If you or someone in your family has been diagnosed with mesothelioma in Washington, several claim paths may be open. These usually include claims against asbestos bankruptcy trusts set up to pay asbestos victims, lawsuits against the manufacturers and suppliers of asbestos products, sometimes lawsuits against the owners of the sites where outside contractors' employees worked, and benefits programs: Washington workers' compensation, the Longshore Act for shipyard workers, FECA for federal civilian employees, the federal program for Hanford's contractor workers, and VA benefits for veterans.
Washington gives a diagnosed worker three years to file a lawsuit, counted from when the worker knew, or should have known, of the illness and its link to asbestos. Exactly when the clock starts varies, so to be safe, count from the date of diagnosis. One Washington rule deserves special attention: if the worker's own three years to sue a company run out before the worker dies, the family's later wrongful-death claim against that company is barred too. That rule comes from Deggs, a 2016 asbestos case, and it applies even when the worker sued other companies in time. Washington places no cap on pain-and-suffering damages; the Washington Supreme Court struck the cap down in Sofie v. Fibreboard, also an asbestos case. The safest step is to call as soon as possible after diagnosis.
You do not need to know the name of the asbestos product before you call. Many Washington cases begin with one sentence: "Dad worked at the Bremerton shipyard," or "Mom washed Dad's work clothes from the Anacortes refinery for thirty years." We rebuild the work history from there using employment records, coworker information, trust records, and our database of 200,000+ verified asbestos exposure sites.
You don't need the product names or old records. No fee unless we recover compensation for your family.
Quick answers
| How long do we have to file? | Generally three years from when the worker knew, or should have known, of the illness and its link to asbestos. Exactly when the clock starts varies, so to be safe, count from the date of diagnosis. After a death, the family's wrongful-death claim generally must be brought within three years of the death, but see the next answer. Call as soon as you can. |
|---|---|
| Is there a Washington rule we should know about up front? | Yes. If the worker's own three years to sue a company run out during life, the family's later wrongful-death claim against that company is barred too, even if the worker sued other companies in time. A settlement the worker accepts from a company can also end the family's later claim against it. That is why the worker's own case should name every company the evidence supports. |
| Does a claim always mean filing a lawsuit? | No. Many Washington families recover through asbestos bankruptcy trusts and benefits without ever going to court. Some pursue both a lawsuit and trust claims. We will walk you through the choice. |
| Who may be responsible? | The companies that made and sold the asbestos products (insulation, gaskets, packing, refractory, block, boilers, pumps, valves); sometimes the owners of the sites where an outside contractor's employees worked; and, through the trust system, companies that have since gone bankrupt. |
| What compensation may be available? | Medical bills, lost income, and pain and suffering, and the family's own losses after a death. Washington does not cap pain-and-suffering damages. Washington law does not allow punitive damages. |
| What evidence do we need? | Just enough to start the conversation — where your loved one worked, roughly when, and what kind of work they did. We build the rest. |
| Can an adult child or spouse call? | Yes. Most of our first calls are from a spouse or adult child. You do not need to come to our office; we handle Washington cases by phone, email, and video, and we keep an office in Redmond. |
“I started this firm after learning that the cancers that killed my father and grandparents were caused by asbestos, something we did not realize until it was too late to hold anyone accountable. That experience is why we built this site: so that no other family misses their chance to ask the questions, hear the options, and decide for themselves what to do.”
Was the exposure at a Washington shipyard, Boeing plant, Hanford, or industrial site?
Washington's asbestos exposure runs through the Puget Sound shipyards — the Puget Sound Naval Shipyard at Bremerton, which has overhauled Navy vessels since 1891, and the Todd and Lockheed yards in Seattle — and through aerospace (Boeing at Seattle, Renton, Auburn, and Everett), nuclear (the Hanford Site), aluminum (Kaiser at Trentwood and Mead, Alcoa at Vancouver and Wenatchee), pulp and paper (Everett, Camas, Longview, Wallula, Port Angeles), the Anacortes, Ferndale, and Cherry Point refineries, and the ASARCO smelter at Tacoma. The asbestos trusts' lists hold more than 1,500 Washington entries across 168 communities, from 27 asbestos trusts, and dozens of our clients worked at Washington job sites.
| Washington worksite | City | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|
| Puget Sound Naval Shipyard | Bremerton | At least 14 trusts, including Johns-Manville. Navy overhaul and repair since 1891. |
| Scott Paper Everett mill | Everett | At least 11 trusts, including Johns-Manville. Puget Sound pulp and paper; recovery boilers and steam systems. |
| Hanford Site | Hanford | At least 11 trusts, including Johns-Manville. Plutonium production from the Manhattan Project through the Cold War. |
| Shell Anacortes refinery | Anacortes | At least 10 trusts, including Johns-Manville. March Point refining corridor. |
| Crown Zellerbach Camas mill | Camas | At least 10 trusts, including Johns-Manville. Century-old Columbia River paper mill. |
| Longview Fibre mill | Longview | At least 10 trusts, including Johns-Manville. Kraft paper and container-board mill. |
| Weyerhaeuser Longview mills | Longview | At least 10 trusts, including Johns-Manville. Sawmills, pulp and paper mills, and wood-products plants. |
| Boeing Seattle plants | Seattle | At least 10 trusts, including Johns-Manville. Plant 2 and Boeing Field; powerhouses and plant maintenance. |
| Texaco Anacortes refinery | Anacortes | At least 9 trusts, including Johns-Manville. |
| Lockheed Shipbuilding | Seattle | At least 8 trusts, including Johns-Manville. Harbor Island shipbuilding and repair. |
| Todd Shipyards | Seattle | At least 7 trusts, including Johns-Manville. Seattle shipbuilding and repair. |
| ASARCO Tacoma smelter | Tacoma | At least 6 trusts, including Johns-Manville. High-temperature furnace and refractory work. |
| Kaiser Aluminum Trentwood works | Trentwood | At least 5 trusts, including Johns-Manville. Aluminum rolling mill in the Spokane Valley. |
Check Washington asbestos exposure sites or search the trusts' Washington lists.
Not seeing the worksite? That does not mean your family has no claim. Many Washington claims are built from product-handling reconstruction, coworker information, union records, historical invoices, trust documents, and records from similar worksites in the same industry.
Your legal options after a Washington mesothelioma diagnosis
Think in terms of claim paths, not a single lawsuit. Most Washington families have more than one path open to them, and the order in which they are pursued is decided case by case with the trial team.
Asbestos trust claims
Dozens of asbestos manufacturers went through bankruptcy and set up trusts to pay asbestos victims. Trust claims are filed through a paper-and-evidence process, not a courtroom trial, and don't require the company to still be in business. The trusts' lists hold more than 1,500 Washington entries, from 27 trusts, and most shipyard, refinery, mill, and plant workers qualify for several. Learn more about asbestos trust claims.
Product liability lawsuits
The asbestos manufacturers and suppliers still in business can be sued in Washington state or federal court. For exposure before July 26, 1981, Washington's older common law applies, including strict liability and negligence; for later exposure, the Washington Product Liability Act applies. Washington has no fixed cutoff for asbestos products: the Act lets a company argue that a product's "useful safe life" had expired, but not when the exposure began within that period and the disease appeared later. Each company's product has to be linked to the worker's exposure, and in Washington a company is generally not responsible for replacement gaskets, packing, or insulation that other companies made. Learn more about product liability lawsuits.
