10 Apps That Can Help You Manage Your Ny Asbestos Litigation

New York Asbestos Litigation

In New York, mesothelioma and lung cancer victims can find compensation through an experienced mesothelioma lawyer. These illnesses are often caused by asbestos exposure. The symptoms may not be apparent for a long time.

Judges who oversee NYCAL's caseload have crafted a pattern of favoring plaintiffs. Recent rulings could further erode the rights of defendants.

Upstate New York Asbestos Litigation Dockets

Asbestos litigation is different from the typical personal injury lawsuit. These cases involve multiple defendants (companies being sued), multiple law offices representing plaintiffs, and multiple expert witness. Additionally, there are usually specific workplaces which are the focus of these cases due to asbestos was used in a variety of products and a lot of workers were exposed to asbestos during their work. Asbestos victims are often diagnosed with serious illnesses such as mesothelioma and lung cancer.

New York has its own unique way of dealing with asbestos litigation. In fact, it is one of the largest dockets in the country. It is governed by a special Case Management Order. This CMO was designed to manage asbestos cases involving a large number of defendants. The judges involved in the NYCAL docket have experience in asbestos cases. The docket has also seen some of the highest settlements for plaintiffs in recent years.

The New York Court of Appeals has recently made significant changes to the NYCAL docket. In 2015 the political establishment in Albany was shaken to its foundation when former Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver was convicted on federal corruption charges. Silver was accused of killing every reasonably created tort reform bill that was passed by the legislature for more than 20 years, while working for the plaintiffs firm Weitz & Luxenberg.

Justice Sherry Klein Heitler retired in April 2014 amid reports that she gave the Weitz & Luxenberg firm "red carpet treatment". She was replaced by Justice Peter Moulton who implemented a number changes to the docket.

Moulton introduced a new rule for the NYCAL docket that requires that defendants file evidence that their products were not responsible for plaintiffs' mesothelioma. He also implemented new rules that stipulated that he would not dismiss cases until the expert witness testimony had been completed. This new policy may have significant effects on the speed of discovery in cases on the NYCAL docket, and could result in a more favorable outcome for defendants.

A federal judge in the Eastern District of Virginia dismissed MDL 875 last week and ordered that all Asbestos Lawsuit cases in the future be transferred to another District. This will hopefully bring about more efficient and uniform handling of these cases because the MDL currently MDL has earned itself reputation for abuse of discovery, unwarranted sanctions and low evidentiary requirements.

Central New York Asbestos Litigation Dockets

After years of corruption by former Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver and his mismanagement the scandals surrounding Sheldon Silver's ties with asbestos lawyers have finally brought attention to New York City’s asbestos court that is rigged. Justice Peter Moulton is now presiding over NYCAL and has already held a town hall meeting with defense attorneys to listen to complaints about the "rigged" system that favors one powerful asbestos law firm.

Asbestos litigation is different from the typical personal injury lawsuit, which has many of the same defendants (companies who are being sued) and plaintiffs (people who file the lawsuits). Asbestos litigation also involves similar job sites, where many people were exposed asbestos, leading to mesothelioma and lung cancer. This can lead large verdicts that can block court dockets.

To address the problem, several states have adopted laws to limit these types of claims. These laws typically deal with issues such as medical requirements, two-disease regulations, expedited case scheduling, forum shopping, joinders, consequential damages, and successor liability.

Despite these laws, certain states continue to see large numbers of asbestos lawsuits. Certain courts have created special "asbestos attorneys Dockets" to reduce the number of asbestos lawsuits and accelerate the resolution of these cases. These dockets are governed by different rules that are specifically designed for asbestos cases. The New York City asbestos court, for example requires claimants to meet certain medical standards and has rules for two diseases. It also utilizes an accelerated schedule.

Some states have also passed laws to limit the amount of punitive damages awarded in asbestos cases. These laws are meant to discourage particularly harmful conduct and allow more compensation to the victims. You should speak with a New York Mesothelioma Lawyer regardless of whether you decide to file your case in federal or state courts to know the laws applicable to your particular situation.

Alfred Sargente focuses his practice on toxic tort and environmental litigation, product liability, commercial litigation and general liability matters. He has extensive experience defending clients against claims alleging exposure to lead, asbestos and World Trade Center dust in both New York and New Jersey. He also regularly defends cases that claim exposure to other hazardous substances and contaminants like vibration, noise, mold and environmental contaminants.

