Mesothelioma Court Rulings & Legislation

A South Carolina Jury Awards a Mesothelioma Widow $1.75 Million in Compensation

April 2, 2024 | Throneberry Law Group

For purposes of this article, the deceased victim, in this case, will be referred to as Mr. C.B., and his surviving spouse as Mrs. M.B.

In a recent court decision, a South Carolina jury awarded a mesothelioma widow $1.75 million in compensation. The jury’s decision held the defendant, John Crane, Inc., accountable for negligence in the mesothelioma victim’s untimely death.

The mesothelioma victim’s widow, Mrs. M.B., filed a claim against John Crane, Inc., and accused the company of having irresponsibly exposed her late husband, Mr. C.B., to asbestos-contaminated gaskets when he was working at the Celanese factory in the maintenance department. According to the widow, the gaskets that were used in Celanese’s processes only lasted for a short time before wearing out. After they wore out, the gaskets would be taken to Mr. C.B.’s department, where their residue would be scraped off to allow for the installation of new gaskets. It was during this process that Mr. B would inhale the asbestos dust, which later led to the development of his illness.

Court Denies Asbestos Defendant Westinghouse’s Request to Be Dismissed From Litigation

March 6, 2024 | Throneberry Law Group

For purposes of this article, the mesothelioma victim in this case will be referred to as R.M., and the victim’s husband as T.M.

After a person develops mesothelioma, they or their loved ones can file a mesothelioma claim on their behalf and seek justice and financial compensation from the party or parties responsible for the asbestos exposure. One of the first crucial steps before filing a mesothelioma case is identifying all the parties responsible for the asbestos exposure. Often, people are exposed to asbestos from multiple sources. Identifying all defendants is vital to ensuring that victims or their families can recover the maximum compensation. Also, identifying all defendants promotes fairness. It ensures that each party responsible for the asbestos exposure is held accountable. However, after identifying all the parties responsible for the asbestos exposure and filing a claim, it is not uncommon for some defendants to deny liability and request the court to drop them from litigation.

In a recent case, the judge denied a co-defendant’s request to be dropped from litigation. The defendant, Westinghouse Electric Corporation, asked the court to drop them from litigation on the grounds that the company they supplied the asbestos-containing materials to did not need any warning about the dangers of asbestos since it was a “sophisticated user.” The claimant and the other defendant opposed this action, and the judge denied the request.

Fireproofing Materials Used in World Trade Center Alleged to Cause Mesothelioma

February 19, 2024 | Throneberry Law Group

For purposes of this article, the widow in this case will be referred to as Mrs. M.B.R., and the late husband will be referred to as Mr. R.

In a recent legal battle in the New York Supreme Court between a mesothelioma widow and Arconic, Inc., the judge presiding over the case denied Arconic’s motion to dismiss the claim against them. Arconic, Inc. is just one of the multiple companies named in the personal injury claim. According to Mrs. M.B.R., the defendants are responsible for having exposed her late husband to asbestos.

Mrs. M.B.R.’s late husband used to work at the World Trade Center construction site. According to the mesothelioma widow, during the time her husband worked at the World Trade Center construction site, the Arconic’s fire-proofing spray her husband worked with led to him being exposed to asbestos, which, in turn, led to him developing mesothelioma. Mesothelioma is a cancer that occurs in the mesothelium (the thin tissue covering most of your internal organs). Arconic, Inc. did not take these allegations lightly and decided to counter the accusations by filing a motion to dismiss with the court. According to Arconic, they stopped using asbestos-containing products after 1970. The company argued that Mr. R started working at the World Trade Center after the company had stopped using asbestos-contaminated products.

Printing Press Companies’ Attempts to Dismiss Mesothelioma Lawsuits Denied

January 17, 2024 | Throneberry Law Group

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

In a recent court decision, Justice Adam Silvera of the New York Supreme Court denied two printing press companies’ motions to dismiss the mesothelioma claims filed against them. The two printing press companies tried to escape liability for the deceased victim’s asbestos exposure between the 1960s and 1980s. Justice Adam Silvera ruled that the victim’s testimony was strong enough to allow the case to proceed.

The victim in this case, Mr. R.D., was a printing press operator from the 1960s to the 1980s. It was during this time that R.D. was exposed to asbestos numerous times. Before passing away, the late mesothelioma victim filed lawsuits against two press companies he accused of being responsible for his asbestos exposure. The two companies are L3Harris Technologies Inc. and Heidelberg USA. Inc. printing presses. In his legal claim, Mr. R.D. said that he developed mesothelioma as a result of being exposed to brakes from Airflex, which L3Harris incorporated in their printing presses. As for the other defendant, Mr. R.D. claimed their presses also contained asbestos. According to the mesothelioma victim, the two companies exposed him to asbestos-contaminated parts in their machines without sufficient warnings of the dangers they posed.

A Mesothelioma Trial in Libby, Montana, Has Been Scheduled for April 2024

December 1, 2023 | Throneberry Law Group

For purposes of this article, the victims in this case will be referred to as T.W. and J.W.

