Ohio Senate Passes Troubling Asbestos Lawsuit Bill

 

Ohioans may soon have a greater uphill battle if they seek justice following a mesothelioma diagnosis.

Recent news reports indicate the state senate has approved a measure that makes it more difficult for mesothelioma victims to take their cases to court. Supporters countered that the measure "evens the playing field." You can bet the "supporters" are not innocent citizens victimized by this terrible cancer.

Our plaintiff mesothelioma lawyers understand that House Bill 380, sponsored by a Cincinnati Republican, would require that a person who files an asbestos claim must list every other entity they previously sued - including federal bankruptcy trusts. Not only that, but plaintiffs would have to provide detailed and specific evidence that they used in those cases. Further, if a defendant had some reason to suspect the plaintiff was withholding pertinent information or that he or she did not sue another entity they should have, the defendant could petition the judge to delay the trial.

The proposed law stems from the mistaken belief that there are an abundance of mesothelioma patients who are attempting to game the system by suing as many different entities as they can, in an effort to collect multiple damage awards. Supporters say they want to prevent "double-dipping" by limiting the amount a defendant should be made to pay to the share of the judgment for which the defendant is deemed by a jury or judge to be at fault.

However, the truth of the matter is that mesothelioma patients and their families don't have much time left. The disease takes years to develop, and once it is diagnosed, it progresses rapidly and is fatal. Overwhelmingly, that sought by those who are dying is not greed, but justice. And the sad fact is that the companies responsible too often engage in an endless series of delays. In fact, extensive delays are already a primary tactic of these firms.

Ruppel v. CBS Corp. - Company Seeks Immunity for Acting Under Federal Authority

 

CBS Corporation, a machine manufacturer who used to supply asbestos-laden turbines to the U.S. Navy, is seeking immunity in a mesothelioma case, arguing that it was acting under federal authority.

Plaintiff mesothelioma lawyers in Ruppel v. CBS Corp. counter that they are simply alleging a failure to warn - something the Department of Defense would not have impeded, even if the company were acting under the direction of federal authority.

Our mesothelioma lawyers understand that part of the defense tactic has involved trying to keep the case in federal court, appealing even after a federal judge stripped himself of authority and remanded the case back to state court.

However, a three-judge panel for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit in Illinois has determined that the defendant meets all criteria necessary to be considered for immunity.

The plaintiff in this case is still suing several dozen others for his mesothelioma diagnosis, so he may still have a good shot at recovering damages. However, this case sets a troubling precedent for former members of the military who have been diagnosed with mesothelioma. It makes it all the more critical for plaintiffs to hire a skilled attorney.

New Life for Old Asbestos Cases?

An attempt is being made in Maryland to kick start some 13,000 asbestos cases that had been set aside by the courts. Fighting through a bottleneck of cases would be a victory in this case, as it's too often a battle just to get a plaintiff's day in court.

The effort, as our mesothelioma lawyers understand it, involves a proposal to have a number of those old cases lumped together based on similarities. These are cases that were previously put on the back burner because plaintiffs alleged asbestos exposure, but not sickness. Plaintiff attorneys say many of those individuals have since fallen ill, and now hope to have their cases heard together. It may ultimately reduce the damages per litigant, but it would ensure their cases could be heard sometime in the next decade, and the grouping would likely bolster their chances of a win.

The Baltimore Circuit Court has yet to rule on the proposal. However, the action is being sharply contested by defendant lawyers for allegedly bypassing certain due process procedures in an effort they contend is intended to pressure them into resolving potentially weaker cases.

Baltimore was one of the first cities to establish a two-tiered, priority system to address the flood of mesothelioma and asbestos cases, and whatever resulting decision is made could have a potential impact on other cities that followed Baltimore's lead.

Asbestos Firms Wrong: Chrysotile Asbestos Causes Mesothelioma

 

No matter how aggressively defendant asbestos manufacturers try to argue that Chrysotile asbestos doesn't cause mesothelioma - they're wrong.

Our mesothelioma lawyers understand the best example of this defense involved a consortium of three joint compound firms who made the case during an estimation hearing in their Chapter 11 bankruptcies. Each of the companies - Bondex International Inc., Specialty Products Holding Corp., and RPM International - filed bankruptcy as they faced thousands of asbestos injury and wrongful death claims.

