Keywords: Texas law, preconception torts, Texas Instruments, workplace injury, Texas Workers Compensation Act

The Supreme Court of Delaware recently held that Texas law did not recognize preconception torts and that the Texas Workers Compensation Act barred a claim for a preconception tort brought by a child whose injuries were allegedly caused by his father's workplace exposure to toxic chemicals. Peters v. Texas Instruments, Inc., 2013 WL 85245 (Del. Jan. 8, 2013).

Christopher Peters was allegedly born with severe birth defects, including retinoblastoma. Christopher and his parents sued Texas Instruments, alleging that Christopher's father was exposed to chemicals while working in Texas Instruments' semiconductor manufacturing facilities in Texas which damaged the father's sperm and caused Christopher's birth defects.

The Superior Court of Delaware held that Christopher's claims were derivative of his father's alleged workplace injury and, thus, were barred by the Texas Workers Compensation Act. As the court wrote, "Christopher's injury is entirely dependent on his father's alleged workplace exposure." According to plaintiffs' theory of causation, if the father's sperm had not been damaged at work, Christopher would not have been born with birth defects.

The court also held that preconception tort liability is not a separate tort recognized under Texas law and that there is no duty to an un-conceived child, explaining that "this Court will not recognize [preconception] tort[s] in the absence of [controlling state law] establishing it."

On appeal, the Supreme Court of Delaware affirmed the Superior Court's decision without analysis.

Peters is important in the expanding area of preconception torts and birth defect claims from alleged parental exposures. There have been dozens of cases filed in the United States against semiconductor manufacturers that allege similar claims with several still pending in Delaware and other courts. Moreover, the potential for claims arising out of alleged preconception liability, birth defects and alleged chemical exposure expands well beyond the semiconductor industry. Peters helps clarify the limits on an employer's potential liability to the children, even as yet un-conceived children, of employees.

Learn more about our Product Liability & Mass Torts practice.

Visit us at mayerbrown.com

Mayer Brown is a global legal services provider comprising legal practices that are separate entities (the "Mayer Brown Practices"). The Mayer Brown Practices are: Mayer Brown LLP and Mayer Brown Europe – Brussels LLP, both limited liability partnerships established in Illinois USA; Mayer Brown International LLP, a limited liability partnership incorporated in England and Wales (authorized and regulated by the Solicitors Regulation Authority and registered in England and Wales number OC 303359); Mayer Brown, a SELAS established in France; Mayer Brown JSM, a Hong Kong partnership and its associated entities in Asia; and Tauil & Chequer Advogados, a Brazilian law partnership with which Mayer Brown is associated. "Mayer Brown" and the Mayer Brown logo are the trademarks of the Mayer Brown Practices in their respective jurisdictions.

© Copyright 2013. The Mayer Brown Practices. All rights reserved.

This Mayer Brown article provides information and comments on legal issues and developments of interest. The foregoing is not a comprehensive treatment of the subject matter covered and is not intended to provide legal advice. Readers should seek specific legal advice before taking any action with respect to the matters discussed herein.