Articles Tagged with Boston mesothelioma lawyer

Published on:

Establishing liability for asbestos-related lung cancer can be challenging for aBoston Mesothelioma Lawyer number of reasons – not the least of which being that lung cancer has numerous known causes. Mesothelioma, on the other hand, is only known to be caused by exposure to asbestos. Proving lung cancer was caused by negligent asbestos exposure – and not something else – can be a challenge for your personal injury attorneys. You need to be sure they are up to it.

A recent court opinion from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit involved a man who worked at a major regional power and energy company for more than two decades and was later diagnosed with asbestos-related lung cancer. He died in 1997. Four years later, his wife was diagnosed with mesothelioma. Her ensuing injury lawsuit alleged she was exposed to “take-home” asbestos, via her husband’s work clothing.

Many people think of lung cancer solely as a smoker’s disease. That’s not always the case, and asbestos has been definitively shown to cause lung cancer. Still, smokers could be at higher risk of developing asbestos-related diseases, including lung cancer and mesothelioma. They are no less entitled to damages, but proving causation with thorough evidence and expert witness testimony is key.  Continue reading →

Published on:

The legal landscape of asbestos liability may soon change dramatically – and not in a way that benefits the plaintiffs suffering asbestos-related diseases, such as asbestosis and mesothelioma. Uscapitolbuilding

For several years now, lobbyists for the asbestos manufacturers and industries targeted for litigation due to negligently exposing workers and others to the toxin have been pushing the passage of a law that purports to “further asbestos claim transparency.” Now, that sounds like a nice measure – who doesn’t want more transparency in anything? However, the reality was these companies wanted to make it harder for plaintiffs to seek damages from more than one asbestos manufacturer for their injuries, even though we know these diseases can arise from exposure to the substance from multiple sources.

But the bills were never going to get very far, at least not while President Barack Obama was in office, because Obama had vowed to exercise his veto power, even if the measures passed both the House and Senate. Now, representatives are hoping President Donald Trump will be more receptive.  Continue reading →

Published on:

An investigation by reporters in Georgia revealed that the state agency in charge of enforcing asbestos regulations fails to make certain that those removing the dangerous substance are actually licensed to do so. That’s because the program was de-funded six years ago. This lack of basic enforcement, say victim advocates, puts residents and the general public at grave risk of developing diseases associated with asbestos exposure – including mesothelioma. asbestos

One of the men who has been affected is in 2015 was diagnosed with mesothelioma. For the last several years, he worked six days every week at a heating and cooling company. At his most recent doctor’s visit, he was given between six and eight months left to live. Mesothelioma, of course, is caused by exposure to asbestos. The man has filed a lawsuit against the manufacturers he believes ares responsible for his exposure to the substance while he was working on residential projects in the Atlanta region some two decades ago. The father-of-two lamented the fact that his condition was terminal, and he would likely die before he saw the companies responsible for the toxic exposure held to account.

Of course, most homes build prior 1978 use some type of asbestos in the joint compound in the wallboards. However, most people have no idea because asbestos doesn’t have any distinct odor or taste. The real risk of exposure occurs when the substance is disturbed and the fibers are kicked up in the air and breathed in. This is especially concerning when you consider that in driving through older neighborhoods in that city at any given time, one is likely to see dozens of these older residences under construction. If the asbestos removal work isn’t done properly by licensed contractors, it increases the risk that not only are the workers being exposed to the toxin, but so too are the neighbors.  Continue reading →

Published on:

The Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania (one of two intermediate appellate courts in the state) recently ruled that a school board can be potentially liable for the mesothelioma suffered by a math teacher who was allegedly exposed to the toxic fibers at the school. school

According to court records in the case, the subject of the underlying matter worked as a high school math teacher who worked at the district from 1958 to 1959 – basically one full school year. During this time, she was exposed to asbestos dust coming from pipe coverings on the steam and water pipes that were in the hallways, stairs and classrooms of the school.

