Asbestos Litigation Defense
In order to defend companies against asbestos litigation and claims, it is essential to review the plaintiff's medical records, work history and testimony. We often employ the bare-metal defense, which focuses on arguing that your company didn't manufacture, sell or distribute the asbestos-containing products in question in the claimant's case.
Asbestos cases require a unique method and a persistent strategy to achieve success. We act as 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 six years after a victim is diagnosed with an asbestos-related illness. It is essential for the defense to prove that the alleged injury occurred after the deadline. Often, this requires conducting a thorough review of the plaintiff's past work history, which includes interviews with former coworkers and the careful examination of Social Security, union, tax and other documents.
Defending asbestos cases involves many complicated issues. Asbestos-related victims can suffer from a less severe illness, such as asbestosis, prior to being diagnosed with a fatal condition such as mesothelioma. In these cases, a defense attorney will argue that the statute of limitations should start when the victim was aware or reasonably ought to have known that their exposure to asbestos triggered the disease.
The difficulty of these cases is exacerbated by the fact that the statute of limitations can differ between states. In these instances, an experienced mesothelioma lawyer will try to file the case in the state where most of the exposure alleged occurred. This may be a difficult task as asbestos patients frequently moved around the country in search of employment, and the alleged exposure may have taken place in several states.
The process of discovery can be difficult in asbestos litigation. Asbestos litigation is more complicated than other personal injury cases. Instead of just a few defendants in the majority of cases, there are typically several parties involved. As a result, it can be hard to find a relevant evidence in these cases, particularly when the plaintiff's argument for injuries spans decades and involves several different defendants.
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 devise strategies for litigation, manage local counsel, and achieve consistent and cost-effective results that align with the client's goals. We regularly appear before coordinating and trial judges as well as special masters of litigation across the nation.
Bare Metal Defense
In the past, producers of boilers, turbines valves and pumps have defended themselves from asbestos lawsuits by arguing what is known as "bare metal" doctrine or the component part doctrine. This defense states that a manufacturer is not responsible for asbestos-related injury caused by replacement parts they did not manufacture or install.
In the case of Devries, a worker at the Tennessee Eastman chemical plant sued various equipment manufacturers over mesothelioma. The plaintiff's job included the removal and replacement of insulation, steam traps and gaskets from equipment, such as pumps, valves and steam traps. He claimed that he had been exposed to asbestos when working in the plant and was diagnosed with Mesothelioma many years later.
The Supreme Court's Devries decision has changed the nature of asbestos litigation and may influence the way that the courts in other jurisdictions deal with the issue of third-party components manufacturers add to equipment. The Court said that the application of the bare metal defense in this case is "cabined" to maritime law however, it left open the possibility that other federal circuits might apply this principle to non-maritime cases as well.
This was the first time that a federal appellate court ruled on the"bare-metal" defense in a case involving asbestos, and it is a significant departure from the traditional product liability laws. The majority of courts have interpreted "bare metal" as a denial of the responsibility of a maker to warn about the dangers posed 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 affect the entire industry. We assist our clients to develop strategies for litigation, manage local and regional counsel and provide an efficient, cost-effective defense in accordance with their goals. Our attorneys speak at industry conferences on major issues affecting asbestos litigation. Our firm's experience includes defending clients across the nation and working closely with coordinating judges, trial courts and litigation special masters. Our unique method has proven successful in reducing exposure and legal costs for our clients.
Expert Witnesses
An expert witness is a person who has specialized skills, experience or knowledge and offers independent assistance to the court by way of an impartial opinion on matters of his expertise. He should clearly state the facts or assumptions on the basis of his opinion and should not be oblivious to look into matters that might affect his opinions.
In the event that asbestos exposure is alleged medical experts may be required to assess the claimant's condition and to determine any causal link between the condition and the source of exposure. Many of the diseases that are caused by asbestos are complicated and require the expertise of experts. This could include pharmacists, doctors, nurses toxicologists, epidemiologists, as well as occupational health specialists.
In the event of a prosecution or defence the role of an expert is to provide impartial technical assistance. He should not assume the position as an advocate and should not try to influence or persuade the jury in favour of his client. He should not attempt to convince the jury or make an argument.
The expert should collaborate with the other experts to resolve any peripheral issues and identify any technical issues. The expert should also co-operate 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.
At the conclusion of his main examination the expert must present his conclusions and the reasons behind them in a clear and understandable way. He should be able to answer questions posed by the judge or the prosecution, and be willing to answer all questions raised during 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 counsel and manage national and regional defense counsel, as well as regional and local experts as well as witnesses. Our team appears regularly 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 which involve asbestos-related injuries due the latency between exposure to asbestos and the beginning symptoms. Asbestos cases typically involve complicated theories of injury that span decades and connect hundreds or even dozens of defendants. It is almost impossible for a plaintiff to prove their case without the help of experts.
why asbestos litigation are important in the fields of medicine and other sciences are required to assess the extent of an individual's exposure and medical condition and also to provide insight into future health issues. These experts are vital to any case and should be thoroughly vetted and educated about the subject. The more experience the medical or scientific expert has, the more persuasive they'll 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 testify 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 on the lungs and respiratory tract (e.g. plaques in the pleural cavity).
Other experts such as industrial hygienists might also be needed to assist in establishing asbestos-related exposure levels. They can use advanced sampling techniques and analytical methods to evaluate airborne asbestos levels in a home or workplace and compare these levels to legal exposure standards.
Experts of this kind are also useful in defending companies that produced or distributed asbestos-related goods as they often have the capability of proving that the levels of exposure of plaintiffs were within legal limits and that there was no evidence of employer negligence or the manufacturer's responsibility.
Other experts in these cases include environmental and occupational specialists who can provide insight into the quality of safety procedures at a particular workplace or company, and how these protocols relate to asbestos manufacturers' liability. These experts can be able to, for instance, prove that the materials used in the course of remodeling could contain asbestos, or that shaking contaminated clothing could cause asbestos fibers and asbestos dust to release.