Vermiculite, a naturally occurring mineral with heat-resistant properties, and asbestos, also a naturally occurring mineral, form under the same conditions. Asbestos is a dangerous substance that can cause several fatal illnesses, including mesothelioma. In Libby, Montana, asbestos contaminated the city’s vermiculite deposit, so years of mining this mineral in the city exposed workers and residents to asbestos. Thousands of people got sick because of asbestos exposure, and over the years, victims and families of victims have filed countless legal claims. In April 2024, two Libby residents’ stories will be told by their surviving loved ones who filed a lawsuit against the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway.

T.W. ‘s family and J.W. ‘s family filed a mesothelioma wrongful death claim against the railway company and other defendants after their loved ones died of malignant mesothelioma. According to the two families, the companies named in the lawsuit are strictly liable for their loved one’s death. T.W.’s family and J.W.’s family are seeking to recover compensatory and punitive damages for the wrongful deaths of their loved ones.

A Manufacturer of Asbestos-Contaminated Gloves Fails in Two Attempts To Avoid Mesothelioma Trial

November 13, 2023 | Throneberry Law Group

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.

Philadelphia Teachers Accuse the District of Violating Their First Amendment Rights After Holding Asbestos Protests

October 12, 2023 | Throneberry Law Group

For purposes of this article, the teachers in this case will be referred to as E.T., C.G., and K.C.

Recently, schoolteachers from a school in Philadelphia filed a class action lawsuit accusing the district of violating their Constitutional rights. E.T. and C.G. teach at a public school in Philadelphia, while K.C. retired in June this year. According to the lawsuit, the teachers claim that the school withheld their pay after they protested having to work in dangerous conditions. The teachers gathered their workstations on the outside yard of the school because of fears that the school facilities might be asbestos-contaminated. The school withheld the teachers’ pay for unauthorized absences. According to the complaint, the district withheld the teachers’ pay for August 26 and 27.

According to an attorney representing all three teachers, the district knew that the teachers were not absent. According to the attorney, the district knew the teachers were working. The teachers’ attorney said that the district wanted to put an end to the protest, so it punished the teachers. According to the attorney, such an act violates the First Amendment. The First Amendment gives people the right to express themselves and assemble. According to the lawsuit, up to 50 teachers were unjustly punished and lost wages because of protesting. The affected teachers made it clear that they would not have had to take action if the school had provided them with complete information about asbestos remediation efforts and the dangers of asbestos.

Court Allows World Trade Center Worker’s Mesothelioma Lawsuit to Proceed

October 5, 2023 | Throneberry Law Group

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

In a recent court decision, a New York judge allowed a World Trade Center worker’s mesothelioma claim to proceed. When K.L. was diagnosed with malignant mesothelioma, it was clear where his illness had come from. K.L. suffered asbestos exposure while working as a subcontracted employee at the World Trade Center when it was being built. K.L. worked at the WTC starting in 1972. According to the mesothelioma claim, ALCOA was to blame for K.L. suffering asbestos exposure. ALCOA, a general contractor, used asbestos-contaminated products close to where K.L. worked, resulting in K.L. suffering asbestos exposure. According to the mesothelioma claim, ALCOA created a dangerous condition for K.L. despite knowing about the dangers of asbestos.

After learning about the claims against them, ALCOA filed a motion for summary judgment. ALCOA argued that it should not have to defend itself against the claims. The defendant argued they did not supervise or control K.L.’s work as a sub-contracted employee. Additionally, ALCOA presented a memo dated May 15, 1970, that showed an agreement regarding the costs of switching to an asbestos-free product. In other words, the memo was meant to show that ALCOA had stopped using asbestos-containing materials by 1972, the time K.L. started working at the WTC.

Hope for Mesothelioma Victims After Judge Denies Johnson & Johnson’s Second Bankruptcy Attempt

September 1, 2023 | Throneberry Law Group

U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Michael Kaplan denied Johnson & Johnson’s second bankruptcy attempt in a recent court decision. This decision offers hope to many mesothelioma and ovarian cancer victims seeking justice from Johnson & Johnson. The consumer giant is facing tens of thousands of negligence claims accusing its talc powder product of causing mesothelioma and ovarian cancer.

Sometime back, Johnson & Johnson formed its subsidiary, LTL Management, for the purpose of carrying its talc liabilities into Chapter 11 bankruptcy. When a company is facing mesothelioma or other asbestos-related lawsuits, the company can file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy. Once the bankruptcy filing is approved, the company is required to establish a trust fund and put aside money to compensate people harmed by asbestos. In 2021, LTL Management filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy and offered $2 billion in settlement for victims and their families. An NJ bankruptcy court approved this first filing, but a higher court reversed the decision citing that the company filed for bankruptcy without any real financial distress, thus, lacked good faith.

Johnson & Johnson did not give up and, through its subsidiary, filed for bankruptcy for the second time. The company offered $8.9 billion in settlement in the second bankruptcy filing for the victims and their families. This is over four times the amount Johnson & Johnson had offered during the first bankruptcy filing. However, despite this and the fact that about 60,000 plaintiffs and some attorneys representing plaintiffs supported the proposed settlement, many more people argued against the move. According to those who do not support Johnson & Johnson’s attempt to declare bankruptcy, allowing Johnson & Johnson to declare bankruptcy would mean that victims and their families will be forced to agree to insufficient terms and will prevent those who may be diagnosed in the future from pursuing justice.

Mesothelioma Lawsuit Against Boiler Manufacturer to Continue With Punitive Damages Charge

August 19, 2023 | Throneberry Law Group

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.