Posts Tagged ‘ asbestos risk ’
Asbestos News Roundup: 1.10.14 – Get Your Furance Checked for Asbestos
January 10th, 2014. 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.
Hot Air Furnace Asbestos Risk
Just a reminder, as almost all of North America is in a deep freeze—or under several feet of snow right now that if you have an old furnace that has just gone—or you’re thinking or replacing—beware—it could contain asbestos!
While asbestos has been banned from use in furnace gaskets since the 1970s in Canada, and likely the US as well, furnaces purchased and installed before then may still be in operation—they have a lifespan of some 50 years or more.
As the gaskets in hot air furnaces disintegrate with time and wear and tear, they can spread asbestos fibers throughout the house, exposing the inhabitants to long-term exposure and potentially fatal asbestos disease including asbestosis and lung cancer—without them even knowing it. If you suspect your furnace could contain asbestos, get a professional in to take a look at it.
Asbestos Lawsuits
Madison, IL: Georgia-Pacific and John Crane Inc, have been named as defendants by Robert Cowger, personal representative for the heirs and estate of Barbara Cowger, deceased, and her husband Bill Cowger.
According to the lawsuit, Bill Cowger worked as a drywaller from 1963 to 2008 for various contractors. During the course of this employment, his wife was exposed to and inhaled, ingested or otherwise absorbed large amounts of asbestos fibers emanating from certain products he worked with and around which were manufactured, sold, distributed or installed by the defendants.
The lawsuit contends that the defendants either knew or should have known the products had a toxic, poisonous and highly damaging effect upon persons inhaling, ingesting or otherwise absorbing them. Barbara Cowger developed lung cancer that ultimately led to her death as a direct and proximate result of one or more of the acts of negligence on the part of the defendants.
The defendants are also accused of several acts of omission amounting to willful and wanton misconduct.
Additionally, the lawsuit claims that conspirator defendants (both named and not named) as agents of one another and as co-conspirators, agreed and conspired among themselves and with other asbestos manufacturers, distributors and trade organizations to injure the deceased by willfully conspiring to publish false and misleading reports of the health hazards of asbestos.
Judgments in excess of $50,000 for each of the charges have been entered against the defendants. (madisonrecord.com)
Asbestos News Roundup: 1.2.14 – Asbestos Fire Damage
January 2nd, 2014. 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 Fire Damage
During the holiday season, there are always news stories of fires caused by unattended candles, tree decorations, and faulty electronics. If asbestos-containing products are involved, there is a risk for inhaling asbestos fibers, and consequently asbestos disease.
Exposure to extremely high temperatures, around 1000°C, can cause asbestos fire damage, such as charring, spalling and loss of structural strength. (Spall are flakes of a material that are broken off a larger solid body). Asbestos fire damage can also be seen in asbestos containing materials where thermal expansion has occurred even though no direct exposure to fire has taken place.
The major issue with asbestos fires is the debris left behind, which can spread to a large area as a result of spalling. Asbestos contamination can be found within ash and dust during and after an asbestos fire.
In the event of asbestos fire damage, the following steps should be taken:
• Avoid entering the asbestos fire contaminated area to reduce the risk of disruption, exposure or cross contamination.
• Seek professional opinion from an asbestos remediation expert.
• Use appropriately licensed asbestos removal contractors to remove asbestos fire debris and dispose of in a safe and controlled manner.
• Use independent asbestos analysts to conduct asbestos atmospheric testing before/ during/ after the removal of asbestos fire debris.
Asbestos Lawsuits
St. Clair County, IL: James L. Hays and Carol Hays have filed an asbestos lawsuit naming 113 defendant corporations, which, they allege, caused Mr. Hayes to develop lung cancer as a result of exposure to asbestos-containing products throughout his career.
Mr. Hays worked as a laborer at a pipeline company in Texas, as an apprentice at Ross School and Tool Company from 1961 until 1966 and as a tool inspector at Abco Corp. from 1966 until 1968, according to the Hays complaint. They allege the defendants should have known of the harmful effects of asbestos, and failed to exercise reasonable care and caution for the plaintiff’s safety.
The Hays allege that as a result of his asbestos-related diseases, James L. Hays became disabled and disfigured, 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 Hays are seeking a judgment of more than $100,000, economic damages of more than $150,000, compensatory damages of more than $100,000, punitive and exemplary damages of more than $150,000 and other relief the court deems just.(madisonrecord.com)
New Orleans, LA: Following the death of his father, Lance Vincent Ford has filed an asbestos lawsuit naming numerous defendants as being responsible for his father’s asbestos disease and subsequent death. Carl Ford allegedly contracted malignant mesothelioma from repeated environmental and occupational asbestos exposure, the lawsuit claims.
