Asbestos News Roundup: 3.21.13 – California Asbestos Dust

March 21st, 2013. By LucyC

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.

Asbestos Dust in California Buildings

Across California, asbestos was used heavily in many building materials up until the mid-1980s. If these asbestos containing materials are disturbed through renovations or demolitions, or become friable with age, the asbestos may become airborne and spread throughout a property. Eventually these asbestos fibers will settle and may contribute to dusts found in buildings. This puts people working or living in those buildings at risk for asbestos exposure, without their knowledge.

According to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), “Asbestos fibers may be released into the air by the disturbance of asbestos-containing material during product use, demolition work, building or home maintenance, repair, and remodeling.” The EPA goes on to report, “Exposure to asbestos increases your risk of developing lung disease. That risk is made worse by smoking. In general, the greater the exposure to asbestos, the greater the chance of developing harmful health effects.”

In 1987, asbestos was added to California’s Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986, better known as Proposition 65. Prop 65 lists chemicals known to cause cancer, birth defects or other reproductive harm to people living in the state of California.

Asbestos Lawsuits

Charleston, WV: Denise Tate has filed an asbestos lawsuit on behalf of Ervin Dallas Mayes, who was diagnosed with asbestos-related lung cancer in April 2010, and subsequently died on May 5, 2011.

In her asbestos lawsuit, Tate alleges 68 defendants are responsible for her family member’s lung cancer and death.

Tate’s asbestos lawsuit contends that the defendants exposed Mayes to asbestos and/or asbestos-containing products during his employment as a laborer and carpenter from 1955 until 1995, according to the lawsuit.

The defendants are being sued based on theories of negligence, contaminated buildings, breach of expressed/implied warranty, strict liability, intentional tort, conspiracy, misrepresentations and post-sale duty to warn.

Certain defendants are also being sued as premise owners and as Mayes’ employers for deliberate intent/intentional tort, according to the lawsuit.

The 68 companies named as defendants include 3M Company; A.W. Chesterton Company; Allied Chemical Corporation; Ashland, Inc.; Aurora Chemical Corporation; Borg-Warner Corporation; Brand Insulations, Inc.; Buffalo Pumps, Inc.; BW/IP, Inc.; and CBS Corporation.(wvrecord.com)

St. Clair, IL: Leonard and Monica Freed have filed an asbestos lawsuit naming 69 companies as being responsible for Leonard Freed’s diagnosis of asbestos-related lung cancer.

In their lawsuit, the Freeds allege that Mr. Frees was exposed to asbestos-containing products throughout his career. He worked as an apprentice and electrician’s helper for electrical contractor Dan House from 1965 until 1966; for Florida Power and Light from 1967 until 1996; as a helper at the Fort Myers plant from 1967 until 1968; at the Turkey Point Plant in Homestead, FL, from 1968 until 1971; and as an apprentice mechanic, instructor for control specs and senior plant technician from 1971 until 1992.

The Freeds claim that the defendants should have known of the harmful effects of asbestos, but failed to exercise reasonable care and caution for the plaintiff. Consequently, Mr. Freed’s resulting asbestos-related disease caused him to become disabled and disfigured, incurred medical costs and suffer great physical pain and mental anguish. Further, the lawsuit states Mr. Freed became prevented from pursuing his normal course of employment and, as a result, lost large sums of money that would have accrued to him.

The Freeds are seeking punitive and exemplary damages of more than $150,000, compensatory damages of more than $100,000, punitive damages in an amount sufficient to punish and a judgment of more than $100,000, plus costs and other relief. (madisonrecord.com)

 

Top 10 Most Ridiculous Claims that led to Lawsuits in 2012

March 19th, 2013. By LucyC

LawyersandSettlements.com is releasing its list of the Top 10 Most Ridiculous Marketing Claims from consumer fraud lawsuits during the last year.

The alleged false advertising claims found in these ten consumer fraud lawsuits shows the extent to which marketers may go in order to promote their products, as well as the level of consumer savviness that exists in the marketplace. Consumers will clearly check marketers on promotional claims where product performance does not appear to live up to what’s being promised.

Here, our list of most ludicrous marketing claims found in consumer fraud class action lawsuits during 2012:

1. Coty’s Rimmel London Lash Accelerator was the target of a consumer fraud class action in 2012. Filed in federal court in California, the consumer fraud class action lawsuit, entitled Algarin v. Coty Inc., Case No. 12-cv-2868 JAH JMA) alleged that Coty deceives consumers by advertising that Rimmel London Lash Accelerator mascara with Grow-Lash Complex lengthens eyelashes by 37 percent within one month and, with regular use, increases their number. The Rimmel London Lash Accelerator class action lawsuit makes our top 10 list for if the product really did generate that kind of eyelash growth, Coty would likely be facing a personal injury lawsuit resulting from eyelashes restricting visibility.

