Asbestos Litigation Defense
Defending companies from asbestos litigation requires a thorough review of a plaintiff's work history as well as medical records and evidence. We often use a bare metal defense that focuses on the fact that your company didn't make, sell, or distribute asbestos-containing products that are the subject of the claimant's lawsuit.
Asbestos cases are special and require 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 specific time period, known as the statute of limitations. For asbestos-related cases, this means the deadline for filing a lawsuit is between one and six years after the victim becomes diagnosed with an asbestos-related disease. For the defense, it is important to prove that the alleged injury or death did occur prior to this timeframe. In most cases, this involves conducting a thorough review of the plaintiff's employment background, including interviews with former coworkers and the careful review of Social Security, union, tax and other documents.
The process of defending an asbestos case involves several complex issues. Asbestos sufferers may suffer from a less severe illness, such asbestosis, before they are diagnosed with a fatal condition like mesothelioma. In these instances, a lawyer for defense will argue that the limitation period should begin when the victim was aware or reasonably ought to have known that their asbestos exposure caused the disease.
These cases are made more complex due to the fact that the statute of limitations can vary from state to state. In these cases, an experienced mesothelioma lawyer may try to bring the case to the state where the bulk of the alleged exposure took place. This can be a challenging task as asbestos sufferers often move around the country to find jobs, and the alleged exposure could have occurred in several states.
In addition, the process of discovery is a challenge in asbestos litigation. Unlike other personal injury cases, which typically have only a handful of defendants, asbestos-related litigation usually includes dozens or more parties. It can be difficult to obtain relevant information when there are multiple defendants and the plaintiff's claim is spanning decades.
The McGivney, Kluger, Clark & Intoccia Team has vast experience as National Coordinating Counsel for multi-district, multi-jurisdictional, asbestos litigation. We work closely with local and regional counsel to formulate a strategy for litigation, manage local counsel and obtain consistent, cost-effective outcomes in line with the goals of the client. We frequently appear before coordinating and trial judge, as and litigation masters across the country.
Bare Metal Defense
In the past, makers of boilers, turbines valves and pumps have defended themselves against asbestos lawsuits using the "bare metal" doctrine or component part doctrine. This defense holds that a company cannot be held liable for asbestos-related harms caused by replacement components that the company did not design or install.
In the case of Devries, an employee at the Tennessee Eastman chemical plant sued several equipment manufacturers for mesothelioma. Plaintiff's work included the removal and replacement of insulation, steam traps, and gaskets from equipment like pumps, valves and steam traps. He claimed he was exposed asbestos while working in the plant and was diagnosed with Mesothelioma several years later.
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 said that this use of the bare metal defense is "cabined" in maritime law, but left open the possibility that other federal circuits to apply this doctrine to cases that aren't maritime.
This was the first time an appeals court of the federal level has applied the bare-metal defense in a asbestos lawsuit and is quite a departure from the norms of product liability law. Most courts have interpreted "bare metal" as a denial of the responsibility of a manufacturer to warn about the potential harms caused by replacement parts it did't manufacture or sale.
The McGivney, Kluger, Clark & Intoccia team is regularly serving as National Coordinating Counsel for clients who are involved in multi-jurisdictional asbestos litigation. We assist our clients to develop litigation strategies, manage regional and local counsel, and achieve an effective, cost-effective and consistent defense that is in line with their goals. Our attorneys participate in industry conferences on important issues affecting asbestos litigation. Our firm's experience includes representing clients across the nation and collaborating closely with the coordinating judges, trial courts and litigation special masters. Our unique approach has been successful in decreasing our clients' risk and legal costs.
Expert Witnesses
An expert witness is someone who has specific expertise, knowledge or experience and offers independent assistance to the court in the form of unbiased opinion concerning matters within his area of expertise. He should clearly state the facts or assumptions upon which his opinion is based and should not be oblivious to look into matters that could detract from his concluded opinions.
In cases where asbestos exposure is suspected medical experts may be required to evaluate the claimant's condition and identify any causal links between the condition and the identified source of exposure. Many of the diseases associated with asbestos are complex and require the expertise of specialists. This includes doctors and nurses, pharmacists, toxicologists or occupational health specialists, epidemiologists and pharmacists.
If it's the prosecution or defence the expert's job is to provide impartial technical assistance. He should not assume the role as an advocate, nor should he seek to influence or persuade the jury to favor his client. He should not try to convince jurors or make an argument.
The expert should work with other experts in trying to resolve any technical issues at a very early stage and eliminate any irrelevant issues. The expert should also cooperate with the experts who instruct him in identifying areas of agreement and disagreement for the purpose of the joint statement of experts ordered by the court.
After his examination in chief, the expert should present his conclusions and the reasoning behind them in a clear and understandable way. He is expected to be able to respond questions from the prosecution or judge and be prepared to address any points which are raised on cross-examination.
Cetrulo LLP is well versed in the defense of clients in complex, multi-jurisdictional, multi-party asbestos litigation. Our lawyers can assist and manage national and regional defense counsel, as well as regional and local experts and witnesses. Our team is regularly in front of trial judges, coordinating judges, and special masters in asbestos litigation throughout the country.
Medical Experts
Due to the latency issues that arise between asbestos exposure and the appearance of symptoms Expert witnesses play an extremely important role in any case involving an asbestos-related injury. Asbestos cases usually involve complicated theories of injuries that can span decades and connect hundreds or even dozens of defendants. It is almost impossible for a claimant to prove their case without the assistance of experts.
Experts in the field of medicine and other science are required to determine the extent of a person's exposure and medical condition, as well as provide insight into future health concerns. Oakland asbestos lawyers like these are essential to any case, and they must be thoroughly examined and knowledgeable in the relevant field. The more experience the medical or scientific expert has the more convincing they'll be.
In many asbestos cases, an expert in medicine or a scientist is required to look over the records of the claimant as well as perform an examination. Experts can testify as to whether the claimant's exposure asbestos was enough to cause a specific medical condition like mesothelioma or lung cancer, or other types of scarring that affects the lungs and respiratory tract (e.g. the pleural plaques).
Other experts such as industrial hygienists may be required to aid in determining the existence of asbestos-related exposure levels. They can employ advanced sampling techniques and analytical methods to assess the levels of asbestos in the air in a home or workplace and compare these to legal exposure standards.
They can be beneficial in defending companies that produce or distribute asbestos-related goods. They often are in a position to prove that the levels of exposure for plaintiffs were lower than the limits set by law, and that there was no evidence of employer negligence or manufacturer liability for the product.
Other experts in these instances include environmental and occupational specialists who can provide insight into the quality of safety protocols at a given workplace or company, and how such protocols are related to the liability of asbestos manufacturers. These experts can be able to, for instance, prove that renovation materials disturbed in the course of a remodel could contain asbestos or that shaking clothing contaminated by asbestos can cause asbestos dust and asbestos fibers to escape.