The lawsuit states that Carl Ford, who was born in 1938, was exposed to injurious levels of asbestos, both through environmental exposure while living on the West Bank since birth, near residences and areas contaminated with asbestos-containing scrap metal, as well as occupational exposure while working for National Gypsum at its Westwego facility.
The lawsuit alleges that prior to and during Carl Ford’s exposure period, each of the defendants designed, tested, evaluated, manufactured, packaged, furnished, stored, handled, transported, installed, supplied and sold asbestos-containing products.
The defendants include the Asbestos Corporation Limited, Taylor-Seidenbach Inc., Eagle Inc., Union Carbide Corporation, Burmaster Land and Development Co LLC, Zurich American Insurance Company, Owens Illinois Inc., Uniroyal Inc., The United States Rubber Company Inc. and Metropolitan Life Insurance Company in the Orleans Parish Civil District Court.
The defendants are accused of the mining, manufacture, sale, supply, distribution and use of products that are unreasonably dangerous and that have high potential for causing serious injury such as respiratory disease, cancer and other health problems.
Additionally, Ford alleges the defendants failed to warn, failed to provide safety instructions, failed to adequately test the products for defects, failed to truthfully report or adequately report the results of product testing, failed to recall the products and being otherwise negligent. The International Hygiene Foundation and its members are also accused of fraud and conspiracy.
The plaintiff requests a trial by jury, and seeks an unspecified amount in damages for the conscious physical pain and suffering sustained by the plaintiff and his now deceased father, the physical impairment and disfigurement suffered by the plaintiff’s father, reasonable and necessary medical expenses, funeral and burial expenses, lost earnings, loss of quality of life, and loss of consortium, love, affection, services and society and other damages. (louisianarecord.com)
Retna, LA: The husband and son of a woman who died from asbestos mesothelioma on May 19, have filed an asbestos lawsuit, naming several defendant corporations as being responsible for her death.
Mark Hennessey and Jude Gattuso name Burmaster Land & Development Company LLC, Zurich Insurance Company, Asbestos Corporation and Southern Talc as defendants, alleging Betty Hennessey contracted mesothelioma due to direct exposure to asbestos groundfill material mined and milled by Asbestos Corp. and delivered by Burmaster Land and Development LLC in areas near the home in Gretna from 1950 to 1961.
They further claim that during the period that Betty Hennessey was a resident in the area, Burmaster Land and Development LLC crushed concrete pipe containing asbestos to make ground fill material that was used in area driveways and that asbestos-laden dust inside was spread throughout the neighborhood and into her home. Hennessey and Gattuso claim that Betty Hennessey’s exposure to asbestos directly related to her death. The defendants are accused of failing to warn, product liability and selling unreasonably dangerous materials.
An unspecified amount in damages is sought for physical pain and suffering, physical disability, mental pain and suffering, loss of benefits and loss of enjoyment of life. (louisianarecord.com)
Asbestos News Roundup 12.26.13 – Study: Small Exposure Still Deadly Risk
December 27th, 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.
Lowest Asbestos Levels Linked to Asbestos Disease in Industrial Workers
New research published recently in the Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, suggests that industrial workers at the lowest levels of the asbestos exposure spectrum may still be at risk for deadly mesothelioma, lung cancer, and laryngeal cancer.
The study used data from the long-running Netherlands Cohort Study of 58,279 Norwegian men between 55 and 69 years old. To determine the association between asbestos risk and cancer, researchers compared each man’s job history to asbestos-exposure matrices of various occupations. They then compared likely levels of asbestos exposure to the incidence of mesothelioma and several other cancers.
After 17.3 years of follow-up, there were 132 cases of mesothelioma, 2,324 cases of lung cancer, and 166 cases of laryngeal cancer. Although very rare, mesothelioma is considered the most deadly of the asbestos-linked cancers because of its fast progression and resistance to standard treatments. Of the three types of cancer studied, only two subtypes – lung adenocarcinoma (a form of non-small cell lung cancer) and glottis cancer (a subtype of laryngeal cancer affecting the vocal chords) – were associated with higher levels of prolonged asbestos exposure.
