In reversal of longstanding precedent, Court liberalizes standard deliberate Injury claims under Industrial Insurance Act
OLYMPIA, Wash. – May 29, 2025 – The Washington Supreme Court has issued a landmark decision in Cockrum v. C.H. Murphy/Clark-Ullman, Inc. (No. 102881-4), holding that the “deliberate intention” exception to employer immunity under the Industrial Insurance Act (IIA) applies where an employer intentionally exposed its workers to asbestos.
The case involved Jeffrey Cockrum, a former Alcoa Inc. employee who was diagnosed with mesothelioma in 2022 after decades of occupational asbestos exposure. Cockrum testified that that Alcoa forced him to work with and around raw asbestos without any warnings or respiratory protection.
The trial court and Court of Appeals had ruled that under Walston v. Boeing Co, a case litigated by Bergman Oslund Udo Little (BOUL) in 2014, Cockrum could not pursue a civil claim because he could not show his employer had “actual knowledge that injury was certain to occur.” The Supreme Court reversed, expressly overruling Walston and holding that in cases involving latent occupational diseases, “virtual certainty” is sufficient to establish the first prong of the deliberate intention exception.
“There are circumstances under which an employer may have sufficient knowledge of the hazardousness of the exposure, the existence of symptoms linked to latent disease, and the causal relationship between the two for the employer to form actual knowledge disease is virtually certain to occur,” the Court wrote.
The Court emphasized that this new standard is limited to latent disease cases and does not displace the Birklid v. Boeing Co. (1995) two-prong test requiring both actual knowledge and willful disregard of the risk. Instead, the ruling clarifies that virtual certainty satisfies the actual knowledge component when diseases like mesothelioma are involved.
“This decision restores the balance the legislature intended by ensuring that employees who knowingly expose workers to deadly toxins are not protected from accountability simply because the resulting harm takes decades to appear,” said attorney Matthew P. Bergman, who argued the case on behalf of the Plaintiff along with BOUL attorney Justin Olsen. “The Court rightfully recognizes that justice demands access to the courthouse for workers suffering from occupational diseases caused by corporate misconduct. This ruling will have life-saving consequences for future generations of workers.”
The ruling represents a significant doctrinal shift in Washington workers’ compensation and tort law, with implications for toxic tort litigation, employer liability standards, and statutory interpretation of RCW Title 51.
The case has been remanded to the trial court for further proceedings consistent with the newly adopted legal standard.
About BOUL
The Seattle-based law firm of Bergman Oslund Udo Little (BOUL) has stood for justice for ordinary people. Largely serving clients who live or have worked in Washington and Oregon, BOUL is active in courts throughout this region, and has recovered over $1 billion on behalf of Pacific Northwest asbestos victims. Recently, BOUL has secured jury verdicts of $13 million for a Kent, WA woman for medical malpractice involving cosmetic surgery; $30 million for an Oregon man diagnosed with mesothelioma; $11.2 million for a mesothelioma victim in Tacoma, Washington; $10 million for “take home” shipyard asbestos exposure in Seattle, Washington.
Related Reading:
