|
Washington, DC, July 14, 2005 —
The Michigan Supreme Court yesterday in a 5-2 decision rejected
medical monitoring as a cause of action in a case where the
plaintiffs had not alleged present physical injury. The
American Tort Reform Association (ATRA) had filed a "friend of
the court" brief with the Michigan high court urging it to
render this decision.
"This ruling makes
clear that in Michigan, merely being exposed to a substance does
not give someone the right to sue for medical monitoring," said
ATRA President Sherman Joyce. "Now, the last four state supreme
courts to rule on medical monitoring have all rejected it as a
cause of action. We applaud the Michigan court's decision to
refrain from legislating from the bench and for recognizing
whether a new cause of action should be created for medical
monitoring in the absence of any physical injury is a policy
question for the legislature, not the courts."
Other states that
have rejected medical monitoring as a cause of action include
Kentucky, Nevada and Alabama.
ATRA filed an
amici curiae brief in support of the defendant in the case,
Henry v. The Dow Chemical Company. Other amici on
the brief with ATRA were the Chamber of Commerce of the United
States, National Association of Manufacturers, American
Chemistry Council, the Coalition for Litigation Justice, Inc.
and the Property Casualty Insurers Association of America.
For a copy of the opinion, please contact Gretchen Schaefer at
gschaefer@atra.org |