For mesothelioma and all other categories of lung and laryngeal cancer, even lower levels of asbestos exposure were enough to trigger disease. “Asbestos levels encountered at the lower end of the exposure distribution may be associated with an increased risk of pleural mesothelioma, lung cancer, and laryngeal cancer,” the researchers conclude.
The U.S. EPA has stated that all levels of asbestos exposure are potentially risky. They have strict guidelines governing the handling and disposal of asbestos and recommend that do-it-yourself home renovators hire asbestos abatement professionals in order to minimize their mesothelioma risk.
The original study appears in the Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, the journal of the American College of Occupational and Environmental Medicine. (Offermans, NS, et al, “Occupational Asbestos Exposure and Risk of Pleural Mesothelioma, Lung Cancer, and Laryngeal Cancer in the Prospective Netherlands Cohort Study”, December 17, 2013, Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Epub ahead of print. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24351898)
Asbestos Lawsuits
Charleston, WV: 55 companies have been named as defendants in an asbestos lawsuit, alleging workplace-related asbestos related lung disease.
Filed by James L. Prince and his wife, Julia Fay Prince, the lawsuit claims Mr. Prince was diagnosed with lung cancer on November10, 2011. The couple allege Mr. Price was exposed to asbestos and/or asbestos-containing products during his employment as a carpenter from 1947 until 1975.
The defendant companies 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, according to the complaint.
The Princes are seeking a jury trial to resolve all issues involved. The named defendants include:
A.W. Chesterton Company; Air & Liquid Systems Corporation; American Electric Power Company; American Electric Power Service Corporation; Appalachian Power Company; Aristech Chemical Corporation; Brand Insulations; Certainteed Corporation; Cleaver-Brooks; and Copes-Vulcan. (wvrecord.com)
Asbestos Settlements
Cleveland, OH: A jury in Ohio has awarded $27.5 Million to an English professor and his wife who alleged he developed asbestos disease through second hand or take home asbestos exposure.
The jury assessed 60 percent liability to against Kelsey-Hayes Company, successor to National Friction Products Corp, the defendant.
Mr. Panza was diagnosed with terminal asbestos mesothelioma in 2012. The only known cause of mesothelioma in the United States is asbestos exposure. Mr. Panza has received several rounds of chemotherapy and radiation as well as radical surgery which resulted in the removal of one of his lungs and part of his diaphragm in an effort to prolong his life. There is no cure for mesothelioma. Mr. Panza is only 40 years old.
The Panza’s contended that John Panza Jr.’s take-home exposure occurred from exposure to asbestos dust that his father, John Panza, Sr., an employee of the brake company Eaton Airflex, brought home, unknowingly, on his work clothing.
Mr. Panza’s father worked at Eaton from 1963 to 1993 in the shipping and receiving department. As part of his job, he was required to deliver materials all over the plant and was a frequent bystander to other employees who drilled and abraded National Friction products, which released asbestos. Mr. Panza and his father were very close and were known to spend a lot of time together. Mr. Panza, Sr. coached his son’s baseball league and Mr. Panza also helped sort and wash his father’s dusty laundry.
Mr. Panza married his high school sweetheart, and they now have a young daughter. While they had hoped for more children, Mr. Panza’s cancer medication prevents that from happening.
The jury awarded Mr. Panza $515,000 in economic damages and $12 million in non-economic damages. His wife, Jane Panza, was awarded $15 million for loss of consortium for a total award of $27,515,000. (harrismartin.com + waterskraus.com)
Asbestos News Roundup: 12.19.13 – Major Ruling on Workplace Asbestos SOL
December 20th, 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.
Statute of Limitations on Work Place Asbestos Disease No Longer Valid in Pennsylvania
Recently, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court rendered a decision that could have widespread implications with respect to lawsuits filed by plaintiffs who allege to have contracted illnesses from the workplace, specifically asbestos disease.
In November, the high court ruled that occupational diseases that manifest outside of a 300-week period prescribed by the Workers’ Compensation Act do not preclude an employee from filing a civil action against his or her employer. The high court ruled that the Workers’ Compensation Act did not apply to latent occupational diseases, or diseases that could take years to develop and be diagnosed.
