Asbestos Litigation Reform – H.B. 328

Utah

Address over-naming in asbestos cases and requires plaintiffs with nonmalignant conditions to demonstrate impairment pursuant to objective medical criteria.  Within twenty-one days after the day on which the first answer is filed in response to the plaintiff’s complaint, the plaintiff must provide the parties with a sworn declaration stating the evidence providing the basis for each claim against each defendant and include supporting documentation.  The court, on motion by a defendant, shall dismiss a plaintiff’s asbestos action without prejudice as to any defendant whose product or premises is not identified in the required disclosures.  The court may not dismiss a plaintiff’s asbestos claim upon a showing of good cause by the plaintiff.  In addition, within ninety days after the day on which the plaintiff files a complaint in an asbestos action alleging a nonmalignant condition, the plaintiff must file a detailed narrative medical report and diagnosis, signed under oath by a qualified physician and accompanied by supporting test results, constituting prima facie evidence that the exposed individual has a physical impairment for which exposure to asbestos was a substantial contributing factor.

Share This Post:
The American Tort Reform Association is the nation’s first organization dedicated exclusively to reforming the civil justice system through education and legislative enactment.

To receive occasional updates from ATRA, enter your email address:
By subscribing, you agree to our Privacy Policy and consent to receive updates.
© 2026 ATRA. All rights reserved.