Asbestos Litigation Defense

Cetrulo LLP is widely recognized as a leading expert in asbestos litigation defense. The firm's lawyers are frequently invited to give presentations at national conferences. They are also well-versed on the many issues that arise in defending asbestos cases.

Research has shown that exposure to asbestos causes lung damage and diseases. This includes mesothelioma and lesser illnesses like asbestosis and pleural plaques.

Statute of Limitations

In most personal injury cases statutes limit the time period after which a victim may make a claim. For asbestos the statute of limitations varies by state and is different than other personal injury cases because the signs of asbestos-related diseases can take years to show up.

Due to the delaying nature of mesothelioma as well as other asbestos litigation paralegal-related diseases the statute of limitations clock begins at the date of diagnosis (or death in cases of wrongful death) instead of the date of exposure. This discovery rule is why victims and their family members must consult an experienced New York mesothelioma lawyer as early as is possible.

When filing an asbestos lawsuit, asbestos Litigation wiki there are many factors that must be taken into account. The statute of limitations is one of the most crucial. This is the deadline which the victim must make a claim by, and failing to file a lawsuit by the deadline will result in the case being barred. The time limit for filing a lawsuit varies from state to state and laws vary greatly. However, most allow between one and six years after the time that the victim was diagnosed.

In an asbestos case defendants frequently employ the statute of limitations as a defense to liability. For example, they may 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 argument that is common in mesothelioma litigation and it isn't easy for the victim to prove.

Another potential defense in a asbestos litigation cases case is that the defendants did not have the means or resources to inform the public about the dangers of the product. This is a difficult case and depends largely on the evidence available. For example it was successfully presented in California that defendants did not have "state-of-the-art" knowledge and could not be expected to give adequate warnings.

In general, it is recommended to file the asbestos lawsuit within the state where the victim's home. In some cases it might be beneficial to make a claim in a different state than the victim's. This usually has something to do with the location of the employer or where the worker was first exposed to asbestos.

Bare Metal

The"bare metal" defense is a typical strategy used by manufacturers of equipment in asbestos litigation. It argues that since their products left the factory as bare metal, they had no obligation to warn consumers about the dangers of asbestos-containing substances added by other parties at a later date for example, thermal insulation and flange gaskets. This defense is accepted in a few states, but it's not permitted under federal law in all states.

The Supreme Court's decision in Air & Liquid Sys. Corp. v. DeVries has altered the law. The Court did not accept the manufacturers' preferred bright line rule, and instead established the new standard under which manufacturers are required to inform consumers if they know that its product is likely to be harmful for its intended purposes and has no reason to believe that its end users will realize that risk.

This change in law makes it more difficult for plaintiffs to bring claims against equipment manufacturers. However it's not the end of the story. The DeVries decision is not applicable to state law claims which are based on strict liability, or negligence, and is not applicable to claims brought under federal maritime law statutes like the Jones Act.

Plaintiffs will continue to pursue an expanded interpretation of the defense of bare metal. In the Asbestos Multi-District Litigation in Philadelphia for instance, a case was remanded back to an Illinois federal judge to determine if that state recognizes this defense. The plaintiff who died in the case worked as a carpenter and was exposed to turbines and switchgear at an Texaco refinery which contained asbestos-containing components.

In a similar case a judge in Tennessee has signaled that he will take a different view of the defense of bare metal. The plaintiff in that case was a Tennessee Eastman chemical plant mechanic who was diagnosed with mesothelioma following working on equipment that was repaired or replaced by third-party contractors which included the Equipment Defendants. The judge in that case ruled that the bare metal defense is applicable to cases like this. The Supreme Court's DeVries decision will affect the way judges apply the bare-metal defense in other cases.

Defendants' Experts

Asbestos litigation can be complex and requires attorneys with deep medical and legal knowledge, as well as accessing experts of the highest caliber. EWH attorneys have years of experience in asbestos litigation, such as investigating claims, preparing strategies for managing litigation and budgets, identifying and bringing in experts, and defending plaintiffs and defendants with expert testimony in trials and depositions.

Typically asbestos cases require the testimony of medical professionals like pathologists and radiologists who can testify about X-rays or CT scans that show the lung tissue being damaged typical of asbestos exposure. A pulmonologist may also testify about symptoms such as difficulty breathing that are similar to symptoms of mesothelioma, as well as other asbestos litigation cases-related diseases. Experts can provide a detailed description of the plaintiff's employment background, which includes an investigation of their tax, social security and union records as well as job and employment details.

A forensic engineer or environmental science expert may be required to clarify the reason for Asbestos Litigation Wiki the Asbestos litigation wiki exposure. These experts can aid the defendants argue that the asbestos exposure was not at the workplace, but was brought to the home through clothing worn by workers or by airborne particles.

Many plaintiffs lawyers will call experts from the field to determine the financial losses incurred by the victims. They can estimate the amount of money a victim suffered due to their illness and the impact it had on his or her lifestyle. They can also testify to costs like medical bills and the cost of hiring someone to do household chores that an individual is unable to complete.

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

In asbestos cases, defendants may also seek summary judgement when they can prove that the evidence does not establish that the plaintiff was injured by exposure to the defendant's products. However a judge won't accept summary judgment simply because the defendant points to weaknesses in the plaintiff's evidence.

Going to Trial

Due to the latency issues in asbestos cases, it is difficult to make a significant discovery. The time between exposure and the onset of disease can be measured in years. To determine the facts upon which to base a case it is important to review an individual's work history. This involves a thorough review of the individual's tax, social security and union financial documents, as well as interviews with family members and colleagues.

asbestos law and litigation sufferers are more likely to develop less serious illnesses like asbestosis before being diagnosed with mesothelioma. Due to this the capacity of a defendant to prove that the plaintiff's symptoms could be due to another disease other than mesothelioma can be beneficial in settlement negotiations.

In the past, certain attorneys have employed this strategy to deny liability and obtain large sums. However, as the defense bar has developed and diversified, this strategy is generally rejected by the courts. This is especially true in federal courts, where judges regularly reject such claims due to lack of evidence.

A careful evaluation of every potential defendant is crucial to ensure a successful defense in asbestos litigation. This includes assessing the duration and extent of exposure as well as the degree of any diagnosed illness. For instance carpenters with mesothelioma is likely to be awarded a higher amount of damages than a person who has only had asbestosis.

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

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