Asbestos Litigation Defense

Cetrulo LLP what is asbestos litigation widely recognized as a leader in asbestos litigation defense. The Firm's attorneys are regularly invited to present at national conferences. They are also knowledgeable on the numerous issues that arise in trying to defend asbestos cases.

Research has proven that exposure to asbestos causes lung damage and disease. This includes mesothelioma, and less serious diseases like asbestosis and pleural plaques.

Statute of Limitations

In the majority of personal injury claims statutes limit the time period after which a victim may file an action. For asbestos-related cases, the statute of limitations differs by state. They also differ from other personal injury lawsuits because asbestos-related diseases can take a long time to manifest.

Due to the delayed nature of mesothelioma and other asbestos-related diseases the statute of limitations begins at the time of diagnosis (or death, in wrongful death cases) instead of the time of exposure. This discovery rule is the reason why the families of victims need to work as soon as they can with a reputable New York asbestos lawyer.

There are a variety of factors to consider when making an asbestos lawsuit. The statute of limitations is among the most important. This is the time limit which the victim must file the lawsuit by, and failing to file the lawsuit will result in the case being barred. The time limit for filing a lawsuit varies by state, and the laws differ widely, but most allow for between one and six years from the time 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 as a defense against liability. For instance, they might argue that the plaintiffs were aware or should have been aware of their exposure and thus had a legal obligation to inform their employer. This is a common argument in mesothelioma cases and can be difficult for the plaintiff to prove.

Another possible defense in a asbestos case is that the defendants didn't have the resources or means to inform the public about the dangers associated with the product. This is a complex argument and largely depends on the evidence available. For instance, it has been successfully argued in California that defendants didn't have "state-of-the-art" knowledge and thus could not be expected to provide adequate warnings.

Generally, it is best to file the asbestos lawsuit in the state where the victim's home. In certain situations, it may make sense to bring a lawsuit in a different state than the victim's. This usually has to do with the location of the employer or where the person was exposed to asbestos litigation wiki.

Bare Metal

The bare-metal defense is a strategy used by equipment manufacturers in asbestos litigation. The bare-metal defense claims that, because their products left the plant as untreated steel, they did not have a duty to warn about the dangers posed by asbestos containing materials added later by other parties, genius.decore.co.kr for instance thermal insulating seals and flanges. This defense has been embraced in certain states, but it's not available under federal law in all states.

The Supreme Court's decision in Air & Liquid Sys. Corp. v. DeVries changed that. The Court did not accept the bright-line rule that manufacturers prefer and instead formulated a standard that requires a manufacturer to warn if they know that their integrated product is dangerous for its intended purpose and have no reason to believe that the end users will realize this danger.

This change in law makes it more difficult for plaintiffs to file claims against equipment manufacturers. However, this is not the end of the story. For one, the DeVries decision is not applicable to state-law claims based on negligence or strict liability, and are not covered by federal maritime law statutes, such as the Jones Act or the Maritime Claims Act.

Plaintiffs will continue to pursue a broader interpretation of the defense of bare metal. For example in the asbestos MDL case in Philadelphia the case has been remanded back to an Illinois federal court to decide whether the state is able to recognize the defense. The plaintiff who died in this instance was a carpenter who was exposed to turbines, switchgear and other asbestos-containing equipment at an Texaco refinery.

In a similar case, a judge in Tennessee has signaled that he will adopt a third view of the bare metal defense. The plaintiff in that case was a Tennessee Eastman chemical plant mechanic who was diagnosed with mesothelioma after working on equipment that was repaired or replaced by contractors of third party, including the Equipment Defendants. The judge in the case decided that the bare metal defense is applicable to cases similar to this. The Supreme Court's DeVries decision will influence how judges apply the bare-metal defense in other cases.

Defendants' Experts

Asbestos lawsuits are complex and require skilled lawyers with a thorough knowledge of legal and medical issues, as well as access to top experts. EWH attorneys have years of experience in asbestos litigation, including investigating claims, preparing strategies for managing litigation and budgets, as well as identifying and hiring experts and defending plaintiffs as well as defendants expert testimony at depositions and trials.

In most cases, asbestos cases require the testimony from medical professionals like a radioologist or pathologist. They can testify that X-rays and CT scans show the typical scarring of lung tissue caused by asbestos exposure. A pulmonologist may also testify regarding symptoms, such as difficulty in breathing, that are similar to mesothelioma and other asbestos-related illnesses. Experts can provide an in-depth report of the plaintiff's job history, including an analysis of their tax and social security documents, irken.co.kr union and job information.

A forensic engineer or environmental scientist may be required to explain the cause of the asbestos law & litigation exposure. Experts in these fields can assist defendants argue that the alleged asbestos was not exposed in the workplace and instead was brought home through clothing worn by workers or in the air outside (a common defense in mesothelioma cases).

A lot of plaintiffs' lawyers employ experts in economic loss to determine the monetary losses incurred by victims. They can estimate the amount of money a victim lost as a result of their illness and the impact it had on his or her lifestyle. They can also testify about expenses like medical bills and the cost of hiring someone to perform household chores that a person is unable to complete.

It is essential for defendants to challenge the experts of the plaintiff, particularly when they have given evidence in dozens, or hundreds of other asbestos-related claims. If they repeat their testimony, the experts may lose credibility among jurors.

In asbestos cases, defendants can also seek summary judgment when they can prove that the evidence does NOT show that the plaintiff was injured by exposure to the products of the defendant. A judge won't grant summary judgement just because a defendant points out holes in the plaintiff's proof.

Trial

The delays involved in asbestos cases means that significant information can be almost impossible. The time between exposure and the appearance of disease can be measured in years. As such, establishing the facts that will make a case requires a thorough review of a person's entire employment history. This includes a thorough analysis of the individual's social security, tax and union records, as well as financial records, as well as interviews with family members and colleagues.

Asbestos sufferers are often diagnosed with less serious illnesses such as asbestosis prior to a mesothelioma diagnose. Because of this, a defendant's ability to prove that a plaintiff's symptoms are caused by a disease other than mesothelioma may have a significant significance in settlement negotiations.

In the past, certain lawyers have employed this tactic to avoid liability and receive large awards. However as the defense bar has developed the strategy is generally rejected by the courts. This is particularly evident in federal courts where judges have often dismissed claims due to the absence of evidence.

As a result, an in-depth analysis of every potential defendant is essential to a successful asbestos defense. This includes assessing the length and extent of exposure as well as the severity of any disease that is diagnosed. For example, a woodworker who has mesothelioma will likely to receive higher damages than someone who only has asbestosis.

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

Asbestos litigation can be complex and expensive. We help our clients understand the risks involved in this type of litigation. We work with them to formulate internal programs to identify potential liability and safety concerns. Contact us to find out how we can safeguard your business's interests.