Got so much sh*t you need a storage locker? Well, understandably, sheer consumption isn’t the only reason why a lot of folks put their stuff in storage—there are many reasons, including some that are prime material for a “Judge Judy” episode or two. But the reasons for removing the stuff from storage? Well, for some, the reason winds up being an inability to pay their storage locker rent. Never mind why the rent can’t be paid—the bottom line is that the storage facility basically holds the storage locker contents as a form of collateral. And if you’re not paying rent, well then, the self-storage company is ready, able and willing to make some cash off of your precious belongings—by auctioning them off. And, in many instances, they have a right to…but…we’ll get to that later.
Surely you’ve heard of “Storage Wars”?—the popular reality tv show on A&E. Auctioning storage locker contents is the premise of the entire show. And, of course, being reality tv, there is suspense and excitement—and a few tense arguments thrown in for good measure.
That brings us to the lawsuit recently filed by “Storage Wars” former star buyer, Dave Hester (aka “the mogul”). His lawsuit was originally filed in December, 2012, against A&E, claiming that the production company actually staged many of the auctions with goods that were not originally in the featured storage lockers. Basically, he claimed that A&E planted more valuable goods into the featured lockers in order to falsely drum up excitement (and, therefore, more viewers) for the program.
That lawsuit was eventually thrown out, with the judge deeming what A&E chooses to highlight on the show a matter of free speech.
Ahh, but the story, and the lawsuit, doesn’t end there. Hester was let go. According to a report over at The Wrap, Hester’s got a retooled lawsuit and is now arguing wrongful termination, alleging he was fired over his claims that the show was rigged.
The outcome of Hester’s lawsuit remains to be seen. But rigged locker contents or not, the lawsuit has put focus on the practice of storage locker auctions—and wrongful auctions—in general: what are they and why do they happen? “Storage Wars” makes storage locker auctions seem like some unclaimed freight or abandoned merchandise sale. Unfortunately, for some, that’s not quite how things happen—they haven’t quite abandoned their stuff; they simply can’t (or don’t) make the rent payments. And in some instances, the storage facility has simply auctioned off the wrong person’s stuff. Yes, it’s happened…
Example: Dubey v. Public Storage. Here’s an excerpt from court documents on that one:
“Kitchen [former storage facility property manager] told Dubey that her property had been auctioned off. She told Dubey that her rent had not been paid and that Metropublic records showed that there was $191 in past-due rent for unit E-11. However, unit E-11 was rented to someone by the name of Maria Cruz, and Dubey’s rental agreement showed that her unit was C-10. Cruz’s rental agreement had a computer-generated designation of unit number E-12. Such unit number had been scratched out and next to it, handwritten, was the number E-11.”
In Dubey’s case, she showed up at her rental storage locker one day to find it inaccessible. When the operator opened it, it was empty—except for some remaining debris, remnants of Dubey’s belongings. Needless to say, Dubey was a bit taken back and things wound up in court.
In fairness, if a self-storage facility plays by the rules, they do have a contractual right to move to an auction. But, the key is they have to play by the rules. The “rules” in this case, are state lien laws.
Lien laws regulate all aspects of when and how storage unit contents can be auctioned. They cover everything from when a storage operator can replace the lock on a unit, to how a renter is sent default notices, to how long the renter has to ‘make good’ on his payments, to how and when the operator can publish an advertisement for an auction.
For example, recently new legislation went into effect in Nevada regarding how a storage facility operator must notify a tenant about being in default. Nevada self-storage facility operators may now notify tenants about impending lien procedures by email, as well as assess late fees and deny access to tenants in default after 10 days. If there is no confirmation of the email, a second notice must be sent by verified mail to the last known address of the tenant.
While there are many legitimate storage auctions, some are not. There are rules to be played by and operators need to follow those rules before they auction off storage locker contents. And if you’ve got stuff in storage, it’s worth it to not only read your contract closely, but also check out your state’s self-storage lien laws; you can do that online.
A lot of questions we receive here at LawyersandSettlements.com have to do with employment…things like what counts as on-the-job harassment, whether or not someone is owed overtime pay, and questions about wrongful termination. One of the trickiest areas of employment though has to do with misclassification—i.e., whether someone’s position is considered exempt or non-exempt. We discuss misclassification in greater detail on our Unpaid Overtime-Employment info hub on our website. But beyond what most people consider to be the difference between exempt and non-exempt—that exempt jobs don’t qualify for overtime pay while non-exempt ones do—there are other things you should be aware of if you’ve recently been switched over or promoted into an exempt position.