More than five decades past when the teacher, long since retired, was diagnosed with mesothelioma. She and her husband filed a personal injury lawsuit against the school district and 40 other defendants, including those responsible for making, distributing, selling, supplying, installing and removing asbestos products. Plaintiff alleged it was her occupational exposure to the dust, caused by defendants’ acts and/ or omissions, that resulted in her injuries. Her husband also claimed loss of consortium.  Continue reading →

Published on:

The governor of Ohio has just signed a measure into law that will grant firefighters in that state the right to file a workers’ compensation claim if they are diagnosed with cancer – including mesothelioma. The measure creates a rebutable presumption that when a fire department employee is diagnosed with cancer, it stemmed from an on-the-job activity. That means it will be up to the employer to refute that presumption with solid evidence if it wants to deny the claim. firefighter

The change in state law was introduced last year, according to the Cleveland Plain Dealer, and will simplify the process for firefighters seeking to recover their pension and workers’ compensation benefits if they receive a cancer diagnosis.

The bill was by no means a shoe-in. The bill, S.B. 27, passed only after the fourth time it was introduced for consideration by state lawmakers. The bill is named after a fire department captain in Northeast Ohio who developed brain cancer in two years ago, and had to struggle to obtain workers’ compensation benefits.  Continue reading →

Published on:

The government contractor defense was accepted in a recent asbestos liability lawsuits out of California. The decision by a state appellate court breaks with a ruling by the federal Ninth Circuit. navy

The government contractor defense shields the federal government’s exercise of discretion and judgment in contract specifications and designs. It can be raised by government contractor defendants in certain product liability lawsuits, such as those pertaining to asbestos exposure. It’s often used by companies that provide products that have some type of military application, though matters can get complicated when the product in question is sold to both the government and the general public.

The California case involves a man who was exposed to asbestos insulation while working on nuclear submarines in the early 1970s. The insulation product was called Unibestos, and it’s been available for decades. In 1936, the U.S. Navy started using the product in its vessels because of its high resistance to heat. Although ads for the product indicated it was “available everywhere,” there is no evidence as to how much of the product was sold commercially.  Continue reading →

Published on:

According to a recent news article from The Stratford Patch, asbestos has just been discovered in the soil at a major project on Interstate 95 (I-95) in Connecticut. All construction work and roadside maintenance has been suspended while environmental agency workers can assess the scope of the contamination and work on a plan to deal with the toxic asbestos fibers.

constructionsiteAs part of the standard protocol when doing roadside maintenance that involves disturbing the soil, Department of Transportation inspectors will set up air quality monitoring stations and take soil samples to check for the presence of any toxic materials.  This can include asbestos, which was what was found in this case, as well as radon, other radioactive material, as well as any number of types of toxic waste. Continue reading →

Published on:

There is no question that being diagnosed with malignant pleural mesothelioma is about one of the worst things a patient can hear.  For the vast majority of patients, they have very little time to left to live, so it is basically the same as receiving a death sentence.  In most cases, the patient will not survive for more than a period of three years following an initial diagnosis.

senateThe reason for this is because once a person begins to suffer the symptoms – shortness of breath, chest pain, stomach pain, or any of the others = the malignant mesothelioma is normally in a very advanced stage.  Continue reading →

Published on:

We know that manufacturers of products sold in the U.S have a duty to warn consumers of potential risks. This is certainly true with makers of asbestos-laden products, particularly where users are at risk of exposure to deadly asbestos fibers or dust, which are toxic when breathed in. valve

But what duty do makers of non-asbestos products have to warn when there are asbestos-containing parts that are made by a third party but used in its non-asbestos product?

Recently, the New York Court of Appeals – the highest court in that state – took on this issue in Dummitt v. Crane Co. Continue reading →

Published on:

Two multi-million dollar verdicts by separate juries in two asbestos injury cases in New York resulted in damages collectively totaling $28 million, to be paid by boilermaker Burnham.boiler1

According to Legal Newline, one case resulted in the estate of one man receiving a $6.25 million victory in mid-June, while a second case awarded a man suffering from mesothelioma $22 million.

In both cases, plaintiffs allege they were exposed to deadly asbestos fibers after coming in contact with boilers made by Burnham.  Continue reading →