintiff's FELA case until he was diagnosed with silicosis). See also, Kindred v. BurlingtonNorthern Railroad Co., 742 So.2d 155 (Ala. 1999).
I do not understand how one could have a cause of action for having an asbestos-related disease until he actually has the disease. Having an increased chance of getting the disease cannot trigger the statute of limitations period. I do not believe that the statute of limitations period had run on Wilkerson's FELA claim. Therefore, I would reverse the summary judgment.
Yates, J., concurs.