Exempt positions tend to be ones that pay a salary rather than an hourly rate. For many, the chance for what could be a higher rate of pay and no longer “working on the clock” makes pursuing exempt positions worth the trip. Here though are eight protections that an exempt job status deprives employees of—provided by the State of California Department of Industrial Relations (you can find this info at your own state’s department of labor).
A roundup of recent asbestos-related news and information that you should be aware of. An ongoing list of reported asbestos hot spots in the US from the Asbestos News Roundup archive appears on our asbestos map.
Last month, a junior high school in Rhode Island was closed for several days so that workers could safely remove asbestos from the building. The asbestos was discovered when a ceiling that was being taken down revealed a second concealed ceiling. The hidden ceiling was found to contain asbestos.
Because of its strength and heat resistance, asbestos was used in a wide variety of building construction materials. As the Rhode Island case demonstrates, many times asbestos containing materials may be out of sight.
According to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), asbestos can be found in many products and materials. Some of the many suspect materials include:
• Attic and wall insulation produced containing vermiculite
• Vinyl floor tiles and the backing on vinyl sheet flooring and adhesives
• Roofing and siding shingles
• Textured paint and patching compounds used on wall and ceilings
• Walls and floors around wood-burning stoves protected with asbestos paper, millboard, or cement sheets
• Hot water and steam pipes coated with asbestos material or covered with an asbestos blanket or tape
• Oil and coal furnaces and door gaskets with asbestos insulation
• Heat-resistant fabrics
• Automobile clutches and brakes
You can find out more about asbestos dangers in the home by watching this video:
St. Clair, IL: An asbestos lawsuit has been filed by Steve and Marsha Bostick against 65 defendant corporations which, they allege, caused Steve Bostick. Specifically, the lawsuit claims that Bostick was exposed to asbestos-containing products throughout his career as a mechanic in the US Army from 1965 until 1968, as a deckhand on the Mississippi River and as a mechanic at MTA City Bus Line from 1968 until 1971, as a power plant operator at TVA from 1971 until 1985 and as a power plant shift operator for the Army Corps of Engineers from 1985 until 2002.
The Bosticks claim the defendants should have known of the harmful effects of asbestos, but failed to exercise reasonable care and caution for Steve Bostick’s safety.
According to the lawsuit, as a result of his asbestos-related diseases, Steve Bostick is disabled and disfigured, has incurred medical costs and suffered great physical pain and mental anguish. Further, he was prevented from pursuing his normal course of employment and, as a result, lost large sums of money that would have accrued to him, the lawsuit states.
The Bosticks are seeking a judgment of more than $100,000, economic damages of more than $50,000, punitive and exemplary damages of more than $100,000, compensatory damages of more than $50,000, punitive damages in an amount sufficient to punish the defendants, plus costs and other relief the court deems just. (madisonrecord.com)
New Orleans, LA:The family of Judy Gail Babin has filed an asbestos lawsuit claiming that her diagnosis of asbestos mesothelioma and subsequent death resulted from her asbestos exposure in connection with her husband’s career.
In their lawsuit, Joseph Edward Babin II, husband of Judy Gail Babin and her children, Joseph Edward Babin III and Lori Babin, allege Judy Gail Babin was continuously exposed directly and indirectly to her husband’s asbestos-laden work clothes, his tools, his car, and their shared surroundings. As a result of her second hand or take home asbestos exposure, she developed and died from mesothelioma.
In the lawsuit, the defendants are accused of designing, testing, contracting, evaluating, manufacturing, packaging, furnishing, storing, handling, transporting, installing, supplying and or selling asbestos-containing products. In addition to these charges, the plaintiffs allege that the defendants for many decades have been in possession of medical and scientific data, literature and test reports clearly indicating the danger of asbestos, and willfully, fraudulently and maliciously concealing and distorting these facts.
The family is seeking an undisclosed amount in connection with strict liability, product liability, negligence and conspiracy allegations against the employers, products, equipment, suppliers, and contractors. The plaintiffs seek damages for conscious physical pain and suffering and mental anguish sustained by the decedent, physical impairment, disfigurement, reasonable and necessary medical expenses, loss of consortium, death and any further damages.
