Asbestos Lawsuit History

Asbestos suits are dealt with in a complicated manner. Levy Konigsberg LLP attorneys have been a major part of asbestos trials that are consolidated in New York, which resolve a significant number of claims at one time.

The law requires manufacturers of dangerous products to warn consumers about the dangers. This is especially true for companies who manufacture, mine, or mill asbestos or asbestos-containing items.

The First Case

One of the earliest asbestos lawsuits ever filed was filed by a construction worker named Clarence Borel. Borel claimed that asbestos insulation manufacturers did not warn workers of the dangers of inhaling asbestos. Asbestos lawsuits can award victims compensatory damages for a variety of injuries that result from exposure to asbestos. Compensatory damage can include a sum of money for discomfort and pain as well as lost earnings, medical costs and property damage. Depending on where you live, victims can also receive punitive damages to punish the company for their wrongdoing.

Despite warnings for years, many companies in the United States continued to use asbestos lawyer lawsuit. By 1910, the global annual production of asbestos was more than 109,000 metric tons. This enormous consumption of asbestos was fueled by the need for low-cost and durable construction materials to meet population growth. Growing demand for low-cost asbestos products, which were mass-produced, led to the rapid growth of the manufacturing and mining industries.

By the 1980s, asbestos producers faced thousands of lawsuits from mesothelioma and other asbestos disease victims. Many asbestos companies were forced to go bankrupt and others settled lawsuits with large sums of money. However the lawsuits and other investigations showed an enormous amount of fraud and corruption by plaintiff's attorneys and asbestos companies. The resulting litigation led to the conviction of a number of individuals under the Racketeer corrupt and influenced organizations Act (RICO).

In a limestone building that was built in the Neoclassical style located on Trade Street in Charlotte's Central Business District, Judge George Hodges uncovered a decades-old scheme used by lawyers to defraud defendants and drain bankruptcy trusts. His "estimation ruling" dramatically changed the landscape of asbestos litigation.

Hodges found, for instance that in one instance an attorney claimed to a jury that his client was only exposed to Garlock products, when the evidence showed a larger scope of exposure. Hodges discovered that lawyers made up claims, concealed information and asbestos lawsuit History even made up evidence to obtain asbestos victims' settlements.

Other judges have also discovered legal evasions in asbestos cases, but not as extensive as the Garlock case. The legal community hopes the ongoing revelations of fraud and fraud in asbestos cases will lead to more accurate estimates of how much companies owe to asbestos victims.

The Second Case

The negligence of companies who manufactured and sold asbestos-related products has led to the development mesothelioma among thousands of Americans. Asbestos lawsuits have been filed both in federal and state courts. The victims often receive substantial compensation.

Clarence Borel was the first asbestos case to receive a verdict. He suffered from mesothelioma following 33 years of working as an insulation worker. The court determined that the manufacturers of asbestos-containing insulation are liable for his injuries due to the fact that they failed to warn him about the dangers of exposure to asbestos. This ruling opens up the possibility of future asbestos lawsuits being successful and ending in awards or verdicts for victims.

Many companies were trying to limit their liabilities as asbestos litigation grew. This was done by paying "experts" who were not reputable to conduct research and produce papers that could support their arguments in court. They also employed their resources to try to distort public perceptions of the facts about the asbestos's health hazards.

Class action lawsuits are among of the most troubling trends in asbestos litigation. These lawsuits permit the families of victims to take on multiple defendants at one time instead of filing individual lawsuits against every company. While this tactic may be helpful in some cases, it can lead to a lot of confusion and wasted time for asbestos victims and their families. In addition the courts have a long tradition of refusing class action lawsuits in asbestos cases.

Another legal strategy used by asbestos defendants is to search for legal rulings that assist them in limiting the scope of their liabilities. They are attempting to get judges to agree only manufacturers of asbestos-containing products should be held accountable. They also want to limit the types damages that a juror can award. This is a very important issue because it will affect the amount of money a victim receives in their asbestos lawsuit asbestos.

The Third Case

In the late 1960s, mesothelioma cases began appearing on the courts' docket. The disease is caused by exposure to asbestos, a mineral many companies once used in various construction materials. Patients with mesothelioma filed lawsuits against companies who exposed them.

The mesothelioma latency time is long, meaning that patients don't typically show symptoms until decades after exposure to asbestos. Mesothelioma is more difficult to prove than other asbestos-related diseases due to its long period of latency. Additionally, the businesses who used asbestos typically concealed their use of asbestos because they knew that it was dangerous.

Many asbestos-related firms declared bankruptcy as a result of the litigation firestorm surrounding mesothelioma suits. This allowed them to reorganize under court supervision and set money aside to cover current and future asbestos liabilities. Companies like Johns-Manville set aside more than $30 billion to pay victims of mesothelioma and various asbestos-related diseases.

But this also led to an attempt by defendants to get legal rulings that could limit their liability in asbestos lawsuits. Some defendants, for example have tried to claim that their asbestos-containing products were not made, but were utilized in conjunction with asbestos material that was subsequently purchased. The British case of Lubbe v Cape Plc (2000, UKHL 41) is a good example of this argument.

In the 1980s and 1990s, New York was home to a number of major asbestos trials, like the Brooklyn Navy Yard trials and the Con Edison Powerhouse trials. Levy Konigsberg LLP attorneys served as the leading counsel in these trials and other asbestos litigation major in New York. These consolidated trials, which combined hundreds of asbestos cancer law lawyer mesothelioma settlement claims into a single trial, helped to reduce the number of asbestos lawsuits and resulted in significant savings to the companies involved in the litigation.

Another significant change in asbestos litigation occurred with the adoption of Senate Bill 15 and House Bill 1325 in 2005. These legal reforms required that the evidence used in an asbestos lawsuit be founded on peer-reviewed scientific studies instead of relying on speculation and supposition from a hired-gun expert witness. These laws, as well as the passage of similar reforms, effectively doused the litigation firestorm.

The Fourth Case

As asbestos companies ran out of defenses to the lawsuits filed by victims, they began to attack their adversaries and the lawyers who represent them. The goal of this strategy is to make the plaintiffs look guilty. This is a shady strategy to distract attention from the fact that asbestos companies were responsible asbestos exposure and mesothelioma.

This method has proven to be very effective. People who have been diagnosed with mesothelioma must seek out a reputable firm as soon as they can. Even if you don't think you have mesothelioma, an experienced firm can provide evidence and build a strong claim.

In the early days, asbestos litigation was characterized by a variety of legal claims. Workers who were exposed at work filed lawsuits against companies that mined or manufactured asbestos products. A second group of litigants comprised those exposed at home or in public structures suing employers and property owners. Later, people diagnosed with mesothelioma or any other asbestos-related illnesses, sue companies that sell asbestos-containing products, manufacturers of protective equipment, banks that funded projects using asbestos, and numerous other parties.

One of the most significant developments in asbestos litigation was in Texas. Asbestos firms in Texas were specialized in bringing asbestos cases and taking the cases to court in large numbers. Baron & Budd was one of these firms, which became famous for its secret method of instructing clients to select specific defendants and to file cases without regard to accuracy. This practice of "junk science" in asbestos lawsuits was later rescinded by courts and legislative remedies were enacted which helped to stop the litigation raging.

Asbestos victims can claim fair compensation, including for medical expenses. Contact a reputable law firm that specializes in asbestos litigation to ensure that you get the compensation you're entitled to. A lawyer can review your personal circumstances and determine if you're in a viable mesothelioma case and help you pursue justice against asbestos companies that harmed you.