## Facts

- Frances Harig worked as a secretary for Reid-Hayden, Inc. from about 1940 to 1955.
- Reid-Hayden bought, made, sold, and installed asbestos products; some were fabricated and warehoused above the office where Harig worked.
- In the course of her employment, Harig allegedly inhaled asbestos dust from workplace files and areas where asbestos products were handled and stored.
- Around 1975, approximately two decades after her last alleged exposure, Harig was diagnosed with malignant mesothelioma.
- In 1976, she sued Johns-Manville Products Corporation, an alleged manufacturer/supplier of asbestos-containing products, asserting negligence, breach of warranty, and strict products liability.
- Johns-Manville asserted Maryland’s three-year statute of limitations, arguing the action accrued at last exposure (ending in 1955) and was time-barred.
- The certifying court submitted questions to Maryland’s highest court asking when negligence and strict liability claims accrue for a latent disease.

## Issues

1. For a latent disease allegedly caused by exposure to a harmful product, does a negligence cause of action accrue at last exposure or when the plaintiff knew or reasonably should have known of the disease and its probable cause?
2. For the same type of latent disease, does a strict products liability cause of action accrue at last exposure or upon discovery (actual or reasonable) of the injury and its probable causal connection to the product?

## Decision

- The Court of Appeals of Maryland held that Maryland’s discovery rule governs accrual for latent-disease claims.
- Negligence claims for latent disease accrue when the plaintiff discovered, or reasonably should have discovered, the nature of the injury and its probable cause.
- Strict products liability claims for latent disease accrue under the same discovery-based standard.
- The court answered the certified questions accordingly and left application (including timeliness under the three-year period) to the certifying court.

## Legal Principles

- Under Md. Code, Cts. & Jud. Proc. § 5-101, a civil action must be filed within three years from when it “accrues.”
- In latent-disease cases, “accrual” occurs when the plaintiff knows, or through reasonable diligence should know, (1) the nature of the injury and (2) its probable causal connection to the defendant’s conduct or product.
- Accrual is not fixed at the time of the defendant’s alleged wrongful act or the plaintiff’s last exposure when the injury is not reasonably discoverable until later.
- The discovery rule applies based on the practical discoverability of the harm, not on the formal tort label; thus it applies to both negligence and strict products liability in latent disease product cases.
- The discovery rule does not eliminate limitations; it postpones commencement of the limitations period until a reasonable discovery point, after which the statutory period runs.

## Conclusion

Maryland applied the discovery rule to latent-disease claims arising from asbestos exposure, holding that both negligence and strict products liability actions accrue when the plaintiff knew or reasonably should have known of the disease and its probable cause, rather than at the time of last exposure.


Harig v. Johns-Manville Prods. Corp., 394 A.2d 299 (Md. 1978)