Vicknair v. Phelps Dodge Industries, Inc.
2011 ND 39
| N.D. | 2011Background
- Plaintiffs are asbestos-related claimants from states other than North Dakota seeking damages from numerous defendants.
- Exposures occurred outside North Dakota; ND not the place where injuries or exposure occurred.
- District court dismissed for inconvenient forum; this Court reversed, noting an adequate alternative forum must exist and may be affected by statutes of limitations.
- On remand, defendants moved for summary judgment; plaintiffs conceded other jurisdictions' limits ran but pressed ND’s six-year limit via the escape clause or discovery extension.
- District court held the escape clause did not apply and dismissed claims; judgment entered against plaintiffs.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does the escape clause apply to adopt North Dakota's limitations? | Vicknair urged escape clause to apply ND six-year limit. | Burden on plaintiffs to prove escape clause; defendant argues it does not apply. | Escape clause does not apply. |
| Who bears the burden to prove the escape clause applies? | Plaintiffs bore burden to prove the clause. | Defendants bore burden to show other states' limits opposed fair opportunity. | Plaintiffs bore burden; they failed to prove fair opportunity under other states' limits. |
| Was additional discovery time under Rule 56(f) warranted before summary judgment? | Discovery could preclude summary judgment. | No need; discovery not identified and cases long-pending. | Court did not abuse discretion; no extra discovery granted. |
Key Cases Cited
- Hall v. Summit Contractors, Inc., 158 S.W.3d 185 (Ark. 2004) (burden on claimant to show unfairness requires evidence)
- Hein v. Taco Bell, Inc., 803 P.2d 329 (Wash. Ct. App. 1991) (unfairness requires evidence of barriers to suit)
- Kimball v. Landeis, 2002 ND 162, 652 N.W.2d 330 (N.D. 2002) (burden to show exception rests on party asserting it)
- Paracelsus Healthcare Corp. v. Philips Med. Sys., Nederland, B.V., 384 F.3d 492 (8th Cir. 2004) (burden-shifting in limitations exceptions recognized)
- Meacham v. Knolls Atomic Power Lab., 554 U.S. 84 (U.S. 2008) (principle that those who carve out exceptions must prove them)