Asbestos Litigation Defense
The defense of companies against asbestos litigation requires a thorough review of the plaintiff's employment history, medical records and testimony. We typically use the bare metal defense which is focused on proving that your company was not able to manufacture, sell or distribute the asbestos-containing products at issue in the claimant's case.
Asbestos cases are special and require a tenacious approach to achieve successful results. We are regional, local and national counsel.
Statute of Limitations
The statute of limitations is a period within which the majority of lawsuits have to be filed. For asbestos cases, this means that the deadline for filing a lawsuit is between one and six years after a person is diagnosed with an asbestos-related illness. In order to defend the case, it is important to prove that the alleged injury or death did occur prior to the timeframe. Often, this means reviewing the entirety of the plaintiff's work background, including interviews with former coworkers and the careful review of Social Security, union, tax and other documents.
In defending asbestos cases, there are various complex issues. For instance, asbestos victims are more likely to suffer from a less serious disease such as asbestosis before being diagnosed with a fatal illness like mesothelioma. In these situations, a lawyer for defense will argue that the statute of limitations should start when the person who suffers from asbestos knew or reasonably ought to have known that their exposure to asbestos triggered the disease.
The complexity of these cases is made more difficult by the fact that the time limit for filing a lawsuit may differ between states. In these cases an experienced mesothelioma lawyer will try to bring the case in the state where the bulk of the exposure alleged occurred. This can be a challenging job, since asbestos victims typically travel around the country in search of jobs, and the alleged exposure could have occurred in several states.
The process of establishing the facts isn't always easy in asbestos litigation. In contrast to other personal injury cases, which typically contain only a few defendants, asbestos-related litigation typically involves dozens or more parties. As a result, it can be difficult to obtain relevant evidence in these cases, particularly when the plaintiff's argument for injuries spans decades and connects multiple defendants.
The McGivney, Kluger, Clark & Intoccia Team has vast experience as National Coordinating Counsel for multi-district asbestos litigation that spans multiple jurisdictions. We work closely with regional and local counsel to devise strategies for litigation, manage local counsel, and produce efficient and consistent results in coordination with the goals of our clients. We regularly appear before coordination and trial judges, as well as special masters of litigation, across the country.
Bare Metal Defense
The past has seen manufacturers of turbine, boiler and pump equipment have successfully defended themselves against asbestos litigation by claiming the defense referred to as the "bare metal" or the component part doctrine. Alameda asbestos lawsuit asserts that a manufacturer is not responsible for asbestos-related injury caused by replacement parts they did not install or manufacture.
In the case of Devries, an employee at an Tennessee Eastman chemical plant sued several equipment manufacturers for his mesothelioma. Plaintiff's job entailed the removal and replacement of insulation, steam traps and gaskets on equipment like pumps, valves and steam traps (Equipment Defendants). He claimed that he had been exposed to asbestos while working in the plant and was diagnosed with Mesothelioma several years later.
The Supreme Court's Devries decision has altered the landscape of asbestos litigation, and could influence the way that the courts in other jurisdictions deal with the issue of third-party components that manufacturers incorporate into their equipment. The Court declared that the application 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 applied the bare-metal defense in a case involving asbestos and it is a significant deviation from the standard product liability laws. Most courts have interpreted this "bare metal" defense as a way of avoiding the obligation of a company to warn of the dangers caused by replacement parts that it did not manufacture or sell.
The McGivney, Kluger, Clark & Intoccia Team is regularly serving as National Coordinating Counsel in multi-jurisdictional asbestos lawsuits that affect the entire industry. 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 objectives. Our lawyers participate in industry conferences on major issues affecting asbestos litigation. Our firm's experience includes representing clients across the nation and working closely with the coordinating judges and trial courts as well as litigation special masters. Our unique strategy has proven successful in reducing exposure and legal costs for our clients.
Expert Witnesses
A person with specific expertise, experience or knowledge can be an expert witness. They offer independent assistance to a judge by providing an objective opinion on matters that are within their expertise. He must clearly state his views and the evidence or assumptions he's basing it on. He should not overlook any aspects that could influence his conclusions.
In cases involving allegations of exposure to asbestos, medical professionals are often asked to assist in the assessment of the claimant's illness and to determine if there is a causal connection between their condition and a known source of exposure. Many of the ailments that are caused by asbestos are complex, requiring the expertise of specialists in the field. This includes pharmacists, doctors, nurses, toxicologists, epidemiologists and occupational health professionals.
Whether it is the prosecution or defence, an expert's role is to provide objective technical assistance. Experts should not be an advocate or try to influence the jury to favor his client. He should not attempt to convince jurors or make an argument.
The expert should collaborate with other experts to address any peripheral issues and reduce any technical issues. The expert should also work with the experts who instruct him in identifying areas that are in agreement and areas of disagreement for the reason of the joint statement of experts commissioned by the court.
At the conclusion of his examination in chief the expert must be able to explain his findings and the reasons behind them in a clear and easy-to-understand way. He is expected to be able to respond questions from the prosecution or judge and should be willing to address any points which are raised on cross-examination.
Cetrulo LLP has extensive experience in defending clients involved in complex asbestos litigation involving multiple parties and jurisdictions. Our attorneys are able to advise and manage national and regional defense counsel as well as local and regional experts and witnesses. Our team is regularly in front of coordinating judges in asbestos litigation across the nation as well as trial judges and special Masters.
Medical Experts
Expert witnesses are crucial in cases which involve asbestos-related injuries due the time lag between exposure to asbestos and initial symptoms. Asbestos cases typically involve complicated theories of injuries that span decades and involve hundreds or dozens of defendants. Due to this, it's nearly impossible for a plaintiff to prove their case without the assistance of experts.
Experts in the fields of medicine and other sciences are required to determine the extent of an individual's exposure and their medical condition, as well as provide insight into future health concerns. Experts like these are essential to any case and should be thoroughly checked and knowledgeable of the field of study. The more experience the medical or scientific expert has the more persuasive they will be.
In many asbestos cases, a medical expert or scientist is required to examine the records of the claimant and conduct a physical exam. These experts can testify whether asbestos exposure has caused a particular medical condition, like mesothelioma or lung cancer.
It could be necessary to consult other experts, such as industrial hygienists to determine the presence of asbestos exposure levels. They can employ advanced sampling and analytical techniques to assess the levels of asbestos in the air in a home or workplace and compare them to the legal exposure standards.
They can be beneficial in defending companies that produce or distribute asbestos-related goods. They are usually 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 negligence on the part of the employer or the responsibility of the manufacturer of the product.
Other experts who could be involved in these instances are occupational and environmental experts. They can provide insights into the safety protocols that are in place at a specific workplace or business, and how they are related to the liability of asbestos manufacturers. They can, for example, establish that renovation materials damaged during a remodel project may contain asbestos or that shaking clothing contaminated by asbestos can cause asbestos dust and asbestos fibers to be released.