Mesothelioma Court Rulings & Legislation

Man’s Mesothelioma Linked to Asbestos in Talc Used for Pleurodesis

October 12, 2024 | Throneberry Law Group

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

In this case, a Utah resident, Mr. B.Z. Claims that his mesothelioma was caused by talc pleurodesis, a procedure that was meant to help him. Talc pleurodesis is a medical procedure that helps prevent fluid or air from accumulating in the pleural cavity. This medical procedure is for patients with respiratory issues such as malignant pleural mesothelioma. Many people have and continue to benefit from talc pleurodesis. Unfortunately, for B.Z., a procedure that was supposed to help him ended up causing him harm. According to Mr. B.Z., the talc used during his treatments in 2014 and 2020 resulted in him developing mesothelioma.

Over the years, many ovarian cancer and malignant mesothelioma patients have filed lawsuits against manufacturers and suppliers of cosmetic and industrial talc. These individuals have blamed these companies for acting negligently by failing to warn people about the presence of asbestos in their products and for distributing unsafe goods that can cause several health issues.

Asbestos in Gloves Blamed for Food Worker’s Mesothelioma

October 10, 2024 | Throneberry Law Group

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

In a recent Supreme Court decision, Justice Corcoran rejected a motion for summary judgment filed by a defendant accused of causing a deceased individual’s mesothelioma. In this case, the late W.S., who worked in the food industry, blamed his mesothelioma on the safety gloves he used at work. Mr. W.S. died in 2021, but before his death, he filed a lawsuit against the manufacturer of the gloves, Magid Glove and Safety Manufacturer. The defendant filed a motion seeking to have Mr. W.S.’s case dismissed, but the court denied their request.

Mr. W.S.’s case is not unique, as most people diagnosed with malignant mesothelioma blame their illness on years of being exposed to asbestos while at work. This is called occupational asbestos exposure. However, many other people develop mesothelioma after suffering secondary and environmental asbestos exposure. After years of working in the food industry and using safety gloves manufactured by Magid Glove and Safety Manufacturer, Mr. W.S. was diagnosed with mesothelioma, a rare and aggressive form of cancer that affects the mesothelium (the tissue lining most internal organs). His trial was scheduled to be held in March 2021 but was postponed due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Unfortunately, Mr. W.S. passed away in July 2021 before the resolution of his case. However, his case continued after his death, with his estate representative taking over.

Connecticut Mesothelioma Case Sheds Light on the Dangers of Talc

October 7, 2024 | Throneberry Law Group

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

A recent mesothelioma lawsuit in Connecticut has attracted significant attention and highlighted concerns over previously unknown dangers of talcum powder in consumer products, notably Johnson & Johnson’s (J&J’s) talcum powder products. In this case, a 64-year-old man is blaming J&J’s talcum powder products for his mesothelioma. E.P. claims that illness resulted from prolonged use of the giant pharmaceutical company’s talcum powder. The personal injury lawsuit filed in Bridgeport Judicial District Court is part of a growing number of legal actions against J&J. The company has faced numerous lawsuits related to its talc-based products.

Mr. E.P.’s lawsuit centers on his prolonged use of Johnson & Johnson’s talcum powder. Mr. E.P. claims that his mesothelioma diagnosis was a result of using J&J’s talcum powder products to soothe rashes he suffered from as a child due to his weight. In his lawsuit, E.P. said he continued using the product in his youth since he was an athlete. According to the lawsuit, the giant pharmaceutical company failed in its duty to warn consumers about the health risks associated with its talcum powder, which is alleged to contain asbestos.

Chicago Jury Awards $24.4 Million to Mesothelioma Victim’s Family in Lawsuit Against Avon Products

September 28, 2024 | Throneberry Law Group

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

In a recent court decision, a Chicago jury ordered Avon Products to pay $24.4 million to the family of Mr. C.R., a mesothelioma victim. Mr. C.R. is a former janitor who was diagnosed with mesothelioma in 2023. After his diagnosis, C.R. linked his illness to asbestos exposure during the 1980s when he was working at Avon in Morton Grove, Illinois. The lawsuit, which accused the company of negligently exposing C.R. to asbestos-containing talcum powder, was filed by C.R. and his family.