Premises liability lawsuits
Sometimes the companies that owned the plants where an outside contractor's employees worked can also be responsible. In Washington a contractor's employees are the owner's invitees: the owner must use reasonable care about dangerous conditions on the property that it knew or should have known about, though it can meet that duty by reasonably entrusting it to a qualified contractor. An owner is generally not responsible for how the contractor does its own work unless it kept control over that work. General contractors have their own safety duties. A worker can't sue his own employer this way. Navy shipyards, bases, and other federal property are not sued like private property owners. Learn more about premises liability lawsuits.
Workers' compensation, Longshore Act, FECA, EEOICPA, VA, and Social Security
Depending on where the worker was employed, benefits can be pursued alongside a civil case:
- Washington workers' compensation — for occupational disease, against the worker's own employer, with its own claim deadline.
- Longshore and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act (LHWCA) — for employees of private shipyards such as Todd and Lockheed, and for contractors' employees at Puget Sound Naval Shipyard. Some settlements with the companies need the employer's written approval in advance.
- Federal Employees' Compensation Act (FECA) — for federal civilian employees of Puget Sound Naval Shipyard and other federal facilities.
- Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program (EEOICPA) — for employees of Hanford's contractors and subcontractors, alongside Washington workers' compensation.
- VA service-connected disability — for veterans with asbestos exposure during military service. The VA has no automatic presumption for asbestos diseases, but it treats in-service asbestos exposure as likely for many Navy ratings; a claim still needs a diagnosis and a doctor's opinion linking the disease to service.
- Social Security disability — only for claimants under full retirement age.
Some of these benefits must be repaid from a lawsuit recovery or are reduced by it, so we plan them together. Learn more about asbestos disability claims.
Can we choose not to sue?
Yes. Some Washington families pursue only trust claims and benefits and never file a lawsuit. The firm respects that decision. We will walk you through every option so you can make an informed choice. We will not pressure you into a court case you do not want.
Uncomfortable with the idea of a lawsuit? So was Clarence Borel. He spent 33 years as an insulator on the Gulf Coast and didn't believe in suing anyone — until he realized his coworkers would die the same way he was dying. His 1969 lawsuit helped establish the product-liability law that protects families today, and the cases that followed it eventually led to the bankruptcy trusts that pay claims now. Read his story.
How long do I have to file a Washington mesothelioma claim?
Three years from when the illness and its cause were known, or should have been. Washington's three years start when the worker knew, or with reasonable diligence should have known, of the illness and its link to asbestos — not when the exposure happened decades ago. For mesothelioma, which typically appears 30 to 50 years after exposure, that discovery rule is what makes claims possible at all. Exactly when the clock starts varies, so to be safe, count from the date of diagnosis. If an earlier X-ray, CT scan or screening showed asbestos-related scarring, a Washington court may count the three years from that earlier finding, so call us right away.
After a death. If the worker dies, the family's wrongful-death claim is brought by the estate's personal representative, generally within three years of the death. But Washington bars the family's claim against any company the worker could no longer sue when he died. In Deggs, an asbestos case, the worker had filed and won his own lawsuit years earlier, and the family's later claims against companies he had not sued within his own three years were barred. A settlement or judgment the worker reaches with a company during life also ends the family's later claim against that company, so we talk through every settlement with the whole family. If the worker dies while his own case is pending, the case doesn't end: his personal representative asks the court to continue it, and the worker's own pain and suffering can still be recovered for the family. If the worker dies before his own three years run out without having filed, the estate's claim keeps his deadline, with at least one year after the death.
Washington workers' compensation has its own rules: an occupational-disease claim must be filed within two years after a doctor gives the worker written notice of the disease and that a claim may be filed, or within two years of the death. The Longshore Act and FECA have their own deadlines too: for an occupational disease under the Longshore Act, notice within one year and a claim within two years after the worker knew, or should have known, of the link between the work, the disease, and the disability; under FECA, notice within 30 days and a claim within three years, counted for a latent disease from when the worker knew or should have known of the link to the job.
Call 833-4-ASBESTOS — the safest step is to call as soon as possible after diagnosis.
Legal detail: Washington filing deadlines
Personal injury — three years. An action "for any other injury to the person or rights of another" must be commenced within three years. RCW 4.16.080(2). Washington's discovery rule applies: the claim accrues when the plaintiff discovers, or reasonably should have discovered, the essential elements of the cause of action. Koker v. Armstrong Cork, Inc., 60 Wn. App. 466 (1991) (asbestos; citing Ohler v. Tacoma General Hospital, 92 Wn.2d 507 (1979)).
Product Liability Act claims — three years. For claims under the Act, "no claim under this chapter may be brought more than three years from the time the claimant discovered or in the exercise of due diligence should have discovered the harm and its cause." RCW 7.72.060(3). The Act applies to claims "arising on or after July 26, 1981" (RCW 4.22.920(1)); where substantially all of the asbestos exposure came earlier, the claim arose before the Act and pre-Act law applies. Koker, 60 Wn. App. 466.
Separate diseases. No Washington appellate decision settles whether an earlier asbestosis or pleural diagnosis starts the clock for a later mesothelioma. The Washington Supreme Court has suggested that a "truly separate and distinct" later disease may have its own accrual, but declined to apply that rule without expert testimony establishing a separate injury. Green v. A.P.C., 136 Wn.2d 87 (1998).
Wrongful death — three years. A wrongful-death action is brought by the personal representative "for the economic and noneconomic damages sustained by the beneficiaries." RCW 4.20.010(1). It has a three-year limitations period (RCW 4.16.080(2)), generally running from the death; in White v. Johns-Manville Corp., 103 Wn.2d 344 (1985), an asbestos case, the court applied the discovery rule to a death action.
The Deggs bar. In Deggs v. Asbestos Corp. Ltd., 186 Wn.2d 716 (2016) (5–4), the worker, Ray Sundberg, sued nearly 40 companies in 1999 and won a verdict in 2001; after his death in 2010 his daughter sued, mostly naming companies he had not sued. The court affirmed dismissal: a wrongful-death action lies only if the decedent had a "subsisting cause of action" at death, and Sundberg's claims against those companies had become time-barred during his life. The court described this limit as including "prior litigation, prior settlements, and the lapsing of the statute of limitations." See also Brodie v. Washington Water Power Co., 92 Wash. 574 (1916) (a release and satisfaction by the injured person bars the death action). The 2019 amendments (Laws of 2019, ch. 159) changed the beneficiaries and damages, not this rule, and apply to claims "that are not time barred" (§ 6).
Survival. "All causes of action by a person or persons against another person or persons shall survive to the personal representatives." RCW 4.20.046(1). The personal representative may recover the decedent's economic losses and the decedent's own "pain and suffering, anxiety, emotional distress, or humiliation" for the statutory beneficiaries, "regardless of whether or not the death was occasioned by the injury." RCW 4.20.046(2); see RCW 4.20.060(3) (personal-injury action occasioning death). A pending action does not abate, but "the court may at any time within one year thereafter, on motion, allow the action to be continued by or against his or her representatives." RCW 4.20.050. If a person entitled to sue dies before the limitations period expires and the cause of action survives, the representatives may sue "after the expiration of the time and within one year from his or her death." RCW 4.16.200.
