Archive for the ‘Asbestos Litigation’ Category

The wife of a Kentucky man who recently passed away from mesothelioma has filed an asbestos-related lawsuit at Madison County Circuit Court in Illinois, alleging that the man’s disease was wrongfully caused.

The lawsuit, which names a total of 149 defendant corporations, was filed on October, 22 by Eloise Heep on behalf of her husband, Zelba Leon Heep. He was diagnosed with malignant mesothelioma on November 27, 2007 and passed away less than two months later on January 10, 2008.

According to the lawsuit, her husband was exposed to asbestos at some point during his career, which included service for the United States Navy. He was a navy man between 1961 and 1963, and work as a boilermaker from 1968 until 2006.

Those most at risk of exposure are generally people who have worked around asbestos-containing products. However, there are cases of secondary exposure where household members of asbestos workers develop asbestos-related diseases.

Naval shipyards have long been known as places where a substantial amount of asbestos was used in building and repairing ships. Thousands of shipyard workers and people serving in the United States Navy have developed asbestos-related diseases as a consequence of working on and around Navy vessels.

In this suit, however, it’s difficult to say whether Heep developed mesothelioma as a consequence of having worked for the Navy because his subsequent work as a boilermaker.

In any case, Eloise Heep claims her husband’s asbestos exposure should have been anticipated and prevented due to the known dangers of asbestos. As a result of having developed the disease, she claims her husband incurred heavy medical expenses and suffered considerable mental and physical pain.

The eleven-count lawsuit asks for economic damages of $150,000 and compensatory damages of at least $150,000, as well as punitive damages.

Another asbestos-related lawsuit recently filed at Madison County Circuit Court in Illinois tells the story of a man who passed away from mesothelioma after a career as a laborer. A second lawsuit covers a man who was exposed to asbestos during the course of his employment as a railroad worker.

Gilbert Gillis was diagnosed with pleural mesothelioma on February 19, 2003, and passed away just a few years later on October 24, 2007. According to the lawsuit filed on October 22, 2008, by his son James Gillis, Gilbert’s cancer was caused by exposure to asbestos.

The lawsuit alleges that Gilbert Gillis was exposed to asbestos during his work as a laborer and furnace operator. The suit claims the asbestos exposure should have been anticipated and prevented by the defendants.

James claims the exposure to asbestos eventually caused Gilbert to develop mesothelioma cancer and experience considerable physical and mental pain. Gilbert Gillis also incurred heavy mesothelioma treatment costs and was unable to work due to the cancer.

The lawsuit is claiming compensation of at least $350,000, including damages of $200,000 or more. James is also seeking punitive damages to serve as punishment to the defendants involved in the case.

Another recently filed lawsuit involves the past railroad worker, Raymond Hamilton, who developed lung cancer and asbestosis after working for Illinois Central Railroad.

The suit, filed on October 23, 2008 by Raymond Hamilton’s son Donald, claims that during the course of his work, Raymond was exposed to a number of toxins, including asbestos, silica, diesel, solvent, and gasoline fumes.

Raymond Hamilton passed away from his occupational injuries on November 9, 2005 after suffering great physical and mental pain. He also suffered from heavy financial losses due to medical expenses.

Donald Hamilton’s lawsuit claims Illinois Central Railroad acted negligently because the company failed to provide a safe place to work, failed to supply the necessary protective equipment, and failed to warn Raymond Hamilton of the risks associated with the work he was doing. The lawsuit also claims that the company failed to provide asbestos warnings and failed to monitor asbestos levels in the workplace.

The news that Judge Donald Molloy has set the W.R. Grace & Company trial date for February, 19 has many people wondering what the company will bring to the table on court day.

It seems impossible to think that Grace would try to deny what has happened to residents of Libby, Montana where the company owned and operated an asbestos-contaminated vermiculite mine.

The company operated the mine between 1919 and 1990, and it has since been alleged that the company, and many of its top executives, were aware that the asbestos-contaminated mine was toxic as early as 1959.

However, many believe Grace will stand up and court and deny any responsibility for those residents who have contracted asbestos-related diseases. Such diseases include lung cancer, asbestosis, and mesothelioma.

Malignant mesothelioma is especially harmful due to the latency period associated with the disease. In most cases, the disease is diagnosed during the latest stages of development, which often leaves patients with palliative mesothelioma treatment rather than curative.

