Archive for the ‘Tennessee’ Category

March 21, 2008, Madison County, Illinois – Over the past few years, asbestos cases had dropped off in Madison County. This week, however, that all changed, as twenty asbestos-related lawsuits were filed between March 13 and March 18.

That’s a total of 1,036 summonses being sent to defendants in the suits, and a total of $129,997 in fees paid to the Madison County Circuit Clerk’s Office.

March 13

* Marcella Walters (Nebraska) was diagnosed with mesothelioma in 2007 and claims she was exposed to asbestos between 1946 and 1977 while working as a secretary. She also claims she received secondary exposure from her husband’s work clothes.

* The estate of Mary Hazelrigg (Indiana) claims she was exposed during the 1970s while working as a welder’s assistant, and via secondary exposure from her ex-husband’s clothing. She died in April 2007 after being diagnosed with mesothelioma in October 2006.

* Darrel Henderson (Kansas) claims he has lung cancer that developed as a result of asbestos exposure during his service in the US Navy. He was diagnosed in 2007.

* The estate of Nancy Foster claims her lung cancer developed following asbestos exposure during the 1960s and 1970s while working as a laborer and housekeeper.

* Edward Kronsperger, diagnosed with mesothelioma in January 2008, claims he developed the disease as a result of asbestos exposure while in service to the US Navy.

* The estate of James Price (Tennessee) claims he developed lung cancer as a result of asbestos exposure while working for Texaco, Shell Oil, Amoco, Anheuser-Busch, Chrysler and American Zinc between 1964 and 1993.

March 14

* William Yeager (Missouri) claims his mesothelioma developed following asbestos exposure during his career as a boilermaker.

* Forrest Bateman (Idaho) developed mesothelioma, allegedly following work as a dairy farmer, machinist, and x-ray technician, between 1949 and 1990. He also claims to have suffered secondary exposure from his wife’s work clothes.

* Nina Anderson (Illinois) claims her mesothelioma developed from a mixture of occupational and secondary asbestos exposure from her husband’s work clothes.

* The Estate of Daniel Malcolm claims he died of mesothelioma caused by asbestos exposure that occurred during his career as a teacher and foundry-worker.

March 17

* Larry Marlow (Texas) was diagnosed with mesothelioma in 2007, following a 41 year career working as a laborer.

* The estate of Doyle Clayton claims his mesothelioma developed after working as a machinist between 1956 and 1990.

* The estate of Lois Nisi claims her mesothelioma developed as a result of asbestos exposure that occurred during her 48-year machinist career.

* Gloria LaBargage (California) claims she developed mesothelioma as a result of asbestos exposure that occurred after 1968.

* Roy Brown (Indiana), diagnosed with mesothelioma in 2007, claims his disease results from asbestos exposure during his work as a laborer between 1972 and 1974.

March 18

* John Barringer (Pennsylvania) was diagnosed with mesothelioma in 2007 and claims it’s the result of exposure that may have occurred while in service to the US Navy or during his time as a computer manager in Pennsylvania.

* Dolores Joppa (Arkansas) claims her mesothelioma is the result of both primary and secondary asbestos exposure.

* The estate of Frederick Shuberg claims he died from mesothelioma as a result of asbestos exposure that occurred from 1964 during the deceased’s work as a technician.

* Lawrence Schmidt claims his colon cancer developed as a result working with asbestos during his work as a painter.

* The estate of Charles Lampin, Sr. claims his esophageal cancer occurred as a result of asbestos exposure.

March 19, 2008, Tennessee – The Tennessee Court of Appeals has decided to uphold a jury verdict that awarded $5 million to former railroad worker Thurston Hensley.

Hensley filed the suit in 2002, after developing toxic encephalopathy and asbestosis as a result of working as an electrician for railroad company CSX Transportation. Hensley worked for CSX for 33 years, at the company’s railroad yards at Corban, KY.

Asbestosis is a chronic lung disease that is caused by long-term asbestos exposure. The disease leads to difficulty breathing due to lung scarring caused by inhaling asbestos. Encephalopathy in railroad workers is most often caused by exposure to toxic solvents.

During the initial trial, the jury in Hensley’s case awarded $5 million in compensatory damages after deliberating for two and a half hours. The case was filed under Federal Employer Liability Act, which allows compensatory but not punitive damages to be awarded.

During the three week trial, the jury had heard testimony about Hensley’s exposure to toxic solvents and asbestos, and the results of the exposure.

