Asbestos Lawsuit History
Since the 1980s, numerous asbestos-producing employers and companies have declared bankruptcy. Victims are compensated through trust funds for bankruptcy as well as through individual lawsuits. Some plaintiffs have reported suspicious legal maneuvering in their cases.
The Supreme Court of the United States has heard a number of asbestos-related cases. The court has dealt with cases involving settlements for class actions which sought to limit liability.
Anna Pirskowski
Anna Pirskowski, a woman who passed away in the early 1900s from asbestos-related diseases was a well-known case. It was a significant case because it triggered asbestos lawsuits being filed against several manufacturers. This, in turn, led to an increase in claims from people suffering from lung cancer, mesothelioma or other illnesses. These lawsuits led to trust funds created by the government which were used by companies that went bankrupt to compensate asbestos-related victims. These funds also permit asbestos victims and their family members to receive compensation for medical expenses as well as suffering.
In addition to the numerous deaths resulting from asbestos exposure, workers who are exposed to asbestos often bring it home to their families. Inhaling the fibers causes the family members to experience the same symptoms as their exposed workers. Some of these symptoms include chronic respiratory issues lung cancer, mesothelioma.
While many asbestos companies knew that asbestos was dangerous however, they minimized the risks and refused to warn their employees or consumers. In reality, the Johns Manville Company rebuffed attempts by life insurance companies to install warning signs in their buildings. Scranton asbestos lawsuit , revealed asbestos' carcinogenicity from the 1930s onwards.
The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) was founded in 1971, but it did not begin to regulate asbestos until the 1970s. By this time doctors were working to inform the public about the dangers of exposure to asbestos. The efforts were mostly successful. News articles and lawsuits started to educate people however, many asbestos firms resisted calls for stricter regulations.
Despite the fact that asbestos is banned in the United States, mesothelioma continues to be a serious problem for individuals throughout the country. It's because asbestos continues to be found in homes and businesses even in those that were built prior to the 1970s. This is why it's essential for individuals who have been diagnosed with mesothelioma, or any other asbestos-related illness to seek legal assistance. A knowledgeable attorney can help them get the amount of compensation they are entitled to. They will be able understand the complicated laws that apply to this particular case and ensure that they receive the most favorable result.
Claude Tomplait
Claude Tomplait, diagnosed with asbestosis in 1966, filed the first lawsuit against asbestos producers. In his lawsuit, he claimed that the manufacturers had failed to warn about the dangers of their insulation products. This crucial case opened the way for thousands and tens of thousands of similar lawsuits to be filed in the future.
The majority of asbestos lawsuits are brought by those who have worked in the construction industry and used asbestos-containing materials. Carpenters, electricians, and plumbers are among those who have been affected. Many of these workers currently suffer from mesothelioma and lung cancer. Some of these workers are seeking compensation in the event that loved ones have passed away.
Millions of dollars can be awarded as damages in a lawsuit against the manufacturer of asbestos-related products. These funds are used to cover the medical bills of the past and future loss of wages, suffering and pain. It can also pay for funeral and burial costs, and loss of companionship.
Asbestos lawsuits have forced a lot of businesses into bankruptcy and created asbestos trust funds to pay victims. It has also put a strain on federal and state courts. In addition, it has consumed countless hours by lawyers and witnesses.
The asbestos litigation was an expensive and long-running process that took several decades. However, it was successful in exposing asbestos-related company executives who hid the truth about asbestos for decades. They were aware of the dangers and pushed workers to keep quiet about their health issues.
After many years of appeal and trial and appeal, the court finally decided in favor of Tomplait. The court's decision was based upon the 1965 edition of Restatement of Torts, which states that "A manufacturer is liable for injury to an end-user or consumer of its product when it is sold in a defected condition without adequate warning."
Jacqueline Watson, Tomplait's wife, was awarded damages by the court following the verdict. Watson died before her final decision could be given by the court. Kazan Law volunteered to take the case to the California Supreme Court to overturn the Appellate Court's decision.
Clarence Borel
In the latter half of 1950, asbestos insulators like Borel began to complain about breathing problems and a thickening of their fingertip tissue, called "finger clubbing." They filed claims for workers' compensation. The asbestos industry, however, downplayed asbestos as a health risk. The truth would only become well-known in the 1960s as more research in medicine connected asbestos exposure to respiratory illnesses like mesothelioma and asbestosis.
Borel sued asbestos-containing insulation material manufacturers in 1969 for not warning about the dangers their products could pose to their users. He claimed that he developed mesothelioma and asbestosis as the result of working with their insulation for thirty-three years. The court ruled that the defendants were required to warn.
The defendants claim that they did nothing wrong since they knew about asbestos's dangers well before 1968. They point to expert testimony that asbestosis does not manifest its symptoms until fifteen or twenty, or even twenty-five years after first exposure to asbestos. If the experts are right the defendants could be liable for injuries that other workers might have been affected by asbestos before Borel.
The defendants argue that they shouldn't be held responsible for Borel’s mesothelioma because it was his choice to continue working with asbestos-containing substances. Kazan Law gathered evidence that proved that defendants' companies were aware of asbestos' risks and suppressed the information for decades.
The 1970s saw a rise in asbestos-related litigation, even though the Claude Tomplait class action case being the first. Asbestos claims crowded the courts, and thousands of workers developed asbestos-related illnesses. In response to the litigation, asbestos-related businesses went bankrupt. Trust funds were set up to compensate asbestos-related illness victims. As the litigation progressed it became clear that asbestos companies were liable for the harm caused by toxic materials. As a result, the asbestos industry was forced to reform the way they operated. Today, many asbestos-related lawsuits have been settled for millions of dollars.
Stanley Levy
Stanley Levy is the author of several articles that were published in journals of academic research. He has also given talks on these topics at a number of seminars and legal conferences. He is a member of the American Bar Association and has been on numerous committees dealing mesothelioma and asbestos as well as mass torts. The firm he runs, Levy Phillips & Konigsberg represents more than 500 asbestos victims across the nation.
The firm charges 33 percent plus costs for the compensation it receives from clients. It has obtained some of the biggest verdicts in asbestos litigation, including a $22,000,000 settlement for a mesothelioma patient who worked at an New York City Steel Plant. The firm represents 132 Brooklyn Navy Yard Plaintiffs and has filed claims on behalf of a multitude of patients suffering from mesothelioma or other asbestos-related illnesses.
Despite this success, the company is now confronted with criticism for its involvement in asbestos lawsuits. It has been accused by critics of encouraging conspiracy theories, attacking the jury system, and inflating the statistics. The company has also been accused of pursuing fraud claims. In response the company has announced an open defense fund and is looking for donations from both corporations and individuals.
Another issue is the fact that a lot of defendants are attempting to undermine the world-wide scientific consensus that asbestos even at low levels, can cause mesothelioma. They have resorted to money paid by the asbestos industry to hire "experts" who have published articles in journals of academics to support their arguments.
In addition to fighting over the scientific consensus on asbestos, attorneys are focusing on other aspects of the case. For instance they are arguing over the necessity of a constructive notice to file an asbestos claim. They claim that the victim must have had actual knowledge of the dangers of asbestos to be eligible for compensation. They also argue over the proportion of compensation among different asbestos-related diseases.
The attorneys representing plaintiffs argue there is a huge public interest in granting damages to compensate people who suffer from mesothelioma and related diseases. They claim that the companies who produced asbestos should have been aware about the dangers and should be held accountable.