Three Greatest Moments In Asbestos Litigation Defense History

Asbestos Litigation Defense

Cetrulo LLP has been widely recognized as a leader in asbestos litigation. The attorneys of the Firm are regularly invited to give presentations at national conferences. They are also knowledgeable in the myriad of issues that arise when litigating asbestos cases.

Research has proven that asbestos exposure causes lung damage and diseases. This includes mesothelioma, and lesser diseases such as asbestosis and pleural plaques.

Statute of limitations

In the majority of personal injury claims statutes limit the time limit within which a victim may file an action. In asbestos cases, statutes of limitations vary by state. They are also different from other personal injury claims since asbestos-related illnesses may take years to manifest.

Due to the delaying nature of mesothelioma as well as other asbestos-related diseases, the statute of limitation clock starts on the date of diagnosis, or death in wrongful death claims, rather than the date exposure. This discovery rule is the reason the victims and their families must consult an experienced New York mesothelioma lawyer as soon as possible.

There are many factors to consider when making an asbestos lawsuit. The statute of limitations what is asbestos litigation among the most important. The statute of limitations is the deadline that the victim has to file a lawsuit. In the event of a delay, it will result in the case being barred. The statute of limitations differs according to state, and the laws differ greatly in some states, but the majority allow between one and six years from when the victim was diagnosed with an asbestos-related disease.

In asbestos cases in which the defendants are involved, they will typically attempt to invoke the statute of limitations to defend against liability. For example, they may argue that the plaintiffs knew or ought to have known about their exposure and therefore were required to inform their employer. This is a common argument in mesothelioma lawsuits, and it can be difficult to prove for the victim.

Another defense that could be used in a asbestos case is that the defendants did not have the means or resources to inform the public about the dangers posed by the product. This is a complicated case and relies on the available evidence. In California, for example it was argued that the defendants lacked "state-ofthe-art" information and could not be expected to provide sufficient warnings.

Generally, it is best to file the asbestos lawsuit within the state where the victim's home. However, there are some circumstances in which it might be beneficial to file the lawsuit in another state. This usually has to do with the location of the employer or where the person was exposed to asbestos.

Bare Metal

The defense of bare metal is a typical strategy used by equipment manufacturers in asbestos litigation. The bare-metal defense claims that because their products left the plant as bare steel, they did not have a duty to inform about the dangers posed by asbestos-containing products later added by other parties, such as thermal insulating seals and flanges. This defense is accepted in some jurisdictions, but not all.

The Supreme Court's ruling in Air & Liquid Sys. Corp. v. DeVries changed that. The Court has ruled against the manufacturers' preferred bright line rule and instead created a new standard under which manufacturers have a responsibility to inform consumers if they know that its integrated product will be hazardous for the purpose it was designed for and has no reason to believe that the end customers will be aware of the risk.

This modification in law will make it more difficult for plaintiffs to file claims against equipment manufacturers. However, this is not the end. First, the DeVries decision does not apply to state-law claims that are founded on negligence or strict liability, and are not covered by federal maritime law statutes, including the Jones Act or the Maritime Claims Act.

Plaintiffs will continue to pursue a wider interpretation of the bare metal defense. In the asbestos litigation meaning Multi-District Litigation in Philadelphia, for example, a case was remanded back to an Illinois federal judge to determine whether that state recognizes this defense. The deceased plaintiff in this claim was a carpenter who was exposed to switchgear, turbines, and other asbestos litigation meaning-containing components at the Texaco refinery.

In the same case in Tennessee, an Tennessee judge has stated that he would take the third approach to the defense of bare-metal. The plaintiff in that case was a Tennessee Eastman chemical plant mechanic who was diagnosed with mesothelioma while working on equipment that was repaired or replaced by third-party contractors which included the Equipment Defendants. The judge in the case ruled that bare metal defenses apply to cases like this. The Supreme Court's DeVries decision will impact how judges use the bare-metal defense in other contexts.

Defendants' Experts

Asbestos lawsuits are complicated and require skilled attorneys with a deep knowledge of both legal and medical issues, as well as access to top experts. Attorneys at EWH have decades of experience assisting clients in various asbestos litigation cases, such as investigating claims, developing strategic budgets and plans for managing litigation in hiring and retaining experts and defending defendants' and plaintiffs' expert testimony during deposition and at trial.

Typically, asbestos cases require the testimony of medical professionals like pathologists and radiologists who testify on X-rays or CT scans that reveal scarring of lung tissue typical of asbestos exposure. A pulmonologist can also provide evidence of symptoms, such as breathing difficulties and coughing, which are similar to those of mesothelioma or other asbestos law and litigation-related diseases. Experts can provide a detailed account of the plaintiff's work history, including an analysis of their tax and social security and union records as well as job and employment details.

A forensic engineering or environmental science expert could be necessary to explain the reason for the asbestos exposure. These experts can aid defense attorneys argue that the asbestos exposure did not occur at the workplace, but brought home by workers' clothing or by airborne particles.

Many plaintiffs' lawyers will bring in economic loss experts to determine the financial losses suffered by the victims. These experts can calculate the amount of money a person has lost due to their disease and the impact it had on his or her life. They can also testify to costs like medical bills and the cost of hiring someone else to complete household chores that a person cannot complete.

It is important that defendants challenge the plaintiffs expert witnesses, especially in the event that they have testified on hundreds or dozens of asbestos claims. If they repeat their testimony, these experts may lose credibility among jurors.

In asbestos law & litigation cases, defendants may also seek summary judgment in cases where they can demonstrate that the evidence does not show that the plaintiff suffered injury due to exposure to the defendant's products. A judge will not issue a summary judgment merely because a defendant has pointed out weaknesses in the plaintiff's evidence.

Trial

The latency issues involved in asbestos cases mean that getting significant information can be almost impossible. The time between exposure and the appearance of the disease can be measured in years. To establish the facts on which to build a claim, it is necessary to look over an individual's job history. This often involves a thorough review of social security as well as tax, union and financial records as along with interviews with coworkers and family members.

Asbestos victims often develop less serious illnesses like asbestosis prior to a mesothelioma diagnosis. Because of this, a defendant's ability to prove that a plaintiff's symptoms stem from a disease other than mesothelioma could be of significant importance in settlement negotiations.

In the past, certain attorneys employed this strategy to avoid responsibility and receive large awards. However, as the defense bar has developed, this approach is generally rejected by the courts. This is particularly true in federal courts, where judges often dismiss claims based on lack of evidence.

A thorough evaluation of each potential defendant is essential for a successful defense in asbestos litigation. This involves evaluating the severity and duration of the disease and the extent of the exposure. For asbestos Litigation meaning example, a woodworker who has mesothelioma will likely to suffer greater damage than someone who has asbestosis.

The Bowles Rice Asbestos Litigation Team defends asbestos-related lawsuits for manufacturers, distributors and suppliers contractors, employers, and property owners. Our lawyers have extensive experience serving as National Trial and National Coordinating Counsel, and are regularly appointed by the courts as liaison counsel to oversee the prosecution of asbestos litigation meaning dockets.

Asbestos cases can be complex and expensive. We assist our clients in understanding the risks associated with this type of litigation and assist them in establishing internal programs that will identify potential liability and safety issues. Contact us to find out how we can help protect your business's interests.