Articles Posted in Mesothelioma Court Rulings & Legislation

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

In a recent court decision, a Chicago jury awarded a mesothelioma victim who used to work as a brick mason $7.4 million in compensation after a two-week trial. Mesothelioma is an aggressive illness that develops after someone is exposed to asbestos fibers. A.J.C. was exposed to asbestos while working as a brick mason at Inland Steel. 30% of the liability was assigned to Foseco who manufactured hot tops for steel manufacturing and the other 70% to an insulation contractor, Paul J. Krez.

According to the evidence presented in court, A.J.C. was diagnosed with mesothelioma in early 2023 when he was 76 years old. While getting treatment at the University of Chicago, A.J.C. embarked on a pursuit for answers. A.J.C. explored his work history for potential asbestos exposure and thought back to when he worked at Inland Steel about six decades ago. A.J.C. recalled being around asbestos during the years he worked in the company. He worked at Inland Steel in 1965 and then served in the army for three years before returning to the steel company. For the rest of his career, A.J.C. worked at Inland Steel. Mesothelioma has a long latency period. It can take up to six decades or more for mesothelioma to develop after asbestos exposure.

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

In a recent court decision, a Connecticut jury awarded $15 million to the family of a man, N.B., who died of malignant mesothelioma in 2023. The jury reached this decision quickly, indicating a clear and decisive outcome.

After N.B., a father of three, died in 2023 at the age of 81, his family filed a mesothelioma claim. N.B. had a degree in chemical engineering and a history of service in the U.S. Army. According to the lawsuit filed by N.B.’s family, his malignant mesothelioma developed due to prolonged asbestos exposure at the General Electric plastics plant where he worked. The family filed the claim against R. T. Vanderbilt Holding, Inc. This company had acquired International Talc, the supplier of the talc used at the plant where N.B. worked. R.T. Vanderbilt tried to have the case dismissed. The company argued they should not be held liable as the successor in interest. The court denied this argument because the company continued the product line after the acquisition. This action led to the company inheriting associated liabilities.

In March 2024, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) handed down a final rule banning chrysotile asbestos in the United States of America. Chrysotile asbestos is the most common type of asbestos used across the world, and the only form of asbestos that is currently used in or imported into the U.S. Chrysotile asbestos can be found in many products, including sheet gaskets, brakes/linings, brake blocks, and other gaskets. This type of asbestos has been banned in 50 other countries worldwide. Exposure to any form of asbestos, including chrysotile asbestos, is known to cause mesothelioma, lung cancer, ovarian cancer, and many other aggressive and fatal illnesses. Asbestos exposure is linked to over 40,000 deaths in the United States of America every year.

As expected, the EPA is already facing lawsuits from both chemical industry lobbyists and mesothelioma advocates. Chemical lobbyists argue that the ban is overly restrictive, while mesothelioma advocates say the ban does not go far enough. On one side, the chemical industry claims that their use of asbestos is safe and should continue. The chemical industry argues that their use of asbestos poses no health risks. On the other hand, ADAO, labor unions, and other mesothelioma advocates are pushing for stricter regulations, arguing that the current EPA ban is insufficient to protect the public.

The chemical industry and mesothelioma advocates have filed their cases in different courts. This is a reflection of legal strategies. While the mesothelioma advocates chose to file their petitions in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, the industry stakeholders decided to file their petitions in the conservative 5th, 6th, and 11th circuit courts.

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

In a recent court case, a jury found Johnson & Johnson and two subsidiaries liable in the mesothelioma-related death of T.G., who was a mother of six and a grandmother and awarded the surviving family members $45 million in damages. T.G.’s case and the cases of many others suffered delays when J&J filed bad faith bankruptcies in an attempt to try and avoid liability. These bankruptcy filings stayed litigation in this particular case and thousands of other cases. The lifting of the hold allowed the case of T.G. and many other cases to finally begin being heard across the country. The decision, in this case, gives hope to the others who continue to fight for justice.

There are thousands of mesothelioma lawsuits pending against Johnson & Johnson. The lawsuits accuse the company of continuing to sell its famous baby powder despite knowing that its talc was asbestos-contaminated. Asbestos is a dangerous substance that can cause several fatal illnesses, including mesothelioma. All the victims and survivors are seeking accountability for the devastating consequences of asbestos exposure.

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

In a recent mesothelioma case, the district court dismissed the U.S. Government’s second petition for dismissal. G.R.P., who passed away due to malignant mesothelioma, a type of cancer that is caused by asbestos exposure, lived for many years downwind from Puget Sound Naval shipyard, the worksite where her husband worked. According to G.R.P.’s family, her mesothelioma and resulting death occurred due to airborne asbestos fibers that found their way to her home from the shipyard. The family also blames G.R.P.’s illness and death on the asbestos fibers that her husband brought home on his clothes. According to the family, G.R.P. suffered asbestos exposure while cleaning her husband’s asbestos-contaminated clothes. G.R.P.’s family filed a lawsuit against the United States Government. The U.S. Government recently filed its second petition to have the case dismissed, but the petition was denied.

The original lawsuit filed by G.R.P.’s family in 2022 describes how G.R.P. suffered asbestos exposure due to negligence at the Puget Sound Naval Shipyard where her husband worked. The original lawsuit details that G.R.P. suffered asbestos exposure due to her husband carrying the fibers home on his work clothes and the airborne asbestos fibers that blew to her home from the shipyard. In other words, G.R.P. suffered environmental and para-occupational asbestos exposure. Para-occupational exposure can also be referred to as second-hand or secondary exposure. G.R.P.’s husband worked at the shipyard from the late 1960s until 1972.

