Illinois Man Files Abestos Lawsuit Alleging Negligence, Conspiracy, and Spoliation of Evidence
By asbestoshub | August 19, 2008
Posted on AsbestosHUB.
Raymond Hostert, an Illinois man who discovered he was suffering from mesothelioma in June of this year, has filed an asbestos suit against 79 defendant corporations.
Mr. Hostert, was employed as a machine operator, drill press operator, truck driver and mechanic from 1952 through 1999 at various locations throughout Illinois. During the course of his employment and during home and automotive repairs, Hostert claims he was exposed to and inhaled asbestos fibers emanating from dcertain products he was working with and around.
Defendants in the case include Bondex International, CBS, Chrysler, Federal-Mogul Asbestos Personal Trust, Ford Motor Company, General Electric, General Motors, Goodyear, Honeywell International, Ingersoll-Rand, International Paper, John Crane, MetLife, Philips Electronics and Trane US.
Hostert claims the defendants knew or should have known that the asbestos fibers contained in their products had a toxic, poisonous and highly deleterious effect upon the health of people.
Hostert alleges that the defendants included asbestos in their products even when adequate substitutes were available and failed to provide any or adequate instructions concerning the safe methods of working with and around asbestos.
He also claims that the defendants failed to require and advise employees of hygiene practices designed to reduce or prevent carrying asbestos fibers home.
As a result of the alleged negligence, Hostert claims he was exposed to fibers containing asbestos. He developed a disease caused only by asbestos which has disabled and disfigured him, the complaint states.
Hostert claims that he has sought, but has been unable to obtain, full disclosure of relevant documents and information from the defendants leading him to believe the defendants destroyed documents related to asbestos.
Hostert alleges that as a result of each defendant breaching its duty to preserve material evidence by destroying documents and information it has been prejudiced and impaired in proving claims against all potential parties.
“Plaintiff has been caused to suffer damages in the form of impaired ability to recover against defendants and lost or reduced compensation from other potentially liable parties in this litigation,” the complaint states.
Hostert is seeking at least $400,000 in damages for negligence, willful and wanton acts, conspiracy, and negligent spoliation of evidence among other allegations.
“In addition to compensatory damages, an award of punitive damages is appropriate and necessary in order to punish the defendants for willful, wanton, intentional and reckless misconduct and to deter them and others from engaging in like misconduct in the future,” the complaint states.
Watch Tom Lamb report on Asbestos News Minute.
Topics: Lawsuits | No Comments »
Asbestos Lawsuit Alleges Fraudulent Representation of Safety of Asbestos Products
By asbestoshub | August 18, 2008
Posted on AsbestosHUB.
Warren Devillier and his wife Rose are suing A.W. Chesterton, along with 15 other companies, for conspiring to mine, process and sell asbestos products, suppressing the information pertaining to the fiber’s hazardous influence on human health and purposely inflicting him with an asbestos disease.
Devillier’s lawsuit was filed in the Jefferson County District Court in Texas on July 1, 2008.
According to the plaintiffs’ petition, companies such as U.S. Steel Corp., Viacom and Zurn Industries knew that the asbestos products they manufactured would hit the market without inspection for defects.
The suit says the defendants knowingly conspired among themselves to cause Wilhelm’s injuries and committed conspiracy by willfully misrepresenting and suppressing the truth as to the risks and dangers associated with asbestos.
“As a result of Devillier’s exposure to asbestos … over his career, he contracted (a) disease which will someday take his life,” the suit says. “Each defendant … bears responsibility in causing plaintiffs’ injuries.”
Furthermore, the suit goes on to allege the defendants fraudulently represented that asbestos products were safe, when they knew asbestos exposure could lead to death.
The plaintiffs are seeking punitive and exemplary damages, plus damages for Mr. Devillier’s physical pain and suffering in the past and future, mental anguish in the past and future, lost wages, loss of earning capacity, disfigurement in the past and future, physical impairment in the past and future, and past and future medical expenses, including funeral costs.
