42 Years - A Professional Law Corporation - Helping Asbestos Victims Since 1974
Menu
Ready to seek justice?888-990-7008

asbestos litigation

“Eternit and The Great Asbestos Trial” Free Online Book Now Available

Posted on by

Eternit trial chief prosecutor Raffaele Guariniello with "Eternit and The Great Asbestos Trial" editor Laurie Kazan-Allen

The verdict to conclude the Eternit asbestos disaster trial in Italy has finally been handed down, with former company owner Stephan Schmidheiny and major shareholder Jean-Louis Marie Ghislain de Cartier de Marchienne each receiving 16-year prison sentences.

Coinciding with the announcement of the verdict in the groundbreaking asbestos case, “Eternit and The Great Asbestos Trial,” compiled and edited by David Allen and Laurie Kazan-Allen, has been released and is now available at WorldAsbestosReport.org.

Detailing the Eternit scandal from the beginning with in-depth coverage of the corporation’s activities in Casale Monferrato, the book offers a rare glimpse into one of the most devastating environmental disasters in recent memory.

Eternit, a manufacturer of fiber cement, built its factory in Casale Monferrato in 1906, but it wasn’t until decades later that it become widely known that thousands of workers and people in the area had been exposed to asbestos, leaving a vast number of victims. The effects of this disaster are still being felt today.

From the factories to the courtroom, Eternit’s rise and fall documented

As it has been proven for decades that exposure to asbestos can have serious consequences for individuals – including the development of lung cancer, asbestosis and malignant mesothelioma – Eternit ultimately declared bankruptcy in 1986. It would be another six years before asbestos use was banned in Italy.

In the book, David Allen and Laurie Kazan-Allen include a number of interviews offering unique perspectives on the Eternit trial. These conversations give insight into the various twists and turns throughout the trial, particularly the attempts by Schmidheiny to settle claims with various cities, including Casale Monferrato. Though it was reported weeks before the verdict that Casale’s mayor was considering a deal, the town ultimately decided against it, paving the way for the Swiss billionaire’s sentencing earlier this week.

Despite verdict, asbestos fight not nearly over

In addition to the Eternit trial in Italy, “Eternit and The Great Asbestos Trial” details the wide-ranging impact that the asbestos disaster had on victims in other countries, including France, the Netherlands and Brazil, among others.

The lasting impact on these number of countries serves as a poignant reminder to the rest of the world that as the use of asbestos continues – particularly in developing countries – the Eternit verdict is only one step in the process of eliminating diseases that the World Health Organization estimates kill approximately 107,000 people across the globe each year.

Related article:

Former Eternit Executive, Shareholder Sentenced to Prison in Groundbreaking Asbestos Trial

Former Eternit Executive, Shareholder Sentenced to Prison in Groundbreaking Asbestos Trial

Posted on by

A verdict in the groundbreaking trial over the Eternit asbestos disaster in Italy has been handed down, with a former executive and a shareholder each receiving 16-year prison sentences for their roles in the incident.

Swiss billionaire Stephan Schmidheiny, the former owner of the Eternit fiber cement company, and major shareholder Jean-Louis Marie Ghislain de Cartier de Marchienne were sentenced in absentia after they were found guilty of violating safety regulations and creating an environmental disaster.

Agence France-Presse (AFP) reports the disaster was responsible for more than 3,000 asbestos-related deaths. The families of these victims had waited anxiously for the trial for years.

“This trial will go down in history… but it will not bring my dad back,” Piero Ferraris, whose father died of lung cancer in 1988 after working in a local Eternit factory from 1946 to 1979, said following the verdict.

Sentence longer than usual due to continued fall-out

The crimes committed by Schmidheiny and de Cartier typically carry a maximum 12-year sentence, but prosecutors successfully argued that the effects of the asbestos disaster continue to affect victims in Italy, according to the news source.

The trial began in 2009 following a five-year investigation into the matter, and it represents the largest such case against a multinational company for its role in asbestos-related deaths. Eternit went bankrupt prior to asbestos being banned in Italy, AFP reports.

