Top 100 Trial Lawyers badge
BBB Accredited Business badge
Multi Million Dollar Advocates Forum badge
10 Best Attorney badge
top 10 trial lawyers badge
RUE Ratings Best Attorneys of aAmerica Badge
Veteran Approved Badge
Americas Top 100 Attorneys Badge
Lawyers of Distinction Badge
American Association for Justice Badge
Best Law Firms of America Badge
Top American Lawyers Badge
NADC Badge
Super Lawyers Badge

You have an old house that was built in the early 1900s, and your family is investing thousands of dollars in a remodeling project. The contractors have signed on for the work and are about to begin. But you may have overlooked something.

Asbestos? Couldn’t be, you think. Your inspector made no mention of it when you bought the house four years earlier. But upon your research, you learn that many older homes – including some built through the 1980s – contain asbestos.

What you discover soon startles you. Asbestos – a fire-retardant material used in home construction – can be found in a number of places within a home. When asbestos becomes damaged, its fibers become airborne and easily inhaled, potentially leading to severe illnesses such as lung cancer and mesothelioma.

A New Jersey state jury recently handed down a substantial verdict in favor of the plaintiff in a groundbreaking talcum powder asbestos cancer lawsuit filed against pharmaceutical giant Johnson & Johnson. After weeks of testimony, the jury awarded the plaintiff $37 million in damages to the plaintiff who claimed he developed mesothelioma after years of inhaling asbestos-contaminated talc products produced by the defendants.

The Middlesex Superior Court jury determined that Johnson & Johnson was 70% responsible for the plaintiff’s mesothelioma diagnosis and France-based talc supplier Imerys was liable for the remaining 30% of damages. The verdict came on the first full day of deliberations after two months of testimony in which both sides argued vigorously for their positions and multiple expert witnesses were called to testify.

During the trial, Johnson & Johnson’s defense lawyers argued that the plaintiff could have contracted mesothelioma from various other sources. It noted that the house in Montclair, New Jersey where the plaintiff grew up once had asbestos-wrapped pipes and that the public schools attended were also treated for asbestos at some point in the past. Fortunately, jurors sided with the plaintiff and his wife and awarded them the appropriate amount of compensation for their damages.

More than five years after filing an asbestos cancer lawsuit on behalf of her deceased husband, a New York woman has finally received justice on his behalf after the defendants in the case agreed to settle the matter. The resolution to the mesothelioma cancer lawsuit came after three days of jury selection in a St. Lawrence County Court. Opening arguments were slated to begin the day of the settlement.

According to the mesothelioma lawsuit, the victim worked at Jones & Laughlin Steel Co. in Star Lake and at Gouverneur, New York and developed his disease after years of exposure to asbestos contained in talc products distributed by the defendants. The defendants included R.T. Vanderbilt Co. Inc. which operates a minerals division manufacturing facility in Gouverneur, and Newton Falls LLC.

The lawsuit accused R.T. Vanderbilt Co and other defendants of knowingly engaging in the sale and distribution of minerals that were contaminated with asbestos, a flaky white mineral that is directly linked to causing mesothelioma. Although rare, mesothelioma is a deadly form of cancer that commonly affects the thin linings of tissue surrounding vital organs like the lungs and abdominal cavity.

Asbestos-containing make-up continues to be a subject that won’t go away, and it shouldn’t until no traces of this cancer-causing mineral are found in consumer products, especially those geared toward children.

The latest development on this topic once again shined a spotlight on Illinois-based Claire’s Stores – a fashion accessories chain with stores throughout U.S. shopping malls. In February, the watchdog group U.S. Public Interest Research Group (U.S. PIRG) conducted tests on 15 cosmetic products that contained talc, and were made by four different companies.

Three Claire’s products contained asbestos

A panel of judges for the New Jersey Superior Court’s Appeals Division recently revived a lawsuit brought on behalf of a man who claimed he developed mesothelioma from years of exposure to asbestos in lawn fertilizer made by Scotts. As part of their ruling, the three-judge panel determined that the lower trial court erred when it failed to reverse its order granting summary judgement to the defense after new evidence came to light. With that order, the plaintiff has hope that the trial court will grant it the opportunity to convene a new trial and give the plaintiff a chance to recover the vital compensation necessary to be made whole again.

The case began in July 2012 when a man from Wayne, New Jersey filed suit against Scotts, claiming that from 1967 to 1980 he was repeatedly exposed to asbestos contaminated vermiculite contained in the company’s Turf Builder lawn fertilizer. The mesothelioma cancer lawsuit claimed that the vermiculite Scotts manufactured its Turf Builder with was sourced from a now infamous mine in Libby, Montana, which is the root of hundreds and potentially thousands of other lawsuits against the mine’s former owner.

