10 Wrong Answers To Common Asbestos Litigation Defense Questions Do You Know The Right Answers?
Asbestos Litigation Defense
In order to defend companies against asbestos-related lawsuits in the future, it is essential to review the medical records of the plaintiff as well as their work history and testimony. We often employ the bare metal defense which is focused on proving that your company was not able to manufacture, sell or distribute the asbestos-containing products that are at issue in a claimant's case.
Asbestos cases are distinct and require a determined strategy to achieve success. We serve as local, regional and national counsel.
Statute of limitations
The statute of limitations is a time limit within which the majority of lawsuits have to be filed. For asbestos-related cases, this means that the legal deadline for filing is between one and six years after the victim becomes diagnosed with an asbestos-related condition. It is crucial for the defense to show that the injury was sustained after the deadline. Often, this means reviewing the entirety of the plaintiff's employment history, which includes interviews with former coworkers as well as the careful review of Social Security, union, tax and other records.
Defending an asbestos case involves many complicated issues. Asbestos sufferers may develop a mild disease, such as asbestosis, prior to being diagnosed with a fatal disease such as mesothelioma. In these cases, a defense attorney will argue that the statute of limitations should start when the person who suffers from asbestos knew or reasonably should have known that their exposure to asbestos triggered the disease.
The difficulty of these cases is also made more difficult by the fact that the time limit for filing a lawsuit may differ from state to state. In these instances, an experienced mesothelioma lawyer will try to file the case in the state where the bulk of the exposure alleged occurred. This may be a difficult task since asbestos sufferers often moved across the country in search of work, and the alleged exposure may have taken place in several states.
The discovery process is challenging in asbestos litigation. Asbestos litigation is more complicated than other personal injury cases. Rather than a few defendants as in most cases, there are usually many people involved. As a result, it is often difficult to get an accurate discovery in these cases, especially when the plaintiff's argument for injuries spans decades and involves multiple defendants.
The McGivney, Kluger, Clark & Intoccia Team has extensive experience as National Coordinating Counsel for multi-district, multi-jurisdictional, asbestos litigation. We collaborate closely with regional and local counsel to develop litigation strategy as well as manage local counsel and achieve consistent, cost-effective results in line with the client's goals. We regularly appear before coordinating and trial judges and special masters of litigation, across the country.
Bare Metal Defense
In the past, manufacturers of boiler, turbine and pump equipment have successfully defended themselves against asbestos litigation by claiming an argument referred to as the "bare metal" or component part doctrine. This defense holds that a manufacturer cannot be held liable for asbestos-related injuries resulting from replacement components that the company did not design or install.
In the case of Devries, an employee at an Tennessee Eastman chemical plant sued several equipment manufacturers to treat his mesothelioma. The job of the plaintiff was to remove and replacement of steam traps, insulation and gaskets on equipment such as pumps, valves and steam traps (Equipment Defendants). He claimed that he had been exposed to asbestos during his work in the plant and was diagnosed with Mesothelioma many years later.
The Supreme Court's Devries decision has changed the landscape of asbestos litigation and could affect how courts in other jurisdictions approach the issue of third-party components manufacturers add to equipment. The Court declared that the application of the bare-metal defense is "cabined" in maritime law, but left open the possibility that other federal circuits to apply this doctrine to cases that are not maritime.
This decision was the first time that a federal appeals court used the defense of bare metal in a asbestos lawsuit and represents an important departure from the traditional product liability law. litigation report asbestos of courts have interpreted "bare metal" as a denial of the responsibility of a manufacturer to inform about the potential harms caused by replacement parts it did not make or sell.
The McGivney, Kluger, Clark & Intoccia Team regularly serves as National Coordinating Counsel in multi-jurisdictional asbestos lawsuits that affect the entire industry. We assist our clients to develop strategies for litigation, oversee regional and local counsel, and ensure a an efficient, cost-effective defense that is in line with their objectives. Our attorneys speak at conferences for industry professionals on the most important issues affecting asbestos litigation. Our firm has experience defending clients across the 50 states and working closely with trial courts, judges and special masters of litigation. Our unique strategy has proven to be effective in reducing legal expenses for our clients.
Expert Witnesses
A person with specific knowledge, skills or experience is an expert witness. They offer independent assistance to a judge by offering an impartial opinion on matters that are within their area of expertise. He should clearly state his opinion and the evidence or assumptions that he is basing it on. He should also not overlook any aspect that could affect his conclusions.
In the event that asbestos exposure is alleged medical experts could be required to evaluate the claimant's health and determine any causal links between the condition and the alleged source of exposure. A lot of the diseases that are caused by asbestos are complex, and require the expertise of experts in the field. This could include doctors and nurses, pharmacists, toxicologists or epidemiologists, occupational health specialists and pharmacists.
Whether it is the defense or prosecution the expert's job is to provide objective technical assistance. He should not assume the role as an advocate, nor should he seek to influence or convince the jury in favour of his client. The duty to the court is greater than the obligations he has to his client and he should not attempt to support a particular argument or find evidence to support it.
The expert should cooperate with the other experts in trying to reduce any technical issues at a very early stage and eliminate any irrelevant matters. The expert should also co-operate with the people who instruct him in identifying areas of agreement and disagreement to serve the reason of the joint statement of experts commissioned by the court.
The expert should, at the end of his examination, present his conclusions and the reasons for the conclusions in a manner that is clear and understandable. He must be able to answer questions from the prosecution or judge and should be willing to discuss any issues that are raised during cross-examination.
Cetrulo LLP has extensive experience in defending clients involved in complex asbestos litigation that involves multiple parties and jurisdictions. Our lawyers can advise and manage national and regional defense counsel as well as regional and local experts as well as witnesses. Our team regularly appears before coordinating judges, trial judges and special masters in asbestos litigation across the nation.
Medical Experts
Expert witnesses are vital in cases involving asbestos-related injuries due to the latency between exposure to asbestos and the beginning symptoms. Asbestos cases typically involve complicated theories of injuries that can span decades and involve dozens or hundreds of defendants. Due to this, it is almost impossible for a plaintiff to prove their case without the help of experts.
Experts in the field of medicine and other science are required to determine the degree of exposure an individual has and medical condition, as well as to provide insight into future health issues. Experts like these are essential to any case, and they should be thoroughly vetted and knowledgeable in the field they are working in. The more experience an expert in medicine or science has the more persuasive he is.
In many asbestos cases, a medical expert or scientist is required to review the claimant's records and perform an examination. These experts can testify whether asbestos exposure has caused a particular medical condition, for example, mesothelioma or lung cancer.
It is possible to seek out other experts, such as industrial hygienists to determine the presence of asbestos exposure levels. They can utilize advanced sampling and analytical techniques to assess the levels of asbestos in the air in the workplace or at home and compare these levels to legal exposure standards.
Experts of this kind can be extremely useful when defending companies that manufactured or distributed asbestos-related products, as they are often capable of proving that the levels of exposure of plaintiffs were below legal limits and that there was no evidence of negligence by the employer or the manufacturer's responsibility.
Other experts that could be involved in these cases are environmental and occupational specialists. They can provide insights into the safety procedures that are in place at a specific workplace or company and how they connect to the liability of asbestos manufacturers. They can determine, for instance, that renovation materials damaged during the course of a remodel could contain asbestos, or that shaking contaminated clothing could cause asbestos fibers and asbestos dust to release.