In addition to the likelihood of denying responsibility, Grace will also deny the knowledge of the dangers the vermiculite mine posed on Libby residents.

The October 24 hearing, at which the trial date was set, made it clear that lawyers working for Grace will challenge issues that have already been decided by the appellate court.

It is expected that Grace’s lawyers will attempt to prove the asbestos-contaminated vermiculite mine was not the cause of the asbestos-related deaths and illnesses that have occurred in the town.

Grace is also expected to challenge evidence from risk assessments carried out in Libby and on Libby asbestos. In addition, they may challenge earlier evidence from testing carried out by the company’s own scientists, which showed that the asbestos in the area was dangerous.

Environmental lawyers have said they expect the company will produce industry-paid scientists to give testimony stating that Libby asbestos is not harmful.

However, the federal government can point to hundreds of deaths of Libby residents, and thousands of incidents of asbestos-related disease developing in people who lived there. Many believe it will be difficult for Grace to provide any evidence that may prove their innocence.

After nearly three years of stalling and delays, a date has finally been set for the criminal trial against W.R. Grace & Company. The date of the trial has been set for February, 2009.

The courtroom was packed on October 24 as Judge Donald Molloy set the trial date. He stated the jury selection would begin on February 19.

The trial, which is against Grace and six former and present top executives, involves the past, present, and future fate of the town of Libby, Montana. This is the location where the company once owned and operated a vermiculite mine.

Grace mined vermiculite in Libby between 1919 and 1990. It has since been proven that the company had known since 1959 that the dust emitted by the mine was full of toxic asbestos.

Several thousand residents of Libby and the surrounding area have potentially been exposed to asbestos as a result of the vermiculite mining in the area. Hundreds of people have passed away from asbestos-related diseases such as asbestosis and mesothelioma.

Even residents of Libby who never worked at the mine have developed diseases like pericardial mesothelioma because they lived in the town and suffered from environmental exposure.

The federal government has fought to bring the case to trial for the past three years, yet Grace has launched appeal after appeal to delay the start of the case.

Judge Donald Molloy has finally said enough is enough, and now the company will be forced to stand trial and face mesothelioma lawyers for its alleged criminal actions.

The trial, which may run for as long as four months, is expected to focus on how much information company executives were privy to. The criminal charges against the executives allege they knew of the presence and toxicity of asbestos in the mine, but chose to conceal or ignore the information.

Maximum sentences for the executives, if they are found guilty, could range from 55 to 70 years, while the company itself may be fined up to $280 million.

A Texas couple has filed an asbestos-related lawsuit alleging that the husband’s mesothelioma, which he developed after asbestos exposure several decades ago, was wrongfully caused.

Asbestos is dangerous because the toxic, microscopic fibers that make up asbestos can easily break off materials and become airborne. If these fibers are inhaled, they often lodge themselves within the lining of the lungs. In addition to mesothelioma, other asbestos-related diseases that can result from exposure include lung cancer and asbestosis.

Rodney and Beatrice LeJeune filed their lawsuit on October 20 in Jefferson County Court, Texas, naming a total of 65 defendant corporations.

The suit indicates that Rodney LeJeune worked as a laborer, truck driver, and in other occupations over the last several decades.

Rodney is claiming he was exposed to inhalable asbestos fibers at some point during his employment. He believes the exposure came from asbestos-containing products he was working with and around at his workplace.

The lawsuit states the defendant companies were negligent in their failure to warn LeJeune that working around asbestos without protection was dangerous. In addition, the suit alleges that the companies were negligent in failing to provide protection from asbestos exposure.

The Lejeunes say that as a result of having developed malignant mesothelioma, Rodney has experienced intense and debilitating physical pain, as well as considerable mental anguish. He’s been unable to work and has suffered from loss of income and earning capacity.

The LeJeunes have also incurred medical expenses as a result of Rodney’s mesothelioma treatment. Beatrice LeJeune claims she has lost the companionship of her husband due to the illness.

The couple is seeking actual and exemplary damages, as well as other relief deemed appropriate by the court in compensation for the suffering they have both experienced as a result of Rodney’s mesothelioma.

Former North Carolina official Gilbert Jackson says he has devoted his professional life to making workplaces across the state healthy and safe. Now, however, he claims he has been “pushed out” of his job because he reported an asbestos threat in the office building where he used to work.

