Asbestos-Riddled Senior Centers Settle With Santa Clara DA

Covia Communities, a holding company now known as Front Porch, agreed to pay $1.125 million to resolve asbestos poisoning claims at eight California facilities.

Prosecutors alleged that between 2014 and 2022, Covia performed extensive renovations at these facilities but failed to obtain building permits and failed to test for asbestos before the renovations.

“These laws exist because asbestos exposure can be deadly,” District Attorney Jeff Rosen said. “We will prosecute companies that cut corners and risk the health of senior citizens, workers, and other people in these buildings.”

The settlement money will be distributed as follows: $700,000 in civil penalties, $162,500 in funding for college-level science courses in the Monterey Bay area to educate students about air pollution and air quality management, and $262,500 in investigative cost reimbursement.

Usually, criminal cases do not fully compensate asbestos poisoning victims, or in this case, do not compensate them at all. Only an asbestos exposure lawyer can obtain fair compensation for economic losses, such as medical bills, and noneconomic losses, such as pain and suffering.

Additional punitive damages are usually available in these claims as well. Legally, an asbestos exposure lawyer can obtain punitive damages if there is clear and convincing evidence that the defendant intentionally disregarded a known risk. Asbestos providers learned about the health risks of this substance around 1898. However, they kept selling these products for nearly a hundred years.

Usually, an asbestos exposure lawyer files a negligent failure to warn claim. Most companies have a legal duty to effectively warn customers about all known hazardous side effects. They cannot suppress negative information or bury important warnings on a long list of side effects.

If a lack of care causes injury, an asbestos exposure lawyer can obtain compensation for damages, as outlined above.

Sometimes, victims pursue defective product claims. In most states, companies are strictly liable for the damages their defective products cause.

The major difference between these two claims is subtle yet important. Failure-to-warn actions basically state that the defendant did not issue a proper warning and that failure to warn caused the victim to use a hazardous product. Strict liability is usually a direct cause matter. The victim must prove, by a preponderance of the evidence, that a specific product, not a general failure to warn, caused damages.

These damages usually include diseases, such as asbestosis and mesothelioma, which are normally fatal.

The two kinds of civil cases have other similarities as well. For example, most civil claims are settled out of court. These resolutions benefit victim-plaintiffs. If a defendant loses a trial, the defendant could tie the matter up in appeals courts for decades. But when a defendant settles a case, the defendant immediately writes a check.

For various reasons, a complex civil claim may not be an option. Several substitute legal claims are available in this instance, such as:

• Workers’ Compensation: If the asbestos exposure disease was work-related, workers’ comp replaces lost wages and pays reasonably necessary medical bills. These benefits are available even if the victim was entirely at fault for the exposure, at least in most cases.
• VA Disability: This system resembles workers’ compensation in many ways, with the obvious exception that the asbestos exposure must be service-related. Many Navy veterans file VA disability claims. Before 1980, the Navy extensively used asbestos in all its ships.
• Social Security Disability: The VA rates disabilities on a percentage basis. SSD, on the other hand, is all or nothing. Applicants are disabled, or they are not. The source of exposure is irrelevant in SSD claims, so all victims are usually eligible.

We should also touch on bankruptcy victim compensation fund claims, which are not under any court supervision. If the responsible provider declares bankruptcy and contributes to a fund, compensation is available.

Mesothelioma victims need and deserve significant compensation. For a confidential consultation with an experienced nationwide mesothelioma lawyer, contact the Throneberry Law Group. We routinely handle these matters nationwide.