MADISON COUNTY, Illinois - On March 19, a Michigan man filed suit against 55 defendants, claiming that they are responsible for the asbestos exposure that resulted in his developing mesothelioma.

The suit filed by Charles Bird, Jr., states that his father was employed at Teledyne Continental Motors from the 1920s through the 1940s, and that he was exposed to asbestos fibers from his father’s clothing.

According to the complaint, when his father was at work, dust created by working with and around asbestos and asbestos-containing products would “permeate the person and clothing of the plaintiff’s father”, and that dust contained asbestos fibers.

The suit further alleges that his father would bring home asbestos dust on his clothing, and the dust would become airborne again, thus exposing him to the hazardous asbestos fibers.

The complaint states that Bird was repeatedly exposed to this asbestos from his father’s person and clothing.

In addition, Bird was employed as a welder, laborer and service station attendant from 1963 to 1995 in various locations, including locations in the state of Illinois. The suit also alleges that Bird was exposed to asbestos during non-occupational work projects such as home and automotive maintenance, repairs and remodeling.

The suit alleges that Bird was diagnosed with mesothelioma on February 21 and subsequently became aware that his illness was wrongfully caused. The counts of the suit include the following:

The defendants failed to require and advise their employees of hygiene practices that would reduce or prevent carrying asbestos fibers home. Because of the negligence, Bird’s suit states that he was exposed to fibers containing asbestos and developed a disease caused only by asbestos, and that disease has disabled and disfigured him.

The suit also claims that Bird has sought but has not been able to obtain full disclosure of relevant documents and information form the defendants, which leads him to believe that the defendants destroyed documents related to asbestos.

The complaint states that a reasonable person in the position of the defendants could have foreseen that the documents and information were evidence material to potential asbestos litigation. Because each defendant breached its duty to preserve material evidence by destroying those documents and information, Bird’s suit claims that he has been impaired in proving claims against all potential parties.

The suit seeks damages in excess of $200,000 plus punitive damages, which it claims are appropriate and necessary to punish the defendants, and to deter the defendants and others from engaging in like misconduct in the future.

This entry was posted on Thursday, April 10th, 2008 at 5:18 pm and is filed under Asbestos Litigation, Illinois, Jobsite Exposure. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS feed. Responses are currently closed, but you trackback from your own site.