New Jersey Mesothelioma Lawyers | Philadelphia Mesothelioma Lawyers» Depositions

Mesothelioma Lawsuit Results in $41M Verdict for Retired California Plumber

admin — Tue, 17 May 2011 15:51:44 +0000

Congratulations to the San Francisco legal team of Gil Purcell and Dustin Bodaghi whom represented California plumber, Jake Casey along with Patricia Casey on Wednesday, May 11, 2011 in a mesothelioma lawsuit filed against Kaiser Gypsum Company, Inc. After a three-week trial and ½ day of deliberations, a San Francisco jury awarded more than $41 million to Mr. Casey, a California plumber who worked in high-rise commercial buildings from 1961 until 2001, and was diagnosed with mesothelioma in January 2011.

This mesothelioma lawsuit was a follow-up to a verdict that was handed down by the courts in March 2011. In a negligence and products liability case filed in San Francisco the jury ruled against Kaiser Gypsum, Inc, a manufacturer of joint compounds and wallboard materials, and defendant FDCC California, Inc., (formerly known as Dinwiddie Construction Company). The litigation alleged that the asbestos containing joint compounds and wallboards were defectively designed and contained a failure to warn product defect, and the jury agreed. At that time, Casey was awarded $1,273,421 in economic damages, $15 million in non-economic damages, and $5 million in loss of consortium. The jury assigned 7 percent of the liability to defendant FDCC California, Inc. and 3.5 percent of the liability to defendant Kaiser Gypsum Company, Inc.

In a statement which was released by the attorneys representing the case, Casey alleged that the companies failed to warn workers that asbestos exposure could cause mesothelioma or cancer, and failed to protect them from deadly asbestos dust and fibers.

On May 10, a jury determined that Kaiser Gypsum acted with oppression or malice and hit the company with a $20 million punitive damages penalty.

Los Angeles Mesothelioma Attorneys Obtain $2.1 Million Jury Verdict for Mesothelioma Victim Exposed to Asbestos

admin — Thu, 17 Mar 2011 15:49:43 +0000

I would like to extend my congratulations to the trial team of of Craig Peters and Selby Lighthill, Paul & Hanley, LLP. On Monday, March 14, 2011, the trial team obtained an impressive $2.1 million verdict against Union Carbide Corporation in Los Angeles on behalf of the family of Arthur Strickland, 68, a drywall installer and taper who died of peritoneal mesothelioma after being exposed to asbestos. According to the trial team “the jury found Union Carbide 46% at fault.”

The trial team also released a statement stating that, “the verdict comes on the heels of the CA Supreme Court’s recent denial of Union Carbide’s petition for review and request for depublication in Stewart v. Union Carbide Corporation.”

Los Angeles, California Mesothelioma Lawyers Win $5 Million in Mesothelioma Trial

admin — Fri, 25 Feb 2011 22:12:57 +0000

I would like to extend my congratulations to the trial team of Tony Vieira, Campbell Filmer, and Craig Peters on their recent verdict of $5 million which was awarded to the plaintiff, a sixty-seven year old warehousemen and his wife, against defendant Special Electric in a 6-week mesothelioma trial in Los Angeles, California. The team fought hard for their client, to ensure that the client received the justice they deserved The plaintiff was diagnosed with mesothelioma after becoming exposed to asbestos while handling a/c pipe and doing brake work at his job. The attorneys representing the plaintiff, aggressively questioned Honeywell CIH Charles Blake on the stand for two days. Honeywell settled shortly thereafter. Following three days of deliberation, the jury awarded $5 million to the plaintiff and his wife, and assigned 18% fault to Special Electric and 18% fault to Honeywell (who settled shortly before closing .

Pending Mesothelioma Lawsuit: What Fisher Scientific Knew About The Dangers of Asbestos

admin — Fri, 17 Dec 2010 14:11:35 +0000

Fisher Scientific sold asbestos containing products to schools, universities and businesses. As a result, Fisher Scientific has been named as a defendant in a number of asbestos related mesothelioma lawsuits. In a recent case, the corporate executive for Fisher Scientific was questioned under oath about when did Fisher know about the dangers of asbestos and when if at all did it warn its customers.

Similar questions were asked in 1977 by a group of seventh graders who were using Fisher Scientific products in science class. The responses in the opinion of this author are somewhat shocking. Rather than further characterize the explanations of Fisher I attach hereto a complete copy of the Fisher executive deposition as well as the letters written to Fisher by the children. We have also included Fisher’s responses.

You can read and decide if in your own opinion Fisher acted properly. Click here to read the entire deposition.

