The No. #1 Question That Everyone In Asbestos Litigation Defense Must Know How To Answer
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, work history, and testimony. We typically use the bare metal defense, which is focused on proving that your company was not able to manufacture or sell the asbestos-containing products in question in a claimant's case.
Asbestos cases are unique and require an aggressive approach to achieving successful results. We are regional, local and national counsel.
Statute of limitations
The statute of limitations is a period within which most lawsuits must be filed. In asbestos cases the deadline to file a lawsuit is between one and six years after a victim is diagnosed with an asbestos-related disease. It is important for the defense to show that the injury was sustained after the deadline. This usually requires a thorough review and examination of the plaintiff's employment history, including interviews of former coworkers, as well as an in-depth examination of Social Security and union records and tax and tax records.
The process of defending asbestos cases involves many complicated issues. For instance, asbestos victims are more likely to develop a less serious illness like asbestosis prior to being diagnosed with a fatal illness such as mesothelioma. In these instances, the defense attorney will argue the time limit should be set when the victim realized or should have reasonably known that exposure to asbestos caused their illness.
Gary asbestos attorney of these cases is also complicated by the fact that the statute of limitations can vary between states. In these instances, an experienced mesothelioma lawyer will attempt to file the case in the state where the bulk of the alleged exposure occurred. This can be a challenging task as asbestos sufferers often move around the country to find jobs, and the alleged exposure could have occurred in a variety of states.
The discovery process is a challenge in asbestos litigation. Contrary to other types of personal injury cases, which typically contain only a few defendants, asbestos-related litigation usually involves dozens or more parties. It can be difficult to obtain relevant information when there are multiple defendants and the plaintiff's theory stretches over decades.
The McGivney, Kluger, Clark & Intoccia Team has years of experience as National Coordinating Counsel for multi-district asbestos litigation that spans multiple jurisdictions. We work closely with regional and local counsel to develop litigation strategies and manage local counsel and ensure efficient and consistent results while coordinating with client goals. We regularly appear before coordination and trial judges and litigation special masters, across the country.
Bare Metal Defense
The past has seen manufacturers of turbine, boiler, pump and valve equipment have defended themselves in asbestos litigation by claiming an argument referred to as the "bare metal" or the component part doctrine. This defense asserts that a manufacturer is not liable for asbestos-related injuries resulting from replacement parts that they did not design or manufacture.
In the case of Devries v. Tennessee Eastman Chemical, an Tennessee Eastman Chemical plant employee filed a lawsuit against several equipment makers over his mesothelioma. Plaintiff's job entailed the removal and replacement of steam traps, insulation and gaskets on equipment such as pumps, valves and steam traps (Equipment Defendants). He claimed asbestos exposure occurred during his time at the plant, and was diagnosed with mesothelioma several years later.
The Supreme Court's decision in Devries has shifted the landscape of asbestos litigation, and could impact the way courts in other jurisdictions address the issue of the liability of third-party components that are added to equipment by manufacturers. 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 ruling was the first time that a federal appeals court has applied the bare metal defense in a lawsuit involving asbestos, and is quite a departure from the norms of product liability law. Most courts have interpreted the "bare metal" defense as a rejection of the obligation of a company to warn about harm caused by replacement parts it did not manufacture or sell.
The McGivney, Kluger, Clark & Intoccia team frequently serves as National Coordinating Counsel for clients in multi-jurisdictional, industry-wide asbestos litigation. We assist our clients in developing strategies for litigation, oversee local and regional counsel and ensure an effective, cost-effective and consistent defense in accordance with their goals. Our attorneys also present at industry conferences on important issues that influence asbestos litigation. Our firm's experience includes defending clients in every state and working closely with the coordinating judges and trial courts as well as litigation special masters. Our unique strategy has proven effective in cutting down on our clients' exposure and legal costs.
Expert Witnesses
An expert witness is one who is specialized in his skills, knowledge or experience and offers independent assistance to the court with the aid of unbiased opinion concerning issues that fall within his field of expertise. He should clearly state the facts or assumptions upon the basis of his opinion and should not be oblivious to look into matters that could affect his opinions.
In the event that asbestos exposure is claimed medical experts may be required to assess the claimant's condition and to determine any causal links between the condition and the source of exposure. A lot of the diseases caused by asbestos are extremely complicated, requiring the expertise of specialists in the field. This could include doctors and nurses pharmacists, toxicologists, pharmacists, occupational health specialists, epidemiologists and pharmacists.
In the event of a defense or prosecution the role of an expert is to provide objective technical assistance. He should not assume the role of an advocate, nor should he seek to influence or convince a jury to favor his client. The obligation to the court overrides 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 work with the other experts in attempting to reduce any technical issues at an early stage and eliminate any peripheral matters. The expert should also work with those who instruct him to pinpoint areas of agreement and disagreement for the joint statement of expert ordered by the court.
After his chief examination, the expert should explain his conclusions and the reasons behind them in a clear and easy-to-understand manner. He is expected to be able to respond questions from the prosecution or the judge and should be willing to address any issues that are raised on cross-examination.
Cetrulo LLP has extensive experience in defending clients in complex asbestos litigation that involves multiple parties and jurisdictions. Our attorneys are able to counsel and manage regional and national defense counsel and local and regional experts and witnesses. Our team regularly appears before the coordinating judges, trial judges, and special masters of asbestos litigation across the country.
Medical Experts
Expert witnesses are extremely important in cases that involve asbestos-related injuries because of the delay between exposure to asbestos and beginning symptoms. Asbestos cases often involve complex theories of injury that can span decades and connect dozens or even hundreds of defendants. It is nearly impossible for an individual to prove their case without the assistance of experts.
Medical and other experts in the field are necessary to assess the extent of a person's exposure, evaluate their medical conditions, and provide insight into potential future health problems. These experts are crucial to any case, and they must be thoroughly examined and educated about the subject. The more experience an expert in science or medicine has the more persuasive the expert is.
Asbestos cases typically require a medical or scientific expert to analyze the claimant's medical records and conduct a physical examination. These experts can testify as to whether exposure to asbestos was enough to trigger a specific medical condition like mesothelioma or lung cancer, or other forms of scarring on the respiratory tract and lungs (e.g., pleural plaques).
Other experts, such as industrial hygienists could be required to aid in establishing the existence of asbestos-related exposure levels. They can use advanced analytical and sampling techniques to evaluate the asbestos concentrations in the air at the workplace or at home to the legal exposure standards.
These experts can be very beneficial in defending companies that produce or distribute asbestos-related products. They are usually in a position to prove that the exposure levels of plaintiffs were not in the range of legal limits and that there was no evidence of employer negligence or manufacturer liability for the product.
Other experts who may be involved in these instances are occupational and environmental experts. They can provide information into the safety protocols which are in place at a particular work site or company, and how they connect to asbestos manufacturers' liability. For instance, these experts can establish that the materials disturbed during a remodel project are more likely to contain asbestos, or that shaking out contaminated clothing can cause asbestos fibers release and become inhaled.