Watch Tom Lamb report the story on Asbestos News Minute.
Topics: Lawsuits | No Comments »
Asbestos Turned James Grumley’s Lungs Into Consistency of Sole of Dress Shoe
By asbestoshub | August 15, 2008
James Grumley and his family have settled a mesothelioma lawsuit with former asbestos manufacturer Garlock Sealing Technologies in the amount of $12 million in damages.
Mr. Grumley worked for decades as a boiler mechanic at a Johnsonburg paper mill, where he was exposed to asbestos. His exposure included the paper mill’s boilers covered in asbestos cement, asbestos gaskets, and asbestos rope packing used on turbines.
Mr. Grumley was diagnosed with malignant pleural mesothelioma in 2006. The pleura is the lining around the lungs and asbestos fibers lodged in the lungs change the single-cell layer pleura into a hard shell the consistency of the sole of a dress shoe. The process inhibits expansion of the lungs making it hard to breathe and causing the nerve endings to scrape against the hard lininig. The growing tumor can sometimes encase and fracture the spine and surround and strangle the heart — as it has done in Mr. Grumley’s case.
Prior to contracting mesothelioma, 84 year old Mr. Grumley played sports with his grandchildren and shared a life with his wife of 55 years. The man worked to support his family in a paper mill and is now enduring pain and suffering through what should have been retirement, but now undoubtedly means borrowed time.
Watch Tom Lamb report the story on Asbestos News Minute.
Topics: Lawsuits | No Comments »
New Jersey Man Files Mesothelioma Lawsuit in Illinois Court: Alleges Spoliation of Evidence
By asbestoshub | August 14, 2008
Posted on AsbestosHUB
John Scarduzio was employed a materials processor and plant manager from 1949 through 2000 at various locations. Mr. Scarduzio was diagnosed with mesothelioma in April of this year. In July he filed an asbestos lawsuit in Madison County Circuit Court in Illlinois.
Scarduzio claims that during the course of his employment and during home and automotive repairs he was exposed to and inhaled, ingested or otherwise absorbed asbestos fibers emanating from certain products he was working with and around.
He names 75 defendant corporations in his lawsuit, including include Bondex International, CBS, Chrysler, Federal-Mogul Asbestos Personal Trust, Ford Motor Company, General Electric, General Motors, Goodyear, Honeywell International, Ingersoll-Rand, International Paper, John Crane, MetLife, Philips Electronics and Trane US.
Scarduzio claims the defendants knew or should have known that the asbestos fibers contained in their products had a toxic, poisonous and highly deleterious effect upon the health of people and that the defendants included asbestos in their products even when adequate substitutes were available and failed to provide any or adequate instructions concerning the safe methods of working with and around asbestos.
He also claims that the defendants failed to require and advise employees of hygiene practices designed to reduce or prevent carrying asbestos fibers home.
As a result of the alleged negligence, Scarduzio claims he was exposed to fibers containing asbestos. He developed a disease caused only by asbestos which has disabled and disfigured him, the complaint states.
Scarduzio also suffers “great physical pain and mental anguish, and also will be hindered and prevented from pursuing his normal course of employment, thereby losing large sums of money,” the complaint states.
Scarduzio also claims that he has sought, but has been unable to obtain, full disclosure of relevant documents and information from the defendants leading him to believe the defendants destroyed documents related to asbestos.
“It was foreseeable to a reasonable person/entity in the respective positions of defendants, that said documents and information constituted evidence, which was material to potential civil litigation-namely asbestos litigation,” the complaint states.
Scarduzio alleges that as a result of each defendant breaching its duty to preserve material evidence by destroying documents and information it has been prejudiced and impaired in proving claims against all potential parties. This is called spoliation of evidence.
“Plaintiff has been caused to suffer damages in the form of impaired ability to recover against defendants and lost or reduced compensation from other potentially liable parties in this litigation,” the complaint states.