Southern New York Asbestos Litigation Dockets

Thousands of people have died from asbestos exposure in New York. Mesothelioma patients and their families have filed lawsuits in five counties against companies that manufacture of asbestos-containing products to seek compensation. Mesothelioma lawsuits that succeed make asbestos companies accountable for their rash decisions to put profits ahead of public safety.

New York mesothelioma lawyers are adept at representing clients with diverse backgrounds against the nation's most significant asbestos manufacturers. Their legal strategies could lead to an impressive settlement or verdict.

Asbestos litigation has a long-standing history in New York, and continues to draw attention. The 2022 national mesothelioma claims report by KCIC states that New York as the third most popular place for mesothelioma lawsuits after California and Pennsylvania.

The state's judiciary has been buffeted by the flood of asbestos lawsuits. Sheldon Silver, the former Assembly Speaker, was convicted in 2015 of federal corruption charges related to millions of dollars in referral fees which he received from powerful political plaintiffs law firms Weitz & Luxenberg for handling asbestos cases. After the scandal, Justice Sherry Klein Heitler, who had managed NYCAL since 2008, was dismissed amid reports that she provided "red-carpet treatment" to Weitz & Luxenberg asbestos lawsuits.

Justice Heitler was succeeded as NYCAL judge by Justice Peter Moulton, who has made it clear that defendants are not entitled to summary judgment unless they have an "scientifically solid credible, admissible and reliable scientific study" showing the measured exposure of a plaintiff was not enough to cause mesothelioma. This effectively ends the possibility that NYCAL defendants can get summary judgment.

Justice Moulton also ruled that the plaintiff must prove some damage to their health as a result of asbestos exposure in order for the court to award compensatory damage. This ruling, along with a ruling in early 2016 that holds that medical monitoring is not a tort, makes it almost impossible for an asbestos defense lawyer to win a NYCAL motion for summary judgment.

In the case that Judge Toal was the judge in mesothelioma-related lawsuits brought against DOVER Green, a company that is accused of violating asbestos work practices regulations when it renovated Manhattan campus buildings in October 2013 to raise funds for a fundraising event. The lawsuit claims that DOVER GREENS was not following CAA and Asbestos NESHAP requirements by failing to inspect the Campus; notify EPA before starting renovation activities and properly remove, store, and dispose of asbestos attorneys and have a trained representative on site during renovation activities.

Eastern New York Asbestos Litigation Dockets

Asbestos-related personal injury and death cases once clogged federal court dockets, and judges' judicial resources were drained, preventing them from addressing criminal matters or important civil disputes. The bloated litigation impeded the timely compensation of victims and irritated innocent families. It also led to companies to invest excessive money on defense.

Asbestos claims are filed by individuals diagnosed with mesothelioma and other asbestos-related diseases following being exposed to asbestos in a workplace environment. Most cases are filed by shipyard workers, construction employees, employees as well as other tradesmen who worked on buildings that contained or were constructed using asbestos-containing materials. They were exposed to dangerous asbestos fibers either during the process of manufacturing or while working on the structure.

Asbestos litigation was the first mass tort. In the late 1970s to the early 1980s, asbestos exposure triggered an explosion of personal injury and wrongful deaths lawsuits. This occurred in state and federal courts across the country.

These lawsuits are filed by plaintiffs who claim that their illnesses were the result from the negligence of asbestos manufacturing products. They also claim that companies failed inform them of the dangers of asbestos exposure. More than half of asbestos lawsuits are filed in federal court.

In the early 1990s, recognizing that the litigation was a "terrible overload of the calendar," District Judge Jack B. Weinstein and New York Supreme Court justice Helen Freedman consolidated hundreds of state and federal cases involving asbestos exposure at the Brooklyn Navy Yard for settlement as well as pretrial and discovery purposes. Under the supervision of Special Master, Judge Weinstein and Justice Freedman consolidated these cases and referred to them as Brooklyn Navy Yard consolidation.

While the majority of these cases were related to the Brooklyn Navy Yard, many of the defendants were defendants in other asbestos lawsuits. The defendants list included Garlock, Inc; H & A Construction Company, as successors to Spraycraft Corporation; CRH, Inc., as the successor to E.I. Dupont; W.R. Grace and Company; Empire-Ace Insulation Manufacturing Company Bell/Atlas Asbestos Corp.; and DNS Metal Industries, Inc.