“I have never seen such a tragedy. It affects workers and inhabitants… it continues to cause deaths and will continue to do so for who knows how long,” prosecutor Raffaele Guariniello said during his closing speech in November.

Defense attorneys had argued the two men were not responsible for the asbestos disaster, according to Reuters.

Trial, verdict shed light on deadly effects of asbestos exposure

The Eternit trial was monitored carefully around the world by the asbestos community, particularly as the carcinogenic substance is still widely used in developing countries.

Exposure to asbestos, which was once prized for its resistance to fire and utility as an insulator has been known for decades to cause a number of serious illnesses, including lung cancer, asbestosis and malignant mesothelioma, a rare form of cancer.

The effects of these illnesses can be seen across the globe, as the World Health Organization estimates approximately 107,000 people succumb to these diseases each year.

Chemical Company BASF Catalyst Seeks Dismissal of Lying Accusations in Asbestos Case

Posted on by

court gavelInternational chemical company BASF Catalyst and its corporate law firm recently asked a New Jersey federal court to dismiss charges that it allegedly lied to asbestos disease victims and their families about the presence of the carcinogenic substance in its talc.

According to Public Justice, an amicus brief was filed in the class-action Williams, et al. v. BASF Catalyst, LLC, et al. case on behalf of the victims and their families, claiming the company and its attorneys should not be able to get away with conspiring to hide the asbestos risk in the talc.

The brief asserts that as a result of BASF’s attempts to conceal the asbestos danger, some members of the class either did not seek injury claims or had their cases dismissed by courts.

Chemical company seeking ‘litigation privilege’

BASF and its corporate law firm are attempting to squeeze their way out of the case through a “litigation privilege” under New Jersey law that reportedly protects companies against civil liability for communications designed to “achieve the objects of litigation,” according to Public Citizen.

Through this protection, the chemical company actually claims that its decision to withhold and destroy evidence was legitimate because it was an attempt to “obtain in the asbestos cases favorable results, which is the ultimate goal in any litigation.”

In the amicus brief, however, Public Justice notes that the ultimate objective in every litigated case is to seek truthful, accurate testimony.

“As the New Jersey Supreme Court has recognized, the goal of litigation is not to win at all costs, as BASF and [its law firm] argue. Rather, the goal of litigation is to search for – and ultimately arrive at – the truth,” noted Public Justice Executive Director Arthur Bryant.

Efforts to conceal asbestos dangers come at the expense of victims

In the Williams class action case, plaintiffs claim an executive with BASF admitted the talc contained asbestos during a personal injury trial decades earlier, but the company’s settlement was on the condition that evidence was kept confidential.

If BASF and its law firm did, indeed, seek to cover up the fact that its talc contained asbestos, it would be the latest example of a troubling trend in which large corporations have sought to protect themselves at the expense of victims.

The victims in the BASF case, who likely suffer from asbestosis, lung cancer or the rare cancer malignant mesothelioma, are not alone, as the World Health Organization estimates approximately 107,000 people around the world succumb to asbestos-related illnesses each year.

Eternit Seeks to Protect Itself, Shed Asbestos Exposure Blame

Posted on by

Eternit looks to shed asbestos blame in Italy An ongoing trial in Italy is the latest example of an asbestos company looking to skirt the legal system and absolve itself from blame at the expense of exposure victims.

In a recent blog post, Laurie Kazan-Allen, the Coordinator of International Ban Asbestos Secretariat (IBAS), noted that the “Great Asbestos Trial” involving asbestos conglomerate Eternit in Italy is beginning to show signs of corruption.

Specifically, Kazan-Allen wrote that lawyers for Stephan Schmidheiny, one of the two former Eternit executives being taken to court, have been engaging in secret negotiations with a number of municipalities that are directly involved in the case. With a three-judge panel expected to announce a verdict on February 13, the lawyers are seeking withdrawal of civic authorities from the case, which would undoubtedly have serious consequences for exposure victims.