No fixed products cutoff. Under the Act, a seller isn't liable if it proves the harm was caused after the product's "useful safe life" had expired, and harm more than twelve years after delivery raises a rebuttable presumption that it was. RCW 7.72.060(1)(a), (2). But a seller may still be liable where "[t]he harm was caused by exposure to a defective product, which exposure first occurred within the useful safe life of the product, even though the harm did not manifest itself until after the useful safe life had expired." RCW 7.72.060(1)(b)(iii).
Construction statute of repose. Claims against those who "constructed, altered or repaired any improvement upon real property" must accrue within six years after substantial completion or the end of their services. RCW 4.16.300, .310. The statute protects only persons who must be registered or licensed under the listed licensing statutes (RCW 4.16.300), and it "shall not be asserted as a defense by any owner, tenant or other person in possession and control of the improvement" (RCW 4.16.310). In Polinder v. Brand Insulations, Inc., No. 102782-6 (Wash. Apr. 30, 2026), the court held that it bars claims against an insulation contractor arising from its installation of asbestos insulation during the construction of the ARCO Cherry Point refinery, but not claims based on its "independent duties as a product seller or supplier." Product manufacturers are not protected.
Workers' compensation. Occupational-disease claims "must be filed within two years following the date the worker had written notice from a physician or a licensed advanced registered nurse practitioner" of the disease and that a claim may be filed, but "a claim is valid if it is filed within two years from the date of death of the worker suffering from an occupational disease." RCW 51.28.055(1).
Who can be sued in a Washington asbestos case?
Washington asbestos cases are rarely against just one company. Identifying the right defendants, and the right law, is one of the first jobs of the case.
Product manufacturers and suppliers
The companies that made and sold asbestos-containing insulation, refractory, gaskets, packing, block, joint compound, boilers, pumps, valves, and friction products. These are usually the primary defendants. Under the Product Liability Act, a seller that didn't make the product is usually liable only for its own negligence, its own express warranty, or intentional misrepresentation, unless the manufacturer can't be sued or can't pay. Where the original manufacturer is in bankruptcy, the claim goes to that company's asbestos trust.
Premises owners and site operators
Sometimes the owner of a refinery, mill, or plant can be responsible to the employees of an outside contractor who worked there, particularly where the owner kept control over the work. Insulation contractors that installed asbestos as part of building, altering, or repairing a plant can raise Washington's six-year construction repose for that work, though not for their role in selling or supplying the insulation.
Asbestos bankruptcy trusts
Many of the original asbestos manufacturers went through bankruptcy and set up trusts to pay asbestos victims. Trust claims are submitted under each trust's own procedures, separate from any lawsuit, and don't require one. The trusts' lists hold more than 1,500 Washington entries, from 27 trusts, including Owens Corning, Babcock & Wilcox, Combustion Engineering, Fibreboard, Eagle-Picher, A.P. Green, Turner & Newall, W.R. Grace, Pittsburgh Corning (Unibestos), and Johns-Manville.
Employers
Washington workers' compensation (Title 51, the Industrial Insurance Act) is usually the only remedy against the worker's own employer, including for occupational disease. There is a narrow exception when the employer deliberately intended the injury. In 2025 the Washington Supreme Court held that, for a latent disease such as mesothelioma, proof that the employer knew the disease was virtually certain to result can meet that test. These claims are still difficult and depend on what the employer knew. Claims against the companies that made the asbestos products are separate, which is why most Washington asbestos cases are product cases, not employer cases.
Legal detail: Washington product liability, causation, premises liability, and workers' compensation
Which product law applies. The Washington Product Liability Act (chapter 7.72 RCW) applies to claims arising on or after July 26, 1981 (RCW 4.22.920(1)). For those claims it replaces common-law product remedies (Washington Water Power Co. v. Graybar Electric Co., 112 Wn.2d 847 (1989)); a "product liability claim" includes claims previously based on strict liability, negligence, warranty, and misrepresentation (RCW 7.72.010(4)). Where substantially all of the exposure came before that date, the claim arose before the Act, and common-law strict liability under Restatement (Second) of Torts § 402A and negligence apply. Koker, 60 Wn. App. 466; Simonetta v. Viad Corp., 165 Wn.2d 341 (2008).
Sellers that didn't make the product. Under the Act, a seller other than a manufacturer is liable only for its own negligence, breach of its own express warranty, or intentional misrepresentation or concealment, RCW 7.72.040(1), unless, for example, no solvent manufacturer can be served or a judgment against the manufacturer likely can't be enforced, RCW 7.72.040(2).
Replacement parts made by others. A manufacturer has no duty under common-law products liability or negligence to warn of asbestos in replacement packing and gaskets it did not make, sell, or specify. Braaten v. Saberhagen Holdings, 165 Wn.2d 373 (2008); Simonetta, 165 Wn.2d 341 (insulation applied to an evaporator by others). For exposure aboard Navy ships, federal maritime law may apply instead; under it, a manufacturer can have a duty to warn when its product required asbestos parts. Air & Liquid Systems Corp. v. DeVries, 586 U.S. 446 (2019).
Government specifications. Under the Act, compliance of the injury-causing aspect of a product with "a specific mandatory government contract specification relating to design or warnings" at the time of manufacture "shall be an absolute defense." RCW 7.72.050(2). Manufacturers of products made to military specifications also often raise the federal government-contractor defense, which requires that the United States approved reasonably precise specifications, the product conformed to them, and the supplier warned the United States of dangers known to the supplier but not to the government. Boyle v. United Technologies Corp., 487 U.S. 500 (1988). Such cases are often removed to federal court under the federal-officer removal statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1442.
Asbestos causation — the Lockwood factors. In Lockwood v. AC&S, Inc., 109 Wn.2d 235 (1987), brought for a worker exposed at Seattle shipyards, the Washington Supreme Court held that a plaintiff may rely on witnesses who place a manufacturer's asbestos products at the workplace, and directed courts to consider the plaintiff's proximity to the product, the expanse of the worksite, the extent of time exposed, the types of products and how they were handled and used, the products' tendency to release fibers, and the evidence of medical causation. Mavroudis v. Pittsburgh-Corning Corp., 86 Wn. App. 22 (1997), upheld a substantial-factor instruction in a mesothelioma case; Morgan v. Aurora Pump Co., 159 Wn. App. 724 (2011), reversed summary judgment for equipment makers in a Puget Sound Naval Shipyard worker's mesothelioma case.
Premises owners and contractors. An independent contractor's employees are invitees, and a landowner's duty to them for dangerous conditions on the land follows Restatement (Second) of Torts §§ 343 and 343A; a landowner may satisfy that duty by a reasonable delegation to a qualified independent contractor. Eylander v. Prologis Targeted U.S. Logistics Fund, No. 101176-8 (Wash. Dec. 7, 2023); Kamla, 147 Wn.2d at 125. A jobsite owner that does not retain control over the manner in which an independent contractor does its work owes the contractor's employees no common-law duty based on retained control, and general contractors have a nondelegable duty to comply with workplace safety regulations. Kamla v. Space Needle Corp., 147 Wn.2d 114 (2002); Stute v. P.B.M.C., Inc., 114 Wn.2d 454 (1990).