Scarduzio is seeking at least $300,000 in damages for negligence, willful and wanton acts, conspiracy, and negligent spoliation of evidence among other allegations.
“In addition to compensatory damages, an award of punitive damages is appropriate and necessary in order to punish the defendants for willful, wanton, intentional and reckless misconduct and to deter them and others from engaging in like misconduct in the future,” the complaint states.
Unfortunately for Mr. Scarduzio, it is too late.
Watch Tom Lamb report the story on Asbestos News Minute.
Topics: Lawsuits | No Comments »
Japanese Government to Monitor 2 Million Buildings for Asbestos
By asbestoshub | August 13, 2008
The Japan Times has reported that the Japanese Government plans to expand biannual checks on the management of asbestos, from the current 260,000 buildings to about 2 million. The checks would possibly start on March 2009, to cover almost all private-sector facilities nationwide.
The Land, Infrastructure, Transport and Tourism Ministry will examine with local officials the 2 million buildings to lessen public anxiety over health hazards caused by asbestos, the sources said.
The infrastructure ministry broadened the targets of the survey following a recommendation issued in December 2007 by the Internal Affairs and Communications Ministry.
The facilities will include retail shops and hotels but exclude wooden facilities, single-family homes and schools, which fall under the responsibility of other ministries, they said.
The infrastructure ministry’s checks currently target large facilities, including factories that have a floor space of more than 1,000 sq. meters and were built between 1956 and 1989.
Among the 2 million facilities, the ministry will prioritize examinations of buildings that were constructed before 1975, the year when regulations on use of asbestos were tightened. Facilities where a large number of people have access will also take priority, they said.
In December 2007, that ministry revealed the results of its own sample survey on the management of asbestos at small private businesses. It found that seven out of 42 buildings, or 16.7 percent, left asbestos exposed to the air.
Topics: Exposure | No Comments »
Did Mobil and Georgia-Pacific Get Away With Murder?
By asbestoshub | August 12, 2008
A case on appeal in Illinois, First District, Fifth Division, Cook County, was affirmed in favor of Exxon Mobil and Georgia-Pacific Corporation, Defendants in an asbestos-related lawsuit filed by Stacey Gregory, on behalf of her late husband, Larry Gregory.
Mrs. Gregory filed a complaint in Illinois against Defendants including Beazer East, Bondex International, Exxon Mobil, Georgia-Pacific Corporation and Union Carbide Corporation, regarding Mr. Gregory’s contraction of mesothelioma and subsequent death.
Mobil moved for summary judgment on various grounds, and the trial court granted this motion finding that Mobil owed no duty to Mr. Gregory.
Meanwhile, Union Carbide moved for the application of Indiana law rather than Illinois law, and Georgia-Pacific joined in this motion.
The trial court granted the motion, finding that choice-of-law factors in the cause favored Indiana law. Georgia-Pacific subsequently moved for summary judgment based on the Indiana statute of repose, and the trial court granted the motion finding that Indiana’s statute of repose barred Mrs. Gregory’s claim against Georgia-Pacific.
A statute of repose is different from a statute of limitations, in that after the statutory period has expired it is not possible to file a lawsuit even if an injury occurs after that time. For example, if there is a twenty year statute of repose on the manufacture of aircraft, a claim cannot be filed against the manufacturer more than twenty years after the date of manufacture, even if a design or manufacturing defect is responsible for a later accident.
Bondex, Union Carbide, and Beazer were all dismissed as parties, leaving Mobil and Georgia-Pacific as relevant defendants.
On appeal from the grant of Mobil’s motion for summary judgment and Georgia-Pacific’s motion for the application of Indiana law, Mrs. Gregory contended that the trial court erred in finding that Mobil owed no duty to Mr. Gregory to warn him of the presence of asbestos in its facility where he worked and that the trial court erred when it determined that Indiana law applied to the claim against Georgia-Pacific for manufacturing and selling its joint compound without including a warning that this product contained asbestos.
