pinepint38

Asbestos Litigation Defense Protecting companies from asbestos litigation requires a thorough examination of the plaintiff's employment history, medical records and testimony. We often use the bare metal defense, which is focused on proving that your company did not make or sell the asbestos-containing products at issue in the case of a claimant. Asbestos cases are special and require a tenacious approach to achieve successful results. We are local counsel, regional and national. Statute of limitations The majority of lawsuits have to be filed within a certain time period, known as the statute of limitations. In asbestos cases, the deadline for filing a lawsuit is between one and six years after a person is diagnosed with an asbestos-related condition. It is important for the defense to show that the alleged injury occurred after the deadline. Often, this means reviewing the entirety of the plaintiff's employment history, including interviews with former coworkers as well as the careful review of Social Security, union, tax and other records. The process of defending asbestos cases involves various complex issues. Asbestos victims may develop a mild illness, such as asbestosis, prior to being diagnosed with a fatal illness like mesothelioma. In these situations an attorney for defense will argue that the limitation period should begin when the victim knew or reasonably ought to have known that their asbestos exposure caused the disease. These cases are made more complex by the fact the statute of limitations may differ from state to state. In these cases, an experienced lawyer for mesothelioma will try to bring the case to a state where the majority of the exposure is believed to have taken place. This can be a daunting job, since asbestos victims often move around the country looking for work and the alleged exposure could have occurred in a variety of states. Finally, the discovery process is difficult in asbestos litigation. In contrast to other types of personal injury cases, which typically involve only a few defendants, asbestos-related litigation typically involves dozens or more parties. As a result, it can be difficult to find a meaningful discovery in these cases, especially when the plaintiff's argument for injuries spans decades and connects many defendants. The McGivney, Kluger, Clark & Intoccia team has extensive experience in serving as National Coordinating Counsel in multi-district and multi-jurisdictional asbestos litigation. We collaborate closely with local and regional counsel to develop strategies for litigation, manage local counsel, and ensure consistent and cost-effective results while coordinating with the goals of our clients. We frequently appear in front of the trial judge and coordinating judge, as and litigation masters across the country. Bare Metal Defense In the past, manufacturers of turbines, boilers, valves and pumps have protected themselves from asbestos lawsuits by arguing what is referred to as “bare metal” doctrine or the component part doctrine. This defense states that a company is not responsible for asbestos-related injuries caused by replacement parts they did not install or manufacture. In the case of Devries, an employee of an Tennessee Eastman chemical plant sued various equipment manufacturers over mesothelioma. The plaintiff's job included the removal and replacement insulation, steam traps and gaskets from equipment such as valves, pumps and steam traps. He claimed asbestos was ingested when working at the plant and was diagnosed with mesothelioma a few years later. The Supreme Court's Devries decision has changed the landscape of asbestos litigation and may influence the way courts in other jurisdictions tackle the issue of third-party components that manufacturers add to equipment. The Court declared that the use of the bare-metal defense in this context is “cabined” to maritime law however, it did not rule out the possibility that other federal circuits could apply this principle to non-maritime cases, as well. This was the first time a federal appellate court used the bare-metal defense in a case involving asbestos and it's a major deviation from the standard law regarding product liability. Most courts have interpreted the “bare metal” defense as a rejection of the responsibility of a manufacturer to warn about harm caused by replacement parts it did not manufacture or sell. The McGivney, Kluger, Clark & Intoccia Team regularly serves as National Coordinating Counsel in multi-jurisdictional asbestos lawsuits that impact the entire industry. We assist our clients to develop strategies for litigation, oversee regional and local counsel, and achieve an effective, cost-effective and consistent defense in accordance with their goals. Our attorneys speak at conferences for industry professionals on the most important issues affecting asbestos litigation. Our firm has a long history of defending clients in all 50 states and working closely with trial courts, coordinating judges and litigation special masters. Our unique method has proven to be successful in reducing exposure and legal spend for our clients. Expert Witnesses An expert witness is someone who has specialized skills, knowledge or experience and offers independent assistance to the court in the form of an impartial opinion on matters of his expertise. Troy asbestos lawsuit must be able to clearly articulate the facts or assumptions on which his opinion is based and should not be oblivious to consider matters which could detract from his concluded opinions. In cases where asbestos exposure is alleged medical experts may be required to help evaluate the claimant's health and determine any causal connections between the condition and the source of exposure. Many of the ailments associated with asbestos are very complex, and require the expertise of specialists in the field. This includes doctors and nurses as well as toxicologists, pharmacists epidemiologists, occupational health specialists and pharmacists. Whether it is the defense or prosecution, an expert's role is to provide objective technical assistance. Experts should not be an advocate or try to influence the jury in favor of his client. He should not try to convince the jury or advocate for an argument. The expert should collaborate with other experts to address any issues that are peripheral and reduce any technical issues. The expert should also work with the people who instruct him in identifying areas of agreement and disagreement to serve the purpose of the joint statement of experts ordered by the court. The expert should at the conclusion of his examination, present his conclusions as well as the reasons behind the conclusions in a manner that is easy to understand and clear. He should be ready to answer questions from either the judge or prosecution and be willing to answer all questions that are raised during cross-examination. Cetrulo LLP is well versed in protecting clients in complex, multi-party, multi-jurisdictional asbestos litigation. Our lawyers can handle and advise national and regional defense counsel as along with local, regional and expert witnesses and experts. Our team is regularly in front of trial judges, coordinating judges, and special masters of asbestos litigation throughout the country. Medical Experts Expert witnesses are crucial in cases which involve asbestos-related injuries due the latency between exposure to asbestos and the beginning symptoms. Asbestos cases often involve complex theories of injury that stretch for decades and involve dozens or even hundreds of defendants. It is almost impossible for a plaintiff to prove their case without the help of experts. Medical and other scientific experts are essential to determine the extent of an individual's exposure, assess their medical conditions and offer insight into the possibility of future health issues. Experts like these are essential to any case and must be thoroughly vetted and knowledgeable about the subject matter. The more experience an expert in medicine or science has the more convincing he is. In many asbestos cases an expert in medicine or a scientist is required to review the claimant's records and perform a physical exam. Experts can testify to whether exposure to asbestos was enough to cause an illness that is specific to him, such as mesothelioma, lung cancer, or other forms of scarring on the lungs and respiratory tract (e.g., pleural plaques). It is possible to seek out other experts, like industrial hygienists, in order to establish the existence of asbestos exposure levels. They can employ sophisticated analytical and sampling techniques to compare airborne asbestos levels at a workplace or home with the standards for exposure that are legally required. These experts can be beneficial in defending companies that produce or distribute asbestos-related goods. They often are in a position to prove that the exposure levels of plaintiffs were below the legal limits and that there was no evidence of negligence by the employer or manufacturer liability for the product. Other experts involved in these cases include occupational and environmental specialists who can offer insights on the safety protocols at a given work site or company and how these protocols relate to the liability of asbestos manufacturers. For instance, these experts can establish that renovation materials damaged during a remodel are more likely to contain asbestos, or that shaking out contaminated clothing can cause asbestos fibers release and then be inhaled.