Articles Posted in Companies & Asbestos

For purposes of this article, the mesothelioma victim will be referred to as G.P.

In a recent court decision, a judge ruled the surviving family members of a deceased cruise ship worker have a valid mesothelioma case against Steel Grip, an asbestos gloves manufacturer. The judge hearing the case ruled that the mesothelioma lawsuit the survivors filed against Steel Grip should proceed. After G.P., a cruise worker, developed malignant mesothelioma and died, his surviving loved ones filed a personal injury claim in New York. G.P.’s family believes he developed mesothelioma because of the asbestos-contaminated gloves he wore when working. Steel Grip manufactured the gloves, so the family included Steel Grip in their claim. The defendant tried arguing that they had never done any business in New York. However, upon listening to the evidence presented, the judge ruled that G.P.’s family had a valid case and the case could proceed.

G.P. worked on Italian cruise ships for many years. However, while working on the cruise ships presented the risk of asbestos exposure, his family strongly believes that he developed malignant mesothelioma because of his work gloves. In response to being named as a defendant in the case, the gloves manufacturer argued that the court hearing the case did not have jurisdiction over them since they had never done any business in New York. This first argument was defeated by the fact that G.P.’s cruise ships would stop in New York, and he remembered seeing boxes of gloves manufactured by Steel Grip being loaded onto ships while in New York.

For purposes of this article, the victim in this case will be referred to as M.F.B.

In a mesothelioma case, you can recover compensatory damages just like in any other personal injury case. These are damages meant to compensate the plaintiff for the harm suffered. Claimants in mesothelioma claims may also be eligible to recover punitive damages.  However, punitive damages are not awarded in all mesothelioma cases. This is because these damages are meant to punish defendants and not compensate victims or their families. Punitive damages are only awarded when the court determines that the defendant acted particularly egregiously or with the intent to cause harm. Any person found guilty of this kind of conduct pays the plaintiff’s compensatory damages and an additional amount meant to punish them and warn others from acting the same in the future.

Because of the financial burden punitive damages place on defendants, some try to dismiss a claim for such damages. In a recent mesothelioma case, the defendant, a boiler manufacturer, tried dismissing a claim for punitive damages. However, the judge sitting in the case denied the defendant’s petition and allowed the case to continue in its entirety. Burnham LLC, one of the defendants being blamed for the malignant mesothelioma that killed M.F.B. in 2021, could be required to pay the deceased’s punitive damages at the end of the case after the court ruled that the company was unable to prove that punitive damages were not warranted.

For purposes of this article, the mesothelioma victim in this particular case will be referred to as Mr. W.W.

Mr. W.W. was exposed to asbestos during the 1960s and 1970s while working as a pipefitter and union welder for several plants. This was before the dangers of asbestos became known to many. Today, many people know about the dangers of asbestos and the role this substance plays in the development of fatal diseases like mesothelioma and asbestosis. Many years after asbestos exposure, Mr. W.W. was diagnosed with mesothelioma. A month after his diagnosis, he filed a mesothelioma claim against four companies he blamed for his asbestos exposure. Later, Mr. W.W. added thirty more companies to his claim. In 2022, the trial court awarded Mr. W.W. $36 million in damages, with Mr. W.W.’s former employer, Level 3, being ordered to pay $19.2 million. After the trial court made its decision, Level 3 petitioned for a new trial, but that request was denied. The company then decided to file an appeal. In a recent decision, the Louisiana Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit rejected the company’s appeal and allowed Mr. W.W. to recover the damages awarded.

After the trial court awarded Mr. W.W. $36 million in damages, his former employer, Level 3, filed an appeal on several grounds. The company argued that during the original trial, mistakes were made. The company argued that the $36 million verdict was excessive and improper. According to Level 3, the verdict was based on emotion, compassion, and a desire to punish. The company argued that the judgment was not based on the law. In other words, the company claimed that the verdict was an abuse of discretion. Additionally, the company claimed that the trial court assigned them too great a portion of the $36 million verdict. Level 3 argued that Mr. W.W. should not have been allowed to pursue a strict liability argument against them and that the trial court made mistakes in some of their decisions regarding the evidence presented.

Asbestos can cause many health problems, including mesothelioma and asbestosis. There are different types of asbestos, and all can cause health problems. People who have suffered asbestos exposure and developed severe health problems have the right to take legal action against those who are to blame for their exposure. Often, asbestos exposure victims blame their exposure on producers, bosses, and others who had the duty to protect them. The family of such a victim filed a mesothelioma claim against a general contractor who failed to uphold his responsibility to provide workers with a safe working environment. The defendant tried to have the lawsuit dismissed, but the court ruled that the case should proceed to court and be decided by a jury.

After M.F. developed mesothelioma, a lawsuit was filed for his estate seeking compensation from multiple defendants. One of the defendants named in the case is Structure Tone, a general contractor. According to the lawsuit, the G.C. is guilty of negligence and violating NY’s Labor Law 200. Negligence claims in NY are based on a person’s duty to give the standard of care that a reasonably prudent person would under the same circumstances. Negligence relies upon an individual having power over the action that resulted in harm. The state’s labor law in question here follows the same principles. In this case, the plaintiff claims that the G.C. failed to provide workers with a reasonably safe working environment and that the failure to provide a safe working environment resulted in asbestos exposure and, thus, the development of mesothelioma.

The general contractor filed a motion to dismiss the claim on the ground that it could not have contributed to the victim’s illness. According to the courts, a party facing negligence accusations in a mesothelioma claim or another similar claim can have the case dismissed if they can unambiguously show they could not have played a part in causing the victim’s injury or illness. In other words, they can have the case dismissed if they provide evidence that convinces the court, without any doubt, that they couldn’t have contributed to the victim’s injury or illness. According to the G.C., M.F.’s testimony didn’t show he had suffered asbestos exposure at the locations he could remember working. The company’s executive V.P. also provided testimony that the company and its subcontractors hadn’t used asbestos-contaminated materials.