American Optical Corporation v. Robert Lee Rankin, Jr.
227 So. 3d 1062
| Miss. | 2017Background
- Plaintiff Robert Lee Rankin Sr., a former construction worker (jackhammering/sandblasting), sued American Optical (AO) in 2013 alleging lung disease and silica-related conditions from defective AO respirators; jury returned $14M verdict in 2015 but trial court reduced non‑economic damages to comply with statutory cap.
- Jury found Rankin had a silica‑induced lung condition, had used AO respirators while exposed to silica, and that AO’s design and warning defects proximately caused his condition; AO assigned 45% fault, others 55%.
- Rankin had long, complex medical history including COPD diagnoses and treatment dating to 2000–2007; a 2010 chest x‑ray noted “pulmonary fibrotic pathology.”
- Rankin’s retained expert (Dr. Haber) later B‑read x‑rays and diagnosed silicosis on January 14, 2014 — eight months after Rankin filed suit; treating physicians had not diagnosed silicosis prior to suit.
- AO moved for a directed verdict arguing the three‑year statute of limitations barred Rankin’s claims because he knew or should have known of lung injury before May 13, 2010; the trial court denied the motion and the jury resolved the discovery issue in Rankin’s favor.
- The Mississippi Supreme Court reviewed only the statute‑of‑limitations issue and held Rankin’s claims were time barred, reversed the jury verdict, and rendered judgment for AO.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Accrual under the 3‑year statute for latent disease (Miss. Code §15‑1‑49) | Rankin: his silicosis claim accrued only when he was diagnosed with silicosis by retained expert (2014); suit filed 2013 is timely under discovery rule | AO: Rankin knew or should have known of a lung injury (COPD, fibrotic changes) well before May 13, 2010, so the 3‑year period expired | Held for AO: reasonable minds could not differ that Rankin knew or should have known of lung injury before May 13, 2010; claims time‑barred; judgment rendered for AO |
Key Cases Cited
- Phillips 66 Co. v. Lofton, 94 So.3d 1051 (Miss. 2012) (discovery of injury — not its cause — controls accrual; factual disputes on discovery may go to jury)
- Lincoln Elec. Co. v. McLemore, 54 So.3d 833 (Miss. 2010) (plaintiff’s knowledge of injury shown by physician statements and seeking legal advice starts limitations running)
- Angle v. Koppers, Inc., 42 So.3d 1 (Miss. 2010) (statute accrues upon discovery of the injury itself, not the cause)
- PPG Architectural Finishes, Inc. v. Lowery, 909 So.2d 47 (Miss. 2005) (seeking medical attention for symptoms can show knowledge of an injury)
- Ridgway Lane & Assocs., Inc. v. Watson, 189 So.3d 626 (Miss. 2016) (discovery accrual is determined by plaintiff’s actions and is a factual inquiry)