Possible Future Harm from Exposure to Carcinogenic Chemicals Not Actual Injury
The plaintiffs sued the defendants for exposure to carcinogenic chemicals allegedly released into a neighborhood where they lived. They did not allege that they had suffered adverse health effects as a result. Rather, they claimed that their exposure to the chemicals caused an increased risk of cancer and other diseases, and that their damages consisted of the need for increased medical monitoring and future tests. The defendants moved for summary judgment, arguing that the plaintiffs had failed to state a claim upon which relief may be granted because they had not yet suffered an actual injury, which is required under Wisconsin law. The plaintiffs asserted that the chemicals coming into contact with their bodies constituted an assault or “affront to their bodies,” and thus they had grounds to pursue damages.
The court of appeals found in favor of the defendants, and the plaintiffs appealed. The court of appeals affirmed, holding that the mere possibility of future harm arising from contact with carcinogenic chemicals does not constitute an “injury” for purposes of bringing a tort claim.
Alsteen v. Wauleco, Inc., 2011 WI App 105 (2010AP1643) Court of Appeals opinion
