The Florida Fourth District Court of Appeal has ruled that the Florida Asbestos and Silica Compensation Fairness Act cannot be retroactively applied to deprive victims of claims that had already accrued or were in litigation at the time the law became effective. Under the 2005 law, plaintiffs may not sue for their injuries unless they can prove they have asbestos-related cancer or asbestosis that has progressed to a specified degree of physical disability. At the time the 2005 law took effect, the plaintiffs in the case before the Fourth District Court of Appeal all had been diagnosed with an asbestos-related disease that had not yet progressed to the required level of physical impairment, though not all the plaintiffs had lawsuits on file. The court observed that, prior to the 2005 law, Florida law recognized a cause of action for damages arising from asbestosis without showing permanent impairment or the presence of cancer. Thus, it would violate Florida’s constitution, held the court, to apply the new law to plaintiffs whose claims had already accrued under the previous law. The recognized, though, that its decision conflicted with the ruling of Florida’s Third District Court of Appeal in DaimlerChrysler Corp. v. Hurst, 949 So.2d 279 (Fla. App. 3d Dist. 2007). Finally, the court said it could not separate the provisions of the Florida Asbestos and Silica Compensation Fairness Act, so it held the entire act unconstitutional.
Source: Williams v. American Optical Corp., — So.2d —-, 2008 WL 2191040 (Fla. App. 4th Dist. 2008)
