In Smith v. Union Carbide Corp., 130 So. 3d 66 (Miss. 2013) (No. 2010-CA-00455), the Mississippi Supreme Court reviewed a trial court ruling granting defendants’ motion for judgment nov based on the so-called “frequency, regularity, and proximity” test.  This test requires a court to determine whether the plaintiff has submitted evidence sufficient to establish that it was “exposed to a particular asbestos-contained product made by [defendant]” with “sufficient frequency and regularity” and “in proximity to where [plaintiff] actually worked” that it is probable that the exposure caused the injuries.  The Mississippi Supreme Court held that the “frequency, regularity and proximity” test is properly used for evaluating whether plaintiff has made a prima facie case of liability, and thus is to be applied only in determining whether to grant a summary judgment or a directed verdict for defendant.  Once the jury reviews the evidence and reaches a verdict, however, the decision whether to grant or deny a motion for JNOV must be based on whether the plaintiff submitted evidence to support the jury’s finding in its favor on each of the elements set forth in the Mississippi Products Liability Act for product liability claims.  Consequently, the court reversed the grant of JNOV for defendants and remanded the case to the trial court to reconsider the defendants’ motion for JNOV under the proper standard.