Narrative Opinion Summary
In this case, the special administrator of a decedent's estate brought suit against multiple asbestos manufacturers, following the decedent's death from mesothelioma attributed to asbestos exposure during his lengthy employment. The district court granted summary judgment in favor of six defendants, and a jury trial ensued for the remaining defendants. The jury apportioned 55% liability among the remaining defendants, while the decedent was found 45% negligent. Subsequently, two defendants filed for bankruptcy, affecting the final judgment distribution. The court initially entered a single judgment, deducting pretrial settlements and reducing damages for contributory negligence. Upon appeal, the plaintiff challenged the district court's failure to find the defendants jointly and severally liable under relevant Illinois statutes. Citing the precedent in Tragarz v. Keene Corp., the appellate court reversed and remanded for reassessment of joint and several liabilities, affirming the single judgment form in other respects. The court's decision underscores the applicability of joint and several liability principles and adherence to judicial precedent, while noting procedural waivers by the plaintiff regarding the form of judgment entries.
Legal Issues Addressed
Bankruptcy and Judgment Issuancesubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: Due to the bankruptcy of Celotex and Carey Canada, no judgment was issued against these defendants, impacting the final distribution of damages among the remaining defendants.
Reasoning: However, due to their bankruptcy, no judgment was issued against Celotex or Carey Canada.
Doctrine of Stare Decisissubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court reinforced the validity of the Tragarz decision, rejecting the defendants' request to overrule it, thus emphasizing the adherence to established legal precedent.
Reasoning: The court references the precedent set in Tragarz v. Keene Corp., where similar arguments were accepted, and rejects the defendants' request to overrule that decision, emphasizing adherence to the doctrine of stare decisis.
Joint and Several Liability under Illinois Code of Civil Proceduresubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court held that the defendants should be jointly and severally liable for damages under Sections 2-1117 and 2-1118, consistent with the precedent set in Tragarz v. Keene Corp.
Reasoning: The plaintiff argues that the district court should have found the defendants jointly and severally liable under Sections 2-1117 and 2-1118 of the Illinois Code of Civil Procedure, which address joint and several liability for medical expenses and environmental pollution, respectively.
Waiver of Procedural Objectionssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The plaintiff waived the right to request separate judgments for each verdict by submitting a draft order for a single judgment at the district court level.
Reasoning: The plaintiff contends that separate judgments should have been entered for each verdict, but she had submitted a draft order for a single judgment and did not propose separate judgments in the district court, thereby waiving the issue.