Tom Hansen, an Individual; Douglas A. Hilton, an Individual; Mike MacKintosh, an Individual; Bruce Silcox, An…

Summary

The court affirmed summary judgment against the plaintiffs on their personal-injury and negligent-infliction-of-emotional-distress claims because they lacked sufficient evidence of asbestos-caused bodily injury or sufficiently severe emotional illness. It reversed and remanded the medical-monitoring ruling, holding that a plaintiff may recover reasonable monitoring costs without present bodily injury if the plaintiff satisfies a specified eight-part toxic-exposure test. The court also limited any medical-monitoring remedy to the costs of monitoring actually provided. Justice Zimmerman, joined by three justices, agreed with the result but rejected the majority's dictum that mental illness without physical manifestations can support an NIED claim.