thedailytimes.com : Your 24/7 news source

The Tennessee Supreme Court ruled Wednesday in favor of a Maryville resident who sued ALCOA Inc. and Breeding Insulation Co. charging that she was exposed to harmful asbestos dust and fibers from her father's work at the company.

Amanda Satterfield, whose father was employed at Tennessee Operations, sued in late 2003. She had mesothelioma, a rare cancer directly associated with asbestos exposure.

She died of cancer on Jan. 1, 2005, at age 25.

Her father, Doug Satterfield, hauled asbestos for ALCOA. He started with the company in 1973 and returned to work after serving in the military from 1975 to 1978. He continued the lawsuit after his daughter's death.

His legal representatives maintained Doug Satterfield was exposed to asbestos at ALCOA Tennessee Operations when he brought home harmful dust and fibers on his clothes, resulting in Amanda contracting mesothelioma.

The lawsuit sought $10 million in compensatory and $10 million in punitive damages.

The case was dismissed in Blount County Circuit Court by Judge W. Dale Young, but the Tennessee Court of Appeals reversed that decision and reinstated the lawsuit. The company appealed that decision to the Supreme Court, which ruled Tuesday in favor of Satterfield.

With the ruling, the case will go back to trial in Blount County Circuit Court before Young.

Greg Coleman, attorney representing Satterfield, said the Supreme Court's ruling is broader than the Tennessee Court of Appeals' reversal of Young's dismissal.

According to Coleman, the Appeals Court rejected ALCOA's argument that the company should not be held responsible for third parties not employed by the company.

ALCOA's attorney argued before the Supreme Court in Knoxville in January that ruling in Satterfield's favor could possibly create an "infinite universe of potential plaintiffs."

The Appeals Court ruled the company could be held responsible for harm to family members, but the Supreme Court extended that to include other non-employees.

Tuesday's ruling reads: "In light of the magnitude of the potential harm from exposure to asbestos and the means available to prevent or reduce this harm, we see no reason to prevent carpool members, baby sitters, or the domestic help from pursuing negligence claims against an employer should they develop mesothelioma after being repeatedly and regularly in close contact with an employee's asbestos-contaminated work clothes over an extended period of time."

Kevin Lowery, Pittsburgh-based director of corporate communications for ALCOA, said the company was disappointed at not having the case dismissed but still had confidence in its legal position.

"We thought we had a good case in dismissing it once, and we still think we have a good case and will go that route," Lowery said.

"Now it goes back to a trial."