The named defendants in the suit are: The Anchor Packing Company, Coltec Industrial, Inc., Foster Wheeler Energy Corporation, Flowserve Corporation, Durco International, Riley Power, Babcock Borsig Power Inc., D.B. Riley, Riley Stoker Corporation, William Powell Company, General Electric Company, Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, Entergy Gulf States LA LLC, Gulf States Utilities Company, Mosiac Fertilizer LLC, IMC Phosphates Company, IMC Agrico Company, Texaco, Motiva Enterprises, Shell Oil Company, Momentice Specialty Chemical Inc., Hexion Specialty Chemicals Inc., Borden Chemical Inc., Borden Inc., The Borden Company, Borden Chemical and Plastics Limited Partnership, BASF Corporation, BASF Wyandotte Corporation, Honeywell International, Allied Signal Inc., Allied-Signal Inc., Georgia Pacific LLC, McDermott Inc., Zeneco Inc., ICI Americas Inc., Rubicon Chemicals, Bovay Engineers International, Burns and Roe Enterprises, Taylor-Seidenbach Inc., The McCarty Corporation, Anco Insulations Inc., Liberty Mutual Insurance Company, Arrowood Indemnity Company, Eagle Inc., Brock Enterprises Inc., Cannon Sline, Inc., Technip Energy and Chemicals International Inc., Shaw Energy and Chemicals Inc., The Shaw Group, Stone & Webber Inc., Technip E & C Inc. and Turner Industries Group LLC. (louisianarecord.com)
New Orleans, LA: Several companies have been named in an asbestos lawsuit filed by Lones James Gagnard Jr. who contracted asbestos-related lung cancer, which he attributes to his occupational exposure to asbestos containing materials from the early 1970s.
Specifically, the defendants are accused of mining, manufacturing, selling, supplying, distributing, and using products unreasonably dangerous and known to possess inherent dangerous properties with high potential for injury, failing to warn the plaintiff as to the hazards of their products in their foreseeable use, failing to provide safety instructions to eliminate or reduce risks associated with the products, failure to inspect truthfully or adequately report product testing and medical studies, failure to properly design, producing defective products, and failure to properly package their products. In addition, employers allegedly failed to provide Gagnard with a safe place to work, adequate engineering or industrial hygiene measures to control the level of exposure to asbestos and failure to warn of associated hazards.
Gagnard Jr. filed his asbestos lawsuit against Avondale Industries, Inc., Northrop Grumman Ship Systems Inc., Huntington Ingalls Incorporated, Eagle, Inc., Hopeman Brothers Inc., International Paper Company, Champion International, US Plywood, Liberty Mutual Insurance Company as insurer of Wayne Manufacturing Company, McCarty Corporation, Maryland Casualty Company as insurer of Marquette Insulation Inc., Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, Reilly-Benton Company, Taylor-Seidenbach Inc., Uniroyal Inc., Viacom Inc. as successor to CBS Corporation, Wayne Manufacturing, Albert Bossier, Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s London, OneBeacon Insurance Company, J.D. Roberts, and James Melton Garrett in the Orleans Parish Civil District Court on July 19.
He is seeking an undisclosed amount for all medical costs or expenses, lost earnings, mental suffering, anguish, pain, and suffering, physical pain and suffering, loss of quality of life and disability. (louisianarecord.com)
A roundup of recent asbestos-related news and information that you should be aware of. An ongoing list of reported asbestos hot spots in the US from the Asbestos News Roundup archive appears on our asbestos map.
Earlier this year, as part of National Asbestos Awareness Week, the US Surgeon General, Dr. Regina Benjamin, issued a statement concerning asbestos exposure—and urging Americans to learn about the dangers of asbestos exposure. In short, the message is that there is no safe level of asbestos exposure. The lawsuits listed below bear testament to this fact.
In fact, the statement notes “that anyone who disturbs asbestos is at risk. However, it is of special concern for construction, insulation, and demolition workers, pipefitters, boilermakers and others who might disturb asbestos found in old buildings or equipment as part of their work. The hazard is also very real to home handymen, first-responders, and community volunteers.”
Veterans who served in any of the following occupations may have also been exposed to asbestos: mining, milling, shipyard work, insulation work, demolition of old buildings, carpentry and construction, manufacturing and installation of products such as flooring and roofing.
Additionally, veterans who served in Iraq and other countries in that region could have been exposed to asbestos when older buildings were damaged and the contaminant released into the air.
The Surgeon General’s statement explains that asbestos exposure can happen from activity that disturbs asbestos, making the asbestos fibers airborne. Inhaling these fibers leads to asbestos-related diseases. Three of the major health effects associated with asbestos exposure are lung cancer; mesothelioma, a rare form of cancer that is found in the thin lining of the lungs, chest, abdomen and heart; and asbestosis, a serious progressive, long-term, non-cancer disease of the lungs. Specifically:
Asbestosis – Scarring of lung tissue that causes breathing problems, usually in workers exposed to asbestos in workplaces before the Federal government began regulating asbestos use (mid-1970s).
