10 Things You'll Need To Learn About Asbestos Litigation Defense

Asbestos Litigation Defense

To defend companies against asbestos-related lawsuits and claims, it is essential to review the medical records of the plaintiff, work history and witness. We often use a bare metal defense that focuses on the fact that your company didn't manufacture, sell, or distribute the products containing asbestos at issue in the claimant's lawsuit.

Asbestos cases are distinct and require a determined approach to achieving successful results. We are regional, local, and national counsel.

Statute of Limitations

The statute of limitations is a period within which lawsuits are required to be filed. In asbestos cases, this means the deadline for filing a lawsuit is between one and six years after the victim becomes diagnosed with an asbestos-related condition. It is important for the defense to prove that the alleged injury occurred after the deadline. This typically requires a thorough review and analysis of the plaintiff's employment background, including interviews with former coworkers, as well as an in-depth examination of Social Security and union records as well as tax, tax, and other documents.

Defending asbestos cases involves various complex issues. Asbestos-related victims can suffer from a less severe illness, such as asbestosis, prior to being diagnosed with a fatal disease like mesothelioma. In these instances, the defense attorney will argue that the limitation period should start when the victim realized or should have reasonably believed that exposure to asbestos caused the disease.

These cases are complicated due to the fact that the statute of limitations may vary from state to state. In these instances an experienced mesothelioma lawyer may try to present the case in the state where the bulk of the exposure alleged to have taken place. This could be a challenging task because asbestos victims frequently moved around the country in search of jobs, and the claimed exposure could have occurred in multiple states.

The discovery process is a challenge in asbestos litigation. Asbestos litigation is more complex than other personal injury cases. Instead of just a few defendants, as is the case in most cases, there are typically many parties involved. It is often difficult to obtain meaningful discovery in these cases, especially when the plaintiff's theory of injuries spans decades and involves many defendants.

The McGivney, Kluger, Clark & Intoccia team has extensive experience serving as National Coordinating Counsel in multi-district and multi-jurisdictional asbestos litigation. We work closely with local and regional counsel to develop strategies for litigation and manage local counsel and produce consistent and cost-effective results in coordination with the client's goals. We regularly appear before coordination and trial judges, as well as special masters of litigation, across the country.

Bare Metal Defense

In the past, makers of turbines, boilers, pumps and valves have defended themselves from asbestos lawsuits by arguing what is referred to as "bare metal" doctrine or component part doctrine. This defense states that a manufacturer is not liable for asbestos-related injury caused by replacement parts that they did not design or manufacture.

In the case Devries v.  Pompano Beach asbestos attorney , a Tennessee Eastman Chemical plant employee filed a lawsuit against several equipment makers over his mesothelioma. The job of the plaintiff was to remove and replacement of insulation, steam traps and gaskets on equipment such as pumps, valves and steam traps (Equipment Defendants). He claimed that he was exposed to asbestos while working in the plant and was diagnosed with mesothelioma a few years afterward.

The Supreme Court's decision in Devries has altered the face of asbestos litigation. It could impact the way courts in other jurisdictions address the issue of liability for third-party components added to equipment by manufacturers. The Court declared that the use of the bare metal defense in this context is "cabined" to maritime law, but left open the possibility that other federal circuits might apply this principle to non-maritime cases also.

This was the first time that a federal appellate court applied the"bare-metal" defense in an asbestos case, and it's a significant departure from the traditional product liability laws. The majority of courts have interpreted the "bare metal" defense as a way of avoiding the obligation of a company to warn of the dangers caused by replacement parts they did not make or sell.

The McGivney, Kluger, Clark & Intoccia Team frequently serves as National Coordinating Counsel in multi-jurisdictional asbestos lawsuits that affect the entire industry. We assist our clients to develop litigation strategies, manage local and regional counsel and ensure an efficient, cost-effective defense in coordination with their objectives. Our lawyers participate in industry conferences on major issues affecting asbestos litigation. Our firm has a long history of defending clients in all 50 states and working closely with trial courts, coordinating judges and special masters of litigation. Our unique strategy has proven effective in cutting down on our clients' exposure and legal costs.

Expert Witnesses

A person with specialized expertise, skills or experience is an expert witness. They offer independent assistance to courts by providing an unbiased opinion on matters within their field of expertise. He should clearly state the facts or assumptions on which his opinion is based and must not fail to consider matters which might affect his conclusions.

In cases that involve allegations of exposure to asbestos, medical professionals are often called upon to assist in the evaluation of the claimant's condition and the determination of any causal link between their condition and a known source of exposure. A lot of the illnesses that are caused by asbestos are complicated and require the expertise of specialists. This could include nurses and doctors pharmacists, toxicologists, pharmacists, epidemiologists, occupational health specialists and pharmacists.

Experts are there to offer an impartial technical support, whether they represent the prosecution or the defence. He should not assume the position of advocate or seek to influence or convince the jury in favour of his client. The obligation to the court is greater than his obligations to his client and he should not attempt to promote a particular argument or find evidence to support it.

The expert should work with the other experts when attempting to resolve any technical issues at an early stage and eliminate any irrelevant issues. The expert should also work with those instructing him in identifying areas that are in agreement and areas of disagreement for the purpose of the joint declaration of experts ordered by the court.

After completing his examination in chief, the expert should present 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 points which are raised on cross-examination.

Cetrulo LLP is well versed in defending clients in multi-jurisdictional, multi-party asbestos litigation. Our lawyers are able to manage and counsel national and regional defense counsel, as well as local regional, expert witnesses and experts. Our team is regularly in front of the asbestos litigation judges who coordinate across the country and also before trial judges and special Masters.

Medical Experts

Due to the latency issues that occur between asbestos exposure and the beginning of symptoms Expert witnesses play an extremely important role in any case involving an asbestos-related injury. Asbestos cases often involve complex theories of injuries that can span decades and involve hundreds or even dozens of defendants. It is nearly impossible for an individual to prove their case without the assistance of experts.

Experts in the fields of medicine and other sciences are required to assess the extent of an individual's exposure and their medical condition, and also to give insight into the future health issues. Experts like these are essential to any case and should be thoroughly vetted and knowledgeable about the field of study. The more experience an expert in medicine or science has the more convincing he will be.

In many asbestos cases, an expert in medicine or a scientist is required to examine the claimant's records and perform an examination. Experts can verify whether asbestos exposure has caused a particular medical condition, such as mesothelioma or lung cancer.

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 a workplace or home with the standards for exposure that are legally required.

These types of experts can also prove valuable when defending companies who manufactured or distributed asbestos-related goods as they are often capable of demonstrating that the levels of exposure of plaintiffs were within the legal limit and that there was no evidence of employer negligence or manufacturer liability.

Other experts in these cases include environmental and occupational experts who can provide insights into the adequacy of safety protocols at a given work site or company and how they relate to the liability of asbestos manufacturers. These experts could, for example, establish that renovation materials damaged during the course of a remodel could contain asbestos, or shaking clothing contaminated with asbestos could cause asbestos dust and asbestos fibers to escape.