S. 852: The Fairness in Asbestos Injury Resolution Act of 2005 Page: 1 of 6
This report is part of the collection entitled: Congressional Research Service Reports and was provided to UNT Digital Library by the UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
Order Code RS22081
Updated February 7, 2006
CRS Report for Congress
Received through the CRS Web
S. 852: The Fairness in Asbestos Injury
Resolution Act of 2005
Henry Cohen
Legislative Attorney
American Law Division
Summary
This report provides an overview of S. 852, the Fairness in Asbestos Injury
Resolution (FAIR) Act of 2005. The bill would largely remove asbestos claims from
the courts in favor of the no-fault administrative process set out in the bill. The bill
would establish the Office of Asbestos Disease Compensation to award damages to
asbestos claimants from the Asbestos Injury Claims Resolution Fund. Companies that
have previously been sued for asbestos-related injuries - and insurers of such
companies - would be required to make contributions totaling roughly $140 billion to
this Fund.
Claims of asbestos-related injury' have flooded the courts since the 1970s, but
litigation has proven to be an inadequate means to resolving all the claims. The Supreme
Court has twice struck down attempted global asbestos settlements,2 in both instances
inviting Congress to craft a legislative solution.3 In an attempt to resolve this problem,
Senator Arlen Specter introduced S. 852, the Fairness in Asbestos Injury Resolution
(FAIR) Act. The bill was reported out of the Senate Judiciary Committee on June 16.
The Claims Process. The bill would establish within the Department of Labor
the Office of Asbestos Disease Compensation, which would award damages to claimants
'Asbestos exposure can cause a variety of serious health conditions, from asbestosis (build-up
of scar-like tissue in the lungs, inhibiting breathing) to mesothelioma (cancer of the membrane
surrounding the lungs).
2 Amchem Products, Inc. v. Windsor, 521 U.S. 591 (1997); Ortiz v. Fireboard Corp., 527 U.S.
815 (1999). In both of these cases, the Court held that the settlements did not satisfy Rule 23 of
the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, which governs class actions in federal courts. For
background information on the history of asbestos litigation, see CRS Report RL32286, Asbestos
Litigation: Prospects for Legislative Resolution, by Edward Rappaport.
3See, e.g., Amchem Products, Inc. v. Windsor, 521 U.S. at 628-629.
Congressional Research Service + The Library of Congress
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This report can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Report.
Cohen, Henry. S. 852: The Fairness in Asbestos Injury Resolution Act of 2005, report, February 7, 2006; Washington D.C.. (https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc847654/m1/1/: accessed April 24, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, UNT Digital Library, https://digital.library.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.