As the case made its way through the civil lawsuit process, the trial judge hearing the case dismissed the testimony of four expert witnesses for the plaintiff who would have testified to the victim’s claims that Scotts Turf Builder contained asbestos. As a result, the defendants successfully argued a motion for summary judgement in January 2014, which effectively threw out the case and left the plaintiff with limited access to justice.

The Missouri state House of Representatives recently approved legislation that could impact the amount of compensation mesothelioma cancer victims could receive for their claims when filing lawsuits against defendants. With Missouri juries handing down substantial verdicts to plaintiffs harmed by the deadly products developed by asbestos companies, lobbyists for the business and insurance companies have long eyed the state for so-called “tort reform” to limit compensation to plaintiffs.

As part of the effort to limit plaintiffs’ access to justice, the Missouri House approved a bill meant to force mesothelioma plaintiffs to disclose whether or not they have filed administrative claims with asbestos bankruptcy trusts. The Missouri Senate is expected to take up the legislation soon and the state may join a growing list of other states that have already passed these asbestos claims transparency laws promulgated by the likes of pro business and insurance lobbyists like the Chamber of Commerce and Industry.

Asbestos bankruptcy trusts were created by companies that were no longer solvent but needed a way to release themselves from legal liability in order to qualify for federal bankruptcy protections. Asbestos companies set aside tens of billions of dollars for mesothelioma cancer victims to file administrative claims with and are often seen as a much more expedient way for plaintiffs to receive the compensation they need to pay for vital medical treatment.

Legislation that would limit asbestos lawsuits continues to make the rounds throughout the country with Indiana and Kansas lawmakers being the latest to consider it. Created by conservative organization the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC), the bill in similar formats has been enacted in 12 other states.

Critics charge that such legislation is unfair to terminally-ill cancer victims who were exposed to the fire-resistant asbestos while on the job. If the bill is enacted, they would not be able to sue a manufacturer after more than 10 years had elapsed since being exposed to asbestos. However, asbestos-related diseases are seldom diagnosed within 10 years of exposure.

Mesothelioma: a usually fatal cancer

The American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO) recently convened an expert panel of doctors, researchers, and cancer advocacy experts to review medical literature on mesothelioma studies conducted from 1990 to 2017. The expert panel did so with special interest to survival, disease-free or recurrence-free survival, and quality of life using available evidence and informal consensus to develop evidence-based guideline recommendations on how best to treat pleural mesothelioma.

Pleural mesothelioma is a rare form of lung cancer caused by exposure to asbestos, a naturally occurring mineral once commonly used in a variety of industrial and commercial applications for its heat resistant properties. Mesothelioma can take decades to show symptoms and unfortunately, there is no cure for the cancer that can spread from the thin linings of tissue surrounding the lungs to other vital organs.

The expert panel identified a total of 222 studies from the 27-year time period and developed several evidence-based recommendations developed for diagnosis, staging, chemotherapy, surgical cytoreduction, radiation therapy, and multimodality therapy in patients with malignant pleural mesothelioma. The expert panel used five guiding questions to help come up with their recommendations, including:

Michigan state lawmakers recently passed legislation that could severely restrict access to justice for mesothelioma cancer victims seeking their day in court to recover vital compensation and hold asbestos companies responsible for their dangerous products. The 58-51 vote, along party lines, passed the Asbestos Bankruptcy Trust Claims Transparency Act as a means to prevent so-called “double dipping” by plaintiffs seeking to recover the compensation they need to pay for medical bills and lost wages.

In some states, mesothelioma cancer victims have the option to file administrative claims with asbestos bankruptcy trusts set up by companies wthat sought federal bankruptcy protections but still needed to fund settlements for future liabilities. Michigan is one of numerous states that recently passed similar legislation forcing plaintiffs in civil lawsuits against solvent parties to disclose whether or not they have filed claims with any asbestos bankruptcy trusts.

Unfortunately for plaintiffs, the law also has another built-in component designed to deny and delay otherwise meritorious claims Under the bill, if the defendant in an asbestos action identified an asbestos trust claim not previously identified that the defendant thinks the plaintiff could file, the defendant could request a stay of the proceeding.

After receiving a mesothelioma diagnosis you might be considering treatment options available. For those interested in cutting edge and alternative treatment options, clinical trials might be a choice. Before signing up for a trial, it is important to understand the potential risks and benefits associated with clinical trials.

What is a clinical trial?

Clinical trials use human subjects to test new medicines and experimental treatment options in a structured and safe environment. The trials are a live setting way for scientists to test new technology, medicines or a combination of both. Clinical trials for mesothelioma patients test drug and other therapy approaches to see if certain therapy treatments are more effective than others. Trials can last for weeks, months or years depending on what is being tested. Often the trials are sponsored by a government agency, but pharmaceutical companies frequently fund clinical trials.

Contact Information