Mrs. Gregory asked that the Appeals Court reverse the order granting summary judgment to Mobil and remand the matter for further proceedings.
Mrs. Gregory also asked that the Appeals Court reverse the order finding that Indiana law applies and enter judgment that Illinois law applies and, accordingly, reverse the order granting summary judgment to Georgia-Pacific.
Alternatively, Mrs. Gregory asked the Appeals Court that it reverse the order finding that Indiana law applies, reverse the grant of summary judgment to Georgia-Pacific, remand the matter for further proceedings, and grant any other appropriate relief.
The Appeals Court affirmed both the trial court’s order granting summary judgment to Mobil and its order in favor of Georgia-Pacific finding that Indiana law applies.
In other words, for whatever reason, the Court chose to apply Indiana law, perhaps the exposure occurred in Indiana. Then the Indiana statute of repose laws became applicable, barring Mrs. Gregory’s claim against Georgia-Pacific, despite (or perhaps because of) common knowledge that mesothelioma diseases occur decades after exposure. The last bit of bad luck for Mrs. Gregory came when it was decided for whatever reason that Exxon Mobil owed no duty to warn Mr. Gregory of asbestos in their products, perhaps he was a contractor and not an employee.
Did Exxon Mobil and Georgia-Pacific get away with murder by exploiting loopholes in the system or was it just bad luck when the application of Indiana law and other circumstances prevent a widow from making an asbestos claim on behalf of her deceased husband? Submit your comments.
Topics: Law, Lawsuits | No Comments »
Holy Sheet Get the Asbestos Insulation Out of the Church
By asbestoshub | August 11, 2008
According to the New Jersey State Attorney General’s Office, 51-year-old Tyrone Maple pleaded guilty in July 2008 to unsafely removing asbestos from a Paterson, N.J., church, releasing hazardous dust and debris into areas that included a day care center.
According to the state Attorney General’s Office, Mr. Maple, of Bronx, NY, faces three years in state prison after pleading guilty to knowingly causing the release of asbestos.
Mr. Maple removed asbestos insulation at Friendship Baptist Church, 433 Park Ave., without a license and without observing federal and state laws intended to protect health and safety, according to officials. An area of the church leased by Whole New World Daycare was affected.
A probe by the state Division of Criminal Justice Environmental Crimes Bureau found that Mr. Maple, a church member who worked as a boiler repairman in New York, was not licensed to perform the work.
Nonetheless, Mr. Maple contracted with the church to remove the asbestos insulation from the church’s basement for $6,200.00 and performed the work in December 2007. That work entailed removing asbestos insulation from steam pipes so they could be safely repaired.
Complaints by a congregation member led to the church hiring an air monitoring firm in February 2008. Elevated levels of asbestos were discovered throughout the first floor of the building, including the area leased to the daycare center.
The church and center were then shut for several days while the asbestos dust was removed by a licensed asbestos abatement contractor.
Peter Aseltine, spokesman for the Attorney General’s Office, said he could not comment on the health risk posed to occupants of the building. However, he noted that the elevated levels of asbestos in the building existed during a period of under two months before being discovered and remedied.
State Attorney General Anne Milgram said, “This crime could have posed serious health risks for the young children in that daycare center. To turn a profit, this defendant took chances with families who had few affordable alternatives for child care.”
Topics: Exposure | No Comments »
Asbestos in the House: New York School Closed for Remediation
By asbestoshub | August 8, 2008
The Thomas O’Brien Academy of Science and Technology, an elementary school in the Albany School District in upstate New York, will be closed this school year because the school requires considerable asbestos remediation before it can open again.
Work began on the Academy and its parent school, Giffen Elementary School, when the school year ended in June 2008, as part of a general improvement project. The Academy was shut down, and a small asbestos remediation project was begun.