2. PepsiCo and its subsidiary Frito-Lay also faced the wrath of disgruntled consumers in Markus Wilson v. Frito-Lay North America, Inc. and PepsiCo, Inc., Case No. 12-cv-01586, U.S. District Court, Northern District of California, Oakland Division. The class action lawsuit alleged Frito-Lay misbranded its Lay’s Potato Chips as healthy by claiming they contain “0 grams of Trans Fat,” while not pointing out in advertising that every 50 chips contains more than 13g of fat. Additionally, the lawsuit states Frito-Lay tells consumers “Snacks may benefit special populations including people with diabetes, children and adolescents, older adults, and pregnant women.” Really?

3. Pepperidge Farm faced a deceptive marketing practices lawsuit. In Bolerjack v. Pepperidge Farm, Inc., Case No. 12-cv-2918, U.S. District Court, Colorado (Denver), the lead plaintiffs alleged the company “mistakenly or misleadingly represented that its Cheddar Goldfish Crackers are ‘Natural,’ when in fact, they are not, because they contain Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) in the form of soy and/or soy derivatives.” Makes you wonder what part of the name “Cheddar Goldfish Crackers” could possibly imply that they are natural? Think about it.

4. ConAgra Foods Parkay Spray. ConAgra Foods faced a class action lawsuit for allegedly misleading consumers over the fat content of Parkay Spray butter substitute. The Parkay lawsuit, Pamela Sue Trewhitt v. ConAgra Foods, Inc., Class Action Case No. 8:12-cv-00287-JFB-TDT, United States District Court for the District of Nebraska, claimed that ConAgra intentionally misrepresented the contents of Parkay Spray butter substitute as “fat-free” and “calorie-free” when it allegedly contains 832 calories and 93 grams of fat per 8 oz. bottle.

5. Kao Brands, makers of Jergens products saw the legal community championing the consumers’ right-to-know over alleged erroneous claims in the packaging, labeling, marketing, advertising and promotion of Jergens Skin Firming Daily Toning Moisturizer. Among the Jergens false advertising claims alleged in J’lyshae Burns v. Kao USA, Inc., Case No. 12-cv-3261, US District Court, Northern District of California, are that the lotion’s ‘clinically proven to reduce the appearance of cellulite,’ that it will tighten a user’s skin, and produce improved resiliency, elasticity, and firmness.” This one makes the top 10 for if Kao Brands had found a way to “produce” firmness, Jergens Skin Firming Daily Toning Moisturizer would have the attention of the medical community.

6. Dr. Pepper Snapple Group. Another class action lawsuit to come out of the food and beverage industry was the one filed against Dr. Pepper Snapple Group over its 7UP Cherry Antioxidant, 7UP Mixed Berry Antioxidant and Diet 7UP Mixed Berry Antioxidant sodas. The consumer fraud lawsuit, Green v. Dr Pepper Snapple Group Inc., was filed US District Court, Central District of California, No. 12-09567, and alleged that antioxidants contained in the 7UP sodas were falsely stated as being derived from blackberries, cherries, cranberries, pomegranates and raspberries, rather than added Vitamin E.

7. Avon Products, Inc. was hit with a consumer fraud class action lawsuit over its Anew skin care line. At issue, according to the lawsuit entitled Lorena Trujillo v. Avon Products, Inc., Case No. 12-9084, California Central District Court, are alleged false advertising anti-aging claims made by the cosmetic manufacturer regarding its Anew Clinical Advanced Wrinkle Corrector, Anew Reversalist Night Renewal Cream, Anew Reversalist Renewal Serum and Anew Clinical Thermafirm Face Lifting Cream products. Avon is alleged to go as far as to compare the products to “procedures found in a dermatologist’s office” and to claim that these same products can boost collagen, recreate fresh skin and fortify damaged tissue. Even the FDA got in the act on this one–they issued a warning letter indicating that the products have been misrepresented to consumers.