The justices’ decision reverses an August 2010 order of the state Superior Court, a lower-tier appellate bench, which in turn had reversed a June 2008 Allegheny County Common Pleas Court ruling. It was based on the justices’ review of two consolidated appeals, Tooey v. AK Steel Corp.and Landis v. A.W. Chesterton Co. In that review, the justices were tasked with addressing whether workers such as John Tooey and Spurgeon E. Landis could seek disability compensation benefits, or file lawsuits against their employers, since their respective mesothelioma diagnoses came well after 300 weeks of the date of their last asbestos exposure.
Tooey, the plaintiff in the first case, died less than a year after being diagnosed with mesothelioma. He had worked as an industrial salesman of asbestos products for Ferro Engineering, a division of Oglebay-Norton, from 1964 until 1982, according to court documents.
Landis, who was diagnosed with asbestos mesothelioma in 2007, was exposed to asbestos during his employment. He had worked for Alloy Rods, Inc., predecessor in interest to Chemetron Corp., and ESAB Group Inc., from 1946 until 1992.
In their decision, the justices specifically singled out mesothelioma, which has an average latency period of 30 to 50 years, saying that even mesothelioma that manifests at the lower end of that average would not occur for decades after an employee’s asbestos exposure. Therefore, the 300-week time window in which to bring a claim “operates as a de facto exclusion of coverage under the Act for essentially all mesothelioma claims,” the high court wrote.
“Indeed, the consequences of Employers’ proposed interpretation of the Act to prohibit an employee from filing an action at common law, despite the fact that the employee has no opportunity to seek redress under the Act, leaves the employee with no remedy against his or her employer, a consequence that clearly contravenes the Act’s intended purpose of benefiting the injured worker,” the ruling states. “It is inconceivable that the legislature, in enacting a statute specifically designed to benefit employees, intended to leave a certain class of employees who have suffered the most serious of work-related injuries without any redress under the Act or at common law.”
Plaintiffs’ attorneys welcome the Pennsylvania’s Supreme Court’s ruling as a positive and humanitarian legal development. (pennrecord.com)
Asbestos Settlements
New Orleans, LA: A Louisiana jury has awarded $6.4 million to a woman who was diagnosed with mesothelioma after being exposed to asbestos manufactured and sold by Asbestos Corporation Ltd (ACL).
After a seven-day trial, a jury sitting in the Louisiana District Court, Parish of Orleans issued the $6,420,467 verdict in favor of New Orleans resident Mary Morvant. The jury found that Morvant was exposed to raw asbestos fiber supplied by ACL to a local plant owned by Johns-Manville Marrero.
According to the lawsuit, Morvant, a surgical nurse, was diagnosed with mesothelioma in October 2012 after being exposed to asbestos fibers through the course of her work. Morvant, a Louisiana resident, brought the asbestos lawsuit against the alleged manufacturers, suppliers, and installers of asbestos products to which she allegedly was exposed. In addition to the Asbestos Corporation Limited, a Canadian asbestos fiber miner and manufacturer, the other named defendants are five Louisiana residents: Eagle, Inc., McCarty Corporation, Taylor-Seidenbach, Reilly-Benton Company, Inc., and Burmaster Land & Development, LLC. (gpo.gov, + harrismartin.com)
Los Angeles, CA: An $8.6 million settlement has been awarded to the family of the recently deceased William Saller, who died from asbestos disease. According to the lawsuit, Saller allegedly contracted asbestos mesothelioma from exposure to asbestos dust generated by a thermal insulation product known as Mundet, made by defendant Crown, Cork & Seal (CCS), a manufacturer of thermal insulation products. Mundet was used extensively in the refinery where Mr. Saller worked. (harrismartin.com)
After just 17 days, the Los Angeles Superior Court jury reached their verdict December 13 awarding $5 million in economic and non-economic damages and $3.6 million in punitive damages to the family of Saller. The ruling comes after the Saller family lose the case in 2007, but the original verdict was overturned on appeal and sent back for retrial.
The sole defendant in the asbestos lawsuit, CCS, was found 30 percent responsible for the compensatory award and 100 percent responsible for the punitive award.
Asbestos News Roundup: 12.12.13 – Cigarettes & Asbestos Risk
December 12th, 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.
Cigarettes & Asbestos Risk
It is hard to think of anything that could make cigarettes more dangerous, but back in the 1950s, certain cigarettes actually contained asbestos in their filters. Those asbestos-containing cigarettes have led to lawsuits alleging mesothelioma and asbestosis disease, either on the part of people who smoked the cigarettes or those who worked in the factory that supplied the filters. Other lawsuits alleging exposure to asbestos fibers resulting in asbestosis lung disease are still pending.
