Photo of Bexis

Last year, in Meyer v. Fluor Corp., 220 S.W.2d 712 (Mo. 2007), the Missouri Supreme Court broke what had otherwise been a clean sweep and recognized medical monitoring claims in certain circumstances. Meyer was a true toxic tort case, involving children allegedly exposed to lead by smelter operators.
Earlier today, Judge Dorr of the Western District of Missouri refused to extend Meyer “outside of the toxic tort context.” Ratliff v. Mentor Corp., 569 F.Supp.2d 926, 928 (W.D. Mo. Aug. 5, 2008) (link to slip opinion here). In Ratliff, plaintiff filed a putative class action seeking medical monitoring for the Missouri statewide class of plaintiffs who received ObTape, an implantable synthetic suburethral sling used to treat stress urinary incontinence in women. Noting that “[t]he Missouri Supreme Court chose its words carefully in Meyer,” Judge Dorr made the Erie prediction “that the Missouri Supreme Court would dismiss medical monitoring claims that do not result from exposure to toxic substances.” Id. at 4.
The court dismissed the complaint with prejudice.