Take-home (household) exposure. Washington's Court of Appeals extended a product seller's strict liability to the child of a worker who carried asbestos home (Lunsford v. Saberhagen Holdings, Inc., 125 Wn. App. 784 (2005)) and recognized a shipyard operator's duty to prevent take-home exposure to household members of an independent contractor's employee (Arnold v. Saberhagen Holdings, Inc., 157 Wn. App. 649 (2010)). In Bauer v. Boeing Co., No. 87593-1-I (Wash. Ct. App. May 18, 2026), a workplace chemical-exposure case about a child's injury before conception, the court relied on those take-home cases and held that workers' compensation exclusivity does not bar the child's claim for a separate and distinct injury; Boeing's petition for review is No. 105476-9. Each claim depends on its facts, and the Washington Supreme Court has not decided the scope of an employer's or owner's duty to household members.
Workers' compensation exclusivity. Title 51 abolishes civil actions against employers for workplace injuries "except as in this title provided." RCW 51.04.010; RCW 51.32.010. If injury results from "the deliberate intention of his or her employer to produce such injury," the worker may also sue the employer for damages beyond the benefits paid or payable. RCW 51.24.020. Birklid v. Boeing Co., 127 Wn.2d 853 (1995), requires actual knowledge that injury was certain to occur and willful disregard of that knowledge. Cockrum v. C.H. Murphy/Clark-Ullman, Inc., No. 102881-4 (Wash. May 29, 2025), overruled Walston v. Boeing Co., 181 Wn.2d 391 (2014), and held that "in latent disease cases, virtual certainty is sufficient to prove the employer's actual knowledge that injury was certain to occur."
Third-party claims, the lien, and settlements. A worker may sue a "third person, not in a worker's same employ," and must notify the Department of Labor and Industries or the self-insurer when the action is filed. RCW 51.24.030. Recovery is distributed under RCW 51.24.060: costs and fees shared proportionally, 25 percent of the balance to the worker, the Department or self-insurer reimbursed for benefits paid, and the rest to the worker, with future benefits suspended until the excess is used up. Damages for pain and suffering and for loss of consortium are not subject to that reimbursement. Tobin v. Department of Labor & Industries, 169 Wn.2d 396 (2010); RCW 51.24.030(5). A third-party settlement "which results in less than the entitlement under this title is void unless made with the written approval of the department or self-insurer." RCW 51.24.090(1). If the Department or self-insurer demands an election in writing and the worker doesn't elect within 60 days, the claim is deemed assigned to it. RCW 51.24.070.
Shipyard workers. Title 51 does not apply to workers "for whom a right or obligation exists under the maritime laws or federal employees' compensation act." RCW 51.12.100(1). For asbestos disease, the Department furnishes benefits to a worker who may have a claim under the maritime laws, on objective clinical findings and a prima facie showing of injurious exposure in covered Washington employment, until the liable insurer begins paying, with a lien on any third-party recovery. RCW 51.12.102. Under the Longshore Act, compensation is the employer's exclusive liability (33 U.S.C. § 905(a)). A worker who settles with a third party for less than the compensation due needs the prior written approval of the employer and its insurer, and failing to get it, or to notify the employer of any settlement or judgment, ends the right to compensation and medical benefits (§ 933(g)); accepting compensation under an award assigns the claim to the employer unless the worker sues within six months (§ 933(b)); and the employer is credited with the net recovery (§ 933(f)). The Act doesn't cover employees of the United States (§ 903(b)).
What evidence do we need to prove a Washington asbestos case?
You do not need to gather everything before calling. A short conversation about where your loved one worked and what they did is enough to begin. We build the rest.
| Evidence | Why it helps | What if you do not have it? |
|---|---|---|
| Employment history (employers, locations, rough dates) | Connects the worker to specific Washington worksites in our database, and shows who the employer was | We can reconstruct from Social Security earnings records, union records, and coworker statements |
| Job title and trade (pipefitter, insulator, boilermaker, machinist, millwright, electrician, laborer) | Identifies typical asbestos exposure pathways for that trade | A general description of the work is enough to start |
| Names of products handled (insulation, gaskets, block, refractory, joint compound) | Supports product-identification claims against manufacturers and trusts | Most workers don't remember product names. Our database matches Washington worksites to the products historically used there. |
| Coworker names | Coworker testimony can confirm exposure when records are thin | Not required. Many cases are built without it. |
| Military service records (DD-214) | Establishes Navy, Coast Guard, or other service exposure for VA claims | The VA can locate records if you authorize the search |
| Medical records and pathology report | Confirms the mesothelioma diagnosis and dates it, which matters for the deadline | Your treating hospital or oncologist has these — we can request them on your behalf |
| Death certificate and probate paperwork (if applicable) | Required for wrongful-death and survival actions | We help families obtain these |
If you have a name, a worksite, and rough dates, we can usually get started. Everything else, we build.
How does Washington divide responsibility when many asbestos companies were involved?
Most mesothelioma cases involve exposure to many different asbestos products over many years — insulation from one manufacturer, gaskets from another, refractory from a third.
Shared responsibility. Washington uses pure comparative fault: any share of fault a company proves against the worker reduces the damages by that percentage, but doesn't bar the claim.
Who pays. Washington generally makes each company pay only its own share of the fault. But the Washington Supreme Court has held that asbestos claims fall within the law's exception for hazardous substances, so a company found responsible for the worker's asbestos disease can be made to pay the whole award, less the worker's own share of fault and what settling companies have paid. Whether that applies depends on the claims and the proof against each company.
Settlements. When a company settles, the court must find the amount reasonable, and the claim against the others is reduced by the amount paid.
Trust claims are separate and are decided under each trust's own procedures.
Call 833-4-ASBESTOS — we coordinate trust claims and any lawsuit case by case with the trial team.
Legal detail: comparative fault, joint and several liability, and allocation
Pure comparative fault. "[A]ny contributory fault chargeable to the claimant diminishes proportionately the amount awarded as compensatory damages ... but does not bar recovery." RCW 4.22.005 (1981 c 27; Washington adopted comparative negligence in 1973, and former RCW 4.22.010 continues to govern claims arising before July 26, 1981, RCW 4.22.925). "Fault" includes "unreasonable assumption of risk, and unreasonable failure to avoid an injury or to mitigate damages." RCW 4.22.015.
Allocation and several liability. The trier of fact determines the percentage of fault of "every entity which caused the claimant's damages," including the claimant, defendants, third-party defendants, released entities, and immune entities, but not "those entities immune from liability to the claimant under Title 51 RCW." RCW 4.22.070(1). Liability is several only, except (a) for concerted action or agency, and (b) where the claimant "was not at fault," in which case "the defendants against whom judgment is entered shall be jointly and severally liable for the sum of their proportionate shares of the claimant's total damages." RCW 4.22.070(1)(a), (b); Washburn v. Beatt Equipment Co., 120 Wn.2d 246 (1992).
