Mesothelioma Court Rulings & Legislation

Contractor’s Negligence Exposes Neighborhood to Mesothelioma Risk

December 8, 2024 | Throneberry Law Group

In a recent court decision, an asbestos contractor in Jefferson County, Colorado, was found guilty of several crimes after his fraudulent and careless acts endangered his workers, a client, and a whole neighborhood. The contractor’s actions put his employees, the client, and the entire neighborhood at risk of developing mesothelioma in the future. The contractor handled asbestos removal poorly and charged the client $70,000 for the poor work. Asbestos is a well-known health hazard, and its removal requires strict adherence to safety protocols. Failure to abide by the set guidelines can result in severe consequences.

The 82-year-old owner of a fire-damaged four-unit rental property in Arvada hired the contractor, Lance Slayton, in 2022 to clean and repair the property. This was when the risk of future mesothelioma diagnoses in the neighborhood began. Lance’s work included properly removing asbestos-contaminated materials from the property. However, according to the state attorney general’s office, instead of the contractor handling the toxic material properly, his company ignored safety protocols and removed the dangerous material improperly and disposed of it in an unsafe manner, putting the employees and residents exposed to the asbestos at risk.

Asbestos is generally not harmful when left undisturbed. However, when asbestos is disturbed or damaged, it can release tiny fibers into the air, which, when inhaled, can cause serious health problems like mesothelioma. Mesothelioma, a disease that affects the mesothelium, is a form of cancer that is rare and quite aggressive. After asbestos fibers are inhaled, they can become stuck in the body, causing inflammation and scarring over time. This can eventually lead to mesothelioma, which often has a long latency period. It can take 20 to 60 years or more for mesothelioma to develop after initial asbestos exposure. Because mesothelioma can take so long to develop, the full impact of this incident may not be felt for quite some time.

Latest J&J Talcum Powder Trial Begins in Connecticut

November 24, 2024 | Throneberry Law Group

The outcome of one of the nation’s first talcum powder/mesothelioma trials could determine if Johnson & Johnson agrees to another massive settlement.

The trial, taking place amidst J&J’s ongoing efforts to settle thousands of talc-related ovarian cancer lawsuits, involves a male plaintiff who alleges he developed mesothelioma due to inhaling asbestos allegedly present in Johnson’s Baby Powder.

Evan Plotkin argues he developed mesothelioma in 2021 at the age of 64 after years of using talc-based cosmetic products, however J&J, which denies its talc products ever contained asbestos, maintains his mesothelioma likely did not develop from asbestos exposure but rather from a family medical history that supposedly made him more likely to get cancer.

Chicago Appeals Court Uphold $45 Million Verdict against Johnson & Johnson in Mesothelioma Case

November 22, 2024 | Throneberry Law Group

For purposes of this article, the deceased mesothelioma victim in this case will be referred to as T.G.

In a recent court decision, a Chicago appeals court upheld a jury’s verdict against Johnson & Johnson (J&J), providing the deceased mesothelioma victim’s family with the deserved justice. Earlier this year, a Cook County court in Illinois ordered the giant pharmaceutical company to pay T.G.’s family $45 million in damages after T.G. died of malignant mesothelioma. J&J tried to secure a retrial, but the court of appeals stood firm and ensured the jury’s decision in favor of the late T.G.’s family remained intact.

T.G., who had six children, was diagnosed with malignant mesothelioma, a rare and aggressive form of cancer that occurs due to asbestos exposure. This illness most commonly affects the lining of the lungs. After T.G.’s death, her family filed a wrongful death lawsuit against J&J. According to the lawsuit, the source of the asbestos exposure that resulted in the death of T.G. was J&J’s talc-based product, which she used throughout her life. T.G. also used the product on her children. During the trial, the family’s legal representative presented evidence revealing that J&J’s talc-based product contained asbestos and the company knew about the dangers of this for years but failed to inform or warn the public, thus endangering the lives of millions of consumers, including T.G. and her children.

Woman’s Death Linked to Second-Hand Asbestos Exposure

November 18, 2024 | Throneberry Law Group

For purposes of this article, the mesothelioma victim in this article will be referred to as A.M.B. and her ex-husband, Mr. A.B.

In a recent court decision, a judge denied an asbestos company’s motion to dismiss the mesothelioma lawsuit and allowed the case to proceed. The tragic death of the mesothelioma victim, A.M.B., that occurred due to second-hand asbestos exposure draws attention to the dangers of this type of exposure. Second-hand asbestos exposure occurs when someone brings asbestos fibers home on clothing or other personal items, putting their family at risk. This indirect exposure can be just as dangerous as direct exposure.