Mr. C.R. and his wife filed the lawsuit against Avon in April 2023, just a few months after receiving his mesothelioma diagnosis. C.R. was diagnosed with malignant pleural mesothelioma. Malignant pleural mesothelioma is a rare and aggressive form of cancer that affects the thin layer surrounding the lungs, known as the pleura. This illness is primarily caused by asbestos exposure. When asbestos is disturbed, it releases tiny fibers into the air. When inhaled or ingested, these fibers can get stuck in the pleura. Over time, they can cause inflammation and scarring. These processes can eventually lead to the development of mesothelioma tumors. Malignant pleural mesothelioma is the most common type, accounting for up to 90% of all mesothelioma diagnoses.

West Virginia Court Overturns Workers’ Compensation Board’s Mesothelioma Ruling

September 26, 2024 | Throneberry Law Group

For purposes of this article, the mesothelioma victim in this case will be referred to as Mr. S.T.C. and his widow as Mrs. M.C.

In a recent court decision, the Court of Appeals of West Virginia overturned a worker’s compensation board’s mesothelioma ruling. Mr. S.T.C. died of malignant mesothelioma in October 2020. After Mr. S.T.C.’s passing, his widow, Mrs. M.C., filed a workers’ compensation claim against his former employer. However, the claim was denied. Mrs. M.C. challenged this decision before the workers’ compensation board, which upheld the administrator’s denial. Mr. S.T.C.’s widow refused to give up and filed an appeal with the Court of Appeals of West Virginia. This time, the decision was overturned. Mrs. M.C.’s workers’ compensation claim was returned for further consideration.

Mrs. M.C. presented a strong case to the workers’ compensation board. She had strong evidence showing the asbestos exposure that led to Mr. M.C.’s illness. The widow presented a comprehensive collection of documents, including a statement that her late husband prepared before his passing. In his statement, Mr. S.T.C. explained his employment history and the duties he performed, which involved working closely with asbestos-contaminated materials. Mrs. M.C. also provided an affidavit from one of her late husband’s supervisors, as well as technical details from equipment manuals and physician testimonies that supported the link between her late husband’s work environment and his illness.

A Senior Living Facility Fined Over $1 Million in Fines for Asbestos Violations That Risked Mesothelioma

September 24, 2024 | Throneberry Law Group

Mesothelioma is a rare and aggressive form of cancer that develops after someone suffers asbestos exposure. Asbestos is a substance that was widely used many years ago due to its qualities. However, as much as asbestos is no longer widely used, legacy asbestos remains a huge concern. Legacy asbestos is asbestos-containing materials installed in buildings, products, or equipment before the 1980s. Asbestos was commonly used in construction and manufacturing due to its fire-resistant and insulating qualities. Buildings containing materials installed before the use of asbestos started being regulated may still contain asbestos, posing risks during renovations and demolition. Asbestos activists and mesothelioma advocates are constantly warning people of the dangers of legacy asbestos. Recent happenings in California show that these concerns are warranted. A senior living facility in California was recently fined $1,125,000 in fines for failing to test for asbestos in its homes.

Malignant mesothelioma is often diagnosed in individuals who were exposed to asbestos many years ago when it was still frequently used. This illness can be diagnosed up to 60 years or more after asbestos exposure. However, while mesothelioma is no longer widely used, it continues to pose significant risks. Buildings and machinery built and sold before 1980 may still contain asbestos. Despite stringent laws about asbestos management, many people ignore these rules to cut costs or avoid delays. This puts many people at risk of developing mesothelioma and other asbestos-related illnesses.

Covia Communities, renamed Front Porch, knew about the dangers of asbestos exposure. However, despite knowing this, the senior living facility developer renovated its facilities without adhering to asbestos regulations. The developer did not obtain building permits or test for asbestos. Asbestos laws require building materials to be sampled and tested before renovation or demolition work can commence.

