Asbestos Litigation Defense
In order to defend companies against asbestos-related lawsuits, it is necessary to review the medical records of the plaintiff, work history and testimony. We often employ the bare-metal defense, which focuses on arguing that your company didn't manufacture or sell the asbestos-containing products that are at issue in the case of a claimant.
Asbestos cases require an exclusive approach and a tenacious strategy to achieve success. We are regional, local and national counsel.
Statute of limitations
The majority of lawsuits must be filed within a specified time period, known as the statute of limitations. In asbestos cases, this means the legal deadline for filing is between one and six years after a person is diagnosed with an asbestos-related illness. For the defense it is essential to establish that the alleged accident or death did not occur prior to the timeframe. Often, this requires conducting a thorough review of the plaintiff's past work background, including interviews with former coworkers and the careful review of Social Security, union, tax and other records.
The process of defending an asbestos case involves a number of complex issues. Asbestos sufferers may develop a less severe illness, such asbestosis, before they are diagnosed with a fatal condition such as mesothelioma. In these cases, a lawyer for defense will argue that the limitation period should begin when the victim knew or reasonably ought to have realized that their exposure to asbestos triggered the disease.
The difficulty of these cases is also exacerbated by the fact that the time limit for filing a lawsuit may vary between states. In these cases a mesothelioma lawyer who is experienced will attempt to bring the case in the state where the majority of the exposure alleged occurred. This can be a daunting task as asbestos sufferers typically travel around the country in search of work and the alleged exposure could have occurred in a variety of states.
The discovery process is a challenge in asbestos litigation. Asbestos litigation is more difficult than other personal injury cases. Instead of a handful of defendants, as is the case in most cases, there are typically many people involved. It can be difficult to get significant discovery when there are many defendants and the plaintiff's claim is spanning decades.
The McGivney, Kluger, Clark & Intoccia team has extensive experience serving as National Coordinating Counsel in multi-district and multi-jurisdictional asbestos litigation. We collaborate closely with regional and local counsel to develop litigation strategies and manage local counsel and produce efficient and consistent results while coordinating with the client's goals. We frequently appear in front of coordinating and trial judge, as well as litigation masters, across the country.
Bare Metal Defense
In the past, manufacturers of boilers, turbines, pumps and valves have defended themselves from asbestos lawsuits using the "bare metal" doctrine or the component part doctrine. This defense states that a manufacturer is not responsible for asbestos-related injuries resulting from replacement parts that they did not install or manufacture.
In the case of Devries, an employee of a Tennessee Eastman chemical plant sued several equipment manufacturers to treat his mesothelioma. The job of the plaintiff was to remove and replacement of insulation, steam traps and gaskets on equipment like pumps, valves and steam traps (Equipment defendants). He claimed that asbestos was ingested during his time at the plant and was diagnosed with mesothelioma years later.
The Supreme Court's Devries decision has changed the landscape of asbestos litigation, and could influence the way that the courts in other jurisdictions deal with the issue of third-party parts that manufacturers include in their equipment. The Court said that this use of the bare metal defense is "cabined" in maritime law but left open the possibility for other federal circuits to apply this doctrine to cases that aren't maritime.
This was the first time that a federal appellate court used the bare-metal defense in a case involving asbestos, and it's a major deviation from the standard product liability laws. The majority of courts have interpreted "bare metal" as a denial of the obligation of a maker to warn about the potential harms caused by replacement parts it did't manufacture or sell.
The McGivney, Kluger, Clark & Intoccia Team is regularly serving as National Coordinating Counsel in multi-jurisdictional asbestos lawsuits that impact the entire industry. We help our clients develop strategies for litigation, manage regional and local counsel, and ensure a an efficient, cost-effective defense in coordination with their goals. Our lawyers speak at industry conferences on important issues that affect asbestos litigation. Our firm has a long history of defending clients across the 50 states and working closely with trial courts, judges and litigation special masters. Our unique strategy has proven to be successful in reducing exposure and legal costs for our clients.
Expert Witnesses
A person who has specialized expertise, experience or knowledge can be an expert witness. They offer independent assistance to a judge by providing an unbiased opinion on matters within their expertise. He must clearly state his views and the evidence or assumptions he's basing it on. He should not ignore any factors that could influence his conclusions.
In cases involving allegations of exposure to asbestos, medical experts are often asked to assist in the assessment of the claimant's health and the identification of any connection between their condition and the identified source of exposure. A lot of the diseases associated with asbestos are very complicated, requiring the expertise of specialists in the field. This could include pharmacists, doctors, nurses toxicologists, epidemiologists, and occupational health specialists.
Whether it is the defense or prosecution the expert's job is to provide impartial technical assistance. He is not expected to assume the role of advocate, nor should he seek to influence or persuade the jury to support his client. He should not try to convince the jury or advocate for an argument.
The expert should collaborate with other experts to resolve any peripheral issues and identify any technical issues. The expert should also work with those instructing him in identifying areas of agreement and disagreement to serve the reason of the joint statement of experts commissioned by the court.
The expert must, at the end of his examination chief, discuss his conclusions as well as the reasoning behind them in a way that is clear and easy to comprehend. He should be prepared to answer questions from the prosecution or the judge and be prepared to address any issues that are raised on cross-examination.
Cetrulo LLP has extensive experience in defending clients involved in complex asbestos litigation involving multiple parties and jurisdictions. Our lawyers can manage and counsel regional and national defense counsel, as in addition to local, regional and expert witnesses and experts. Our team is regularly in front of the coordinating judges, trial judges and special masters in asbestos litigation across the country.
specializes in asbestos litigation to the issues of latency that occur between asbestos exposure and beginning of symptoms Expert witnesses are a crucial part in any case involving an asbestos-related injury. Asbestos cases typically involve complicated theories of injuries that span decades and connect hundreds or dozens of defendants. This is why it is nearly impossible for a plaintiff to establish their case without the assistance of experts.
Experts in the field of medicine and other science are required to determine the degree of exposure an individual has and medical condition, and also to give insight into the future health concerns. These experts are vital to any case and must be thoroughly checked and educated in the field they are working in. The more experience the medical or scientific expert has the more convincing they will be.
In many asbestos cases, an expert in medicine or a scientist is required to review the claimant's records and perform a physical exam. Experts can testify as to whether the claimant's exposure to asbestos was sufficient to cause an illness that is specific to him, such as mesothelioma, lung cancer, or other types of scarring that affects the respiratory tract and lungs (e.g. plaques in the pleural cavity).
Other experts such as industrial hygienists may be required to aid in establishing the existence of asbestos-related exposure levels. They can employ advanced sampling techniques and analytical methods to determine the amount of asbestos in the air in a workplace or home and compare these levels to legal exposure standards.
Experts of this kind can be extremely useful when defending companies who manufactured or distributed asbestos-related products, as they often have the capability of proving that the levels of exposure of plaintiffs were within the legal limit and that there was no evidence of employer negligence or manufacturer responsibility.
Other experts who could be involved in these cases are occupational and environmental specialists. They can provide insights into the safety guidelines that are in place at a specific workplace or company, and how they are related to the liability of asbestos manufacturers. For example, 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.