Hazardous substances. "Nothing in this section affects any cause of action relating to hazardous wastes or substances or solid waste disposal sites." RCW 4.22.070(3)(a). In Sofie v. Fibreboard Corp., 112 Wn.2d 636 (1989), the Washington Supreme Court held that the trial judge "properly interpreted" this exception to include causes of action relating to asbestos, a hazardous substance, because the exception reaches "hazardous substances," "wherever they may be found." Applying Sofie, Coulter v. Asten Group, Inc., 135 Wn. App. 613 (2006), held joint and several liability applied to an asbestos defendant found 5 percent at fault, with the worker 2 percent at fault and 93 percent allocated to suppliers not before the court, and remanded for a judgment of the total damages less the worker's share and settlements actually received. The statute also excepts causes of action arising from "the manufacture or marketing of a fungible product in a generic form." RCW 4.22.070(3)(c).
Settlement credits. A party intending to settle must give five days' notice, and the court must determine that the amount is reasonable. RCW 4.22.060(1). A release "does not discharge any other persons liable upon the same claim unless it so provides," but the claim against the others "is reduced by the amount paid pursuant to the agreement unless the amount paid was unreasonable." RCW 4.22.060(2). Contribution is governed by RCW 4.22.040 and .050.
Bankrupt manufacturers. Companies that went through asbestos bankruptcies are generally pursued through their trusts.
What compensation can a Washington mesothelioma case recover?
Personal-injury compensation
Washington doesn't cap compensatory damages. Recovery can include:
- Medical expenses, past and future, at their reasonable value. Workers' compensation, Medicare, FECA, and some insurers can be repaid from the recovery.
- Lost income and lost earning capacity, past and future.
- Pain, suffering, mental anguish, and loss of enjoyment of life.
- A spouse's loss of companionship while the worker is living.
Washington law does not allow punitive damages.
Wrongful-death and survival compensation
When the worker has passed away, the personal representative brings the claims for the family:
- The family's own losses in the wrongful-death claim, for the spouse or registered domestic partner and the children, including stepchildren, or, if there are none, the parents or siblings: the support and services the worker would have provided, and the loss of the worker's love, care, and companionship.
- The worker's own losses in the survival claim: medical expenses and lost earnings before death, and the worker's own pain and suffering, anxiety, and emotional distress, recovered for the same family members.
Legal detail: Washington damages and wrongful death
No cap. The Washington Supreme Court held the 1986 limit on noneconomic damages (former RCW 4.56.250) unconstitutional because it "interferes with the jury's traditional function to determine damages," in violation of the right to trial by jury (Const. art. I, § 21). Sofie v. Fibreboard Corp., 112 Wn.2d 636 (1989) (a pipefitter's mesothelioma case).
Medical expenses. A plaintiff may recover the reasonable value of medical services received, which must be proved with evidence beyond the bills themselves. Patterson v. Horton, 84 Wn. App. 531 (1997).
Punitive damages. Washington has "consistently disapproved punitive damages as contrary to public policy" and allows them only where a statute authorizes them. Dailey v. North Coast Life Insurance Co., 129 Wn.2d 572 (1996); Spokane Truck & Dray Co. v. Hoefer, 2 Wash. 45 (1891). In a product case where a California company's conduct in California caused the harm, the Court of Appeals applied California's punitive-damages law under Washington's choice-of-law rules. Singh v. Edwards Lifesciences Corp., 151 Wn. App. 137 (2009).
Wrongful death. The action is for "the economic and noneconomic damages sustained by the beneficiaries listed in RCW 4.20.020 as a result of the decedent's death." RCW 4.20.010(1). Beneficiaries: "the spouse, state registered domestic partner, child or children, including stepchildren," and if there are none, "the parents or siblings of the deceased." RCW 4.20.020. The 2019 amendments (Laws of 2019, ch. 159) removed the former dependency and residency requirements for parents and siblings and are "remedial and retroactive" for claims not time-barred. RCW 4.20.010 note. A parent may also sue for the death of an adult child where the parent had "significant involvement" in the child's life and the child left no spouse, partner, or children. RCW 4.24.010.
Survival damages. RCW 4.20.046(2) and 4.20.060(3) allow recovery of the decedent's economic losses and the decedent's "pain and suffering, anxiety, emotional distress, or humiliation" for the statutory beneficiaries.
Costs and offers of judgment. "[T]he prevailing party shall be entitled to his or her costs and disbursements." RCW 4.84.030; see RCW 4.84.010 (filing and service fees, records admitted at trial, deposition transcripts used at trial, statutory attorney and witness fees). A defending party may serve an offer of judgment more than 10 days before trial; "[i]f the judgment finally obtained by the offeree is not more favorable than the offer, the offeree must pay the costs incurred after the making of the offer." CR 68.
Washington shipyard, Navy, Hanford, and federal-facility exposure
Washington's military and federal facilities generated extensive documented asbestos exposure. Federal installations are not sued like private property owners; the claims run against the companies whose products were used there.
- Puget Sound Naval Shipyard, Bremerton — Navy overhaul and repair since 1891, and on at least 14 trusts' lists, including Johns-Manville. Federal civilian employees are covered by FECA, which is their only remedy against the United States and must be repaid from a recovery against the companies; contractors' employees are generally covered by the Longshore Act.
- Todd, Lockheed, and Lake Union shipyards, Seattle — private shipbuilding and repair. Their employees are generally covered by the Longshore Act, and some settlements with the companies need the shipyard's written approval in advance.
- Hanford Site, Richland — Manhattan Project and Cold War plutonium complex. Most Hanford workers were employed by the government's operating contractors and subcontractors, so their benefits are Washington workers' compensation and EEOICPA Part E, not FECA. Washington presumes that respiratory disease and a list of cancers are occupational for qualifying Hanford workers, but its lung-cancer category excludes mesothelioma. EEOICPA cash payments are capped and reduced by state workers' compensation for the same illness, and lawsuit and trust recoveries can offset them.
- Naval Base Kitsap (Bremerton / Bangor), Naval Station Everett, Joint Base Lewis-McChord, and Fairchild Air Force Base — VA for veterans with described in-service exposure; FECA for federal civilian employees.
A household member's own disease is a separate injury; any claim against the United States would go through the Federal Tort Claims Act. Benefits are coordinated case by case with the trial team.
Legal detail: federal programs
FECA. FECA is a federal employee's exclusive remedy against the United States (5 U.S.C. § 8116(c)). A recovery from a third party must be refunded to the extent of FECA benefits paid, and any surplus is credited against future benefits (§ 8132). A veteran generally can't receive VA compensation and FECA for the same disability at the same time and must elect (§ 8116(b)).
EEOICPA Part E. Hanford is a Department of Energy facility. Part E pays contractor and subcontractor employees for illness caused by toxic-substance exposure there, with wage-loss and impairment payments capped at $250,000 in total, other than medical benefits (42 U.S.C. §§ 7385s-2, 7385s-12), reduced by state workers' compensation for the same illness (§ 7385s-11), and subject to offset for lawsuit and trust recoveries (§ 7385). The Department of Labor treats asbestos trust settlements as offsetting recoveries. EEOICPA Fin. Dec. No. 20231211-50025412-3 (Dep't of Labor 2024).
