4 provision limiting liability for one company in asbestos 4 tort reform provision. 4, and applicable to only one company, is an unconstitutional retroactive law. The Supreme Court concluded in Robinson v. Crown Cork Seal Inc. that Texas Civil Practice Remedies Burberry Code Chapter 149, which the state Legislature enacted as part of the sweeping 2003 tort reforms, "significantly impacts a substantial interest" that Barbara Robinson has in a well-recognized Burberry Online cause of action, according to the majority opinion written by Justice Nathan Hecht. The high court also concluded that "the public interest served by Chapter 149 is slight," disagreeing with the 14th Court of Appeals holding Burberry Outlet that the purpose for which the statute was enacted is a valid exercise of the Legislature's police power. Hecht wrote that the Supreme Court's cases establish that the constitutional prohibition against retroactive laws "protects settled expectations that rules are to govern the play and not simply the score, and prevents the abuses of legislative power that arise when individuals or groups are singled out for special reward or punishment." The majority opinion provides the following background on the case: In 2002, Barbara and John Robinson sued Crown Cork, alleging that John had contacted mesothelioma from workplace exposure to asbestos products. The Robinsons named Crown Cork as one of the 21 defendants in Burberry handbag sale the suit and alleged that the defendants were jointly and severally liable. Navy from 1956 to 1976, he was exposed to asbestos products manufactured by the Mundet Cork Corp. and that when Crown Cork merged with Mundet, Crown Cork succeeded to Mundet's liabilities. Crown's predecessor merged with Mundet in February 1976. 4 by a more than a two-thirds vote during the 2003 session, Chapter 149 took effect on June 11, 2003, when the governor signed it. Crown promptly moved for summary judgment in the Robinsons' suit, which the trial court granted. John Robinson died days later. Barbara Robinson amended her petition to assert wrongful death and survival actions against Crown Cork and other defendants remaining in the case. Several defendants settled for amounts totaling $859,067. Robinson appealed to Houston Court, which affirmed the summary judgment in a 2-1 decision. In its decision in Crown Cork, the Supreme Court cited three factors that courts of appeals should consider in determining whether a statute violates the Texas Constitution's prohibition against retroactive laws and those are: the nature and strength of the public interest the statute serves as evidenced by the Legislature's factual findings; the nature of the prior right that the statute impairs; and the extent of the impairment of that right. Justice Dale Wainwright wrote in a dissenting opinion, in which Justice Phil Johnson joined, "The Court's new balancing test reaches the wrong result" and ignores an important principle. "The constitutional retroactivity doctrine does not protect an asserted entitlement burberry handbags outlet to property one does not own, and until a final judgment in the case, we do not know whether a claim will be vindicated or refuted," Wainwright wrote. Justices David Medina and Don Willett wrote concurring opinions. Justice Eva Guzman, formerly a 14th Court justice, did not participate in the case. Mundy Singley partner Jeff Mundy of Austin, Robinson's attorney, says the Supreme Court's ruling "is a very significant decision on Texas constitutional law. It clearly limits the Legislature's powers in passing retroactive laws." Former Texas Supreme Court Chief Justice Tom burberry outlet onlin Phillips, now a partner in Baker Botts in burberry handbags out Austin, represents Crown. Phillips did not immediately return a telephone call seeking comment. -- Mary Alice Robbins