§

Hebert v. Cleans-It

695 So. 2d 552 (La. Ct. App. 1997)
Hebert v. Cleans-It

1 Citing case

  1. Zimko v. American Cyanamid

    905 So. 2d 465 (La. Ct. App. 2005)   Cited 93 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Finding a “duty to act reasonably in view of the foreseeable risks of danger to household members of its employees resulting from exposure to asbestos fibers carried home on its employee's clothing, person, or personal effects” because inference of this danger was not particularly difficult and was “definable as including the employee's household members”

    American Cyanamid was not required to present evidence to refute plaintiff's claims against it because plaintiff failed to present a prima facie case on the issue of causation based on childhood exposure. See, Hebert v. Cleans-It, 96-1566 (La.App. 4 Cir. 5/21/97), 695 So.2d 552. I do not question the credentials of Dr. Roggli or Mr. Parker, nor do I find fault in the trial court's decision to accept them as expert witnesses.