17 Signs To Know You Work With Asbestos Lawsuit History
Asbestos Lawsuit History
Since the 1980s, numerous asbestos-producing companies and employers have been bankrupted. Victims are compensated via trust funds for bankruptcy and individual lawsuits. Some plaintiffs have reported that their cases were the subject of suspicious legal maneuvering.
The Supreme Court of the United States has heard several asbestos-related cases. The court has heard cases involving settlements of class actions which sought to limit liability.
Anna Pirskowski
Anna Pirskowski, a woman who died in the mid-1900s from asbestos-related ailments was a notable case. Her death was notable because it triggered asbestos lawsuits against a variety of manufacturers and triggered an increase in claims filed by those diagnosed with mesothelioma, lung cancer, or other diseases. These lawsuits led the way to trust funds created by the government which were used by banksrupt companies to pay asbestos-related victims. These funds have also allowed asbestos victims and their families to receive compensation for medical expenses, pain and suffering.
In addition to the numerous deaths resulting from asbestos exposure, people who are exposed to asbestos often bring it home to their families. If this happens, family members breathe in the asbestos and experience the same symptoms as the exposed worker. Some of these symptoms include chronic respiratory problems, lung cancer, and mesothelioma.
While many asbestos companies knew that asbestos was dangerous but they hid the dangers and refused to inform their employees or consumers. In fact, the Johns Manville Company rebuffed attempts by life insurance companies to hang warning signs in their offices. Asbestos was discovered to be carcinogenic in the 1930s, according to research conducted by Johns Manville.
The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) was established in 1971, however, it didn't begin to regulate asbestos until the 1970s. At this point, doctors and health experts were already trying to alert people to the dangers of asbestos. The efforts were mostly successful. News articles and lawsuits started to raise awareness however, many asbestos companies were resistant to stricter regulations.
Despite the fact asbestos is banned in the United States, the mesothelioma issue remains a major concern for people across the nation. It's because asbestos continues to be found in homes and businesses even in those that were built prior to the 1970s. This is the reason it's crucial for individuals who have been diagnosed with mesothelioma or an asbestos-related disease to seek legal help. A knowledgeable attorney will assist them in obtaining the compensation they deserve. They will be able to understand the complex laws that govern this kind of case, and can ensure that they get the most favorable result.
Claude Tomplait
In 1966, Claude Tomplait was diagnosed with asbestosis. He then filed his first lawsuit against asbestos manufacturers of products. In his lawsuit, he claimed that the manufacturers had failed warn of the dangers associated with their insulation products. This crucial case opened the floodgates for thousands of similar lawsuits that continue to be filed today.
The majority of asbestos litigation involves claims by workers in construction industries that used asbestos-containing products. These include plumbers, electricians, carpenters, drywall installers, and roofers. Some of these workers suffer from mesothelioma as well as lung cancer. Some of them are seeking compensation in the case that their loved ones have died.
Millions of dollars can be awarded in damages in a lawsuit brought against a manufacturer of asbestos products. This money is used to cover past and future medical expenses, lost wages, and suffering and pain. The money can also be used to pay for travel expenses, funeral and burial expenses, and loss companionship.
Asbestos litigation forced many companies to bankruptcy and established asbestos trust fund to compensate victims. It has also put pressure on federal and state courts. Additionally it has consumed thousands of man-hours by attorneys and witnesses.
The asbestos litigation was a costly and long-running process that took several decades. But, it was successful in exposing asbestos business executives who concealed the truth about asbestos for decades. They were aware of the risks and pressured workers to not talk about their health problems.
After many years of appeals, trials and court rulings in favor of Tomplait. The court's decision was in reference to an edition of 1965 of the Restatement of Torts that states, "A manufacturer is liable for injury to the consumer or user of his product if the product is supplied in a defective condition without adequate warning."
Jacqueline Watson, Tomplait's wife, was awarded damages by the court after the verdict. However, Ms. Watson died before the court could make her final verdict. Kazan Law offered to appeal the Appellate Court decision to the California Supreme Court.
Clarence Borel
Workers' compensation claims were filed by asbestos-insulators like Borel in the latter half of 1950s. They complained of respiratory problems and a thickening of the fingertip tissue (called "finger clubbing"). However, asbestos companies minimized the health risks associated with asbestos exposure. In the 1960s, more medical research began to connect asbestos with respiratory ailments such as mesothelioma and asbestosis.
In 1969, Borel sued manufacturers of asbestos-containing insulation materials for not warning about the dangers of their products. He claimed he had developed mesothelioma and asbestosis as the result of working with their insulation for thirty-three years. The court ruled that defendants had a responsibility to warn.
The defendants claim that they did not violate their duty to warn because they were aware or ought to have known of the dangers of asbestos well before 1968. They point to expert testimony that asbestosis doesn't show its symptoms until fifteen, twenty, or even twenty-five years after the initial exposure to asbestos. If these experts are right and the defendants are found to be negligent, they could have been held accountable for the injuries suffered by others who may have suffered from asbestosis earlier than Borel.
The defendants also claim that they aren't accountable for the mesothelioma that Borel contracted since it was his choice to continue working with asbestos-containing products. Kazan Law gathered evidence that showed the defendants' companies were aware of asbestos' dangers and suppressed the information for decades.
The 1970s saw an increase in asbestos-related litigation, in spite of the Claude Tomplait class action case being the first. Asbestos lawsuits flooded the courts and a multitude of asbestos-related illnesses were contracted by workers. In response to the lawsuit asbestos-related businesses, they went into bankruptcy. Trust funds were set up to pay compensation for asbestos-related illnesses. As the litigation continued, it became clear that asbestos companies were responsible for the damages caused by their harmful products. The asbestos industry was forced to reforming their business practices. Today, many asbestos-related lawsuits have been settled for millions of dollars.
Stanley Levy
Stanley Levy is the author of several articles that have been published in scholarly journals. He has also spoken on these topics at a number of legal seminars and conferences. He is an active member of the American Bar Association and has been on numerous committees that deal mesothelioma and asbestos as well as mass torts. His firm, Levy Phillips & Konigsberg has more than 500 asbestos plaintiffs across the nation.
The firm charges 33 percent plus the cost of expenses for any compensation it receives for clients. It has obtained some of the biggest verdicts in asbestos litigation, including a $22 million award for a mesothelioma patient who worked at an New York City Steel Plant. The firm also represents 132 Brooklyn Navy Yard plaintiffs, and has filed lawsuits for thousands of patients suffering from mesothelioma, among other asbestos-related illnesses.
Despite its successes, the firm has been subject to criticism for its involvement in asbestos litigation. It has been accused by critics of propagating conspiracy theories, sabotaging the jury system, and inflating the statistics. Additionally, the company has been accused of making fraudulent claims. In response to this, the firm has launched a public defense fund and is looking for donations from individuals and corporations.
Another issue is that many defendants are attacking the scientific consensus worldwide that asbestos even at very low levels, can cause mesothelioma. They have resorted to money paid by asbestos companies to hire "experts" who have published articles in journals of academic research to support their claims.
Attorneys aren't just fighting over the scientific consensus regarding asbestos, but are also focusing on the other aspects of the cases. They are arguing, for instance regarding the constructive notice required to file an asbestos claim. They claim that the victim should have had actual knowledge of asbestos' dangers to be eligible for compensation. Racine asbestos attorneys debate the compensation ratios among various asbestos-related diseases.
The attorneys representing plaintiffs argue there is a huge public interest in granting compensation to those who have suffered from mesothelioma and related diseases. They claim that the asbestos-producing companies should have been aware of the risks, and that they must be held responsible.