8. Maybelline faced a consumer fraud class action over its “Super Stay” lipstick and lip gloss–allegedly they weren’t staying on as long as promised. The lipstick lawsuit, entitled Carol Leebove, et al. v. Maybelline LLC, Case No. 12-cv-07146, alleged L’Oreal SA, the parent company of Maybelline, falsely advertised the staying power of both the Super Stay lipstick and lip gloss by naming them Super Stay 14HR Lipstick and Super Stay 10HR Stain Gloss. One of the plaintiffs for the lawsuit alleged that the long-lasting lipstick would wear off as soon as she ate a meal or had a drink. The Maybelline lawsuit alleged unjust enrichment, breach of warranty and violations of various consumer-protection laws.

9. Arctic Zero frozen desserts were on the receiving end of a class action lawsuit that alleged the desserts have 46% to 68% more calories than advertised. The Arctic Zero lawsuit, entitled Brenda Freeman v. Arctic Zero, Inc., Case No. 12-cv-2279 L BGS, US District, Southern District of California, alleged the company deceptively labels and markets its frozen treats as having only “150 calories per pint.” It goes on, however, to say the frozen desserts contain up to “68% more calories than advertised based on findings from recent independent laboratory tests performed by EMSL Analytical, Inc.” Specifically at issue in the class action were the Arctic Zero Chocolate Peanut Butter, and Arctic Zero Vanilla Maple which allegedly had 46% more calories than the 150 calories advertised.

10. Chobani Yogurt found itself involved with a consumer fraud class action lawsuit in Kane v. Chobani, Inc., No CV12-02425 (U.S. Dist. Ct., N.D. Cal., San Jose Div., filed May 14, 2012). The lawsuit alleged Chobani Inc. made deceptive marketing claims concerning the use of certain terms on its Greek yogurt products. Specifically, Chobani’s use of “evaporated cane juice’, ‘all natural ingredients’ and ‘only natural ingredients’ as terms to describe the yogurt allegedly failed to disclose that ‘evaporated cane juice’ is commonly referred as sugar or dried cane syrup.

Asbestos News Roundup: 3.15.13 – Who’s At Risk for Asbestos Disease?

March 15th, 2013. By LucyC

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.

Asbestos Exposure—Who’s at Risk?

This week, a $7.5 million asbestos lawsuit settlement concerning a construction worker who developed a highly aggressive cancer after his exposure to asbestos, made the news. The plaintiff, who was not named, brought the lawsuit against several of the companies that manufactured the materials.

In the 1970s and 1980s, the plaintiff was a construction worker helping install underground water and sewer lines beneath the Sacramento Valley city of Chico. His job involved working with pipes made from a concrete-asbestos compound, which he would cut with a gasoline-powered saw. The cutting generated an enormous amount of cement-asbestos dust, which left the plaintiff covered head to toe by the end of the day. The plaintiff was later diagnosed with pleural mesothelioma, an aggressive form of cancer, also rare except where attributable to asbestos exposure.

But construction workers aren’t the only trades at increased risk for asbestos disease. According to information posted by the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR), workers in the following areas can be exposed to asbestos:

• Brake repair mechanic

• Carpenter

• Demolition worker

• Dry wall finisher

• Electrician

• Insulation installer

• Miner

• Pipe or steam fitter

• Plumber

• Roofer

• Shipyard worker

• Vermiculite processing plant worker

• Welder

Additionally, the ATSDR states that outdoor workers, such as construction workers, landscapers, and excavators might be exposed to naturally occurring asbestos found above the ground through activities that crush asbestos-containing rock or stir up dust in soils that contain asbestos.

Asbestos Lawsuits

Fonda, NY: The family of a recently deceased man who spent part of his career as a plumber has filed an asbestos lawsuit against a local plumbing company, alleging the company is responsible for his death from asbestos mesothelioma resulting from his repeated contact with asbestos.

Josephine Jaworski, the widow of Joseph Jaworski, filed the lawsuit on behalf of herself and her late husband’s estate. The defendant is A. Mormile Plumbing & Heating of Amsterdam. Among the claims in the lawsuit are wrongful death, negligence and loss of consortium.

According to a report in the LeaderHerald.com, “This is the second lawsuit Josephine Jaworski has filed against the company. A similar lawsuit claiming negligence filed in state Supreme Court in Johnstown in June 2011 named more than 100 other defendants, including CBS, Ford, General Electric, Goodyear and Sears, but the case was disposed before coming to trial, according to court records.

According to his obituary, Joseph Jaworski was 83 years old when he died July 17, 2011—less than a month after the first lawsuit was filed.

