Asbestos Lawsuit History

Since the 1980s, a number of asbestos-producing businesses and employers have been bankrupted, and victims are compensated through trust funds for bankruptcy as well as individual lawsuits. Some plaintiffs have claimed that their cases were the subject of shady legal maneuvering.

Many asbestos-related cases have gone before the United States Supreme Court. The court has handled cases involving class action settlements that attempted to limit liability.

Anna Pirskowski

Anna Pirskowski, a woman who died in the mid-1900s from asbestos-related ailments, was a prominent case. It was a significant incident because it led to asbestos lawsuits being filed against a variety of manufacturers. This, in turn, led to an increase in claims filed by those diagnosed with lung cancer, mesothelioma or other ailments. These lawsuits led to the creation trust funds that were used by banksrupt companies to pay asbestos-related victims. These funds also allow asbestos victims and their families to receive compensation for medical expenses as well as pain and suffering.

People who have been exposed to asbestos frequently bring the material home to their families. When this happens, the family members breathe in the asbestos, causing them to suffer from the same symptoms as the asbestos mesothelioma lawsuit-exposed worker. Some of these symptoms include chronic respiratory problems lung cancer, mesothelioma.

Many asbestos companies knew that asbestos was dangerous but they minimized the dangers, and chose not to inform their employees or customers. Johns Manville Company actually refused to allow life insurance companies to enter their buildings to place warning signs. The company's own research, however, proved asbestos' carcinogenicity as early as the 1930s.

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) was founded in 1971, but it did not begin to regulate asbestos until the 1970s. At this point health professionals and doctors were already trying to warn the public to asbestos' dangers. These efforts were generally successful. The media and lawsuits helped raise awareness, however many asbestos firms resisted calls for more stringent regulation.

Despite the fact that asbestos has been banned in the United States, mesothelioma continues to be a serious problem for people across the country. Asbest is still present in commercial and residential buildings even before the 1970s. It is important that individuals diagnosed with mesothelioma or any other asbestos-related disease seek legal advice. An experienced lawyer can assist them in obtaining the justice they deserve. They will be able to understand the complicated laws that apply to this type case and will ensure that they receive the best possible result.

Claude Tomplait

In 1966, Claude Tomplait was diagnosed with asbestosis and filed the first lawsuit against asbestos product manufacturers. In his lawsuit, he alleged that the manufacturers had failed to warn about the dangers of their insulation products. This important case triggered the floodgates of tens of thousands of similar lawsuits, which continue to be filed.

The majority of asbestos litigation involves claims by those who worked in the construction industry and used asbestos-containing products. These people include plumbers, electricians, carpenters as well as drywall installers and roofers. Some of these workers are suffering from lung cancer, mesothelioma and other asbestos-related ailments. Some of these workers are seeking compensation in the event that their loved ones have died.

Millions of dollars may be awarded as damages in a lawsuit brought against the maker of asbestos products. These funds can be used to pay for the medical expenses of the past and in the future, Asbestos Lawsuit History lost wages and suffering and pain. This money can also be used to cover travel expenses funeral and burial costs and loss of companionship.

Asbestos litigation has forced a number of companies into bankruptcy and established asbestos trust funds to compensate victims. It has also placed a strain on federal and state courts. It has also consumed many hours of witnesses and attorneys.

The asbestos litigation was a costly and how long does a asbestos lawsuit take-running process that lasted many decades. But, it was successful in exposing asbestos business executives who hid the asbestos facts for years. They were aware of the dangers and pressured workers to hide their health issues.

After many years of trial and appeal, the court decided in favor of Tomplait. The court's decision was taken from a 1965 edition of the Restatement of Torts that states, "A manufacturer is liable for injuries to a user or consumer of his product if the product is supplied in a defective condition not accompanied by adequate warning."

Jacqueline Watson, Tomplait's wife, was awarded damages by the court after the verdict. Watson passed away before the final award was given by the court. Kazan Law volunteered to take the case to the California Supreme Court to overturn the appellate court's decision.

Clarence Borel

Workers' compensation claims were filed by asbestos insulators like Borel in the late 1950s. They complained of respiratory ailments and thickening fingertip tissue (called "finger clubbing"). But asbestos companies minimized the health risks associated with asbestos exposure. The truth would only be widely known in the 1960s, as more medical research connected asbestos exposure to respiratory illnesses like mesothelioma and asbestosis.

In 1969, Borel sued manufacturers of asbestos cancer lawsuit lawyer mesothelioma settlement-containing insulation materials for not warning about the dangers of their products. He claimed that he contracted asbestosis and mesothelioma as a result of working with their insulation for thirty-three years. The court ruled that the defendants were required to warn.

The defendants argue that they didn't commit any crime because they knew about asbestos's dangers well before 1968. They cite testimony from experts that asbestosis doesn't show its symptoms until fifteen or twenty, or even 25 years after the initial exposure to asbestos. If the experts are right they could be liable for injuries that other workers may have had asbestosis prior to Borel.

The defendants also claim that they aren't accountable for the mesothelioma of Borel, as it was his choice to continue working with asbestos-containing products. Kazan Law gathered evidence that showed the defendants' companies were aware of asbestos' dangers and hid the risks for many years.

The 1970s saw a rise in asbestos-related lawsuits, even though the Claude Tomplait class action case being the first. Asbestos-related claims flooded the courts and a large number of workers were diagnosed with asbestos-related illnesses. In response to the lawsuit asbestos-related businesses, they went into bankruptcy. Trust funds were established to compensate victims of asbestos-related illnesses. As the litigation grew, it became clear that asbestos-related companies were accountable for the harm caused by their toxic products. The asbestos industry was forced into reforming their business practices. Many asbestos-related lawsuits are resolved today for millions of dollars.

Stanley Levy

Stanley Levy has written a number of articles that have been published in journals of scholarly research. He has also addressed these issues at several seminars and legal conferences. He is an active member of the American Bar Association and has been a member of various committees dealing mesothelioma and asbestos as well as mass torts. The firm he runs, Levy Phillips & Konigsberg represents more than 500 asbestos victims across the country.

The firm charges 33 percent plus the cost of expenses for any compensation it receives for clients. It has obtained some of the biggest verdicts in asbestos litigation, including a $22 million settlement for a mesothelioma patient who worked at the New York City Steel Plant. The firm represents 132 Brooklyn Navy Yard Plaintiffs and has filed claims on behalf of thousands of people suffering from mesothelioma or other asbestos-related illnesses.

Despite its achievements, the company faces increased criticism for its involvement in asbestos litigation. It has been accused of spreading conspiracy theories, attacking the jury system and skewing the statistics. The company has also been accused of pursuing fraud claims. In response to this the company has announced an open defense fund and is seeking donations from both corporations and individuals.

Another issue is the fact that a number of defendants are challenging the world-wide scientific consensus that asbestos even at low levels, can cause mesothelioma. They have used money paid by asbestos companies to hire "experts" to publish articles in academic journals that back their arguments.

In addition to arguing over the scientific consensus regarding asbestos, attorneys are looking at other aspects of the case. They argue, for instance regarding the constructive notice required to file an asbestos claim. They argue that to be eligible for compensation, the victim must actually have been aware of the dangers of asbestos. They also argue over the compensation ratios of various asbestos-related diseases.

Lawyers for plaintiffs argue that there is a substantial interest in compensating people who have been affected by mesothelioma and related diseases. They claim that the asbestos lawyer lawsuit-producing companies should be aware of the risks, and they should be held accountable.