Exposure to asbestos has been known to cause several forms of disease, including mesothelioma, lung cancer, and asbestosis. Mesothelioma is especially harmful due to the latency period associated with the disease. In fact, most cases are diagnosed during the latest stages of development because mesothelioma symptoms do not appear for several decades.

Jackson’s complaint to the North Carolina labor department alleges he was forced to retire after reporting an asbestos violation in the workplace. He worked in the Raleigh Building at the time of his employment, which was owned by the North Carolina Medical Society.

His former boss Oscar Keller has responded saying Jackson left of his own free will and was not forced to retire.

The complaint filed by Jackson states that after he and his colleagues moved into the Raleigh office building, he noticed a worker taking air samples in the office. Upon asking the purpose for the tests, he was told they were checking for asbestos because an abatement project was being completed in the area.

Jackson later laid a complaint to the North Carolina Occupational Safety and Health Administration, stating employees in the building had not been notified about the asbestos or the abatement. He notified his boss about the complaint at the same time.

Several weeks later, according to Jackson, Oscar Keller called him saying, “He had gotten a call from the governor’s office telling him that I had to back off from the asbestos problems at the Medical Society. When I objected he said that if I didn’t back off, I would ‘have to go.”

Jackson was forced to attend a meeting with Keller and the CEO of the medical society on the following day, at which he was told to apologize for laying the complaint. He was also told not to make any further complaints about OSHA violations.

Next, Jackson’s hours were changed and his responsibilities were reduced. Jackson says his early retirement was forced in April, but Oscar Keller entirely denies the forced retirement, saying that Jackson was the one who resigned.

Documents show the Medical Society has never disclosed whether asbestos was present in the building. The state OSHA has cited the society for asbestos violations, but has not imposed any penalties.

Milwaukee County Circuit Judge Richard Sankovitz recently decided that the estate of a former Milwaukee man is now entitled to a $1.1 million award. The award was originally made by a jury in July of 2007.

Sankovitz, who has presided over 200 trials, said this instance marked the first time he had had to modify a verdict previously made by a jury.

Sankovitz said, “It is unusual for a court to overturn or even tinker with a jury verdict because if there is any credible evidence in the record, even if it appears to us from our own vantage points that most of the evidence supports a different verdict, the jury’s verdict must be upheld.”

In this case, however, the instructions made to the jury weren’t clear. Because of this, Sankovitz said, “The lawyers and I should take the blame, not the jury.”

The case involved 55-year-old Steven Lemberger, who passed away from mesothelioma in September, 2005. Lemberger claimed he developed the disease after being exposed to asbestos at places where he had worked.

The defendants in the trial were General Motors and Honeywell International, who were the makers of brake linings that were ground in his workplace.

The trial was complicated by the fact that in addition to pleural mesothelioma, Lemberger also suffered from lung cancer, which could have been attributed to him being a heavy smoker.

Because the issue of lung cancer clouded Lemberger’s illness from malignant mesothelioma, the jury debated over two questions. The first being whether his death was due to mesothelioma, and second, whether Lemberger was 95 percent responsible for having developed the illness that killed him. If Lemberger had been found to be responsible, the case would not have been decided in favor of his widow, Colleen.

In his ruling, Sankovitz said, “There is no evidence that he [Lemberger] was negligent in the way that he handled asbestos products or worked in their vicinity. The evidence reveals no reason he ever would have had to suspect that he was breathing in a carcinogen.”

According to Sankovitz, the jury made a distinction between medical expenses and lost wages caused by mesothelioma, and those caused by lung cancer, halving the decided award.

Recently in Madison County, Illinois, around 150 victims of asbestos-related diseases filed a civil conspiracy class action lawsuit claiming they were given misleading information about asbestos.

The claimants say they were exposed to the toxic substance unnecessarily and without knowing they could later be affected by harmful asbestos-related diseases such as asbestosis and mesothelioma.

Mesothelioma is a rare form of cancer that most commonly occurs within the lining of the lungs, known as pleural mesothelioma. Due to the latency period associated with the disease, mesothelioma symptoms often do not appear until the latest stages of development.

The lawsuit was filed on October 14 in Madison County Circuit Court, and includes the defendants John Crane Inc. and Metropolitan Life Insurance Inc.

The lawsuit claims the companies conspired to publish “false and misleading reports” with the express purpose of maintaining a “favorable atmosphere for the continued sale and distribution and use of asbestos.”