Hanford presumption. For workers at a radiological hazardous waste facility for at least one eight-hour shift, RCW 51.32.187 presumes that respiratory disease, listed cancers, beryllium disease, and some heart and neurological conditions are occupational diseases, rebuttable by clear and convincing evidence. The presumption's lung-cancer category covers lung cancer "but not including mesothelioma or pleura cancer." RCW 51.32.187(4)(b)(ii).
Social Security. Washington reduces total-disability workers' compensation for workers receiving Social Security disability, within federal limits. RCW 51.32.220. Social Security disability is available only before full retirement age.
What happens after you call?
A free case review is a conversation, not a commitment to file a lawsuit.
- You call 833-4-ASBESTOS or submit the free case review form. A lawyer or intake specialist takes basic information — name, diagnosis, where your loved one worked, rough dates.
- We check our Washington records — the more than 1,500 Washington entries on the asbestos trusts' lists, from 27 trusts — to identify likely exposure sources and likely defendants.
- We explain the paths that apply to your situation — trust claims, lawsuit, benefits — and what each one looks like in practice.
- If you choose to retain us, you sign a contingency fee agreement. No fee unless we recover.
- We prepare the trust claims and the civil case, in the order the trial team decides is right for your case.
- We coordinate workers' compensation, Longshore, FECA, EEOICPA, VA, and Social Security claims case by case, because some must be repaid from a recovery or are reduced by it.
- You and your family stay informed at every step. We discuss every settlement offer with the family before anyone responds to it. The decision to settle is always yours.
Call 833-4-ASBESTOS — the first call is free, and it commits you to nothing.
How Washington's laws may work in practice
Dennis is a 74-year-old retired boilermaker from Everett. From 1972 through 2008 he was employed by outside boiler-repair and mechanical contractors and dispatched to the big Puget Sound plants: the Scott Paper mill and the Weyerhaeuser mills on the Everett waterfront and the Shell refinery at Anacortes. He was never an employee of the mills or the refinery. He built, tore down, and relined recovery boilers and power boilers, replaced gaskets and packing on high-pressure steam systems, and worked around pipe and block insulation and refractory. In late 2025 he developed shortness of breath and chest pain, and in February 2026 imaging and a pleural biopsy at the University of Washington Medical Center in Seattle confirmed pleural mesothelioma of the epithelioid subtype.
What this looks like for Dennis's family. Washington's three years run from when Dennis knew, or should have known, of the illness and its link to asbestos, so to be safe his lawsuit should be filed well before February 2029. His lawsuit is against the companies that made the insulation, gaskets, packing, block, refractory, and boilers he worked with; much of his exposure came before July 1981, so those claims are under Washington's older product law, and later exposure is under the Product Liability Act. Each company's product has to be linked to his exposure, and the makers of boilers and pumps aren't responsible for replacement parts other companies made. The companies that owned the mills and the refinery may also be responsible, depending on how much control they kept over his work; an insulation contractor that installed insulation as part of building, altering, or repairing a plant may raise Washington's construction repose for that work. Because the Washington Supreme Court treats asbestos claims as within the hazardous-substances exception, a company found responsible can be made to pay the whole award, less any share of fault assigned to Dennis and what settling companies have paid. The Scott Paper Everett mill appears on at least 11 trusts' lists, including Johns-Manville, and the order of trust claims and the lawsuit is decided case by case with the trial team. His compensation may include his medical expenses at their reasonable value, lost income, and his pain and suffering, uncapped in Washington; Washington doesn't allow punitive damages. He can also bring a Washington workers' compensation occupational-disease claim against his former employer within two years of his doctor's written notice; the Department or his self-insured employer is repaid from any recovery, and a settlement for less than his comp entitlement needs its written approval. He has no military service, so no VA claim, and at 74 no Social Security disability. If Dennis dies while his case is pending, his personal representative can continue it, his own pain and suffering can still be recovered for his family, and his wife and children have a wrongful-death claim for their own losses. But the family can't later sue a company Dennis could no longer sue when he died, and a settlement he accepts from a company ends the family's claim against that company, so his own case should name every company the evidence supports, and we talk through every settlement with the whole family. Dennis's wife washed his work clothes for decades; we offer free asbestos health screening to family members of every client who may have been exposed at home, and a household member's own illness may be a separate claim. The screening is a chest X-ray read by a B-reader, with a CT scan if needed; it looks for asbestos-related changes in the lungs and isn't a diagnosis or a reliable way to find mesothelioma early.
Legal analysis of this hypothetical
Ages and dates. Born in 1952, Dennis started as a boilermaker at 20 in 1972 and worked until 2008.
Limitations. Three years from discovery of the harm and its cause (RCW 4.16.080(2); RCW 7.72.060(3) for Act claims); to be safe, from the February 2026 diagnosis, filed well before February 2029.
Product claims. Pre-July 26, 1981 exposure: common-law strict liability (§ 402A) and negligence (RCW 4.22.920(1); Koker). Later exposure: the Product Liability Act (RCW 7.72), with the useful-safe-life exception for exposure first occurring within the product's useful safe life (RCW 7.72.060(1)(b)(iii)). No duty for replacement parts made by others (Braaten; Simonetta). Causation under Lockwood.
Site owners and contractors. Owner liability to a contractor's employee turns on retained control (Kamla). Construction repose bars claims arising from an insulation contractor's construction work but not its product-seller or supplier role (RCW 4.16.300, .310; Polinder). Companies that went through asbestos bankruptcies are trust claims only.
Allocation. Pure comparative fault (RCW 4.22.005). Joint and several liability under the hazardous-substances exception (RCW 4.22.070(3)(a); Sofie; Coulter); settlement credits are the amounts paid, found reasonable (RCW 4.22.060).
Employer. Title 51 is exclusive against his employers (RCW 51.04.010), subject to the deliberate-intention exception (RCW 51.24.020; Cockrum). Occupational-disease claim within two years of a physician's written notice (RCW 51.28.055). Lien and distribution (RCW 51.24.060); written approval of a below-entitlement settlement (RCW 51.24.090); deemed assignment if he fails to elect within 60 days of a written demand (RCW 51.24.070).
Damages. Uncapped (Sofie); medical expenses at reasonable value (Patterson); no punitive damages (Dailey).
Trust filings. Scott Paper Everett mill at least 11 trusts, Shell Anacortes refinery at least 10, Weyerhaeuser Everett mills at least 9, each including Johns-Manville. Order and timing decided case by case with the trial team.
Federal coordination. No military service, so no VA claim. No Social Security disability at 74.
Family. Free screening. A household member's own disease is a separate injury (Lunsford; Arnold).
Death. The action doesn't abate; the court may allow his personal representative to continue it on motion within one year (RCW 4.20.050). Survival damages including his own pain and suffering for his wife and children (RCW 4.20.046(2), 4.20.060(3)); wrongful-death claim for their own losses (RCW 4.20.010, .020). No death claim against a company whose claim was time-barred, released, or reduced to judgment during his life (Deggs; Brodie).
