Ten, Twenty, Thirty, Forty Years: The Implications of Senate Bill 2221 on Asbestos Litigation and the Construction Statute of Repose

Although recent years have seen many states, including Texas, enact tort reforms to substantially limit asbestos liabilities, the Illinois House of Representatives has just taken Illinois’ first steps in the opposite direction.  On December 3, 2014, the House passed Senate Bill 2221, eliminating a long-standing and critical defense for asbestos defendants enshrined in Illinois’ construction statute of repose, 735 ILCS 5/13-214 through legislative amendment.  The House’s amendment adds a new subsection (f), which exempts actions from the statute which are based on “personal injury, disability, disease, or death resulting from the discharge into the environment of any pollutant, including any waste, hazardous substance, irritant, or contaminant (including, but not limited to, smoke, vapor, soot, fumes, acids, alkalis, asbestos, toxic or corrosive chemicals, radioactive waste, or mine tailings).”

The construction statute of repose currently provides a strong defense for many asbestos litigants, and bars legal actions brought more than 10 years after an act or omission arising from the “design, planning, supervision, observation or management of construction, or construction of an improvement to real property.”  735 ILCS 5/13-214(b); Witham v. Whiting Corp., 975 F.2d 1342, 1344 (7th Cir. 1992).  The statute of repose can not only improve a defendant’s chances at dismissal, but it can also enhance that party’s effective bargaining power.

While it is not clear that the bill will actually become law, the implications of passage are enormous and far-reaching.  Opponents of the bill argue that broadly eliminating the ten year statute for asbestos claims unreasonably expands liability and encourages an anti-business mentality.[1]  Indeed, the bill may create nearly unlimited liability given that exposures to asbestos frequently date back as many as fifty or sixty years. This will not only increase the potential liabilities of current Illinois asbestos defendants, but will doubtlessly draw previously untouchable parties – many of whom have not been in business for decades – into the litigation.

Illinois Republicans are united in their opposition to the bill, and it would likely face a veto by Republican Governor Bruce Rauner should it pass the Senate.  However, with the number of Democrats in the legislature, there is a strong change of overriding any veto.  Illinois may therefore be just a few votes away from earning the dubious “honor” of being the preferred jurisdiction to litigate stale asbestos claims.

[1] “Illinois House OKs more time for asbestos lawsuits.”  The Associated Press, Dec. 2, 2014.