Pulmosan Can't Claim Non-Airfed Hood Isn't Dangerous, Plaintiff Says

ABERDEEN, Miss. - A former sandblaster who used a non-airfed hood manufactured by Pulmosan Safety Equipment Corp. has filed a motion for summary judgment to prevent the defendant from arguing the product isn't dangerous. Riggle v. Pulmosan Safety Equipment Company, et al., No. CV-05-230-PFM (Miss. Cir. Ct., Monroe Cty.).

Dennis Riggle, whose silicosis claim is expected to go to trial next year in Monroe County Circuit Court, filed the motion Oct. 30, claiming that Pulmosan is collaterally estopped from contesting claims that its H-30 non-airfed hood is unreasonably dangerous as a matter of law.

Riggle worked as a sandblaster between …