Casale Monferrato offered millions by defendant’s lawyers

Casale Monferrato, the site of the recent international meeting dubbed “A World Without Asbestos” which sought to eliminate asbestos-related diseases around the world, is one town that has reportedly been offered a substantial amount of money from Schmidheiny’s attorneys.

According to Kazan-Allen, the town has been offered up to €20 million to settle the claim and withdraw “from this and any future trials (against Eternit) that it might be involved in.”

But Casale Monferrato is not alone, as the Mayor and town council of Cavagnolo agreed to a deal with the lawyers for €2 million for asbestos decontamination. As part of this “tombstone agreement,” the town said it would not bring any more legal action against the former Eternit executive even if more evidence was uncovered, Kazan-Allen explained.

Potential corruption taking focus away from victims

While the Mayor of Casale Monferrato has publicly stated the town would not consider an agreement similar to the one made in Cavagnolo, a source told Kazan-Allen that Casale’s town council is “refusing to show victims and unions the draft of the (proposed) agreement,” leading to more speculation that the municipality could ultimately give in.

Either way, the attention has been shifted away from the plight of the asbestos exposure victims in this case, many of whom are likely suffering from diseases such as lung cancer, asbestosis or malignant mesothelioma, a rare form of cancer.

Scientific evidence continues to substantiate the claims of these individuals, as the World Health Organization estimates approximately 107,000 people are killed each year around the world as a result of such asbestos illnesses.

Government Accountability Office Refutes Asbestos Manufacturers’ Claims Over Trusts

Posted on by

statue with law imageThe U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) recently released a report that demonstrates the true role of asbestos trusts, suggesting that these trusts do, in fact, have measures to prevent fraud and are transparent.

According to the report, which was requested by House Judiciary Chairman Lamar Smith, asbestos trusts paid out approximately 3.3 million claims valued at approximately $17.5 billion from 1988 through 2010.

The GAO notes that asbestos litigation stems from the “lengthy” occupational exposure to the carcinogenic material experienced by a number of Americans, as such exposure has been linked to the development of asbestosis, lung cancer and the rare cancer malignant mesothelioma.

Due to negligence on the part of manufacturers and other companies that utilized asbestos products, approximately 100 firms have declared bankruptcy at least in part due to asbestos liability, the GAO found.

Transparency of asbestos trusts holds up

One of the major reasons why the GAO was called upon to complete the report on asbestos trusts was the fact that the U.S. Chamber and asbestos manufacturers had accused the trusts of not being transparent.

This, however, is not the case, according to the GAO, which noted 98 percent of the trusts it reviewed required a claims audit program and that defendant corporations have the ability to access information that may not be readily available to the public.

“Most asbestos trusts we reviewed publish for public review annual financial reports and generally include total number of claims received and paid,” the GAO report stated. “Other information in the possession of a trust, such as an individual’s exposure to asbestos, is generally not available to outside parties but may be obtained, for example, in the course of litigation pursuant to a court-ordered subpoena.”

Lack of fraud detected by GAO

In addition to the fact that asbestos trusts were found to be transparent, the GAO noted that none of the trust officials who had conducted the audits indicated that there were any instances of fraud, according to the report.

While asbestos manufacturers have fought to do away with these asbestos trusts claiming they can ultimately enable plaintiffs to receive extra compensation, the GAO also found that most trusts can’t pay the full value of a claim, with a payment percentage being determined.

Gary M. Paul, president of the American Association for Justice, said in a statement that the GAO report suggests asbestos producers must still be held accountable for their role in exposing employees to the carcinogenic substance.

“The GAO has found what we knew all along: this attack on asbestos trusts is just the latest attempt to shield asbestos manufacturers that knowingly killed their workers for decades,” Paul said.

Honeywell International Attempts to Shed Liability through New Legislation

Posted on by
Honeywell Corp. Headquarters

Entrance to Honeywell headquarters, Morristown, NJ

Having been a member of the board of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce’s Institute for Legal Reform (ILR) since 2007, Honeywell International is hoping the government arm can succeed in granting legal immunity to corporations that manufacture dangerous products.