Pleural plaques – Scarring in the inner surface of the ribcage and area surrounding the lungs that can cause breathing problems, though usually not as serious as asbestosis. People living in areas with high environmental levels of asbestos, as well as workers, can develop pleural plaques.
Cancer – The two types of cancer caused by exposure to asbestos are lung cancer and mesothelioma, a cancer of the thin lining surrounding the lung (pleural membrane) or abdominal cavity (the peritoneum). Mesothelioma is a rare form of cancer usually caused by asbestos exposure.
Erie, PA: 62-year-old Lloyd Baldwin has filed an asbestos lawsuit naming 30 defendants, alleging his asbestos-related lung cancer was caused by asbestos exposure on the job. Baldwin was diagnosed with lung cancer in on January 23, 2012, by doctors at the Cleveland Clinic.
In his lawsuit, Baldwin alleges his asbestos exposure began in the 1960s, while working as a machinist, laborer and deliveryman. As a deliveryman, Baldwin claims he was exposed to asbestos from loading and unloading a variety of asbestos-containing products including shingles and rolled roofing materials. He further claims he was exposed to asbestos dust and fibers while performing home renovations and doing automotive work, and while working as a laborer and machinist, and while working around other people who worked on boilers, pumps and valves.
The asbestos lawsuit states that Baldwin, during the course of his automotive work, was exposed to asbestos while working with brakes, clutches, mufflers and gaskets, and when he came into contact with construction materials such as insulation, drywall, joint compound, caulk, floor tiles, ceiling tiles and paint. According to the lawsuit, Baldwin purchased the asbestos-containing materials and supplies from a variety of lumberyards and retail stores.
The list of defendants includes, but is not limited to, Certainteed Corp., DAP Inc., Ford Motor Co., General Electric, Georgia Pacific, Honeywell International, Owens-Illinois, Pfizer, Sears Roebuck and Co., and Union Carbide Corp. (wvrecord.com)
Philadelphia, PA: The widow of a lung cancer victim is suing three companies that dealt in asbestos, alleging her late husband died as a result of injuries he sustained due to his on the job asbestos exposure.
The asbestos short form complaint was filed by Francesca Cerminara, in her capacity as special administrator of the estate of her late spouse, Francesco Cerminara.
The three defendants named in asbestos lawsuit are Ameron International Corp., Hajoca Corp., and J.A. Sexauer Inc.
According to the lawsuit, Francesco Cerminara died on May 1, 2012, at 81 years old, an apparent victim of asbestos-related mesothelioma. He was diagnosed with asbestos disease in the fall of 2011.
Cerminara had worked as a maintenance man, pipefitter, plumber and welder at Chemical Concentrate in Fort Washington, PA, from 1961 to 1974, and at AmChem in Ambler from 1974 to 1988, according to court documents.
The companies listed as defendants in the case are accused of negligence and strict products liability. The plaintiff seeks an unspecified amount of damages. (pennsylvaniarecord.com)
A roundup of recent asbestos-related news and information that you should be aware of. An ongoing list of reported asbestos hot spots in the US from the Asbestos News Roundup archive appears on our asbestos map.
Many of the materials used in construction, including welding, pipe fitting, and millwright work, contained, or in some cases still contain asbestos. By the mid-20th century asbestos was being used in fire retardant coatings, concrete, bricks, pipes and fireplace cement, heat, fire, and acid resistant gaskets, pipe insulation, ceiling insulation, fireproof drywall, flooring, roofing, lawn furniture, and drywall joint compound.
It wasn’t until the 1980s that the knowledge of the dangers of asbestos exposure and related asbestos disease became more widely known amongst the general public. Consequently, millions of men and women likely worked on or around asbestos without any protection for decades.
It would not be uncommon for people to work with asbestos-containing products, either installing or removing them, which would send asbestos fibers into the air. The fibers are inhaled, and settle on people’s clothing—and that’s how asbestos disease begins. People who become ill from asbestos are usually exposed to it on a regular basis, hence the hundreds of asbestos lawsuits we are seeing now.
Riverton, KS: An employee of the Empire District Electric Company has filed an asbestos class action lawsuit alleging the defendant utility company exposed him to asbestos while he was working in the Riverton generating plant.
