Asbestos Litigation Defense

Cetrulo LLP has been widely acknowledged as a pioneer 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 in trying to defend asbestos cases.

Research has shown that asbestos exposure causes lung damage and disease. This includes mesothelioma as well as lesser illnesses like asbestosis and plaques in the pleural cavity.

Statute of Limitations

In the majority of personal injury cases the statute of limitations sets a deadline for how long after an accident or injury, the victim can start a lawsuit. For asbestos-related cases, the statutes of limitations vary according to the state. They also differ 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 limitations clock begins at the date of diagnosis (or death in cases of wrongful death) instead of the time of exposure. This discovery rule is why victims and their families should seek out as soon as they can with a reputable New York asbestos lawyer.

When making an asbestos lawsuit, there are many things that need to be considered. The statute of limitations is one of the most crucial. The statute of limitations is the deadline at which the victim has to make a claim. Failure to do so could result in the lawsuit being barred. The statute of limitations is different from state to state, and the laws differ greatly. However, most allow between one and six year after the victim was diagnosed.

During an asbestos case when the defendants often attempt to invoke the statute of limitations as a defense against liability. For instance, they could argue that the plaintiffs knew or ought to have known about their exposure and therefore had a legal obligation to inform their employer. This is an often used argument in mesothelioma lawsuits and it can be difficult for the plaintiff to prove.

A defendant in an asbestos case could be able to claim that they didn't have the resources or the means to inform people about the dangers of the product. This is a complex case that relies heavily on the available evidence. In California for instance it was argued that the defendants lacked "state-ofthe-art" information and could not be expected give adequate warnings.

In general, it is best to file an asbestos lawsuit in the state where the victim resides. In certain circumstances it might be beneficial to file a lawsuit in a state other than the victim's. This is usually to do with where the employer is located or where the worker was first exposed to asbestos.

Bare Metal

The bare metal defense is a typical strategy used by equipment manufacturers in asbestos litigation. It asserts that because their products left the factory as bare metal, they had no obligation to warn consumers of the risks of asbestos-containing materials that were added by other parties at a later date for example, thermal insulation and flange gaskets. This defense is recognized in some jurisdictions but not all.

The Supreme Court's decision in Air & Liquid Sys. Corp. v. DeVries changed that. The Court rejected the preferred rule of manufacturers' bright line rule, and instead created an entirely new standard that states that a manufacturer has a duty to warn if it knows that its product will be dangerous for its intended purposes and has no reason to believe that its end users will realize that risk.

While this change in law may make it harder for plaintiffs to prevail in claims against manufacturers of equipment, it's not the end of the tale. For one, the DeVries decision is not applicable to state-law claims that are based on negligence or strict liability and are not covered under federal maritime law statutes, like the Jones Act or the Maritime Claims Act.

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

In a similar case a judge in Tennessee has signaled that he will take a different approach to the bare metal defense. In the case, the plaintiff was a Tennessee Eastman Chemical Plant mechanic who was diagnosed with mesothelioma. He had worked on equipment that was repaired or replaced by third party contractors, including Equipment Defendants. The judge in the case ruled that bare metal defenses apply to cases like this. The Supreme Court's decision in DeVries will affect the way judges will apply the bare-metal defense in other cases for example, those involving state law tort claims.

Defendants' Experts

Asbestos lawsuits are complex and require skilled attorneys with a thorough understanding of medical and legal issues, as well as access to top expert witnesses. EWH attorneys have years of experience in latest asbestos litigation litigation, which includes investigating claims, preparing strategies for managing litigation and budgets, injury identifying and bringing in experts as well as defending plaintiffs and defendants with expert testimony in depositions and trials.

Most asbestos cases require the testimony from medical professionals such as a radiologist or pathologist. They can testify that X-rays and CT scans show the typical scarring of lung tissue due to asbestos exposure. A pulmonologist can also testify on symptoms, like breathing difficulties, which are similar to mesothelioma and other latest asbestos litigation-related illnesses. Experts can also provide full details of the work performed by the plaintiff, such as an examination of the worker's union, tax, and social security documents.

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

A lot of plaintiffs' lawyers employ economic loss experts to assess the financial loss suffered by victims. These experts can calculate the amount of money a person lost as a result of their illness and its effect on his or her lifestyle. They can also testify about expenses such as medical bills as well as the cost of hiring someone to perform household chores that one can no longer perform.

It is essential that plaintiffs challenge defendants expert witnesses, especially when they have testified to hundreds or dozens of asbestos litigation group claims. Experts can lose credibility before jurors when their testimony is repeated.

Defendants in asbestos cases can also apply for summary judgment if they can demonstrate that the evidence doesn't show that the plaintiff was injured caused by their exposure to the defendant's product. However the judge will not accept summary judgment simply because the defendant points to holes in the plaintiff's proof.

Going to Trial

The delays involved in asbestos cases mean that getting significant information can be almost impossible. The time between exposure and the onset of disease can be measured in years. As such, establishing the facts upon which to create a case, requires a review of a person's entire employment history. This involves a thorough review of the individual's tax, social security and union records, as well as financial documents, as well as interviews with family members and co-workers.

Asbestos sufferers are often diagnosed with less serious illnesses such as asbestosis prior to diagnosis of mesothelioma. Because of this the ability of a defendant to demonstrate that a plaintiff's symptoms might be due to a different illness that is not mesothelioma-related is crucial in settlement negotiations.

In the past, a few attorneys have used this strategy to deny liability and obtain large awards. However, as the defense bar has evolved, this approach has been largely rejected by the courts. This is especially true in federal courts, where judges routinely dismiss claims based on the absence of evidence.

As a result, an accurate assessment of each potential defendant is crucial to an effective asbestos litigation online defense. This involves evaluating the severity and length of the illness as well as the type of the exposure. For instance, a carpenter who has mesothelioma will likely be awarded higher damages than a person who has only suffered from asbestosis.

The Bowles Rice Asbestos Litigation Team defends asbestos-related litigation on behalf of manufacturers suppliers and distributors, contractors, employers, and property owners. Our lawyers have been appointed as National Trial and National Coordination Counsel and are frequently appointed as liaison counsel by courts to handle asbestos dockets.

Asbestos litigation can be complex and costly. We assist our clients to understand the risks involved in this type of litigation. We collaborate with them to develop internal programs designed to proactively detect potential safety and liability concerns. Contact us today to learn more about how our firm can protect your business's interests.