NJ Court Affirms 7.5 Million Mesothelioma Verdict

admin — Sat, 21 Aug 2010 14:22:54 +0000

In 2006 the NJ Supreme Court made clear the family members who develop an asbestos related disease have a right to seek compensation from the worksite where the exposure originated. Today a NJ appellate court affirmed a verdict for the wife of a worker who brought asbestos home on his clothing from the Exxon Bayway refinery.

We currently have 5 similar cases with upcoming trial dates. This decision will surely help those families. Below is the article reprinted from the star ledger explaining the case more fully.

N.J. appellate court upholds $7M award from Exxon to woman handling husband’s asbestos-laden clothing | NJ.com

In upholding the jury verdict, the court also said Bonnie Anderson’s husband, John, is entitled to $500,000 and it added interest that’s still accruing.

“If we had a picture under the definition ‘innocent victim,’ this would be it,” said Moshe Maimon, a New York attorney who represents Anderson. “This is a tremendous precedent in terms of the families of workers.”

A 2006 state Supreme Court decision said people with a secondary exposure to asbestos can sue companies they believe are liable. Today’s appellate ruling marked the first time a jury verdict in such a case was upheld, Maimon said.

Exxon spokesman Kevin Allexon said the company had not decided whether it will appeal the ruling to the state’s highest court.

“Whatever the end result is, I hope I’m alive to see it,” Anderson, 61, said today. An electrician and librarian, she said she’s gone from being “a supermom” who worked and cared for her family to having to be looked after by her husband. She’s had surgeries, chemotherapy and radiation — which she said gave her leukemia — and now spends most of her time at home, where she is active in mesothelioma awareness and support groups.

“For me, it’s not about the money, it’s about the disease,” Anderson said. “I’d give anything to get my life back.”

According to the decision, John Anderson worked at Exxon’s Linden Bayway Refinery from 1969 to 2004. For the first six years of his employment, his job required him to remove insulation to fix pumps and filters.

Exxon held safety meetings and gave its workers helmets, but it did not give them respirators or uniforms or tell them the flying dust their work created had asbestos in it, the ruling stated. Asbestos is a mineral containing fibers that, once airborne, can lodge in a person’s lungs. It causes several ailments, including the cancer mesothelioma, which has a long latency period.

“John never knew what kind of insulation it was,” the decision said. “He worked in his own street clothes, which Bonnie always laundered. Standing near the washing machine, she would shake out as much dust as possible. She often complained about the dust in his clothes and hair.”

Anderson, who herself worked at the refinery from 1975 to 1986, suffered stomach pains and swelling in 2001 and was diagnosed with malignant peritoneal mesothelioma.

“It’s obviously a very positive ruling for injured people — particularly here in New Jersey where the we have the highest percentage of mesothelioma victims per capita” in the nation, said Red Bank attorney Christopher Placitella, whose practice largely involves mesothelioma cases. “It reaffirms the duty of a property owner to provide a safe workplace.”

Placitella also said it’s important the court agreed with the Andersons’ position “that all exposures contributed to the development of the disease” because companies cannot argue people have no case if they can’t pinpoint which exposure made them sick.

The court also rejected Exxon’s arguments that the case should have been a worker’s compensation complaint and that the trial judge erred by ordering a second trial to allow a jury to reconsider damages. The first jury awarded Anderson $100,000.

Taking America for Granted

admin — Sat, 21 Aug 2010 13:55:46 +0000

This morning I awoke to a story in the New York Times about a young couple stoned to death in Afghanistan. The couple was condemned to death by the Taliban for eloping by more than 100 men who lived in the town where the couple grew up. As I shuddered imagining the scene of this gruesome act, I was reminded once again of how fortunate we are here in America. For most of us, we are here by a pure twist of fate lucky enough to have been born as a result of a struggle for a better life by relatives that came before us. While I thank God for my good fortune, I am saddened by the injustices suffered by many as a result of being deprived of the basic freedoms we often take for granted. May God bless you all my friends, family and neighbors and may we never forget how fortunate we are.

Thank You!

admin — Wed, 21 Oct 2009 16:46:52 +0000

Thank you for taking the time to submit your information. Please allow time for us to read your email, and get back to you. We appreciate your feedback and/or submission of information. We may not be able to respond to each and every email, but we will do our best. Any and all feeback assists us in creating a better site for our visitors.

Depositions

admin — Wed, 07 May 2008 15:36:46 +0000

Client Testimonials

Company Knowledge

Important Legal Decisions

Medical Expert Updates

Products and Exposure