Asbestos Lawsuit History
Since the 1980s, many asbestos-producing companies and employers have been bankrupted. Victims are compensated via trust funds for bankruptcy and individual lawsuits. Some plaintiffs have reported suspicious legal tactics in their cases.
The Supreme Court of the United States has heard several asbestos-related cases. The court has handled cases that involved settlements of class actions that sought to limit liability.
Anna Pirskowski
In the mid-1900s, a woman called Anna Pirskowski suffered from asbestos-related illnesses and passed away. This was a significant event as it led to asbestos lawsuits being filed against several manufacturers. This in turn sparked an increase in claims from those suffering from mesothelioma, lung cancer, or other ailments. The lawsuits against these companies resulted in the creation of trust funds which have been used by banksrupt companies to pay compensation for asbestos-related sufferers. These funds also permit asbestos victims and their families to receive reimbursement for medical expenses and pain.
In addition to the many deaths resulting from asbestos exposure, workers who are exposed to the substance often bring it home to their families. Inhaling the fibers causes the family members to suffer from the same symptoms as their exposed counterparts. Some of these symptoms include chronic respiratory issues lung cancer, mesothelioma.
While asbestos companies were aware asbestos was a risk, they downplayed the risks and refused to warn their employees or clients. In reality the Johns Manville Company rebuffed attempts by life insurance companies to hang warning signs in their buildings. The company's own research meanwhile, showed asbestos's carcinogenic properties in the 1930s.
Lee's Summit asbestos attorneys and Health Administration (OSHA) was established in 1971, however, it didn't begin to regulate asbestos until the 1970s. By the time it was formed doctors and health experts were already trying to warn people to the dangers of asbestos. These efforts were largely successful. News articles and lawsuits started to raise awareness, but many asbestos companies resisted the call for stricter regulations.
Despite the fact that asbestos has been banned from the United States, the mesothelioma problem continues to be a major issue for people across the nation. Asbest is still found in homes and business even before the 1970s. This is why it's important for those diagnosed with mesothelioma or another asbestos-related illness to seek legal advice. A knowledgeable attorney can help them get the amount of compensation they are entitled to. They will be able understand the intricate laws that apply to this type case and ensure that they receive the most favorable outcome.
Claude Tomplait
Claude Tomplait, diagnosed with asbestosis in the year 1966, filed the first lawsuit against asbestos manufacturers. The lawsuit claimed that the manufacturers failed to warn of the dangers posed by their insulation products. This landmark case paved 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 worked in the construction industry and utilized asbestos-containing materials. These people include plumbers, electricians, carpenters and drywall installers as well as roofers. Some of these workers now suffer from mesothelioma as well as lung cancer. Some are also seeking compensation for the loss of loved family members.
Millions of dollars can be awarded in damages in a suit against a manufacturer of asbestos products. This money can be used to pay for the future and past medical expenses, lost wages, and suffering and pain. It can also be used to pay for travel expenses, funeral and burial expenses, and loss companionship.
Asbestos lawsuits have forced a lot of businesses into bankruptcy and created asbestos trust funds to pay victims. The litigation has also put a strain on federal and state courts. In addition, it has consumed countless hours of attorneys and witnesses.
The asbestos litigation was a costly and long-running process that lasted many decades. The asbestos litigation was a lengthy and expensive process that spanned decades. However, it was successful in the exposing of asbestos executives who kept the truth about asbestos for many years. These executives were aware of the risks, and they pressured employees to not speak up about their health issues.
After several years of trial and appeal and appeal, the court decided in favor of Tomplait. The court's ruling was based on the 1965 edition of the Restatement of Torts that states, "A manufacturer is liable for injuries to a user or consumer of his product when the product is sold in a defective state not accompanied by adequate warning."
After the verdict was reached the defendants were ordered to pay the widow of Tomplait, Jacqueline Watson. Watson passed away before the final award could be determined by the court. Kazan Law offered to appeal the Appellate Court decision to the California Supreme Court.
Clarence Borel
Workers' compensation claims were filed by asbestos insulators such as Borel in the latter half of 1950s. They complained of respiratory problems and a thickening of the fingertip tissue (called "finger clubbing"). The asbestos industry, however, downplayed asbestos as a health risk. In the 1960s, more research in medicine began to connect asbestos with respiratory ailments such as mesothelioma and asbestosis.
In 1969, Borel sued manufacturers of asbestos-containing insulation materials for failing to warn about the risks of their products. He claimed that he had mesothelioma and asbestosis as a result of working with their insulation for a period of 33 years. The court ruled that the defendants had a duty to warn.
The defendants argue that they did not violate their duty to warn since they knew or should be aware about the dangers posed by asbestos long before 1968. They cite expert testimony that asbestosis doesn't show its symptoms until fifteen or twenty, or even twenty-five years after the first exposure to asbestos. If these experts are right, the defendants may have been liable for the injuries sustained by other workers who may have had asbestosis prior to Borel.
The defendants also argue that they aren't responsible for Borel’s mesothelioma since 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 hid the risks for many years.
Although the Claude Tomplait case was the first asbestos class action lawsuit, the 1970s saw an explosion of asbestos-related lawsuits. Asbestos lawsuits flooded the courts and a multitude of workers developed asbestos-related diseases. In response to the litigation asbestos-related businesses, they went into bankruptcy. Trust funds were set up to compensate asbestos-related illness victims. As the litigation progressed it became clear that asbestos-related companies were accountable to the extent of the damage caused by toxic substances. Therefore, the asbestos industry was forced to reform how they operated. Today, a number of asbestos-related lawsuits have been settled for millions of dollars.
Stanley Levy
Stanley Levy is the author of numerous articles that were published in scholarly journals. He has also given talks on these subjects at various legal conferences and seminar. He is a member of the American Bar Association and has served on various committees dealing mesothelioma, asbestos, and mass torts. His firm, Levy Phillips & Konigsberg is a representation firm for more than 500 asbestos plaintiffs across the United States.
The firm charges 33 percent plus expenses for the compensation it receives from clients. It has secured some of the largest verdicts in asbestos litigation history such as a $22 million award 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 thousands of people suffering from mesothelioma or other asbestos-related diseases.
Despite this success, the company is now being criticized more frequently for its involvement in asbestos lawsuits. It has been accused by critics of promoting conspiracy theories, attacking the jury system, and inflated statistics. In addition, the company has been accused of making fraudulent claims. In response the company has announced an open defense fund and is looking for donations from both corporations and individuals.
Another issue is 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 used funds paid by asbestos companies to hire "experts" to write papers in academic journals that back their arguments.
Attorneys aren't just disputing the scientific consensus about asbestos, but are also focusing on the other aspects of cases. For instance they are fighting over the necessity of a constructive notice to file an asbestos claim. They argue that to be eligible for compensation, the victim must actually be aware of asbestos' dangers. They also argue over the proportion of compensation among different types of asbestos-related illnesses.
Attorneys for plaintiffs argue there is a substantial interest in compensating those who have suffered mesothelioma or related diseases. They claim that the companies who made asbestos should have known about the dangers and should be held accountable.