For purposes of this article, the mesothelioma victim in this case will be referred to as Ms. M.D.M.

Many years have passed since asbestos fibers that originated from vermiculite mines blew around Libby, Montana. Vermiculite and asbestos form under similar conditions, and therefore, asbestos contaminated Libby’s vermiculite deposit. Decades of mining in the vermiculite mines exposed workers and residents to toxic asbestos. Asbestos is a dangerous substance that can cause aggressive and fatal diseases. One of the most aggressive and fatal illnesses asbestos causes is mesothelioma. Decades after asbestos fibers blew around Libby, Montana, the tragic toll of mesothelioma and other asbestos-related illnesses persists. Victims and their families continue to seek justice and compensation against the entities responsible for their illnesses and deaths. In an upcoming court case, the family of a mesothelioma victim who passed away avoided sanctions BNSF Railway, the defendant, was seeking. BNSF was seeking sanctions because the family had cremated their loved one’s remains before they could get additional tissue samples for testing. Below is more on this case.

Among the many ongoing cases in Libby, Montana, is Ms. M.D.M. Ms. M’s case against MNSF Railway was filed two years ago. Initially, the defendant received tissue samples from Ms. M’s lung, but BNSF asked for more samples. The defendant asked the victim’s family to preserve her organ tissues in the event of death. However, the family did not respond to this request until days before Ms. M.D.M.’s death. According to the family, they could not accept the defendant’s request because of religion. Also, the family cited privacy concerns.

For purposes of this article, the mesothelioma victim in this case will be referred to as Mrs. S.R., and the victim’s daughter will be referred to as Mrs. H.F.

In a recent case, the Superior Court of Pennsylvania rejected the appeal of AII, one of the defendants in the original mesothelioma case, and affirmed a $400,000 compensation award. However, instead of assigning AII half of the verdict, the court distributed liability among AII and two other defendants. Below is more on this case.

In 2019, Mrs. S.R. died of malignant mesothelioma. Mesothelioma is a form of cancer that forms in the lining of the chest or abdomen, whose prognosis is often poor. This illness is most commonly associated with asbestos exposure. Asbestos is a mineral that was once widely used in several industries due to its attractive qualities. After Mrs. S.R.’s death, her daughter H.F. filed a legal claim against the entities she blamed for her mother’s illness. Mrs. H.F. blamed her mother’s mesothelioma on the talcum powders she used in her salon between the 60’s and 80’s. According to the lawsuit, the talc in the powders contained asbestos. The lawsuit named several defendants, including the manufacturers of Jean Nate, Jeris, and Clubman and AII, the successor to Clubman.

For purposes of this article, the victims in this case will be referred to as K.L. and P.J.

Mesothelioma is an aggressive form of cancer that takes the lives of many people every year. Surviving loved ones of people who die from mesothelioma are usually left dealing with intense grief and loss. While filing a wrongful death claim cannot undo what has already happened, filing this claim serves several crucial purposes. Filing a wrongful death claim ensures that those who contributed to the asbestos exposure that led to the death are held liable. A wrongful death claim can provide financial support to surviving family members. Additionally, by pursuing a wrongful death claim, surviving family members can contribute to the prevention of future harm.

However, pursuing legal action after a loved one dies from mesothelioma can be a daunting and emotionally draining process. Therefore, the idea of joining mesothelioma claims can be very appealing. Asbestos companies do not like it when people join mesothelioma claims since two claims carry more weight than one. Asbestos companies fight to prevent claimants from joining forces. However, a recent ruling by a New York judge has allowed two mesothelioma cases to be joined, paving the way for mesothelioma victims and their loved ones to consolidate their claims.

Asbestos is a naturally occurring mineral that was widely used many years ago due to its strength and ability to resist heat and corrosion in many industries, including construction, automotive, shipbuilding, manufacturing, and textiles. Despite its attractive qualities, asbestos is a dangerous mineral. Asbestos exposure can cause cancer and other serious illnesses. While asbestos exposure can occur anywhere, the most common type of asbestos exposure occurs in occupational settings.

The dangers of asbestos have long been recognized, leading regulatory bodies like the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) to implement strict measures to keep employees safe from developing asbestos-related diseases, such as mesothelioma. Unfortunately, some employers don’t follow safety guidelines, putting employees at risk. Below, we discuss OSHA’s asbestos standards and regulations for workplaces, workers’ rights, and what recourse is available for affected workers.

OSHA Asbestos Standards and Regulations for Workplaces

Being diagnosed with mesothelioma is traumatic enough. The last thing a claimant in a mesothelioma lawsuit wants is for the judge presiding over their case to declare a mistrial and for things to go back to square one. Unfortunately, while mistrials in mesothelioma lawsuits do not happen a lot, a mistrial can happen. In this article, we discuss what a mistrial is, what can cause a mistrial, and what happens after a mistrial.

What is a Mistrial?

A mistrial arises when a court case is ended before its conclusion. Generally, a mistrial occurs if a lawsuit is not presented properly or the trial is not fair. A mistrial is typically declared by the judge presiding over the case. A judge has the authority to decide to declare a mistrial if the situation warrants a mistrial. A mistrial in a mesothelioma case can cause emotional strain, financial uncertainty, and delays in justice. However, a mistrial in a mesothelioma case does not necessarily mean that justice will not be served. It does not necessarily mean that the claimant will not recover compensation.

Contact Information