After years of unknowingly inhaling asbestos fibers when washing her ex-husband’s clothing, A.M.B. developed malignant mesothelioma. Mr. A.B. had used DAP Inc.’s products in his home and hardware business. A.M.B.’s family filed a lawsuit against the company, alleging that their products were responsible for her illness. The company tried to dismiss the case by arguing that the plaintiffs had not established a link between A.M.B.’s illness and their products. The court denied the defendant’s motion.

Asbestos Company’s Motion to Overturn Mesothelioma Verdict Denied

November 14, 2024 | Throneberry Law Group

For purposes of this article, the mesothelioma victim in this case will be referred to as T.C.

The Superior Court of Pennsylvania recently denied an asbestos company’s motion to overturn a mesothelioma verdict. T.C. was diagnosed with mesothelioma, a rare and deadly form of cancer, almost eight years ago, and over two years ago, a jury ordered his employer to pay his surviving loved ones $2.3 million in damages after concluding that the employer was liable for T.C.’s illness. Despite there being enough evidence to prove that the employer played a role in T.C.’s illness and the verdict, the employer sought to overturn the decision by filing a motion for a retrial or entry of a judgment in their favor. According to Lenox Instrument Company (employer), T.C.’s family had failed to prove its (the employer’s) role in his disease.

Mesothelioma is a rare, aggressive type of cancer that primarily affects the lungs, abdomen, or heart. This illness occurs after someone is exposed to asbestos, a fibrous mineral that was once widely used in construction, manufacturing, and other industries. When asbestos is left undisturbed, it does not pose any threat. However, when disturbed, asbestos releases tiny fibers into the air, which, when inhaled or ingested, can get stuck in the body, resulting in inflammation and cellular damage over time. This damage can eventually cause mesothelioma.

Judge Denies Burnham Boiler’s Bid to Dismiss Punitive Damages Claim in Mesothelioma Case

November 12, 2024 | Throneberry Law Group

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

In a recent court case, a New York County Supreme Court judge denied Burnham LLC’s request to dismiss a punitive damages claim in a mesothelioma lawsuit. A.F., a former worker, was exposed to asbestos through Burnham boilers and other asbestos-contaminated equipment. A.F. and his wife filed a lawsuit seeking compensation for compensatory and punitive damages from Burnham LLC. The defendants filed a motion to dismiss the claim for punitive damages, but that motion was denied.

After suffering mesothelioma, a victim can file a personal injury lawsuit and seek compensatory damages, which aim to make up for direct losses. Compensatory damages include medical expenses, lost wages, and pain and suffering. Mesothelioma victims’ spouses can also seek compensation for loss of companionship and support. In a mesothelioma claim, victims and their families can also seek punitive damages. Unlike compensatory damages, punitive damages are meant to punish the defendant for particularly reckless or harmful behavior. These damages are intended to send a message to others and warn them against acting in the same manner as the defendant.

Pennsylvania Couple Awarded $3.8 Million in a Boilermaker Mesothelioma Case against Foster Wheeler

November 10, 2024 | Throneberry Law Group

For purposes of this article, the mesothelioma victim in this case will be referred to as H.C. and his wife as R.C.

In a recent court decision, an Allegheny County jury awarded a mesothelioma victim and his wife almost $4 million in damages. H.C. received a malignant mesothelioma diagnosis after working as a boilermaker for a long time. After his diagnosis, H.C. and his wife, R.C., filed a lawsuit against Foster Wheeler, his former employer. H.C. blamed Foster Wheeler for his mesothelioma. H.C. claimed that the company failed to protect workers from asbestos exposure, leading to his illness. Mesothelioma is one of the illnesses that can develop after a person is exposed to asbestos. After listening to the case, the jury found Foster Wheeler liable for H.C.’s illness.

The jury learned that in the many years that H.C. was a boilermaker, he only worked for Foster Wheeler for ten weeks. Foster Wheeler provides engineering services, manufactures boilers, and services boilers across the U.S. and worldwide. Despite the existence of Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) regulations meant to prevent mesothelioma and other asbestos-related illnesses, Foster Wheeler did not comply with these regulations. Foster Wheeler’s legal representatives argued that other companies owned the site were responsible for ensuring workers were safe. However, the jury found that it was the defendant’s negligence that directly contributed to Mr. H.C.’s fatal illness.

Virginia Jury Grants $3.45 Million to the Family of a Deceased Mesothelioma Victim

November 6, 2024 | Throneberry Law Group

For purposes of this article, the mesothelioma victim in this case will be referred to as J.K.

