Asbestos Litigation Defense
Cetrulo LLP is widely recognized as a leader in asbestos litigation defense. The firm's lawyers are frequently invited to speak at national conferences. They are also knowledgeable on the many issues that arise in trying to defend asbestos cases.
Research has shown that asbestos exposure can cause lung damage and diseases. This includes mesothelioma, other lesser illnesses like asbestosis and pleural plaques.
Statute of Limitations
In the majority of personal injury claims statutes limit the time limit within the date a victim is able to make a claim. For asbestos the statute of limitations varies by state and differs from in other personal injury claims because the signs of asbestos-related diseases can take years to manifest.
Due to the delayed nature mesothelioma as well as other asbestos-related illnesses and other asbestos-related illnesses, the statute of limitations clock starts on the date of diagnosis, or death in the case of wrongful death, rather than the date exposure. This discovery rule is the reason why victims and their families should seek out as soon as they can with an experienced New York asbestos lawyer.
When making an asbestos lawsuit, there are many aspects that must be taken into account. The statute of limitations is one of the most crucial. The statute of limitations is the date that the victim has to file a lawsuit. Failure to file a lawsuit will result the lawsuit being barred. The time limit for filing a lawsuit differs from state to state and laws differ widely. However, the majority allow between one and six year after the victim was diagnosed.
In an asbestos-related case, the defendants will often try to use the statute of limitations as a defense against liability. For example, they may argue that the plaintiffs knew or should have known about their exposure and therefore had a duty to notify their employer. This is a common argument in mesothelioma cases, and it can be difficult for the plaintiff to prove.
A defendant in an asbestos case may be able to claim that they didn't have the resources or the means to warn people about the dangers of the product. This is a complicated case that relies heavily on the evidence available. For instance it has been successfully presented in California that the defendants did not possess "state-of-the-art" knowledge and thus could not be expected to give adequate warnings.
Generally, it is best to file the asbestos lawsuit in the state where the victim's home. However, there are circumstances where it may be appropriate to file the lawsuit in another state. It usually has to do with the location of the employer or the place where the worker was exposed to asbestos.
Bare Metal
The bare-metal defense is a strategy that equipment manufacturers employ in asbestos litigation. The bare metal defense argues that, because their products left the factory as untreated steel, they didn't have a duty to inform about the dangers of asbestos-containing materials later added by other parties, for instance thermal insulating seals and flanges. This defense is accepted in a few states, but it's not a federally-approved option in all states.
The Supreme Court's decision in Air & Liquid Sys. Corp. v. DeVries changed the law. The Court rejected the preferred rule of manufacturers' bright line rule, and instead, an entirely new standard that states that manufacturers are required to inform consumers if they know that its product is likely to be dangerous for its intended purposes and has no reason to believe that its end users will realize that risk.
This change in law will make it more difficult for plaintiffs to bring claims against manufacturers of equipment. However it's not the end of the story. First, the DeVries decision does not apply to state-law claims that are founded 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 pursuing a broader interpretation of the defense of bare metal. In the Asbestos Multi-District Litigation in Philadelphia for instance the case was remanded back to an Illinois federal judge to determine whether that state recognizes this defense. The plaintiff who died in this case was a carpenter who had been exposed to turbines, switchgear and other asbestos-containing components at the Texaco refinery.
In a similar case, a judge in Tennessee has stated that he'll take a different approach to 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 had been repaired or replaced by contractors from third parties which included the Equipment Defendants. The judge in the case ruled that bare-metal defenses can be applied to cases similar to this. The Supreme Court's DeVries decision will affect the way judges use the bare-metal defense in other contexts.
Defendants' Experts
Asbestos litigation is a complex affair and requires lawyers with a extensive knowledge of law and medicine and access to top experts. The attorneys at EWH have years of experience in assisting clients with various asbestos litigation cases, such as investigating claims, preparing strategic budgets and plans for managing litigation, hiring and retaining experts and defending plaintiffs' and defendants expert testimony during deposition and at trial.
Typically, asbestos cases will require the testimony from medical professionals like a radioologist or pathologist. They can confirm that X-rays as well as CT scans show the typical scarring of lung tissue caused by asbestos exposure. A pulmonologist can also be a witness to symptoms like difficulty breathing that are similar to those experienced by mesothelioma and other asbestos-related illnesses. Experts can provide a thorough description of the plaintiff's employment background, which includes an analysis of their tax, social security, union and job records.
It could be necessary to consult a forensic engineer or an environmental scientist in order to determine the cause of asbestos exposure. what asbestos litigation pros and cons can aid defendants to argue that asbestos exposure did not occur at the workplace, but was brought into the home through the clothing of workers or the outside air.
A lot of plaintiffs' lawyers employ economic loss experts to determine the monetary losses incurred by victims. They can estimate the amount of money that a victim suffered due to their illness and its effect on their lifestyle. They can also testify about expenses like medical bills and the cost of hiring someone to perform household chores that an individual is unable to perform.
It is crucial for defendants to challenge the plaintiff's expert witnesses, especially in cases where they've testified in dozens or even hundreds of other asbestos-related claims. Experts may lose credibility with the jury when their testimony is repeated.
Plaintiffs in asbestos cases may also apply for summary judgment if they can show that the evidence does not show that the plaintiff was injured due to their exposure to the defendant's product. However the judge will not give summary judgment merely because the defendant cites weaknesses in the plaintiff's evidence.
Trial
Due to the latency issues in asbestos cases, it can be difficult to make a meaningful discovery. The lag between exposure and the development of the disease could be measured in years. Therefore, determining the facts upon which to build a case requires a thorough review of a person's entire employment history. This involves a thorough review of the individual's tax, social security, union and financial records, as well as interviews with family members and coworkers.
Asbestos sufferers are more likely to develop less serious diseases such as asbestosis before a mesothelioma diagnosis. Because of this, the ability of a defendant to demonstrate that plaintiff's symptoms stem from another disease than mesothelioma may have a significant value in settlement negotiations.
In the past, certain lawyers have employed this tactic to deny liability and get large sums. However as the defense bar has grown, this approach has been generally rejected by the courts. This is especially relevant in federal courts, where judges have often dismissed claims due to the absence of evidence.
A careful evaluation of every potential defendant is essential to ensure a successful defense in asbestos litigation. This includes assessing the length and the nature of the exposure, as in addition to the severity of any disease that is diagnosed. For example a carpenter with mesothelioma is likely to be awarded more damages than one who has only had asbestosis.
The Bowles Rice Asbestos Litigation Team defends asbestos-related litigation for product manufacturers distributors and suppliers, contractors, employers, and property owners. Our attorneys have been National Trial and National Coordination Counsel and are frequently appointed as liaison counsel by courts to handle asbestos dockets.
Asbestos cases can be complicated and costly. We help our clients to be aware of the risks associated with this type of litigation, and we assist them to create internal programs that can identify liability and safety concerns. Contact us today to find out more about how our company can safeguard your company's interests.