However, when the crews began their work, they discovered there was more asbestos located at the Academy than previously thought. Asbestos was found in places where it was thought to have been removed in the late 1980s. Does that mean the school’s 500 students plus the school employees have been breathing asbestos dust all these years? We will find out in about 10 years if asbestos health problems start appearing.
Asbestos is an increasingly prevalent problem in schools across the country. It was once heavily used in construction materials of many different types, but due to its toxicity, the asbestos is now becoming a serious problem, particularly as these buildings age and the asbestos they contain becomes more exposed and begins degrading. Asbestos contamination in schools is especially disconcerting, as children are more susceptible to developing asbestos-related diseases such as mesothelioma.
Federal law requires that all schools adhere to Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act (AHERA) guidelines, which require schools to create and maintain asbestos management plans. The plans must include details of the location of any asbestos, as well as all measures taken to prevent exposure risks. Inspections must take place every three years, and asbestos management plans must be available for public review by staff and parents.
After the discovery of the extra asbestos at the Thomas O’Brien Academy, air samples were taken in school buildings, but showed there were no elevated asbestos levels present.
The school estimates it will reopen for the 2009-2010 school year, and will meet with parents this week to discuss the temporary closure.
Topics: Exposure | No Comments »
Care For a Nice Beach Vacation — With Asbestos?!?
By asbestoshub | August 7, 2008
It has been almost a year since the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency tested the shores of Illinois Beach State Park on Lake Michigan, but residents are still asking questions about its safety.
The media first announced the presence of asbestos fibers at Illinois Beach State Park almost 11 years ago. The beach runs along a six-mile stretch of Lake Michigan and is visited by more than two million people every year.
Signs are posted at locations where asbestos is known to have washed up on shore, warning people not to handle rocks and other suspicious material.
An investigation into the source of the asbestos has led to five possible locations, including an old industrial site located south of the park. State and federal officials have been saying for more than a decade that the beach is safe.
However, according to a news report from the Sun-Times newspaper, there are internal EPA documents that raise serious concerns about the safety of the location. A study carried out in 2006 showed there were “significantly elevated” levels of asbestos at the state park.
The EPA carried out more tests in 2007 in an effort to resolve the public’s safety concerns. Investigators performed normal beach activities such as volleyball and Frisbee-tossing to try and determine if normal activity could result in asbestos becoming airborne.
If all was well after the 2007 tests, why has the EPA continued to send out investigatory teams when state and local officials have been insisting the beach is safe for more than a decade?
The EPA claims that asbestos levels are so low that there is no cause for concern.
A 1997 publication by the National Institute for Occupational Health and Safety (NIOSH) states,
“all levels of asbestos exposure studied to date have demonstrated asbestos-related disease…[and] there is no level of exposure below which clinical effects do not occur.”
Topics: Exposure | No Comments »
Secretary Dies With Asbestos Fiber in Her Lung. Just One.
By asbestoshub | August 6, 2008
A very short article in the Telegraph & Argus, a UK publication, reported in July 2008 that retired secretary, Lilian Aldred died of mesothelioma, according to the results of her inquest.
The coroner was told that Lilian Aldred, 79, of Moor Park Drive, Addingham, was diagnosed with the asbestos-related disease in May last year.
She developed breathing difficulties and was admitted to Marie Curie Cancer Care Centre in Bradford, where she died in January.
Here is the thing: Mrs. Aldred used to work near an exhibition hall which had a roof containing asbestos; however, a post-mortem discovered a single asbestos fiber in her lungs. Just one?!? The cause of death was bronco pneumonia due to malignant mesothelioma. From one fiber? And the bigger question is, if Mrs. Aldred worked near an exhibition hall and got one asbestos fiber in her lung, which later caused her to die of mesothelioma, how many others were exposed (thousands probably) and are at risk of getting mesothelioma in the future?
Recording an open verdict, Coroner Roger Whittaker, said: “There is insufficient evidence on her work history to link a causal connection of exposure to asbestos.”
Well, where else did it come from?
Care to comment on this one?
Topics: Exposure | No Comments »