Neither lawsuit specifies when Jaworski was employed by A. Mormile Plumbing & Heating. The 2011 lawsuit says “for a period of many years” Jaworski was exposed to asbestos “while working in various shipyards, steel mills, refineries, paper mills, chemical plants, industrial sites and other facilities” or was exposed through normal use of asbestos products.” (leaderherald.com)

Charleston, WV: 70 companies have been named as defendants in an asbestos lawsuit filed by James E. Preston and his wife, Nancy J. Preston. The Prestons claim that the defendants are responsible for Mr. Preston’s diagnosis of asbestosis. He was diagnosed on June 27, 2011.

The lawsuit states that during his employment as a laborer and instrument maintenance worker from 1953 until 1997, Mr. Preston was exposed to asbestos and/or asbestos-containing products.

The defendants are being sued based on theories of negligence, contaminated buildings, breach of expressed/implied warranty, strict liability, intentional tort, conspiracy, misrepresentation and post-sale duty to warn, according to the lawsuit.

The 70 defendants named in the suit include: 3M Company; 4520 Corporation, Inc.; Ajax Magnethermic Corporation; Allied Chemical Corporation; A.O. Smith Corporation; A.W. Chesterton Company; American Electric Power; American Electric Power Service Corporation; Appalachian Power Company; and Aurora Pump Company.

Charleston, WV: 73 companies are being sued in an asbestos lawsuit filed by John William Taylor, who alleges the defendants are responsible for his lung injury.

Taylor was diagnosed with a lung injury on July 24, 2012. Taylor and his wife Carol allege the defendants exposed him to asbestos and/or asbestos-containing products during his career as a laborer, maintenance worker and electrician from 1955 until 1988.

The Taylors claim the defendants are being sued for negligence, contaminated buildings, breach of expressed/implied warranty, strict liability, intentional tort, conspiracy, misrepresentations and post-sale duty to warn.

Certain defendants are also being sued as premises owners and as John Taylor’s employers for deliberate intent/intentional tort, according to the suit.

The 73 defendants include: A.O. Smith Corporation; A.W. Chesterton Company; 3M Company; Allegheny Energy Service Corporation; American Electric Power Company, Inc.; American Electric Power Service Corporation; Appalachian Power Company; Aurora Pump Company; Beazer East; and Borg-Warner Corporation.

Asbestos Settlements

Los Angeles, CA: A construction worker who developed a highly aggressive cancer after his exposure to asbestos, has resolved his asbestos lawsuit against the defendant companies for $7.5 million prior to trial. The plaintiff brought suit against several of the companies that manufactured the materials. The defendants severally denied liability.

In the 1970s and 1980s, the plaintiff was a construction worker helping install underground water and sewer lines beneath the Sacramento Valley city of Chico. His job involved working with pipes made from a concrete-asbestos compound, which he would cut with a gasoline-powered saw. The cutting generated an enormous amount of cement-asbestos dust, which left the plaintiff covered head to toe by the end of the day. The plaintiff was later diagnosed with pleural mesothelioma, an aggressive form of cancer, also rare except where attributable to asbestos exposure.

The plaintiff filed the lawsuit in the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, seeking damages on a defective product liability action. The plaintiff sought recovery of medical expenses, lost wages, and non-economic recovery. The defendants named were several companies who manufactured, sold or delivered the asbestos-containing pipes the plaintiff worked with, including Parex USA, Westburne Supply, John K. Bice Co., Los Angeles Rubber, Hajoca Corp., Hanson Permanente Cement, Keenan, Properties, J-M Manufacturing, Certainteed Corp., Ferguson Enterprises, Grinnell Corp., Amcord, Ameron International and Calportland.

Asbestos News Roundup: 3.8.13 – Second-Hand Asbestos Risk

March 8th, 2013. By LucyC

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.

Asbestos Disease Risk for Family Members

The recent case of a woman in her 70s who died from mesothelioma has highlighted how asbestos dust represented a danger not just to those who worked in heavy industry, but also to their wives and children.

The 78-year old women succumbed to asbestos mesothelioma which she developed as a result of having breathed in second-hand asbestos fibers as she shook out the work clothes of her husband and son, who worked at a power station.

There are many cases of family members developing asbestos disease as a result of secondary asbestos exposure—secondary exposure caused, for example, by wives beating their husband’s dusty overalls as they hung on a washing line, or shaking them off in a doorway before putting them in a washing machine. Their husbands worked in industries such as mining, ship-building, construction, plumbing and electrical.

Children and even grandchildren have also been put at risk, running up to a returning parent to give them a hug as they return from work, or sitting on their knee as they wear their dusty work clothes. The risk of loved ones being accidentally exposed is unfortunate and just adds to the tragic legacy of asbestos. But as this latest case shows, it is something that family members need to be made aware of.

