Notes

Why Asbestos Litigation Defense Isn't A Topic That People Are Interested In Asbestos Litigation Defense
Asbestos Litigation Defense

In order to defend companies against asbestos-related lawsuits, it is necessary to review the medical records of the plaintiff, work history, and testimony. We typically employ a naked metal defense that focuses on arguing your company did not manufacture or sell asbestos-containing products that are that are the subject of the claimant's lawsuit.

Asbestos cases require a distinctive approach and a tenacious strategy to achieve success. We serve as local counsel, regional and national.

Statute of Limitations

The majority of lawsuits must be filed within a specific time period, known as the statute of limitations. In asbestos cases, the deadline for filing an action is between one and 6 years after the victim is diagnosed with an asbestos-related condition. In order to defend the case it is crucial to establish that the alleged accident or death did not occur prior to the timeframe. This often requires a thorough examination and analysis of the plaintiff's work history, including interviews of former coworkers, and an in-depth study of Social Security and union records, as well as tax and tax records.

Defending an asbestos case involves many complicated issues. Asbestos sufferers may develop a mild disease, such as asbestosis, prior to being diagnosed with a fatal disease such as mesothelioma. In these situations an attorney for defense will argue that the statute of limitations should start when the victim was aware or reasonably ought to have realized that their exposure to asbestos triggered the disease.

The difficulty of these cases is also exacerbated by the fact that the time limit for filing a lawsuit may differ from state to state. In these instances, a seasoned lawyer for mesothelioma will try to present the case in the state in which the majority of the exposure is believed to have taken place. This may be a difficult task because asbestos victims frequently moved around the country to obtain employment, and the alleged exposure could have occurred in several states.

Muncie of discovery can be difficult in asbestos litigation. Asbestos litigation is more difficult than other personal injury cases. Instead of a handful of defendants, as is the case in most cases, there are typically dozens of people involved. It can be difficult to obtain relevant discovery when there are many defendants and the plaintiff's theory extends over a long period of time.

The McGivney, Kluger, Clark & Intoccia Team has vast experience as National Coordinating Counsel for multi-district asbestos litigation, multi-jurisdictional. We collaborate closely with local and regional counsel to develop a strategy for litigation, manage local counsel and obtain consistent, cost-effective outcomes in line with client objectives. We regularly appear before coordination and trial judges and special masters of litigation across the nation.

Bare Metal Defense

In the past, makers of turbines, boilers, pumps and valves have defended themselves against asbestos lawsuits using what is known as "bare metal" doctrine or the component part doctrine. This defense states that a manufacturer cannot be held accountable for asbestos-related injuries caused by replacement components that the company didn't design or install.

In the case of Devries v. Devries, the Tennessee Eastman Chemical plant employee filed a lawsuit against several equipment makers over his mesothelioma. The job of the plaintiff was to remove and replacement of insulation, steam traps and gaskets for equipment like valves, pumps and steam traps (Equipment Defendants). He claimed that asbestos exposure occurred while working at the plant, and was diagnosed with mesothelioma a few years later.

The Supreme Court's Devries decision has altered the legal landscape for asbestos litigation and may influence how the courts in other jurisdictions deal with the issue of third-party parts that manufacturers include in their equipment. The Court declared that the application of the bare-metal defense is "cabined" in maritime law but left open the possibility for other federal circuits to apply this doctrine to cases that are not maritime.

This was the first time an appeals court of the federal level has used the defense of bare metal in a lawsuit involving asbestos, and represents an important departure from the traditional product liability law. The majority of courts have understood "bare metal" as a denial of the responsibility of a manufacturer to warn about harms caused by replacement parts it did not make or sell.

The McGivney, Kluger, Clark & Intoccia team regularly serves as National Coordinating Counsel for clients in multi-jurisdictional, industry-wide asbestos litigation. We help our clients develop strategies for litigation, manage regional and local counsel and provide an efficient, cost-effective defense in coordination with their objectives. Our attorneys also speak at conferences for industry professionals on the important issues that influence asbestos litigation. Our firm's experience includes defending clients across the nation and collaborating closely with the coordinating judges and trial courts, as well as special masters. Our unique method has proven to be effective in reducing exposure and legal spend for our clients.

Expert Witnesses

A person with specialized knowledge, skills or experience can be an expert witness. They provide independent assistance to a judge by offering an impartial opinion on issues within their expertise. He must be able to clearly articulate the facts or assumptions on which his opinion is based and should not omit to look into matters that could detract from his concluded conclusions.

In cases that involve allegations of exposure to asbestos, medical experts are often called upon to assist in the evaluation of the claimant's illness and the identification of any causal connection between their condition and a known source of exposure. Many of the ailments caused by asbestos are extremely complex, and require the expertise of specialists in the field. This could include doctors, nurses, pharmacists toxicologists, epidemiologists, as well as occupational health specialists.

Experts are available to provide unbiased technical assistance, regardless of whether they are representing the prosecution or the defense. He should not serve as an advocate or try to influence the jury to favor his client. He should not try to convince jurors or advocate for an argument.

The expert should work with other experts in trying to narrow any technical issues at a very early stage and eliminate any irrelevant matters. The expert should also collaborate with the people who instruct him to pinpoint areas of agreement and disagreement for the joint statement of the expert commissioned by the court.

The expert must at the conclusion of his examination chief, explain his conclusions and the reasons for the conclusions in a manner that is easy to understand and clear. He must be able to answer questions from the prosecution or the judge and should be willing to discuss any issues that are raised during cross-examination.

Cetrulo LLP has extensive experience in defending clients involved in complex asbestos litigation involving multiple parties and jurisdictions. Our lawyers are able to advise and manage regional and national defense counsel, as well as regional and local experts as well as witnesses. Our team regularly appears before coordinating judges, trial judges, and special masters in asbestos litigation across the nation.

Medical Experts

Due to the latency issues that arise between asbestos exposure and beginning of symptoms Expert witnesses play an extremely important role in any case that involves an asbestos-related injury. Asbestos cases typically involve complicated theories of injury that can span decades and connect hundreds or even dozens of defendants. It is nearly impossible for an individual to prove their case without the assistance of experts.


Medical and other experts in the field are necessary to assess the extent of an individual's exposure, evaluate their medical conditions, and provide insight into potential future health problems. Experts like these are essential to any case, and should be thoroughly vetted and knowledgeable about the subject. The more experience the medical or scientific expert has the more convincing they will be.

Asbestos cases usually require an expert from a medical or scientific field to review the medical records of the claimant and conduct a physical examination. Experts can testify as to whether exposure to asbestos was enough to cause an illness that is specific to him, such as mesothelioma, lung cancer, or any other form of scarring that affects the lungs and respiratory tract (e.g. plaques in the pleural cavity).

Other experts such as industrial hygienists might also be needed to assist in establishing asbestos-related exposure levels. They can use advanced sampling and analytical techniques to determine the amount of asbestos in the air in a home or workplace and compare these to legal exposure standards.

Experts of this kind can be extremely useful when defending companies that manufactured or distributed asbestos-related goods as they often have the capability of proving that the levels of exposure of plaintiffs were within the legal limit and that there was no evidence of negligence on the part of the employer or manufacturer liability.

Other experts that could be involved in these cases are environmental and occupational specialists. They can provide insights into the safety procedures which are in place at a particular workplace or company and how they are related to the liability of asbestos producers. These experts can, for example, establish that renovation materials damaged during the course of remodeling could contain asbestos, or that shaking clothing contaminated by asbestos can cause asbestos fibers and asbestos dust to be released.

Website: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7qvf3O5GRKs