Talc Supplier’s Arguments Fail in Mesothelioma Case

September 18, 2024 | Throneberry Law Group

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

In a recent court decision, the Supreme Court of New York rejected a talc supplier’s motion for summary judgment. This case centers around a woman who we will refer to as L.G. in this article. L.G. was diagnosed with malignant mesothelioma after years of using talc powder products. Kolmar Laboratories, the manufacturer of the products, was named as one of the defendants in L.G.’s negligence claim. Kolmar Laboratories petitioned for removal from the lawsuit, but the company’s arguments failed. The case will move forward for a jury to weigh the evidence.

After L.G. was diagnosed with malignant mesothelioma, she traced the cause of her illness to the Johnson & Johnson talc powder products she had used for many years. Malignant mesothelioma is a form of cancer that affects the thin tissue lining most internal organs, known as the mesothelium. Mesothelioma is a rare form of cancer. In the United States, around 3,000 new mesothelioma cases are diagnosed yearly. This illness is primarily caused by asbestos exposure. Asbestos is a naturally occurring mineral whose fibers are strong and heat resistant. This made asbestos useful in a wide variety of applications. When asbestos is disturbed, tiny fibers are released into the air, which can get stuck in the mesothelium after being inhaled or ingested. Over time, a person may suffer inflammation and scarring, leading to the development of malignant mesothelioma. Kolmar Laboratories manufactured the Johnson & Johnson products that L.G. used. Because of this, Kolmar was named as one of the defendants in L.G.’s mesothelioma claim.

Mesothelioma Researcher Wins Legal Battle Against Johnson & Johnson

September 16, 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.

Judge Denies DAP’s Motion for Summary Judgment Despite the Defendant Presenting Affidavits

September 15, 2024 | Throneberry Law Group

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

In a recent court decision, Justice Adam Silvera denied DAP’s motion for summary judgment despite them presenting affidavits provided by their employee. In this case, the family of P.J.M., who passed away due to mesothelioma, an illness that develops due to asbestos exposure, named DAP Inc. and others as defendants. The family blamed P.J.M.’s disease on exposure to several products that contained asbestos. DAP requested dismissal from the case by filing a motion for summary judgment. The defendant claimed it did not make or sell the products the family is blaming for Mr. P.J.M.’s illness. Despite DAP’s assertion, the court denied the petition and allowed the case to proceed.

Often, defendants in mesothelioma lawsuits and other asbestos-related lawsuits seek dismissal by arguing that the lawsuit is baseless. It is common for defendants to argue that their products were not involved in the plaintiff’s asbestos exposure. It is common for defendants to claim that their products could not have contributed to the claimant’s illness. However, in the New York County Supreme Court, such arguments are often denied because the bar for dismissal is high. Defendants are typically required to unequivocally establish that their products could not have caused the claimant’s injury.

South Carolina Jury Awards $63.4 Million to Mesothelioma Victim in Case Against Johnson & Johnson

September 8, 2024 | Throneberry Law Group

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

In a recent court decision, a South Carolina state court jury awarded $63.4 million to a man diagnosed with malignant mesothelioma in a case against Johnson & Johnson (J&J). The compensation amount is meant to cover both punitive and compensatory damages. M.P. was diagnosed with malignant mesothelioma, a rare and aggressive illness that develops after asbestos exposure, at the age of 53. He blamed his illness on his lifelong use of Johnson & Johnson’s talc powder.

Malignant mesothelioma is a type of cancer that is rare in the United States. Statistics suggest that about 3,000 new mesothelioma cases are diagnosed in the United States annually. Mesothelioma develops after a person is exposed to asbestos. However, this illness does not develop immediately after exposure. It can take decades for mesothelioma to develop after asbestos exposure. Asbestos is a naturally occurring mineral that is resistant to heat, fire, and many chemicals. This made asbestos useful in many industries and products. However, when asbestos is disturbed, it releases fibers into the air, which, when inhaled or ingested, can become lodged in the lungs or other tissues, leading to serious health issues like mesothelioma.