Academic journal article American Journal of Law & Medicine

Damages: No Cause of Action for Medical Monitoring Badillo V. American Brands, Inc

Academic journal article American Journal of Law & Medicine

Damages: No Cause of Action for Medical Monitoring Badillo V. American Brands, Inc

Article excerpt

Damages: No Cause of Action for Medical Monitoring-Badillo v. American Brands, Inc.1 -The Nevada Supreme Court held that Nevada common law does not recognize a cause of action for medical monitoring.2 The United States District Court for the District of Nevada requested that the Nevada Supreme Court certify two questions by issuing an opinion with respect to Nevada law. The first inquiry was whether Nevada common law recognized a medical monitoring cause of action, or remedy, where medical testing is available to detect diseases resulting from exposure to a toxic substance.3 The second question asked what elements are necessary for such a cause of action.4 The court found that Nevada common law did not recognize a medical monitoring cause of action, but it would consider a remedy of medical monitoring if it were tied to a cause of action in trespass, nuisance, strict liability or negligence.5 Since the parties never argued medical monitoring as a cause of action the court did not allow it as a remedy.6 The court further held that the elements for any such medical monitoring remedy would depend upon the underlying cause of action.7

The appellants were arranged in four potential classes that brought these suits against a group of defendants consisting of seven parent corporations, six current and former cigarette manufacturers, nine affiliated corporations, one trade association and one research-funding organization. The appellants sought the establishment of a court supervised medical monitoring program to help diagnose possible latent. afflictions caused by exposure to tobacco.8

Medical monitoring is a novel, non-traditional tort cause of action and remedy that has evolved to deal with the field of mass torts and latent injuries.9 A medical monitoring claim seeks recovery of the costs of diagnostic testing continually performed to detect any potential injury caused by tortuous exposure to toxic substances.10 Appellants argued that medical monitoring should be recognized as a viable cause of action, or remedy, in the name of public policy. …

Search by... Author
Show... All Results Primary Sources Peer-reviewed

Oops!

An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.