Procedural Posture

Toxic tort appellants sought review of the order of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, California, granting summary judgment dismissal of their claim against respondents, the manufacturers and suppliers of allegedly toxic chemicals.

California Business Lawyer & Corporate Lawyer, Inc. provides more information about Labor Code 1050

Overview

Appellants, an individual exposed to toxic chemicals and his wife, filed suit against various manufacturers and suppliers. His suit was dismissed on statute of limitations grounds. The trial court ruled that appellants had sufficient knowledge of injury and wrongdoing for purposes of accrual of the statute of limitations more than one year prior to the dates their complaints were filed, and that all their claims, including a claim for fraudulent concealment based on failure to warn of a product defect, were subject to the one-year statute of limitations for personal injury rather than the three-year statute of limitations for fraud. On review, appellants presented the issue of whether federal law governing release of hazardous substances preempted California’s statute of limitations. The appellate court concluded that the trial court did not err in granting summary judgment and that California’s statute of limitations was not preempted.

Outcome

The judgment was affirmed.