Asbestos Lawsuits

Charleston, WV: A couple from Kentucky has filed an asbestos lawsuit naming 57 companies they allege are responsible for Arthur Benjamin Jr.’s recent diagnosis of asbestosis.

Mr. Benjamin Jr. was diagnosed with asbestosis on August 20, 2012.

Benjamin and his wife, Jackie L. Benjamin, allege the defendants exposed Mr. Benjamin to asbestos and/or asbestos-containing products during his career as a laborer from 1968 until 2001.

The defendants are being sued based upon the theories of negligence, contaminated buildings, breach of expressed/implied warranty, strict liability, intentional tort, conspiracy, misrepresentation and post-sale duty to warn. Certain defendants are also being sued as premises owners and as Arthur Benjamin’s employers for deliberate intent/ intentional tort, according to the lawsuit.

The 57 defendants in the suit include: 3M Company; A.K. Steel Corporation; Ashland, Inc.; A.W. Chesterton Company; Amdura Corporation; Bucyrus International, Inc.; CBS Corporation; Caterpillar, Inc.; Clark Equipment Company; and Certainteed Corporation

Asbestos Settlements

New York, NY: A $35 million settlement has been reached in an asbestos personal injury lawsuit brought by Ivo John Peraica, an asbestos removal worker who died in December from cancer caused by asbestos. The New York Supreme Court jury that heard Peraica’s case returned its verdict Friday, awarding the multi-million dollar settlement to the Croatian-born worker.

Peraica, of Queens, worked for eight years for New York-area contractors removing asbestos insulation from boilers, pumps, and other equipment. He died from complications related to Mesothelioma, a cancer whose only known cause is exposure to toxic asbestos fibers.

Peraica was represented by mass tort and personal injury lawyers Jerry Kristal, Adam Cooper, and Danny R. Kraft, Jr. of the firm Weitz & Luxenberg, P.C. The lawsuit claimed that Peraica’s disease was caused by years of inhaling the asbestos dust stirred up each time he stripped asbestos insulation from the equipment at his jobsites—equipment which, according to testimony, was devoid of any warnings about the dangers of asbestos.

The sole defendant at the time of the verdict—industrial products manufacturer Crane Co—argued that other companies and even Peraica himself were responsible for his exposure to asbestos, but the jury ultimately heaped blame on the Stamford, CN-based company, saying it had acted with reckless disregard for consumers’ safety.

Peraica, a Local 12 Heat and Frost Insulators union member, worked removing asbestos for almost a decade: from the week he moved his family to New York from Croatia in 1978 until he stopped doing asbestos removal work in 1986. Peraica’s widow, Milica, survives him, as do three daughters, one of whom testified at trial to her father’s pain and suffering.

Peraica was unable to testify in person, but before he died on December 28, provided four days’ worth of deposition testimony that Weitz & Luxenberg’s trial team was able to read into evidence.

By the time Peraica’s trial was underway, he was too sick to take part in it. Kraft, a lawyer in Weitz & Luxenberg’s asbestos unit, told the jury Peraica was “a fighter” who would do anything it took to testify in his trial, but likely would be unable to as he quickly deteriorated under medical care.

“This verdict is important because it shows we reached the jury,” Kraft said. “We were able to impress upon them how important it is to hold companies accountable for failing to protect workers like Mr. Peraica. Companies like Crane Co. made millions knowing that workers handling their products would come in contact with asbestos, but never provided warnings. What’s even more alarming is that Crane Co. admitted at trial to having knowledge about the dangers of asbestos that dates to the 1930s. Weitz & Luxenberg isn’t comfortable with that fact, and I don’t think the jury was either.”

Peraica’s case began as a consolidated trial of seven plaintiffs against a number of large corporate defendants. By the time the jury began deliberations, the other plaintiffs and defendants had resolved their cases, leaving only Peraica and his claim against Crane Co.

The trial was held in New York State Supreme Court before Justice Martin Schulman.

Budweiser Uses Water to Fight Water; Says Whistleblowers Are Confused

March 6th, 2013. By AbiK

So after a few Budweiser class action lawsuits were filed last week over allegations that the King of Beers was selling ‘watered down’ beer, Budweiser took the opportunity to strike back. But rather than just defend itself or call the watered-down beer allegations pure bunk, it tried to get clever. How so? Anheuser Busch ran a full-page ad featuring a picture of Budweiser Water—actual canned water—that the brewer produces for disaster relief efforts.

Here’s the full-page ad: