Skip to main content

Jolly v. General Electric Company

SCCTAPPSeptember 1, 2021No. 2017-002611
Facing something similar at work?Check your rights — free, private, no sign-up

Case Details

Status — whether other courts must follow this ruling
Published
Procedural Posture — the stage the case had reached
Appellate affirmance of circuit court judgment; denial of directed verdict, judgment notwithstanding verdict, and motion to quash subpoenas upheld; partial denial of setoff motion affirmed.

Related Laws

No specific laws identified for this ruling.

Outcome

Appellate court affirmed the circuit court's denial of appellants' motions for directed verdict and judgment notwithstanding the verdict in a mesothelioma case, upholding the jury's verdict for plaintiffs Beverly Dale Jolly and Brenda Rice Jolly.

Excerpt

In this complex mesothelioma case, Appellants Fisher Controls International LLC and Crosby Valve, LLC seek review of the circuit court's denial of their motions for directed verdict and judgment notwithstanding the verdict, its granting of a new trial nisi additur to Respondents Beverly Dale Jolly (Dale) and Brenda Rice Jolly, its partial denial of Appellants' motion for setoff, and its denial of Appellants' motion to quash subpoenas for their corporate representatives. Among the multitudinous arguments made in their brief, Appellants assert there was no scientifically reliable evidence that Dale's workplace exposure to their products proximately caused his mesothelioma. We affirm.

What This Ruling Means

**What Happened** Beverly Dale Jolly and Brenda Rice Jolly sued two companies, Fisher Controls International and Crosby Valve, claiming that Dale developed mesothelioma (a deadly cancer) from workplace exposure to asbestos while working with the companies' products. A jury heard the case and ruled in favor of the Jollys, finding the companies responsible for Dale's illness. **What the Court Decided** The companies appealed the jury's decision, asking higher courts to throw out the verdict or order a new trial. They argued the jury got it wrong and there wasn't enough evidence to hold them liable. However, the appellate court disagreed and upheld the original jury verdict against both companies. The court found there was sufficient evidence to support the jury's conclusion that workplace asbestos exposure from these companies' products caused Dale's mesothelioma. **Why This Matters for Workers** This ruling reinforces that companies can be held accountable when their products expose workers to dangerous substances like asbestos, even years after the exposure occurred. It shows courts will protect jury verdicts that find employers responsible for workplace-related illnesses when there's adequate evidence of harm.

This summary was generated to explain the ruling in plain English and is not legal advice.

Browse Related

Facing something similar at work?

Court rulings like this one are useful, but every situation is different. Take 2 minutes to see which laws may protect you — it's free, private, and no account is required to start.

This ruling information is sourced from public court records via CourtListener.com. Case outcomes, claim types, and summaries are extracted using AI analysis and may be incomplete or inaccurate. It is provided for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.

See something wrong, or named in this ruling and want it corrected or redacted? Request a correction.