According to a recent report from the American Association of Justice, the ILR has sought to restrict legislation aimed at such companies, which would completely brush aside any liability they have in producing equipment and other products that caused serious health issues for workers.

In the case of Honeywell, legislation to grant immunity would take the company off the hook for its Zylon bulletproof vest, which has been found to degrade in heat and lose functionality, the Association noted.

In addition, Honeywell could shed a large number of asbestos lawsuits and compensation it has been hit with through such immunity legislation.

Asbestos at forefront of Honeywell’s motivation

While the Zylon bulletproof vest caused significant problems and was manufactured by Honeywell at least five years after its defects were discovered, new legislation being pushed by the ILR would also grant immunity for the corporation in terms of asbestos litigation.

Specifically, a jury in McLean County, Illinois, handed down a multi-million dollar verdict against Honeywell and three other companies in March for alleged negligence in exposing workers to the carcinogenic mineral fibers.

The Association notes that less than a week after the verdict was delivered, the ILR issued a release suggesting that the case “confirms a troubling trend in the State of Illinois where there is a hostile litigation environment.”

Following this response from the ILR, a number of publications also came out against the verdict. Most notably, the Chicago Tribune published an op-ed by ILR president Lisa Rickard, who named McLean County “a home for outrageous, abusive lawsuits,” the American Association of Justice reported.

Honeywell, others share responsibility for occupational asbestos exposure

The case in McLean County, Illinois, was hardly the only asbestos lawsuit to be launched against Honeywell and other large corporations, however. For instance, in September, a West Virginia couple claimed Honeywell, Ford Motor Co. and other corporations were responsible for exposing the husband to asbestos on the job, which ultimately led to his development of lung cancer.

In these cases, victims of asbestos-related illnesses like lung cancer, asbestosis and malignant mesothelioma are fighting for compensation from large businesses for their alleged negligence and failure to promote a safe work environment.

According to the World Health Organization, such diseases kill approximately 107,000 people around the world each year.

Congress May Attack Trusts in Asbestos Litigation

Posted on by

Congress buildingWhile the issue of asbestos litigation is nothing new for members of Congress, lawmakers on the Hill have decided to initiate another examination of such cases, this time going after the trusts set up by companies to pay compensation to victims who deserve it.

According to a recent article in the National Law Journal, Republicans on Capitol Hill, led by Representative Trent Franks (R-Ariz.), are considering making changes to the trusts. The publication reports that the trusts – of which there are approximately 50 – were created in federal court by companies facing asbestos lawsuits that filed for bankruptcy.

One of the most prominent examples of this kind of trust, according to the Law Journal, is USG Corp., which originally funded its trust with $4 billion with the intention of being able to cover costs of asbestos litigation in the future. Corporations such as USG are not as concerned about their trusts anymore at this stage of the game.

Unlike USG, however, there are still some “solvent co-defendants” that face regular asbestos accusations, and still have a major stake in their trusts. Defendant attorneys for these companies have said that plaintiffs can sue the corporation in state court as well as the trust itself, while the lawyers have difficulty accessing information used in the cases against the trusts, according to the publication.

Attacking Trusts the Latest Attempt by Defendants to Shed Blame

As members of Congress debate the merits of requiring more transparency with trusts in asbestos litigation, the one certainty that remains is that defendant companies are still responsible in the long run.

Steven Kazan, the managing partner of Kazan, McClain, Satterley, Lyons, Greenwood & Oberman in Oakland, California, told the Law Journal that going after the trusts is just the latest example of defendant corporations trying to mask the blame that truly falls on them.

“None of them want to acknowledge their responsibilities,” Kazan explained. “They’ve been trying to get legislative relief for decades. That hasn’t worked. Now they’re talking about the trusts.”

Bottom line: Asbestos Exposure has Serious Consequences

The responsibilities of these defendant companies are as clear as the hazards posed by asbestos exposure.

Asbestos litigation is supported by decades of scientific research that has determined exposure to the carcinogenic material leads to the development of a number of serious illnesses.

