legaldock4

Asbestos Litigation Defense Protecting companies from asbestos litigation requires a thorough analysis of a plaintiff's history of work and medical records, as well as testimony. We typically employ a naked metal defense that focuses on arguing your company didn't manufacture, sell, or distribute asbestos-containing products that are the subject of the claimant's lawsuit. Asbestos cases are special and require a determined approach to achieving successful results. We act as local counsel, regional and national. Statute of Limitations Most lawsuits must be filed within a certain time period, known as the statute of limitations. For asbestos-related cases, this means the deadline for filing a lawsuit is between one and six years after the victim is diagnosed with an asbestos-related illness. To defend it is crucial to prove that the alleged injury or death did not occur within this deadline. This typically requires a thorough study and analysis of the plaintiff's employment history, including interviews of former coworkers and a careful study of Social Security and union records and tax and tax documents. In defending an asbestos-related case, there are a number of complex issues. Asbestos-related victims can develop a mild disease, such as asbestosis, prior to being diagnosed with a fatal illness like mesothelioma. In these cases the attorney representing the defense will argue the statute of limitation should begin when the victim knew or should have reasonably known that exposure to asbestos caused their illness. These cases are made more complex due to the fact that the statute of limitations may vary from state to state. In these instances an experienced lawyer for mesothelioma will try to present the case in a state where the majority of the alleged exposure took place. This may be a difficult task since asbestos sufferers frequently moved around the country in search of jobs, and the claimed exposure could have occurred in multiple 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, as is the case in most cases, there are often dozens of parties involved. It can be hard to get meaningful discovery in these cases, particularly when the plaintiff's argument for injuries spans decades and connects many defendants. The McGivney, Kluger, Clark & Intoccia Team has extensive experience as National Coordinating Counsel for multi-district asbestos litigation that spans multiple jurisdictions. We collaborate closely with regional and local counsel to develop litigation strategies and manage local counsel and ensure consistent and cost-effective results in coordination with the client's goals. We regularly appear in front of coordinating and trial judge, as and litigation masters across the country. Bare Metal Defense The past has seen manufacturers of boiler, turbine and pump and valve equipment have successfully defended themselves against asbestos litigation by claiming an argument referred to as the “bare metal” or component part doctrine. This defense states that a company cannot be held responsible for asbestos-related harms caused by replacement components that the company did not design or install. In the case Devries v. Tennessee Eastman Chemical, a Tennessee Eastman Chemical plant employee was suing several equipment manufacturers for his mesothelioma. Marietta asbestos lawsuits of the plaintiff involved the removal and replacement of steam traps, insulation and gaskets on equipment like valves, pumps and steam traps (Equipment Defendants). He claimed he was exposed asbestos during his work in the plant and was diagnosed with Mesothelioma several years later. The Supreme Court's Devries decision has altered the landscape of asbestos litigation and may influence the way courts in other jurisdictions approach the issue of third-party components that manufacturers include in their equipment. The Court declared that the use of the bare metal defense in this context is “cabined” to maritime law however, it left open the possibility that other federal circuits could apply this doctrine to cases that are not maritime as well. This decision was the first time that a federal appeals court has applied the bare-metal defense in an asbestos lawsuit, and represents a significant departure from traditional product liability law. The majority of courts have interpreted “bare metal” as a rejection of the responsibility of a manufacturer to inform about the dangers posed by replacement parts it did not manufacture or sell. The McGivney, Kluger, Clark & Intoccia team is regularly serving as National Coordinating Counsel for clients in industry-wide, multi-jurisdictional asbestos litigation. We assist our clients to develop strategies for litigation, oversee regional and local counsel and achieve an efficient, cost-effective defense in coordination with their goals. Our lawyers also speak at industry conferences about important issues that influence asbestos litigation. Our firm's experience includes representing clients across the nation and collaborating with coordinating judges, trial courts and litigation special masters. Our unique method has proven effective in decreasing our clients' risk and legal costs. Expert Witnesses An expert witness is one who has specialized skills, experience or knowledge and can provide independent advice to the court by way of an objective opinion regarding issues that fall within his area of expertise. He should be able to clearly express his opinion and the facts or assumptions he is basing it on. He should not overlook any aspects that could influence his conclusions. In the event that asbestos exposure is claimed, medical experts may be required to help evaluate the claimant's condition and to determine any causal links between the condition and the alleged source of exposure. A lot of the diseases caused by asbestos are extremely complicated, requiring the expertise of specialists in the field. This can include doctors, nurses, pharmacists, toxicologists, epidemiologists and occupational health specialists. Experts are there to offer impartial technical assistance, whether they represent the prosecution or the defense. He should not serve as an advocate or try to influence the jury to favor his client. He should not try to convince jurors or promote an argument. The expert should work with the other experts to resolve any peripheral issues and identify any technical issues. The expert should also collaborate with the people who instruct him to identify areas of agreement and disagreement for the joint statement of expert ordered by the court. The expert must, at the end of his examination chief, discuss his conclusions and the reasons for them in a manner that is easy to understand and clear. He should be prepared to answer questions posed by the judge or prosecution and be able to address all points raised during cross-examination. Cetrulo LLP has extensive experience in defending clients in complex asbestos litigation that involves multiple parties and jurisdictions. Our attorneys can assist and advise national and regional defense counsel, as well as local, regional and expert witnesses and experts. Our team is regularly in front of coordinating judges in asbestos litigation across the nation, as well as trial judges and special Masters. Medical Experts Expert witnesses are extremely important in cases that involve asbestos-related injuries because of the latency between exposure to asbestos and the initial symptoms. Asbestos cases frequently involve complex theories of injury that span decades and link dozens or even hundreds of defendants. It is almost impossible for a claimant to prove their case without the assistance of experts. Experts in the field of medicine and other science are required to determine the extent of an individual's exposure and their medical condition, and also to give insight into the future health issues. These experts are crucial in any case and should be thoroughly vetted and knowledgeable about the relevant field. The more experience the medical or scientific expert has, the more persuasive they will be. Asbestos cases typically require a medical or scientific expert to review the medical records of the claimant and conduct a physical examination. These experts can testify as to whether the claimant's exposure asbestos was enough to trigger a specific medical condition like mesothelioma or lung cancer, or other forms of scarring in the respiratory tract and lungs (e.g., pleural plaques). Other experts like industrial hygienists could be required to assist in determining the existence of asbestos-related exposure levels. They can employ advanced sampling and analytical techniques 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 also prove valuable when defending companies who manufactured or distributed asbestos-related products, as they can often be able of demonstrating that the levels of exposure of plaintiffs were below legal limits and that there was no evidence of negligence by the employer or manufacturer liability. Other experts that could be involved in these cases are occupational and environmental experts. They can provide insight into the safety guidelines that exist at a particular workplace or business and how they connect to the liability of asbestos producers. For example, these experts can establish that renovation materials that are disturbed during a remodel are more likely to contain asbestos or shaking out clothing contaminated with asbestos can cause asbestos fibers to release and become inhaled.