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

A Franklin County magistrate recently suggested that a $19.8 million fine be imposed on Paxe Latitude (P.L.), Aloft Management (A.M.), and Paxe Latitude’s majority owner. This is after these parties failed to manage asbestos contamination during renovations, putting workers at risk of mesothelioma and rendering the Latitude Five25 apartment complex uninhabitable. For long, this apartment in Ohio has been a source of controversy. However, nothing has occurred in the past compared to what happened in December 2022.

The significant risk of mesothelioma arose after the apartment towers were evacuated in December 2022 after a problem arose with the water pipes. After the evacuation, the building’s owner, P.L., and its management company, A.M., initiated renovations. Before beginning renovations, P.L. and A.M. did not order an asbestos survey, which violated company policies and legal requirements. Failure to request an asbestos survey put the workers who were doing the renovations at significant risk of mesothelioma.

Inadequate safety measures further compounded the parties’ negligence. Workers were not provided with personal protective equipment (PPE), and no asbestos containment procedures were in place. The situation was exacerbated by the negligent way that carpet, drywall, and ceiling tiles were disposed of. Photos presented as evidence in court showed debris scattered across the floor, with no effort to reduce the spread of asbestos-contaminated materials.

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

For almost a decade, the estate of a mesothelioma victim, C.B., has been seeking justice to no avail. Finally, the decedent’s family may get the justice they have been fighting for. The companies blamed for the asbestos exposure that led to C.B. developing mesothelioma and finally dying have aggressively fought to have the case dismissed. In a recent decision, the Iowa Supreme Court reversed a previous ruling and permitted the mesothelioma claim to be heard by a jury.

This legal journey began after Mr. C.B.’s surviving family members filed a mesothelioma claim after he died in 2015. C.B.’s family blamed his death on asbestos exposure that occurred during the time C.B. worked as an independent contractor (IC) at an aluminum plant. The family named Alcoa, the aluminum plant owner, and a company that was responsible for installing asbestos-contaminated insulation at the plant as the two defendants.

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.

Receiving the news that you or a loved one has mesothelioma can be shocking and distressing. It can be difficult for a family to navigate a mesothelioma diagnosis. This is especially true if there are children in the family. It can be difficult to tell children about a mesothelioma diagnosis. Often, parents struggle to tell their children that they or another family member has been diagnosed with mesothelioma. Yet, not having a conversation about mesothelioma with children can leave them experiencing a wide array of negative feelings, such as anxiety and confusion. It can leave them unable to cope. Parents must take the time to talk to their children about their or another family member’s mesothelioma diagnosis. Talking about mesothelioma with children can help them process their feelings. It can help them cope. However, we understand that discussing mesothelioma with children can be difficult. In this article, we share some tips for discussing mesothelioma with children.

How a Parent’s or Another Family Member’s Mesothelioma Can Affect Children

A parent’s or another family member’s mesothelioma diagnosis can affect children emotionally, psychologically, and even academically. The following are some of the ways children may be affected by a parent’s or another family member’s mesothelioma diagnosis;

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.

Mesothelioma is an aggressive form of cancer that affects thousands of people in the United States every year. Unfortunately, there is still no cure for mesothelioma. The good news, however, is that there are several mesothelioma treatment options. One of the treatment options for mesothelioma is surgery. Mesothelioma surgery can be done to relieve pain and other symptoms (palliative surgery) or to try to cure the cancer (potentially curative surgery). The first option is for people whose tumor has already spread beyond where it began, and it would be difficult to remove it completely. In contrast, the second option is for people who are in otherwise good health and whose cancer can be removed completely. A common concern that mesothelioma patients and their families usually have about surgery is the recovery process. If you or a loved one has mesothelioma, you may be wondering how long it takes to recover after mesothelioma surgery.

So, how long does it take to recover after mesothelioma surgery? Unfortunately, there is no straightforward answer to this question. The time it takes to recover after mesothelioma surgery may vary from person to person. This means that just because someone you know took a few weeks to recover after mesothelioma surgery does not mean you or your loved one will also take a few weeks to recover. Several factors can impact the timeline of recovery after mesothelioma surgery, including the type of surgery conducted, the disease’s stage, the patient’s overall health, and arising complications.

What are the Mesothelioma Surgery Options?

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.

Contact Information