14 Creative Ways To Spend Extra Asbestos Litigation Defense Budget

Asbestos Litigation Defense
Protecting companies from asbestos litigation requires a thorough review of a plaintiff's work history, medical records and testimony. We often employ the bare metal defense, which is focused on proving that your company didn't manufacture, sell or distribute the asbestos-containing products at issue in the case of a claimant.
Asbestos cases require an exclusive approach and a tenacious approach to get results. We are local, regional and national counsel.
Statute of Limitations
The statute of limitations is a time limit within which the majority of lawsuits have to be filed. In asbestos cases, the deadline for filing an action is between one and 6 years after a person is diagnosed with an asbestos-related illness. It is essential for the defense to prove that the injury occurred within the timeframe. This typically requires a thorough examination and analysis of the plaintiff's employment history, which includes interviews with former coworkers, and a thorough examination of Social Security and union records as well as tax, tax, and other records.
In defending an asbestos-related case, there are a number of complex issues. Asbestos victims may suffer from a less severe illness, such as asbestosis, before they are diagnosed with a fatal illness such as mesothelioma. In these instances the defense attorney will argue that the limitation period should start when the victim realized or ought to have known that exposure to asbestos causes the disease.
These cases are complicated by the fact the statute of limitations could differ from state to state. In these cases, an experienced mesothelioma lawyer will attempt to file the case in the state where most of the alleged exposure occurred. This may be a difficult task since asbestos sufferers often moved across the country to find work, and the alleged exposure may have taken place in several states.
The process of discovery isn't always easy in asbestos litigation. In contrast to other personal injury cases, which typically involve only a few defendants, asbestos-related litigation usually involves dozens or more defendants. It can be difficult to get significant discovery when there are multiple defendants, and the plaintiff's case is spanning decades.
The McGivney, Kluger, Clark & Intoccia team has extensive experience as National Coordinating Counsel in multi-district and multi-jurisdictional asbestos litigation. We collaborate closely with local and regional counsel to develop litigation strategy as well as manage local counsel and obtain consistent, cost-effective outcomes in line with the goals of the client. We frequently appear before the trial judge and the coordinating judge as also litigation masters across the country.
Greeley asbestos lawsuit www.youtube.com has seen manufacturers of turbine, boiler and pump and valve equipment have successfully defended themselves against asbestos litigation by asserting a defense known as the "bare metal" or the component part doctrine. This defense asserts that a manufacturer is not liable for asbestos-related injury caused by replacement parts they did not install or manufacture.
In the case of Devries, a worker at a Tennessee Eastman chemical plant sued various equipment manufacturers over his mesothelioma. The job of the plaintiff involved the removal and replacement of steam traps, insulation and gaskets on equipment such as valves, pumps and steam traps (Equipment defendants). He claimed asbestos was ingested when working at the plant and was diagnosed with mesothelioma several years later.
The Supreme Court's decision in Devries has changed the course of asbestos litigation. It 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 said that this use of the bare-metal defense is "cabined" in maritime law but left open the possibility of other federal circuits to apply this doctrine to cases that aren't maritime.
This was the first time that a federal appellate court applied the bare-metal defense in an asbestos case, and it is a significant deviation from the standard product liability laws. Most courts have interpreted the "bare metal" defense as rejecting the obligation of a company to warn consumers about the harm caused by replacement parts it did not manufacture or sell.
The McGivney, Kluger, Clark & Intoccia Team frequently serves as National Coordinating Counsel in multi-jurisdictional asbestos lawsuits that impact the entire industry. We assist our clients in developing strategies for litigation, manage local and regional counsel and provide an effective, cost-effective and consistent defense in coordination with their objectives. Our attorneys also speak at industry conferences on key issues affecting asbestos litigation. Our firm has experience defending clients in all 50 states and working closely with trial courts, judges and litigation special masters. Our unique method has proven successful in decreasing our clients' risk and legal costs.
Expert Witnesses
An expert witness is one who has specific skills, experience or knowledge and provides independent assistance to the court in the form of unbiased opinion concerning matters of his expertise. He should be able to clearly express his views and the evidence or assumptions he is basing it on. He should not overlook any aspects that could influence his conclusions.
In cases where asbestos exposure is suspected, medical experts may be required to assess the claimant's condition and identify any causal links between the condition and the source of exposure. A lot of the diseases that are caused by asbestos are complex, requiring the expertise of specialists in the field. This can include nurses and doctors pharmacists, toxicologists, pharmacists, epidemiologists, occupational health specialists, and pharmacists.
Experts are there to offer unbiased technical assistance, regardless of whether they are representing the prosecution or the defense. Experts should not be an advocate or attempt to influence the jury to favor his client. He should not try to convince the jury or advocate for an argument.
The expert should co-operate with the other experts in attempting to narrow any technical issues at an early stage and eliminate any irrelevant matters. The expert should also work with those who are instructing him to identify areas of agreement and discord for the joint statement of the expert commissioned by the court.
At the conclusion of his examination in chief the expert should be able to present his conclusions and the reasons behind them in a clear and easy-to-understand manner. He should be able to answer questions from either the judge or prosecution and be able to answer all questions that are raised during cross-examination.
Cetrulo LLP has extensive experience in defending clients involved in complex asbestos litigation involving multiple parties and jurisdictions. Our lawyers are able to counsel and manage national and regional defense counsel, as well as regional and local experts and witnesses. Our team regularly appears before judges who are coordinating asbestos litigation across the country and also before trial judges and special Masters.
Medical Experts
Expert witnesses are crucial in cases involving asbestos-related injuries due to the latency between exposure to asbestos and the onset symptoms. Asbestos cases often involve complex theories of injuries that can span decades and involve dozens or hundreds of defendants. It is nearly impossible for a plaintiff to prove their case without the help of experts.
Medical and other scientific experts are necessary to assess the extent of a person's exposure, assess their medical conditions and provide information about potential future health problems. These experts are crucial to any case, and must be thoroughly checked and knowledgeable in the relevant field. The more experience the medical or scientific expert has, the more persuasive they'll be.
In many asbestos cases a medical expert or scientist is required to look over the claimant's records and perform a physical exam. These experts can testify as to whether exposure to asbestos was sufficient to cause an illness that is specific to him, like mesothelioma, lung cancer, or other forms of scarring in the lungs and respiratory tract (e.g., pleural plaques).
Other experts, such as industrial hygienists could be required to aid in establishing asbestos-related exposure levels. They can employ advanced analytical and sampling techniques to determine the amount of asbestos in the air in a home or workplace with the standards for exposure that are legally required.
They can be valuable in defending companies who produce or distribute asbestos-related products. They often are in a position to prove that the levels of exposure for plaintiffs were not in the range of legal limits and that there was no evidence of negligence on the part of the employer or product manufacturer responsibility.
Other experts that could be involved in these instances are occupational and environmental experts. They can provide insights into the safety guidelines which are in place at a particular workplace or business, and how they relate to asbestos manufacturers' liability. For example, these experts can establish that the materials damaged during a remodel are more likely to contain asbestos or shaking out clothing contaminated with asbestos could cause asbestos fibers to release and become inhaled.