[PUBLISH]
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT FILED
U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
________________________ ELEVENTH CIRCUIT
May 13, 2004
No. 03-14038 THOMAS K. KAHN
________________________ CLERK
D. C. Docket Nos. 90-00258-CV-5 & 90-00262- CV-5
FELTON CULLEN WILLIAMS,
RICHARD L. CARTER,
ROBERT STANLEY GRIFFIN,
Plaintiffs-Appellees,
versus
OWENS-CORNING FIBERGLAS CORPORATION, et al,
Defendants,
CSX TRANSPORTATION, INC.,
Defendant-Appellant.
________________________
No. 03-14508
________________________
D. C. Docket No. 01-00155-CV-2
JAMES LEVERETT,
Individually and as Executor of the
Estate of Gloria Leverett, Deceased,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
CSX TRANSPORTATION INC.,
Individually and as Successor in Interest to
Seaboard Systems Railroad, Inc., The Seaboard
Coastline Railroad, The Atlantic Coastline Railroad and
The Georgia and Florida Railroad,
Defendant-Appellant,
GARLOCK, INC., et al,
Defendants.
________________________
Appeals from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Georgia
_________________________
(May 13, 2004)
Before BLACK and RONEY, Circuit Judges, and STROM*, District Judge.
PER CURIAM:
*
Honorable Lyle E. Strom, United States District Judge for the District of Nebraska,
sitting by designation.
2
CERTIFICATION FROM THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR
THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT TO THE SUPREME COURT OF GEORGIA,
PURSUANT TO O.C.G.A. § 15-2-9.
TO THE SUPREME COURT OF GEORGIA AND ITS HONORABLE
JUSTICES:
This case consists of two separate interlocutory appeals, Appeal Nos. 03-14038
& 03-14508, involving the district court’s denials of partial summary judgments to
Defendant CSX Transportation, Inc. (“CSXT”) on Plaintiffs’ Georgia negligence
claims. Plaintiffs are relatives, or personal representatives thereof, of CSXT
employees who allege they were exposed at locations other than CSXT work
facilities, such as at home, to asbestos fibers emitted from the work clothing worn by
their CSXT-employee relatives, causing them lung diseases, other illnesses, or death.
The district court held that Georgia negligence law imposed a duty of care on CSXT
to its employees’ family members who were exposed to that asbestos-tainted clothing.
The district court reasoned that CSXT “reasonably should have foreseen that its
employees’ family members would come in contact with the same airborne asbestos
to which its employees were exposed.” Whether the district court erred in denying
CSXT partial summary judgment is dependant upon whether there indeed is a duty
of employers under Georgia law to third parties exposed to asbestos emitted from the
clothing of its employees away from the workplace.
3
Finding no published Georgia case on point, this Court now certifies the
following question of Georgia law to the Supreme Court of Georgia:
Whether Georgia negligence law imposes any duty on an
employer to a third-party, non-employee, who comes into
contact with its employee’s asbestos-tainted work clothing
at locations away from the workplace, such as the
employee’s home?
We certify the above-styled question to the Supreme Court of Georgia. The
phrasing used in this certified question should not restrict that court’s consideration
of the problems of state law posed by this case.
QUESTION CERTIFIED.
4