3M 2015 Annual Report Download - page 104
Download and view the complete annual report
Please find page 104 of the 2015 3M annual report below. You can navigate through the pages in the report by either clicking on the pages listed below, or by using the keyword search tool below to find specific information within the annual report.TableofContents
RespiratorMask/AsbestosLitigation
AsofDecember31,2015,theCompanyisanameddefendant,withmultipleco-defendants,innumerouslawsuitsinvariouscourts
thatpurporttorepresentapproximately2,130individualclaimants,comparedtoapproximately2,220individualclaimantswith
actionspendingatDecember31,2014.
ThevastmajorityofthelawsuitsandclaimsresolvedbyandcurrentlypendingagainsttheCompanyallegeuseofsomeofthe
Company’smaskandrespiratorproductsandseekdamagesfromtheCompanyandotherdefendantsforallegedpersonalinjuryfrom
workplaceexposurestoasbestos,silica,coalminedustorotheroccupationaldustsfoundinproductsmanufacturedbyother
defendantsorgenerallyintheworkplace.Aminorityofthelawsuitsandclaimsresolvedbyandcurrentlypendingagainstthe
Companygenerallyallegepersonalinjuryfromoccupationalexposuretoasbestosfromproductspreviouslymanufacturedbythe
Company,whichareoftenunspecified,aswellasproductsmanufacturedbyotherdefendants,oroccasionallyatCompanypremises.
TheCompany’scurrentvolumeofnewandpendingmattersissubstantiallylowerthanitexperiencedatthepeakoffilingsin2003.
TheCompanyexpectsthatfilingofclaimsbyunimpairedclaimantsinthefuturewillcontinuetobeatmuchlowerlevelsthaninthe
past.Accordingly,thenumberofclaimsallegingmoreseriousinjuries,includingmesotheliomaandothermalignancies,will
representagreaterpercentageoftotalclaimsthaninthepast.TheCompanyhasprevailedinalltencasestakentotrial,including
eightoftheninecasestriedtoverdict(suchtrialsoccurredin1999,2000,2001,2003,2004,2007,and2015),andanappellate
reversalin2005ofthe2001juryverdictadversetotheCompany.Theremainingcase,triedin2009,wasdismissedbythecourtat
thecloseofplaintiff’sevidence,basedonthecourt’slegalfindingthattheplaintiffhadnotpresentedsufficientevidencetosupporta
juryverdict.
TheCompanyhasdemonstratedinthesepasttrialproceedingsthatitsrespiratoryprotectionproductsareeffectiveasclaimedwhen
usedintheintendedmannerandintheintendedcircumstances.ConsequentlytheCompanybelievesthatclaimantsareunableto
establishthattheirmedicalconditions,evenifsignificant,areattributabletotheCompany’srespiratoryprotectionproducts.
NonethelesstheCompany’slitigationexperienceindicatesthatclaimsofpersonswithmalignantconditionsarecostliertoresolve
thantheclaimsofunimpairedpersons,anditthereforebelievestheaveragecostofresolvingpendingandfutureclaimsonaper-
claimbasiswillcontinuetobehigherthanitexperiencedinpriorperiodswhenthevastmajorityofclaimswereassertedbythe
unimpaired.
Aspreviouslyreported,theStateofWestVirginia,throughitsAttorneyGeneral,filedacomplaintin2003againsttheCompanyand
twoothermanufacturersofrespiratoryprotectionproductsintheCircuitCourtofLincolnCounty,WestVirginia,andamendedits
complaintin2005.Theamendedcomplaintseekssubstantial,butunspecified,compensatorydamagesprimarilyforreimbursement
ofthecostsallegedlyincurredbytheStateforworker’scompensationandhealthcarebenefitsprovidedtoallworkerswith
occupationalpneumoconiosisandunspecifiedpunitivedamages.Thecasehasbeeninactivesincethefourthquarterof2007,other
thanacasemanagementconferenceinMarch2011.InNovember2013,theStatefiledamotiontobifurcatethelawsuitintoseparate
liabilityanddamagesproceedings.Atthehearingonthemotion,thecourtdeclinedtobifurcatethelawsuit.Noliabilityhasbeen
recordedforthismatterbecausetheCompanybelievesthatliabilityisnotprobableandestimableatthistime.Inaddition,the
CompanyisnotabletoestimateapossiblelossorrangeoflossgiventhelackofanymeaningfuldiscoveryresponsesbytheStateof
WestVirginia,theotherwiseminimalactivityinthiscaseandthefactthatthecomplaintassertsclaimsagainsttwoother
manufacturerswhereadefendant’sshareofliabilitymayturnonthelawofjointandseveralliabilityandbytheamountoffault,if
any,ajurymightallocatetoeachdefendantifthecaseisultimatelytried.
RespiratorMask/AsbestosLiabilitiesandInsuranceReceivables:TheCompanyestimatesitsrespiratormask/asbestosliabilities,
includingthecosttoresolvetheclaimsanddefensecosts,byexamining:(i)theCompany’sexperienceinresolvingclaims,
(ii)apparenttrends,(iii)theapparentqualityofclaims(e.g.,whethertheclaimhasbeenassertedonbehalfofasymptomatic
claimants),(iv)changesinthenatureandmixofclaims(e.g.,theproportionofclaimsassertingusageoftheCompany’smaskor
respiratorproductsandallegingexposuretoeachofasbestos,silica,coalorotheroccupationaldusts,andclaimspleadinguseof
asbestos-containingproductsallegedlymanufacturedbytheCompany),(v)thenumberofcurrentclaimsandaprojectionofthe
numberoffutureasbestosandotherclaimsthatmaybefiledagainsttheCompany,(vi)thecosttoresolverecentlysettledclaims,
and(vii)anestimateofthecosttoresolveanddefendagainstcurrentandfutureclaims.
104