This example is general. Every case depends on the diagnosis, exposure history, dates, defendants, applicable law, and available evidence.
Why families choose our firm
Our firm has recovered over $400 million for asbestos clients nationally. Our Washington work is supported by our proprietary database of 200,000+ verified asbestos exposure sites built over more than a decade — including the more than 1,500 Washington entries on the asbestos trusts' lists, from 27 trusts — and a home-state office in Redmond. We routinely get claims approved by many asbestos trusts.
- Washington worksite knowledge. The Puget Sound Naval Shipyard at Bremerton, the Seattle shipyards (Todd, Lockheed, Lake Union), the Boeing plants, the Hanford Site, Kaiser Aluminum at Trentwood and Mead, the Everett, Camas, Longview, Wallula, and Port Angeles paper mills, the Anacortes, Ferndale, and Cherry Point refineries, and the ASARCO Tacoma smelter.
- Case strategy built for Washington law. We work with Washington's discovery-based deadline, the Deggs wrongful-death rule, the line between older product law and the Product Liability Act, the hazardous-substances rule on who pays, and the rules on site owners, contractors, and immune employers.
- Filing during life. A case started while the worker is alive, against every company the evidence supports, preserves his own testimony and protects the family's later claims against those companies.
- Benefits coordination. Washington workers' compensation, Longshore, FECA, EEOICPA, VA, and Social Security are coordinated case by case with the trial team.
- Free family health screening. We offer screening to family members of every client who may have been exposed at home.
- No fee unless we recover. Contingent fee. We discuss every settlement offer with the family before anyone responds to it.
Court decisions: 221 asbestos cases from Washington courts
Frequently asked questions
What is the statute of limitations for mesothelioma in Washington?
Three years from when the worker knew, or should have known, of the illness and its link to asbestos. Exactly when the clock starts varies, so to be safe, count from the date of diagnosis. If an earlier X-ray, CT scan or screening showed asbestos-related scarring, a Washington court may count the three years from that earlier finding, so call us right away.
How long does my family have to file if my loved one already passed away?
Generally three years from the death. But the family can't bring a wrongful-death claim against a company the worker could no longer sue when he died, because his own three years had run out or because he had settled with it or taken it to judgment. That is true even if he had sued other companies in time, so call now.
Do we have to file a lawsuit?
Not necessarily. Many Washington families recover through bankruptcy trust claims and benefits without ever filing a lawsuit. We will walk you through every option and the trade-offs.
Are trust claims separate from lawsuits?
Yes. Trust claims are filed with the bankruptcy trusts under each trust's own procedures and paid outside the court system. Lawsuits are filed against still-solvent companies in court. Many cases involve both, and the order is decided case by case with the trial team.
Can I file a Washington claim if I no longer live in Washington?
Often yes. We handle Washington cases for clients who have moved away, including retirees. Which state's law applies, and where a case can be filed, depends on where the exposure happened and where the companies can be sued.
What if the exposure happened at work?
Most Washington asbestos cases are against the companies that made the asbestos products, not the worker's own employer. Washington workers' compensation is usually the only remedy against the employer. A 2025 Washington Supreme Court decision opened a narrow path for suing an employer that knew a latent disease was virtually certain to result, but those claims are difficult and depend on what the employer knew.
What if the exposure happened through a spouse's work clothes?
Family members who breathed asbestos from a worker's clothes may have their own claims against the companies whose products were involved, and may qualify for trust claims. Washington's Court of Appeals has recognized such claims against product sellers and a shipyard operator, but each depends on its facts, and the Washington Supreme Court hasn't decided how far the duty goes. Our free family screening is available either way.
Are punitive damages available in Washington asbestos cases?
No. Washington law does not allow punitive damages. Washington does not cap compensatory damages, including pain and suffering.
Does Washington cap pain and suffering?
No. The Washington Supreme Court struck down the state's noneconomic damages cap in Sofie v. Fibreboard Corp. (1989), an asbestos case, because it violated the right to trial by jury. A living worker can recover for pain, suffering, mental anguish, and loss of enjoyment of life. After a death, the estate recovers the worker's own pain and suffering, and the family recovers its own losses, including the loss of the worker's love, care, and companionship.
Where will my Washington case be filed?
A Washington personal-injury lawsuit can be filed in the county where the claim arose or where a defendant resides, and a company resides in any county where it transacts business. King County Superior Court in Seattle handles many asbestos cases under its own consolidated pretrial order and case schedule for asbestos cases. Cases can also be filed in, or moved to, federal court in the Western or Eastern District of Washington, and cases involving Navy equipment are often moved to federal court.
What if I worked at a Navy or Seattle shipyard?
Puget Sound Naval Shipyard appears on at least 14 trusts' lists, including Johns-Manville, and the Seattle yards — Todd, Lockheed, and Lake Union Drydock — are on many trusts' lists for marine insulation. Federal civilian employees at the Navy yard are covered by FECA, which must be repaid from a recovery against the companies; employees of the private yards and contractors are generally covered by the Longshore Act, and some settlements need the employer's written approval in advance. Veterans with described in-service exposure may also have a VA claim, but VA and FECA benefits for the same disease generally require a choice between them.
What if I worked at Boeing, Hanford, or a paper mill?
All are heavily documented. Boeing's Seattle plants appear on at least 10 trusts' lists and the Hanford Site on at least 11, each including Johns-Manville, and the Puget Sound and Columbia River paper mills (Scott, Crown Zellerbach, Weyerhaeuser, Longview Fibre, Boise Cascade) appear on many. Hanford's contractor employees may have Washington workers' compensation and EEOICPA claims. Call us with the plant or mill name and we will tell you what we have documented.
What if I'm a veteran with asbestos exposure during military service?
VA service-connected disability is available for veterans with asbestos exposure during military service. A claim needs a described in-service exposure, a diagnosis, and a doctor's opinion linking the disease to service. A civil or trust recovery doesn't reduce VA disability compensation.
Talk with a Washington mesothelioma lawyer
Whether your family is dealing with a new diagnosis, a very sick loved one, or a death from mesothelioma, we are ready to help. Washington's law gives families real tools — no cap on pain and suffering, no fixed cutoff for old asbestos products, pure comparative fault, and the hazardous-substances rule on who pays — and one real trap, the Deggs wrongful-death rule, that makes a timely case against every responsible company during the worker's lifetime an important step for a family to take.
You do not need to know the product names. You do not need to have all the records. You do not need to travel to our office. A spouse or adult child can call for the family.
Related resources
Sources and references
Statutes and rules
- RCW 4.12.020, 4.12.025 — Venue for personal-injury actions; residence of corporations.
- RCW 4.16.080(2) — Three-year limitations period for personal injury and wrongful death.
- RCW 4.16.200 — Survival of a claim after the death of a person entitled to sue; one year from death.
- RCW 4.16.300, 4.16.310 — Six-year construction statute of repose for registered or licensed contractors and design professionals; not available to an owner in possession.
- RCW 4.20.010, 4.20.020 — Wrongful death; beneficiaries (amended by Laws of 2019, ch. 159).
- RCW 4.20.046, 4.20.050, 4.20.060 — Survival of actions; continuation after death on motion within one year; personal-injury action occasioning death.