An estimation hearing is one in which a judge will determine how much money the companies must set aside to meet their liability to cover current and future asbestos claims. Debtors say they will only need about $30 million, while plaintiff attorneys say it is likely to be closer to $55 million.

Part of closing that disparity involves figuring out to what extent the defendants can be expected to be found liable for each claim, which is why the home improvement products firms are attempting to argue that the asbestos their goods contained wasn't actually all that dangerous.

This is not the first time we've heard the argument about Chrysotile asbestos being somehow safer than other forms, and it probably won't be the last. Chrysotile asbestos, sometimes called white asbestos, accounts for roughly 95 percent of the asbestos present in the U.S., according to the Occupational Safety and Health Administration. Despite a slightly differing chemical make-up from the amphibole group of asbestos, it is no less dangerous - a fact repeatedly underscored in numerous studies. Most recently, a professor of occupational epidemiology at the University of Wisconsin conducted a study last year, concluding definitively, "Chrysotile asbestos, along with all other types of asbestos, has caused mesothelioma, and a world-wide ban of all asbestos is warranted to stop an epidemic of mesothelioma."

$17.5M Mesothelioma Verdict Tossed by State High Court

Justices of the Virginia Supreme Court threw out a sizable mesothelioma verdict after a defense appeal argued the trial judge failed to allow critical evidence that would have lessened the burden of responsibility.

Our mesothelioma lawyers understand that in Exxon Mobile v. Minton, the justices sided with the oil company, remanding the case back to the circuit court for a new trial.

The plaintiff in this case is the widow of a Newport News Shipbuilding employee, who worked at the shipyard from 1956 until 1993 (except for two years in which he served in the Army Reserves). During his first four years on the job, he worked as an apprentice shipfitter, constructing new ships. He returned to that post upon his discharge from the Army Reserves, and at that point was promoted to a supervisory role.

During this time, he was routinely exposed to asbestos in and around his work site, which was not on any Exxon ship. As such, the plaintiff never alleged Exxon was responsible for this asbestos exposure. Asbestos was commonly used aboard civilian and military ships. Consequently, shipbuilders are among those occupations at highest risk for developing mesothelioma as a result of decades of asbestos exposure.

Mesothelioma Plaintiffs' Rights Under Siege With "Transparency" Laws

 

Following passage of Ohio's new "asbestos transparency" law late last year, another state is now mulling the same.

Our mesothelioma attorneys understand House Bill 529 in the Mississippi House of Representatives would require asbestos plaintiffs to disclose all involvement with asbestos trusts.

Specifically, the measure would mandate asbestos trust claimants to submit a sworn statement disclosing all asbestos trust claims made either by him or on his behalf. Additionally, the claimant would have to turn over all information related to that claim at least a month before the discovery phase of the case gets underway. In instances where such claims were made after the suit was filed, the claimant would have a month to let the defense know of that as well.

If the asbestos defendants find any issues (as they most certainly are apt to do), they would have 2.5 months before the beginning of a mesothelioma trial to request a stay in the case, provided they can show credible evidence.

What's more, if a person files a claim to access funds in an asbestos trust after he or she has obtained a court judgment, the court can later decide to re-open that case in order to adjust the judgment amount.

Bill Would Enhance Worker Protections From Asbestos, Other Hazards

 

The primary reason so many people in this country have been terminally sickened by exposure to asbestos is that employers and manufacturers failed in their obligation to warn workers of the dangers and to take all precautionary measures to keep them safe.

Our mesothelioma lawyers know that despite the fact that asbestos use has waned significantly over the last 40 years, it continues to be a legal material that is still used in the production of numerous compounds and materials.

While we would like to believe that our workforces are safer than they were even just a few decades ago, the reality is that the Occupational Safety and Health Act hasn't been updated since 1970.

Now, some lawmakers are hoping to change that, with the Protecting America's Workers Act, which would serve as an amendment to the earlier legislation and enhance workplace protections, including for employees who continue to come into contact with asbestos.

In general, the bill aims to:

• Extend OSHA coverage to public employees;


• Increase whistleblower protections;


• Improve reporting, inspection and enforcement.