These diseases, including asbestosis, lung cancer and malignant mesothelioma, typically do not manifest themselves until decades after initial exposure, with diagnoses often being made too late for effective treatment.

Still, asbestos attorneys and plaintiffs will closely monitor the discussion on Capitol Hill, with The Wall Street Journal reporting that years of talks have not yet led to any reform legislation.

2 Major Rulings in Asbestos Litigation & Workers’ Compensation

Posted on by

Alameda County CourtWorkers’ compensation awards are often a lifeline for individual victims of asbestos disease. Following are two major rulings that Kazan Law achieved which have formulated law about occupational diseases in California. While Kazan Law no longer handles workers’ compensation claims, these changes remain important to all California asbestos victims.


Case #1:  On behalf of Harvey and Lucille Steele. Achieved by former Kazan Law principal Victoria Edises.

Summary: Mr. Steele was diagnosed with relatively mild asbestosis in 1976. Eleven years later he came down with mesothelioma and Kazan Law filed a new workers’ compensation application on his behalf. The new application was contested.

Ruling: The same asbestos exposure can give rise to separate and different asbestos-related injuries and disabilities.

Why this ruling is of major importance: People with one disease (like pleural plaques or asbestosis) are at a much higher risk of later developing other asbestos diseases (like mesothelioma or lung cancer.) The Steele decision acknowledged that even though Harvey Steele had already filed a workers’ compensation claim for one asbestos disease, he was nevertheless entitled to file another workers’ compensation claim for the separate injury and disability he suffered when he became ill from mesothelioma.

 

Case #2: On behalf of George and Lucille Force. Achieved by former Kazan Law principal Victoria Edises.

Summary: In 1984 Victoria Edises obtained workers’ compensation benefits for Mr. Force, a former shipyard worker. George Force and his wife, Lucille, also filed a third party lawsuit against various asbestos manufacturers and distributors, and obtained substantial recoveries.

After Mr. Force passed away, his wife brought a longshore compensation claim. The insurance carrier attempted to obtain credit against its liability for benefits to Mrs. Force from the monies that Mrs. Force and other members of the Force family received in their successful third party case.

Ruling: The credit to the third party settlement apportioned to Mrs. Force was limited. The amounts apportioned to the Force children were excluded. Additionally, the Court found that the employer had the burden of proving apportionment of any third party settlement between multiple parties.

Why this ruling is of major importance: Insurance carriers can now only receive credit for monies paid to the actual applicants and cannot receive credit for monies paid to other family members. For instance, if a jury awards damages to an injured asbestos worker and to his wife and three children, then under Force, the workers’ compensation carrier can get credit only for the monies apportioned to the worker himself, and not for the monies apportioned to his family. This ruling enhances the overall recoveries of workers with asbestos-related diseases, and their families, from their workers’ compensation claims and third party lawsuits.

Raising Awareness of UK Rights to US Justice in Asbestos Litigation

Posted on by

The Royal Courts of Justice of England and Wales

The Royal Courts of Justice of England and Wales

An asbestos case is worth about ten or more times more in the United States than in the United Kingdom.  Yet many British citizens remain unaware of the very valuable rights they have under United States law.

Requirements for US Rights

Any British asbestos disease victim who meets one of the following qualifications could have the right to proceed with litigation in the United States, as well as under British law for any UK asbestos exposures.

  • The victim has worked with asbestos in the United States or its territories

How Asbestos Litigation is Handled in the United States

Asbestos litigation is handled on a “no-cost no-fee” basis in the United States. This means that the attorney advances all the expenses of the litigation and is only paid by collecting a negotiated percentage of any money recovered. There is essentially no risk to the victim in pursuing a claim under US law.

How Asbestos Liabilities are Paid after a Bankruptcy

Many US asbestos manufacturers and distributors have gone bankrupt, just as Turner & Newall did in the United Kingdom. Almost all of these companies have emerged from bankruptcy by funding a Trust to evaluate and pay for their asbestos liabilities. Some of these companies are still undergoing reorganization and will emerge in the years ahead with their own Trust Funds.