The coal-fired plant in Riverton was built in 1910, and used asbestos insulation, which was standard in those days. Although the plant has undergone upgrades over the decades it’s been in use, the asbestos has not been removed. In the lawsuit, Les Rider claims the insulation is not only common throughout the building but is also exposed and disintegrating. The asbestos class action claims that Empire District Electric Company knowingly exposed employees to asbestos and other hazardous materials. Specifically, the lawsuit states that Rider and other employees were “repeatedly assigned tasks that brought them into close contact with unreasonably dangerous concentrations of asbestos fibers.”
According to the lawsuit, Rider and other employees were instructed to dispose of various scrap materials that were excavated from the plant when the plant was being converted from coal to natural gas. Court documents show that plant manager Ed Eason said he “wanted these materials to disappear so that Empire personnel charged with environmental oversight would not find them. Mr. Eason further said he wanted ‘plausible deniability’ so that if these materials were found he would not be held responsible for their improper disposal.”
In the class action, Rider claims that as a result he and other employees are at risk for a “significantly higher risk of cancer” due to asbestos exposure. (sekvoice.com)
New Orleans, LA: Charles J. Carrone Sr. has filed an asbestos lawsuit against several defendants alleging they are responsible for his diagnosis of terminal asbestos-related lung cancer.
During his 30 years work at various companies, Carrone claims he was exposed to injurious levels of asbestos. Carrone worked as an electrician from approximately 1950 to 1979. In his lawsuit, he alleges he used, handled or was in the vicinity of others using or handling asbestos on United Fruit Company vessels at the New Orleans riverfront. He also claims he was exposed while working at Evans Cooperage, at Coca-Cola in the construction of a canning room and while pipefitters and insulators installed pipes insulated with asbestos. Carrone further claims his duties required that he start the boilers and perform maintenance, which he did for over 20 years in areas he states lacked proper ambient air filtration.
Negligence and strict liability action is sought against each of the defendants, who the plaintiff claims should not have designed, tested, evaluated, manufactured, handled, transported, installed, supplied and/or sold asbestos-containing products. Moreover, they should have disclosed critical medical and safety information, removed the hazards, supervised for proper safety procedure, mitigated the inhalation and transfer of the asbestos to the plaintiff’s home, and warned him about the known health hazards. Instead, the defendants ostensibly “ignored or actively concealed such information, or condoned such concealment, in order to sell asbestos or asbestos-containing products and to avoid litigation by those who were injured from asbestos inhalation.”
An undisclosed amount is sought for all medical costs or related expenses, lost earnings, mental suffering, anguish, pain, suffering, physical pain and suffering, loss of quality of life and disability.
The named defendants are: Asbestos Corporation Limited, Eagle Inc., Foster Wheeler Energy Corporation, McCarty Corporation, Maryland Casualty Company as insurer of Marquette Insulations Inc., Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, Owens Illinois Inc., Reilly-Benton Company, Taylor-Seidenbach Inc., General Electric, Boland Machine & Manufacturing Company Inc., Chiquita Brands International Inc., United Fruit Company, Coca-Cola Company, Evan Cooperage, Evans Industries Inc. and Evans Harvey Corporation. (louisianarecord.com)
Montgomery, PA: Fifty-three year old David Mermelstein, a resident of Willow Grove, PA, has been indicted on five counts of illegal asbestos removal. If convicted, the defendant faces a maximum possible sentence of 25 years imprisonment and a fine of $1.25 million.
According to the US Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, the indictment alleges that from in or about September, 2009 through in or about April, 2010, Mermelstein hired day laborers instead of licensed asbestos contractors to remove asbestos from commercial property he owned at 10175 Northeast Avenue, Philadelphia. The indictment also claims Mermelstein directed the removal of asbestos by these laborers without safeguards required by federal law. The asbestos in question was contained in insulated pipes that ran throughout the building. Mermelstein had purchased the property, which is an old furniture warehouse, back in April 2001, according to the indictment.
“Mermelstein directed the workers to remove asbestos insulated pipes that were present at the Property, using techniques that included cutting, breaking and ripping the dry asbestos, allowing it to drop to the floor, sweeping asbestos containing dust and debris, and disposing of asbestos in the trash and in a dumpster,” the indictment states.
The case was investigated by the Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) and the City of Philadelphia’s Air Management Services. It is being prosecuted by Assistant United States Attorney Virgil B. Walker and Special Assistant United States Attorney Patricia Miller. The indictment charges Mermelstein with violating the federal Clean Air Act. (www.justice.gov/usao/pae)