In a recent court case, a Virginia jury awarded $3.45 million to the family of a deceased mesothelioma victim in a case against John Crane, Inc., a company known for manufacturing asbestos-contaminated products. The victim in this case, who will be referred to as J.K., died of malignant mesothelioma, a rare and aggressive form of cancer that is primarily caused by asbestos exposure in 2022. After his death, J.K.’s family filed a lawsuit against John Crane, Inc., alleging that J.K.’s occupational asbestos exposure occurred while he was working with asbestos-containing products made by the company. Recently, a jury hearing the case ruled in favor of J.K.’s family and held John Crane, Inc. responsible for its failure to adequately warn about the dangers of its products.

During the trial, jury members listened to details about J.K.’s career as a millwright. For around 18 years (between 1961 and 1979), J.K. was a millwright at a plant in Chesterfield County. While there, his responsibilities included repairing and maintaining equipment such as valves and pumps. Unfortunately, when carrying out his tasks, he unknowingly inhaled microscopic asbestos fibers, putting himself at risk of developing mesothelioma. The jury heard evidence that over time, the wear and tear of the parts that J.K. repaired and maintained caused asbestos fibers to break free, contaminating the air in the workplace.

Mesothelioma Researcher Wins Legal Battle Against Johnson & Johnson

October 27, 2024 | Throneberry Law Group

A significant legal victory was recently achieved when a federal judge dismissed a lawsuit filed by Johnson & Johnson (J&J) against a mesothelioma researcher. For long, mesothelioma victims have encountered challenges when trying to hold companies liable for their asbestos exposure. Many asbestos companies have defended themselves by challenging scientific evidence. Often, these companies argue that there is no conclusive proof that asbestos exposure causes mesothelioma. They focus on the methods and data and refuse to accept responsibility. Most recently, J&J filed a lawsuit against a mesothelioma scientist whose research suggests that talc-based consumer products can cause cancer. However, the judge dismissed the giant pharmaceutical company’s suit, emphasizing the researcher’s right to free speech. The judge also found no evidence to show that the researcher’s findings were false.

J&J has faced tens of thousands of lawsuits filed by victims of mesothelioma and ovarian cancer who used the company’s talc-based baby powder. The victims blame the talc-based baby powder for their asbestos exposure, which, in turn, caused their illnesses. The claimants argue that J&J failed to adequately warn consumers about the potential dangers associated with their product. In response to the lawsuits against them, J&J has employed several strategies, including creating a subsidiary, LLT Management, that proceeded to file for bankruptcy. The company has also filed lawsuits against researchers, including one prominent mesothelioma researcher, Dr. Jacqueline Moline.

Plaintiffs have presented internal J&J documents describing fears over the company’s talc’s connection to cancer. Despite this, the company still filed lawsuits against several researchers. Johnson & Johnson has not only attacked the researchers’ studies but has also accused one of the researchers, Dr. Jacqueline Moline, of libel, fraud, and false advertising in connection to the paper she published that connects asbestos-containing talcum powder products to mesothelioma.

J&J Files Third Bankruptcy Application to Resolve Mesothelioma and Ovarian Cancer Claims

October 18, 2024 | Throneberry Law Group

The giant pharmaceutical company Johnson & Johnson (J&J) is facing thousands of personal injury claims from people who blame the company’s talc products for ovarian cancer and malignant mesothelioma. After previously filing two bankruptcy claims and both claims being rejected by victims and courts, J&J recently made another attempt to file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy. The company hopes that the latest bankruptcy filing, which proposes a $10 billion compensation plan for victims and their families, will end litigation against it. So far, this third bankruptcy filing has received a vote of confidence from many victims.

When companies are hit with thousands of lawsuits alleging harm from their products, they face the risk of multi-million or even billion-dollar verdicts. Over the years, several ovarian cancer and mesothelioma victims who blame J&J’s talc-based products for their illnesses have been awarded multi-million dollar verdicts. Such financial judgments can be overwhelming. These substantial verdicts were the reason J&J pursued bankruptcy twice before. Bankruptcy provides a way for companies to manage and limit their financial exposure. By filing a Chapter 11 bankruptcy, also called reorganization bankruptcy, a company can propose a restructured plan to compensate victims and their families without having to pay out huge, unpredictable verdicts that could cripple the business financially. After a company files for Chapter 11 bankruptcy, the “automatic stay” halts ongoing litigation and prevents people from filing new cases. In the case of J&J, this third bankruptcy filing has stopped thousands of lawsuits from moving forward. If the bankruptcy is approved, the company can implement its proposed compensation plan.

Johnson & Johnson filed its first bankruptcy case in Charlotte, North Carolina, and the second case in Trenton, New Jersey. Both efforts were unsuccessful, as victims and courts rejected both cases. The third time, J&J filed its Chapter 11 bankruptcy case in Houston, Texas, immediately halting thousands of pending lawsuits. While J&J’s latest bankruptcy filing has garnered support from many victims with pending claims, the company still faces opposition from some victims and their attorneys, who are seeking higher compensation and more accountability from the pharmaceutical company.