According to Daily Business Review (9/19/13), Richard Delisle was diagnosed with mesothelioma, a fatal condition linked to asbestos exposure, in 2012. He alleges that his smoking of Kent cigarettes, which reportedly used a filter that contained asbestos, contributed to his developing mesothelioma. Also included as defendants in the trial were a paper mill company where Delisle was employed and the manufacturer of the filters used in the Kent cigarettes.
A jury found the cigarette maker, Lorillard, and the maker of the filters each 22 percent responsible for Delisle’s condition, with another 16 percent fault given to the paper company. The final 40 percent was against other defendants. In all, the jury awarded Delisle $8 million, with Lorillard paying $3.52 million as a result of an indemnity agreement between Lorillard and the maker of the filter manufacturer.
Asbestos Lawsuits
Philadelphia, PA: A$2.3 million award in an asbestos mass tort case has been upheld by a trial court judge in Philadelphia. Common Pleas Court Judge Mark I. Bernstein refused to throw out the multi-million dollar verdict against Crane Co., DAP Inc., Duro Dyne Corp., The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. and Goodyear Canada Inc., which had been reached following a jury trial in late February, the Pennsylvania record reportss.
Charlotte Vinciguerra filed her asbestos lawsuit on behalf of her late husband, Frank Vinciguerra, who died from malignant mesothelioma on November 3, 2010.
Mrs. Vinciguerra filed suit in June 2012, citing numerous companies as defendants, many of whom were dismissed pre-trial. The lawsuit alleged that Mr. Vinciguerra developed mesothelioma as a result of his exposure to asbestos at work as a sheet metal helper and sheet metal mechanic for E.I. DuPont De Nemours & Co. from 1951 to 1985. Frank Vinciguerra was diagnosed with malignant mesothelioma in the summer of 2010, according to court records.
Mrs. Vinciguerra alleged that E.I. DuPont failed to exercise reasonable care to protect her husband and others from the hazardous, dangerous and harmful conditions that existed at the property, according to the lawsuit.
The defendants claimed, in their attempt to get a new trial, that the trial judge allowed the plaintiff’s expert witness to testify that “each and every breath” and “every exposure” to asbestos-containing fiber was causative of Frank Vinciguerra’s injuries, in violation of precedence set by the Pennsylvania Supreme Court in the case of Betz v. Pneumo Abex LLC. However, Judge Bernstein wrote that none of the plaintiff’s expert witnesses ever offered this opinion during the course of the litigation.
During the trial, Dr. Steven Markowitz, an occupational and environmental medicine expert, testified that it was his opinion that Frank Vinciguerra’s exposure to asbestos likely caused the man’s disease.
According to court records, Markowitz explained that there is a dose-response relationship in asbestos disease, and concepts of cumulative exposure to asbestos.
Markowitz’s testimony was based upon his individual analysis of the specific factors in Vinciguerra’s condition, was offered to a reasonable degree of medical certainty, and was “fully subject to cross-examination,” Judge Bernstein wrote. The Judge also noted that Markowitz’s testimony clearly explained “that it is the cumulative effect which causes the disease.”
The total verdict for the plaintiff is $2,286,376.44. (pennrecord.com)
Find us on
Archive by Category
- Accidents (24)
- Airlines (9)
- Asbestos Mesothelioma (262)
- Automotive (25)
- Celebrity (14)
- Class Action (84)
- Complaints/Comments (15)
- Consumer Fraud (84)
- Contest (2)
- Court of Public Opinion (5)
- Crazy Sh*t Lawyers See (61)
- Criminal Law (4)
- Defective Products (111)
- DePuy ASR Hip Recall (2)
- Discrimination (22)
- Drugs/Medical (248)
- Elder Care Abuse (4)
- Emerging Issues (462)
- Employment (54)
- Environment (52)
- Financial (28)
- Food Illness (15)
- Human/Civil Rights (4)
- Insecurities (5)
- Insurance (16)
- Intellectual Property (16)
- Internet/E-commerce (19)
- lawsuits (161)
- Lawyers (20)
- Lawyers Giving Back (43)
- Lex Levity (10)
- Personal Injury (106)
- Pleading Ignorance (53)
- Real Estate (2)
- Recall (6)
- Scam (3)
- Securities (13)
- Settlement (81)
- Tort Reform (2)
- Totally Tortelicious (81)
- Veterans (11)
- Whistleblower (9)