공지사항

Asbestos Litigation Defense

Protecting companies from asbestos litigation requires a thorough examination of the plaintiff's employment history, medical records and testimony. We typically use a bare metal defense, which focuses on proving that your company didn't manufacture or sell asbestos-containing products that are at issue in the claimant's lawsuit.

Asbestos cases require an exclusive approach and a determined approach to achieve successful results. We are regional, local, and national counsel.

Statute of Limitations

The statute of limitations is a period within which lawsuits are required to be filed. For asbestos-related cases, this means that the legal deadline for filing is between one and six years after the victim becomes diagnosed with an asbestos-related disease. For the defense, Asbestos Litigation Defense it is important to prove that the claimed injury or death did not occur within this deadline. Often, this requires an exhaustive review of the plaintiff's past work history, including interviews with former coworkers and the careful review of Social Security, union, tax and other documents.

Defending an asbestos case involves many complicated issues. For instance, latest asbestos litigation-related victims are more likely to develop a less serious illness like asbestosis prior to being diagnosed with a fatal disease like mesothelioma. In these cases, a defense attorney will argue that the limitation period should begin when the victim knew or reasonably should have known that their asbestos exposure caused the disease.

These cases are complicated because the statute of limitations can vary from state to state. In these instances, an experienced mesothelioma lawyer will try to file the case in the state where the bulk of the alleged exposure occurred. This can be a challenging task, as asbestos victims often move around the country looking for jobs, and the alleged exposure could have occurred in a variety of states.

The discovery process is challenging in asbestos litigation. Asbestos litigation is more difficult than other personal injury cases. Instead of just a few defendants in the majority of cases, there are usually many parties involved. It can be difficult to get meaningful discovery when there are many defendants and the plaintiff's theory extends over a long period of time.

The McGivney, Kluger, Clark & Intoccia team has extensive experience in serving as National Coordinating Counsel in multi-district and multi-jurisdictional asbestos litigation. We work closely with regional and local counsel to develop a strategy for litigation and manage local counsel to obtain consistent, cost-effective outcomes in line with the client's goals. We regularly appear before coordination and trial judges and 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 an argument referred to as the "bare metal" or the component part doctrine. This defense states that a manufacturer cannot be held accountable for asbestos-related injuries resulting from replacement components that the company did not make or install.

In the case of Devries v. Tennessee Eastman Chemical, a Tennessee Eastman Chemical plant employee filed a lawsuit against several equipment makers over his mesothelioma. Plaintiff's work included the removal and replacement insulation, steam traps and gaskets from equipment, such as valves, pumps and steam traps. He claimed he was exposed asbestos during his work in the plant and was diagnosed with Mesothelioma many years later.

The Supreme Court's Devries decision has altered the nature of asbestos litigation, and could influence the way the courts in other jurisdictions deal with the issue of third-party parts that manufacturers incorporate into their equipment. The Court stated that the application of the bare-metal defense in this case is "cabined" to maritime law, but left open the possibility that other federal circuits could apply this principle to non-maritime cases also.

This ruling was the first time that a federal appeals court used the defense of bare metal in a asbestos lawsuit and represents a significant departure from traditional product liability law. The majority of courts have interpreted "bare metal" as a denial of the responsibility of a maker to warn about harms caused by replacement parts it did not make or sell.

The McGivney, Kluger, Clark & Intoccia team frequently serves as National Coordinating Counsel for clients in multi-jurisdictional, industry-wide asbestos litigation. We assist our clients in developing litigation strategies, manage regional and local counsel, and achieve a consistent, cost-effective defence in line with their goals. Our lawyers present at industry conferences on major issues that affect asbestos litigation. Our firm has experience in defending clients in all 50 states and working closely with trial courts, judges and special masters of litigation. Our unique strategy has proven effective in decreasing our clients' risk and legal costs.

Expert Witnesses

A person with specialized knowledge, skills or experience is an expert witness. They offer independent assistance to courts by providing an objective opinion on matters that are within their expertise. He must be able to clearly articulate the facts or assumptions upon which his opinions are based and should not be oblivious to consider issues that could affect his opinions.

In cases where asbestos exposure is suspected, medical experts may be required to help evaluate the claimant's condition and to determine any causal link between the condition and the identified source of exposure. Many of the illnesses caused by asbestos are extremely complicated, requiring the expertise of experts in the field. This can include doctors and nurses, pharmacists, toxicologists or occupational health specialists, epidemiologists and pharmacists.

If it's the prosecution or defence, an expert's role is to provide objective technical assistance. He should not act as an advocate or attempt to influence the jury in favor of his client. He should not try to convince the jury or make an argument.

The expert should work with the other experts in attempting to reduce any technical issues at an early stage and eliminate any other peripheral matters. The expert should also work with the people who instruct him to identify areas of agreement and discord in the joint statement of expert ordered by the court.

The expert must, at the end of his examination, present his conclusions as well as the reasoning behind the conclusions in a manner that is easy to understand and clear. He should be prepared to answer questions from the prosecution or the judge and should be prepared to discuss any issues that are raised during cross-examination.

Cetrulo LLP has extensive experience in defending clients involved in complex asbestos exposure litigation litigation involving multiple parties and jurisdictions. Our lawyers can advise and manage regional and national defense counsel as well as local and regional experts and witnesses. Our team regularly appears before trial judges, coordinating judges and special masters in asbestos litigation group litigation across the nation.

Medical Experts

Expert witnesses are extremely important in cases which involve asbestos litigation cases-related injuries due the time lag between exposure to asbestos and onset symptoms. Asbestos cases frequently involve complex theories of injury that span decades and link hundreds or even dozens of defendants. It is nearly impossible for an individual to prove their case without the assistance of experts.

Experts in the fields of medicine and other sciences are required to assess the extent of a person's exposure and medical condition, as well as provide information on future health concerns. These experts are crucial to any case, and should be thoroughly vetted and educated in the field they are working in. The more experience an expert in medicine or science has the more persuasive he will be.

In a majority of asbestos cases, an expert in medicine or a scientist is required to examine the records of the claimant and conduct a physical exam. Experts can testify as to whether the claimant's exposure to asbestos was sufficient to cause a particular medical condition like mesothelioma or lung cancer, or other forms of scarring in the lungs and respiratory tract (e.g. plaques in the pleural cavity).

Other experts, such as industrial hygienists could be required to assist in establishing asbestos-related exposure levels. They can employ advanced sampling techniques and analytical methods to assess the levels of asbestos in the air in a home or workplace and compare them to the legal exposure standards.

These experts can be very useful in defending companies that produce or distribute asbestos-related goods. They are often in a position to prove that plaintiffs' exposure levels were below the legal limits, and that there was not evidence of negligence by the employer or asbestos litigation defense the responsibility of the manufacturer of the product.

Other experts who may be involved in these instances are occupational and environmental specialists. They can provide insights into the safety protocols that are in place at a specific workplace or business, and how they relate to asbestos manufacturers' liability. For instance, they can determine that materials used in renovation disturbed during a remodel project are more likely to contain asbestos or that shaking out contaminated clothing could cause asbestos fibers to release and be inhaled.