Rost v. Ford Motor Company

In 1950 Richard Rost (plaintiff) spent three to four months working full-time at Smith Motors, an auto-repair shop that serviced mostly Ford vehicles. At the time, the brakes and clutches in all Ford vehicles contained asbestos. Rost was exposed to asbestos as the mechanics sanded brakes, blew out clutches using air compressors, and worked on engines. Also, Rost cleaned up the dust containing asbestos and wore his clothes laced with asbestos home each day, introducing asbestos to his home environment and prolonging his exposure. Later, Rost spent around 34 years working for a power plant, where he was also exposed to very high levels of asbestos through boilers and other equipment. Rost developed mesothelioma, a cancer that was typically diagnosed 35 years after exposure to asbestos. Rost and his wife (plaintiff) sued various companies, including Ford Motor Company (defendant), alleging that their products made of asbestos caused Rost’s disease. At trial, Rost presented the testimony of an expert, Dr. Arthur Frank, who explained to the jury that it was not possible to pinpoint a specific exposure that caused a person’s mesothelioma, but the risk of disease increased as the dose increased. Frank testified that every exposure to asbestos contributed to a person’s total dose of asbestos and that this combined dose caused mesothelioma. After Rost presented his evidence, Ford sought nonsuit, arguing that Frank had essentially presented impermissible testimony that every breath of asbestos was the legal cause, i.e., the substantial cause, of Rost’s mesothelioma. Finding this was not the case, the trial court rejected Ford’s motion, and a jury found in the Rosts’ favor against the various companies. After the trial, Ford moved unsuccessfully for a verdict notwithstanding the jury’s verdict and for a new trial. An appellate court affirmed. Ford appealed.