• 목록
• 답변
• 게시판 리스트 옵션
  • 수정
  • 삭제

Asbestos Litigation Defense

Cetrulo LLP has been widely recognized as a leader in asbestos litigation. The Firm's attorneys are regularly invited to give presentations at national conferences. They are also knowledgeable on the numerous issues that arise when trying to defend asbestos cases.

Research has proven that asbestos exposure can cause lung damage and disease. This includes mesothelioma and lesser illnesses like asbestosis and pleural plaques.

Statute of limitations

In the majority of personal injury claims statutes limit the time frame within which a victim can make a claim. In the case of asbestos, the statute of limitations differs by state and differs from other personal injury cases because the signs of asbestos-related diseases can take a long time to show up.

Due to the delay in the development of mesothelioma as well as other asbestos-related illnesses, the statute of limitation clock starts on the date of diagnosis, or death in wrongful death cases, rather than the date exposure. This discovery rule is why victims and their families must work as quickly as they can with an experienced New York asbestos lawyer.

When you file a asbestos lawsuit, there are a variety of things that need to be considered. The statute of limitations is one of the most crucial. This is the time limit that the victim must file the lawsuit by, and failure to file a lawsuit by the deadline will result in the case being closed. The statute of limitations differs according to state, and the laws vary greatly however, most states allow between one and six years from when the victim was diagnosed with an asbestos-related illness.

During an asbestos case when the defendants often attempt to use the statute of limitations to defend against liability. They may say that, for instance, the plaintiffs should have known or knew about their asbestos exposure and had the obligation of notifying their employer. This is a common defense in mesothelioma lawsuits and can be difficult to prove for the victim.

Another potential defense in a case involving asbestos is that the defendants didn't have the means or resources to inform the public about the dangers of the product. This is a difficult case that relies heavily on the evidence available. In California for instance, it was successfully argument that defendants did not have "state-ofthe-art" information and were not able to to provide sufficient warnings.

In general, it is best to make an asbestos lawsuit in the state where the victim resides. In certain situations it might be beneficial to file a lawsuit in a different state than the victim's. This usually has something to be related to where the employer is located or the place where the employee was first exposed to asbestos.

Bare Metal

The"bare-metal" defense is a method that equipment manufacturers employ in asbestos litigation. It asserts that because their products left the factory as unfinished metal, they had no obligation to warn of the risks of asbestos-containing substances that were added by other parties at a later time for example, thermal insulation and flange gaskets. This defense is accepted in certain jurisdictions, but not everywhere.

The Supreme Court's decision in Air & Liquid Sys. Corp. v. DeVries changed the rules. The Court did not accept the bright-line rule of manufacturers and instead formulated an obligation for manufacturers to inform consumers if they know that their integrated product is hazardous for its intended purpose and there is no reason to believe that the end users will realize this risk.

This change in law makes it more difficult plaintiffs to bring claims against manufacturers of equipment. However it's not the end of the story. For one it is that 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, including the Jones Act or the Maritime Claims Act.

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

In a similar case a judge in Tennessee has signaled that he is likely to 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 worked on equipment that was repaired or replaced by third party contractors, which included Equipment Defendants. The judge in the case held that bare metal defenses apply to cases similar to this. The Supreme Court's DeVries decision will impact how judges apply the bare metal defense in other cases.

Defendants' Experts

Asbestos lawsuits are complex and require experienced lawyers with a deep understanding of medical and legal issues as well as access to top expert witnesses. Attorneys at EWH have years of experience helping clients in a variety of asbestos litigation matters including investigating claims, developing strategic budgets and litigation management plans as well as finding and retaining experts, and defending defendants' and plaintiffs' expert testimony during deposition and at trial.

Most asbestos cases require the testimony from medical professionals such as a radiologist or pathologist. They can testify that X-rays and CT scans reveal the typical scarring of lung tissue due to asbestos exposure. A pulmonologist could also testify on symptoms, such as breathing difficulties, which are similar to mesothelioma as well as other asbestos-related diseases. Experts can also provide a detailed history of work performed by the plaintiff, such as a review of job, union, tax, and social security documents.

It is possible to consult an engineer who is forensic or an environmental scientist in order to determine the cause of asbestos exposure. These experts can help plaintiffs argue that the asbestos was not exposed in the workplace and was instead brought home through clothing worn by workers or from the outside air (a common defense in mesothelioma cases).

Many attorneys representing plaintiffs employ economic loss experts to assess the financial losses suffered by the victims. These experts will be able to determine the amount of money a person has lost due to illness and the impact it has had on their life. They can also testify about expenses like the cost of medical bills as well as the cost of hiring a person to take care of household chores that a person cannot perform anymore.

It is crucial that plaintiffs challenge defendants expert witnesses, especially when they have testified to dozens or hundreds of asbestos claims. If they repeat their testimony, these experts may lose credibility among jurors.

In asbestos cases, defendants can also request summary judgment if they can show that the evidence does not prove that the plaintiff was injured by exposure to the defendant's products. A judge won't grant summary judgement just because a defendant points out weaknesses in the plaintiff's evidence.

Going to Trial

Due to the latency issues in asbestos cases, it can be difficult to make a meaningful discovery. The lag between exposure and the onset of the disease could be measured in years. To determine the facts upon which to build a case it is important to examine an individual's employment background. This requires a thorough examination 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 victims often develop less serious diseases like asbestosis before being diagnosed with mesothelioma. Due to this the capacity of a defendant to prove that a plaintiff's symptoms might be due to a different illness than mesothelioma is valuable in settlement negotiations.

In the past, some attorneys have used this strategy to deny liability and get large awards. However as the defense bar has developed, this approach is generally rejected by the courts. This is particularly true in federal courts, where judges often reject such claims due to lack of evidence.

An in-depth analysis of each potential defendant is therefore essential to ensure a successful defense in asbestos litigation. This includes assessing the duration and extent of exposure as and the severity of any disease that is diagnosed. For example, a carpenter who has mesothelioma may be awarded more damages than one who has only had asbestosis.

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

Asbestos litigation can be complicated and costly. We help our clients understand the potential risks associated with this type of litigation. We collaborate with them to develop internal programs to identify potential liability and safety concerns. Contact us today to learn more about how we can safeguard your company's interests.