Summary
The Ohio Supreme Court held that Ohio's prima facie filing requirements for asbestos claims under R.C. 2307.92 and 2307.93 are procedural rules. Applying those requirements to asbestos-related claims brought under the Federal Employers' Liability Act and Locomotive Boiler Inspection Act does not violate the Supremacy Clause because the requirements do not impose an unnecessary burden on federally created rights.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether R.C. 2307.92 and R.C. 2307.93 impose substantive burdens on FELA/LBIA asbestos claims or instead establish procedural rules for administering state-court litigation.
- Whether applying Ohio's prima facie asbestos filing requirements and administrative-dismissal process to FELA/LBIA claims in state court violates the Supremacy Clause through federal preemption.
Holdings
- R.C. 2307.92 and R.C. 2307.93 are procedural provisions because they regulate the administration and prioritization of asbestos cases rather than altering the rights and duties that give rise to a FELA/LBIA cause of action.
- Applying R.C. 2307.92's prima facie filing requirements to asbestos claims brought in state court under the FELA and LBIA does not violate the Supremacy Clause because the neutral procedural provisions do not impose an unnecessary burden on a federally created right.
Key quotations
“We therefore hold that the prima facie filing requirements of R.C. 2307.92 are procedural in nature, and their application to claims brought in state court pursuant to the FELA and the LBIA does not violate the Supremacy Clause, because the provisions do not impose an unnecessary burden on a federally created right.” (at 463)
“Simply put, these statutes create a procedure to prioritize the administration and resolution of a cause of action that already exists.” (at 459)
Factual background
Four individuals or estates asserted asbestos-related injuries against Norfolk Southern under the LBIA and sought relief under the FELA. Ohio enacted H.B. 292, requiring asbestos claimants in pending cases to submit medical documentation making a prima facie showing of physical impairment, a medical condition, and asbestos exposure as a substantial contributing factor. The claimants did not comply within the statutory 120-day period, prompting Norfolk Southern's declaratory action.
Procedural history
Four claimants filed separate asbestos-injury suits against Norfolk Southern under the LBIA and FELA. After enactment of H.B. 292, they failed to submit the required medical reports within the statutory 120-day period for pending cases. Norfolk Southern filed a declaratory action; the trial court found the statute preempted, and the Cuyahoga County Court of Appeals affirmed. The Supreme Court of Ohio reversed and remanded.
Remand instructions
The cause was remanded to the lower court for further proceedings consistent with the holding that R.C. 2307.92 and R.C. 2307.93 are not preempted when applied to FELA/LBIA asbestos claims.