- RCW 4.22.005, 4.22.015 — Pure comparative fault; definition of fault.
- RCW 4.22.040, 4.22.050, 4.22.060 — Contribution; settlement notice, reasonableness hearing, and credit for the amount paid.
- RCW 4.22.070 — Allocation of fault; several liability with exceptions, including the fault-free-claimant rule and hazardous substances; no allocation to employers immune under Title 51.
- RCW 4.22.920, 4.22.925 — The 1981 tort reform and Product Liability Act apply to claims arising on or after July 26, 1981.
- RCW 4.24.010 — Parent's action for the injury or death of a child.
- RCW 4.84.010, 4.84.030 — Costs to the prevailing party.
- RCW 7.72.010–.060 — Washington Product Liability Act, including seller liability (7.72.040), government-specification defense (7.72.050), and useful safe life and the three-year discovery limit (7.72.060).
- RCW 51.04.010, 51.32.010 — Industrial Insurance Act exclusive remedy.
- RCW 51.12.100, 51.12.102 — Maritime workers outside Title 51; interim benefits for maritime asbestos disease.
- RCW 51.24.020 — Deliberate-intention exception.
- RCW 51.24.030–.090 — Third-party actions: notice, deemed assignment, lien and distribution, approval of below-entitlement settlements.
- RCW 51.28.055 — Two-year occupational-disease claim deadline.
- RCW 51.32.187 — Occupational-disease presumption for radiological hazardous waste facility workers.
- RCW 51.32.220 — Reduction of total-disability compensation for Social Security disability benefits.
- CR 68 — Offer of judgment; post-offer costs.
- 5 U.S.C. §§ 8101 et seq. — Federal Employees' Compensation Act (FECA), including §§ 8116, 8119, 8122, 8132.
- 33 U.S.C. §§ 901 et seq. — Longshore and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act (LHWCA), including §§ 903, 905, 912, 913, 933.
- 42 U.S.C. §§ 7384 et seq. — Energy Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act (EEOICPA), including §§ 7385, 7385s-2, 7385s-11, 7385s-12.
- 28 U.S.C. § 1442 — Federal-officer removal.
Cases
- Air & Liquid Systems Corp. v. DeVries, 586 U.S. 446 (2019) — Maritime duty to warn when a product requires asbestos parts.
- Arnold v. Saberhagen Holdings, Inc., 157 Wn. App. 649 (2010) — Shipyard operator's duty to household members of a contractor's employee.
- Bauer v. Boeing Co., No. 87593-1-I (Wash. Ct. App. May 18, 2026), petition for review filed, No. 105476-9 — Chemical exposure; workers' compensation exclusivity does not bar a child's claim for a separate and distinct injury.
- Birklid v. Boeing Co., 127 Wn.2d 853 (1995) — Deliberate-intention standard.
- Boyle v. United Technologies Corp., 487 U.S. 500 (1988) — Government-contractor defense.
- Braaten v. Saberhagen Holdings, 165 Wn.2d 373 (2008) — No duty to warn of asbestos in replacement packing and gaskets made by others.
- Brodie v. Washington Water Power Co., 92 Wash. 574 (1916) — Injured person's release bars the later death action.
- Cockrum v. C.H. Murphy/Clark-Ullman, Inc., No. 102881-4 (Wash. May 29, 2025) — Virtual certainty suffices for deliberate intention in latent-disease cases; Walston overruled.
- Coulter v. Asten Group, Inc., 135 Wn. App. 613 (2006) — Joint and several liability for asbestos claims under the hazardous-substances exception.
- Dailey v. North Coast Life Insurance Co., 129 Wn.2d 572 (1996) — Punitive damages contrary to public policy absent statutory authority.
- Deggs v. Asbestos Corp. Ltd., 186 Wn.2d 716 (2016) — No wrongful-death action where the decedent's claim was time-barred at death (5–4).
- Eylander v. Prologis Targeted U.S. Logistics Fund, No. 101176-8 (Wash. Dec. 7, 2023) — Landowner's duty to a contractor's employees as invitees; reasonable delegation.
- Green v. A.P.C., 136 Wn.2d 87 (1998) — Separate accrual for a distinct later disease left open absent expert testimony.
- Kamla v. Space Needle Corp., 147 Wn.2d 114 (2002) — Jobsite owner's duty to an independent contractor's employees.
- Koker v. Armstrong Cork, Inc., 60 Wn. App. 466 (1991) — Asbestos claim from pre-1981 exposure governed by pre-Act law; discovery rule.
- Lockwood v. AC&S, Inc., 109 Wn.2d 235 (1987) — Asbestos product identification and causation factors.
- Lunsford v. Saberhagen Holdings, Inc., 125 Wn. App. 784 (2005) — Product seller's strict liability to a worker's child for take-home exposure.
- Mavroudis v. Pittsburgh-Corning Corp., 86 Wn. App. 22 (1997) — Substantial-factor instruction in a mesothelioma case.
- Morgan v. Aurora Pump Co., 159 Wn. App. 724 (2011) — Product identification for a Puget Sound Naval Shipyard worker.
- Patterson v. Horton, 84 Wn. App. 531 (1997) — Reasonable value of medical services.
- Polinder v. Brand Insulations, Inc., No. 102782-6 (Wash. Apr. 30, 2026) — Construction repose and an insulation contractor's seller and supplier duties.
- Simonetta v. Viad Corp., 165 Wn.2d 341 (2008) — No duty to warn of asbestos insulation applied by others.
- Singh v. Edwards Lifesciences Corp., 151 Wn. App. 137 (2009) — Another state's punitive-damages law applied under choice-of-law rules.
- Sofie v. Fibreboard Corp., 112 Wn.2d 636 (1989) — Noneconomic damages cap struck; asbestos within the hazardous-substances exception.
- Spokane Truck & Dray Co. v. Hoefer, 2 Wash. 45 (1891) — Punitive damages contrary to Washington public policy.
- Stute v. P.B.M.C., Inc., 114 Wn.2d 454 (1990) — General contractor's nondelegable duty to comply with safety regulations.
- Tobin v. Department of Labor & Industries, 169 Wn.2d 396 (2010) — Pain-and-suffering damages excluded from Title 51 reimbursement.
- Washburn v. Beatt Equipment Co., 120 Wn.2d 246 (1992) — Joint liability under RCW 4.22.070(1)(b) limited to defendants against whom judgment is entered.
- Washington Water Power Co. v. Graybar Electric Co., 112 Wn.2d 847 (1989) — The Product Liability Act replaces common-law product remedies.
- White v. Johns-Manville Corp., 103 Wn.2d 344 (1985) — Discovery rule in an asbestos death action.
Last reviewed: November 2026. The Law Offices of Justinian C. Lane, Esq. — PLLC | Round Rock, TX · Mesa, AZ · Redmond, WA. We partner with firms in every relevant jurisdiction so claims can be handled in the appropriate court or claims system.
This page is provided for general informational purposes and does not constitute legal advice. Every asbestos case turns on its own facts, exposure history, diagnosis, deadlines, available evidence, and applicable law. Reviewing this page does not create an attorney-client relationship. For advice about your specific situation, call 833-4-ASBESTOS for a free case review.