According to the plaintiffs, the misinformation distributed by the companies allowed the defendants to continue using asbestos freely without regulation, and to limit the possibility of workers filing medical and disability claims.

The suit also alleges that a doctor, who investigated the dangers of asbestos, falsified the results of a public health study to reduce the apparent dangers of asbestos.

“Dr. Anthony J. Lanza began an investigation…In 1935 this study was altered by Lanza, with the full knowledge of Metropolitan, at the request of and in concert with the asbestos industry…in order to wrongly influence the United States Public Health Service, the United States medical community, and various state legislatures…”

In addition, the lawsuit claims that “active scientists in the field of environmental cancer were driven out of their laboratories soon after describing their findings on cancer hazards…These efforts wrongfully obstructed and confused the real asbestos hazard situation, and had a profound retarding effect on the evaluation of the truth in asbestos and asbestos-related health and cancer research.”

Several more asbestos-related lawsuits were recently filed in Madison County, Illinois. While it is typically men in manual occupations who are affected by asbestos exposure, one lawsuit shows women are also at risk for developing asbestos-related diseases.

In each lawsuit, the plaintiff worked in a location where asbestos products were either manufactured or used on a regular basis.

The first lawsuit was filed by Wisconsin couple Amado Torres-Padron and Laurentina Torres, who claim Amado was diagnosed with mesothelioma after being exposed to asbestos. They believe the exposure he experienced occurred between 1945 and the mid-1990s. The lawsuit, filed on October 1, states that Amado worked as a foundry worker, railroad worker, and ranch hand in Illinois, Kansas, Texas, and Wisconsin.

Another lawsuit, filed by Bruno Dobler, claims he developed pleural mesothelioma after working between 1959 and 2000 as an electrician and engineer.

The third suit involves Susie Powell, a Washington woman who claims she was diagnosed with malignant mesothelioma after working since 1961 as a glass-worker and auto salvage worker. She also claims to have been subjected to secondary asbestos exposure, as a family member worked in a high-risk occupation during the 1950s and 1960s.

In all three cases, the plaintiffs believe the defendant companies should have been able to anticipate and prevent the asbestos exposure that occurred. Most companies that manufactured or used asbestos-containing products were well aware of the dangers of asbestos, but often continued to use the substance while failing to provide workers with protection from exposure.

As a result, the three plaintiffs have developed serious asbestos-related diseases. Now they have turned to the courts seeking compensation for serious injuries to their physical and mental well-being.

The plaintiffs are asking for punitive and exemplary damages, as well as compensatory damages to compensate for mental and physical pain, loss of income, loss of enjoyment of life, and medical expenses.

Finding themselves in the midst of an asbestos-related lawsuit, the Maytag and Whirlpool Corporation has asked Madison County, Illinois Circuit Judge Daniel Stack to dismiss a lawsuit filed by the estate of a man who passed away from mesothelioma.

Maytag and Whirlpool attorneys are arguing that the plaintiff has failed to provide enough evidence to prove the company had any involvement in the development of the man’s asbestos related disease.

In particular, the company has argued that the plaintiff has not supplied evidence relating to when the exposure occurred, what asbestos-containing products or materials were involved, and when the products were supplied.

The lawsuit, which was filed on August 15, 2008, concerns Wilfred Korando, who passed away from malignant mesothelioma on January 21, 2007. Korando worked between 1954 and 2004 as a mechanic, washer and drying maintenance worker, and commercial window installer.

The lawsuit states he was exposed to asbestos during the course of his employment due to working with or around products containing the toxic substance.

However, Maytag and Whirlpool attorneys claim there is not enough evidence to show Korando was exposed to asbestos through company products. They have also claimed that the statute of limitations has expired for the case.

In addition to Maytag and Whirlpool, other defendants that are named in the lawsuit include Boeing, Chrysler, C.P. Hall, Ford Motor Company, General Electric, General Motors, Goodyear, Hawker Beechcraft, Ingersoll-Rand, International Paper, John Crane, McDonnell Douglas, MetLife, Philips Electronics, Pratt & Whitney, and Rolls-Royce.

The estate of Wilfred Korando is seeking $250,000 or more in damages.

Cases such as these demonstrate that there is often difficulty in conclusively proving when and how an individual’s asbestos exposure occurred. The situation is made even more difficult due to the fact that mesothelioma has a typical latency period of three to five decades, meaning up to 50 years may elapse between asbestos exposure and the onset of mesothelioma symptoms.