The former railroad worker claimed he had been constantly exposed to chemical solvents and asbestos during his 33 years working for CSX, suffering both lung and brain damage as a result of the double toxic exposure. The solvents Hensley had been exposed to include carbon tetrachloride, tetrachloroethylene, trichloroethane, and trichloroethylene.

The railroad appealed the jury’s decision on the basis of several factors. According to the railroad’s defense team, the statute of limitations had already expired on the case. The railroad also questions the judge’s charge, including the fact that the judge had “predetermined” that the plaintiff was affected by the diseases he claimed, and also that the judge did not tell the jury they must consider whether the plaintiff had a “genuine and serious” fear of developing cancer. In addition, the defendants said, the judge had erred in not declaring a mistrial following inflammatory statements made during the plaintiff’s closing arguments.

The Tennessee Court of Appeals, however, disagreed on all of the defendant’s appeal claims, and upheld the jury’s decision to award $5 million to Thurston Hensley.

CSX Transportation has already settled more than 450 solvent exposure claims but continues to deny there is a link between solvent exposure and brain damage, despite the growing body of medical evidence that strongly points to a direct link between the two.

Just as there is a now-proven link between asbestos exposure and the development of asbestosis and mesothelioma, the link between solvent exposure and encephalopathy has been proven by dozens of independent medical studies. Many doctors have suggested that thousands of railroad workers across the nation have suffered from the effects of solvent exposure but remain undiagnosed.

MEMPHIS, Tennessee – Several former and current employees at Minneapolis-based Cargill, Inc., have brought suit against the company claiming that they were subjected to asbestos hazards in the workplace and faced both racial discrimination and retaliation.
Along with the company, the employees list four local Cargill management team members as defendants. The suit against Cargill was filed by nine current and former employees of the company: Patricia Coburn, Avery Doss, Keith Howard, Francois Johnson, Terry Lewis, Vincent Mickens, Connie Seay, Cornell Trotter and Tomeka Winston. The suit was filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Tennessee at the end of last month.

All of the workers had previously filed complaints with the Tennessee Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and received a right-to-sue letter from the Commission. That letter states that the EEOC had concluded there were violations under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. That law prohibits discrimination by employers on the basis of race, color, religion, sex or national origin.

The claimants have filed the lawsuit pro se, and will be serving as their own attorneys in the case. The EEOC says that the agency can not release any information related to the suit, and Cargill stated through its director of media relations that Cargill’s policy is not to comment on pending litigation. David Feider did stress that Cargill is an equal opportunity employer and does not practice discrimination.

The basis of the suit stems from the abandoned asbestos removal performed at a facility in Memphis that is owned by Cargill. The property, on Second St. in Memphis was owned by Continental Grain, which was sold to Cargill Inc., in July 1999.

Immediately before the sale was concluded, Continental had begun removing asbestos from the Memphis building. After the company changed hands, though, Cargill did not complete the asbestos removal project.

The lawsuit states that Cargill knew of the hazardous conditions within the plant since acquiring the building. Asbestos is considered an occupational and air quality hazard. Asbestos fibers released into the air by materials that contain asbestos can be inhaled by workers and visitors, and eventually cause serious illnesses. Those illnesses include lung cancer, asbestosis and mesothelioma, a rare lung cancer that is only found in those who were exposed to asbestos.

In 2000, an area of the facility was found to clear of asbestos by a Tennessee OSHA investigator, but six years later, a representative from the corporate office visited the Memphis plant and asked about certain tile in the building. An asbestos sign was placed in the area immediately after the representative noticed disturbed floor tile.

Johnson and Mickens, union stewards representing other employees, raised questions about the presence of the asbestos and what it meant for those who worked in the area around the disturbed tiles. They stated that only black employees work in that area.

The response from the company was that the employees had been receiving asbestos training for the past five years. The company did not explain how receiving asbestos training would deter the hazards of being exposed to asbestos for the past six years.

All the employees deny that they ever received any asbestos training. The company has produced documents purporting to be signed by the defendants and stating that they’d received asbestos training, but the paper appeared to be altered, said Mickens. Mickens and Johnson refused to sign a paper presented to them at the meeting, and both were suspended. Other employees said that they were asked to sign papers with no heading, date or identifying information.

Johnson said that whenever they asked for a copy of papers and documents that they signed off on, the company told them that it as for company records, not individual employee records.
Other employees say that they signed the papers, but only because they were told that if they didn’t sign them, they could “just go home”.

Cargill has not yet entered an official response to the lawsuit.