Several of these Trusts have published lists of work sites at which they recognize their products were used:

  • 5 Trusts have acknowledged responsibility for asbestos exposure at a total of 36 work sites in the United Kingdom.
  • 14 Trusts have acknowledged responsibility for asbestos products on 15,440 ships, many of which have traveled all over the world.

Any British resident who worked at any of these approved sites or on any of the approved ships at the appropriate times has gone a long way towards proving a claim against the particular Trust Fund involved.

The absence of a work site from these approved lists does not mean there is no claim. It does mean that work needs to be done to establish credible evidence of the presence of appropriate products at work sites at a time when the injured person was there and in a position to be exposed to asbestos from those products.

Why Bankruptcy Expertise is Vital

The bankruptcy claiming process can be complicated, with many built-in traps for the unskilled and unwary. Senior partners at Kazan Law:

  • Have served on the Bankruptcy Court-appointed creditors’ committees in virtually every asbestos bankruptcy reorganization
  • Currently serve as members of the victims’ Trust Advisory Committees that work with the Trustees managing virtually every current Bankruptcy Trust Fund

This experience has provided us with:

  • An intimate knowledge about the operations of these Trusts
  • How to efficiently present claims
  • How to negotiate maximum values for the claims

Just as in the United Kingdom, asbestos litigation in the United States requires skilled and experienced counsel – it’s easy to say you can do it, but it’s not at all easy to do it right.

Asbestos Litigation Takes Place at Different Levels

Posted on by

CourthouseAsbestos litigation is an important tool that protects workers who came in contact with the carcinogenic substance during their careers.

From rail workers to laborers to mechanics, many were exposed to asbestos because the mineral was once widely used as a flame retardant and insulator in many industries. However, it was known by the mid-1960s that the inhalation of the deadly mineral fibers could cause a range of serious illnesses such as asbestosis, lung cancer and malignant mesothelioma.

These deadly diseases have affected millions of people around the world and often times the only recourse they have is to file an asbestos lawsuit against the party responsible for their asbestos exposure, so that they can receive compensation for medical bills and a sense of security for their family. However, asbestos litigation can take place at a number of different levels.

U.S. Supreme Court to Review Asbestos Case

According to the Courthouse News Service, the high court will review a lower court’s pre-emption ruling in a case involving the mesothelioma death of a rail worker. The mesothelioma lawsuit was filed on behalf of George Corson, who allegedly came in contact with the asbestos that caused his fatal cancer while working on trains and in the course of other employment activity.

Originally, the lawsuit named 59 defendants, with 57 of them being dismissed for lack of evidence. The remaining two – Railroad Friction Products and Viad Corp. – were granted summary judgement because a district court ruled that the Locomotive Inspection Act pre-empted the claims in the lawsuit. The Act reportedly holds that the employer is almost always liable for injuries sustained by workers on trains, meaning that the two companies, which were both connected to the production of asbestos products, were not responsible for Corson’s death.

The 3rd Circuit Court upheld the pre-emption but the U.S. Supreme Court granted Certiorari to the case and will review it, reports the news source.

Asbestos Lawsuit Filed in Texas on Behalf of Deceased Laborer

Not all asbestos cases make their way to state supreme courts but they are still important nonetheless. The Southeast Texas Record reports that an asbestos lawsuit was filed on behalf of Freeman Eugene Peart, who allegedly died of an asbestos-related disease, by one of his relatives.

The lawsuit claims that American Optical and 34 other firms were responsible for the asbestos illness the claimed the life of Peart, who worked as a boilermaker, pipefitter, welder and laborer over the course of his lifetime.

Get a Free Case Evaluation

Our Recent Verdicts

Latest News

Recent Blog Posts

Search Our Site

Kazan, McClain, Satterley & Greenwood

55 Harrison St. Suite 400
Oakland, CA 94607
888-990-7008

Mesothelioma Lawyers

© 2024 Kazan, McClain, Satterley & Greenwood.
A Professional Law Corporation.