The 10 Most Scariest Things About Asbestos Lawsuit History
Asbestos Lawsuit History
Since the 1980s many asbestos-producing businesses and employers have gone through bankruptcy and the victims are paid through trust funds for bankruptcy and individual lawsuits. Some plaintiffs have reported suspicious legal maneuvering in their cases.
Several asbestos-related cases have gone before the United States Supreme Court. The court has handled cases involving settlements of class actions which sought to limit liability.
Anna Pirskowski
In the mid-1900s, a lady named Anna Pirskowski suffered from asbestos-related diseases and died. Her death was notable due to the fact that it sparked asbestos lawsuits against several manufacturers and triggered an increase in claims from those diagnosed with mesothelioma, cancer of the lung or other ailments. These lawsuits led to the trust funds created by the government which were used by companies that went bankrupt to pay asbestos-related victims. These funds also permit asbestos victims and their families to receive compensation for medical expenses and suffering.
The asbestos-effected workers often bring the asbestos-containing material home to their families. Inhaling the fibers causes the family members to experience the same symptoms as their exposed worker. These symptoms include chronic respiratory problems mesothelioma, lung cancer and lung cancer.
Although many asbestos companies were aware that asbestos was dangerous but they hid the dangers and refused to warn 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 identified as carcinogenic in the 1930s, according to research conducted by Johns Manville.
OSHA was established in 1971. However, it was only able to regulate asbestos in the 1970s. By the time it was formed health professionals and doctors were already trying to warn the public to the dangers of asbestos. These efforts were generally successful. The news media and lawsuits began to raise awareness however, many asbestos companies were resistant to stricter regulations.
Despite the fact asbestos is banned in the United States, the mesothelioma problem continues to be a major issue for people across the nation. Asbest remains in homes and business even in buildings built prior to the 1970s. This is the reason it's crucial for those who have been diagnosed with mesothelioma, or any other asbestos-related illness to seek legal assistance. An experienced attorney can help them get the compensation they deserve. They will comprehend the complicated laws that apply to this type of case and make sure that they get the most favorable result.
Claude Tomplait
Claude Tomplait, diagnosed with asbestosis in the year 1966, filed the first lawsuit against asbestos manufacturers. In his lawsuit, he claimed that the manufacturers failed to warn of the dangers associated with their insulation products. This crucial case opened the floodgates to tens of thousands of similar lawsuits, which continue to be filed today.
Most asbestos lawsuits are brought by people who worked in the construction industry and employed asbestos-containing products. These people include electricians, plumbers and carpenters and drywall installers as well as roofers. A few of these workers are suffering from mesothelioma, cancer of the lung and other asbestos-related ailments. Many are also seeking compensation for the loss of their loved family members.
A lawsuit against a manufacturer of asbestos-based products can result in millions dollars in damages. The money is used to cover the future and past medical expenses, lost wages and suffering and pain. It can also be used to pay for travel costs funeral and burial expenses, and loss companionship.
Asbestos lawsuits have forced a lot of companies into bankruptcy and established asbestos trust funds to pay victims. The litigation has also put pressure on the state and federal courts. Additionally it has consumed thousands of hours of attorneys and witnesses.
The asbestos litigation was an expensive and long-running process that lasted many decades. However, it was successful in exposing asbestos company executives who concealed the asbestos facts for years. These executives were aware of the dangers and pushed workers to keep quiet about their health concerns.
After years of appeal and trial and appeal, the court decided in favor of Tomplait. The court's decision was based upon the 1965 edition of the Restatement of Torts, which states that "A manufacturer is responsible for the harm caused to an end-user or consumer of its product if it is sold in a defective condition, without adequate warning."
After the verdict was reached the defendants were ordered to compensate the widow of Tomplait, Jacqueline Watson. Watson passed away before the final award could be made 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 such as Borel were starting to complain of breathing problems and the thickening of their fingers tissue, referred to as "finger clubbing." They filed worker's compensation claims. But asbestos companies minimized the health risks of asbestos exposure. The truth would only be more widely known in the 1960s, when more research in medicine connected asbestos exposure to respiratory illnesses like mesothelioma and asbestosis.
In 1969, Borel sued manufacturers of asbestos-containing insulation materials for not warning of the dangers of their products. He claimed he developed mesothelioma and asbestosis as a result of working with their insulation for a period of 33 years. The court ruled that defendants were required to warn.
The defendants argue that they didn't commit any crime since they knew about asbestos' dangers long before 1968. Expert testimony indicates that asbestosis might not be manifest until 15, 20 or even 25 years after asbestos attorneys exposure. If these experts are correct the defendants could be liable for injuries suffered by other workers who may have had asbestosis prior to Borel.
Furthermore, the defendants claim that they shouldn't be held accountable for the development of Borel's mesothelioma because it was his choice to continue to work with asbestos-containing insulation. Kazan Law gathered evidence that showed the defendants' companies were aware of asbestos' dangers and suppressed the information for decades.
The 1970s saw a surge in asbestos-related litigation, despite the Claude Tomplait class action case being the first. asbestos lawyers lawsuits flooded the courts and thousands of workers were diagnosed with asbestos lawyers-related diseases. In the wake of the litigation, many asbestos lawyer-related businesses went under and created trust funds to compensate victims of asbestos-related diseases. As the litigation progressed, it became evident that asbestos companies were liable to the extent of the damage caused by toxic materials. The asbestos industry was forced into reforming their business practices. Many asbestos-related lawsuits are settled today for millions dollars.
Stanley Levy
Stanley Levy has written a number of articles that have been published in journals of scholarly research. He has also given talks on these subjects at various seminars and legal conferences. 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 represents more than 500 asbestos victims across the country.
The firm charges 33 percent plus costs for any compensation it receives for clients. It has secured some of the biggest verdicts in asbestos litigation history such as an award of $22 million for a man with mesothelioma who worked at a New York City steel plant. The firm represents 132 Brooklyn Navy Yard Plaintiffs and has filed lawsuits on behalf of tens of thousands of mesothelioma patients or other asbestos-related diseases.
Despite this achievement however, the firm is facing increased criticism over its involvement in asbestos lawsuits. It has been accused by critics of propagating conspiracy theories, attacking the jury system, and inflating statistics. The company has also been accused of pursuing fraud claims. In response the company has announced a public defense fund and is seeking donations from corporations and individuals.
Another problem is that a lot of defendants do not believe that asbestos is a cause of mesothelioma, even at very low levels. They have used the money provided by asbestos companies to hire "experts" who have published papers in academic journals to support their claims.
In addition to fighting over the scientific consensus regarding asbestos, lawyers are also focusing on other aspects of the case. They are arguing, for instance regarding the constructive notification required to submit an asbestos claim. They claim that the victim should have had actual knowledge of the dangers of asbestos to be eligible for compensation. They also debate the compensation ratios for various asbestos-related diseases.
Lawyers for plaintiffs claim there is a significant interest in compensating people who have been affected by mesothelioma and related diseases. They argue that the companies that made asbestos should have known about the risks and must be held accountable.