20 Interesting Quotes About Ny Asbestos Litigation
From Shiapedia
New York Asbestos Litigation
In New York, mesothelioma and lung cancer patients can seek compensation with the help of a dedicated mesothelioma lawyer. The exposure to asbestos is often the cause of these kinds of diseases; symptoms may develop for years before they show up.
The judges who manage NYCAL's caseload have developed a pattern of favoring plaintiffs. Recent rulings could further erode the rights of defendants.
Upstate New York Asbestos Litigation Dockets
Asbestos litigation is very different from the typical personal injury lawsuit. These cases involve many defendants (companies that are sued), multiple law firms representing plaintiffs, and numerous expert witnesses. Additionally there are often specific work sites which are the subject of these cases due to asbestos was utilized in a variety products and workers were exposed during their work. Asbestos-related victims are often diagnosed with serious diseases like mesothelioma and lung cancer.
New York has its own unique method of handling asbestos litigation. In fact, it is one of the largest dockets in the country. It is governed by a specific Case Management Order. This CMO was created to handle asbestos cases with a large number of defendants. The judges on the NYCAL docket have extensive experience in asbestos cases. The docket also is the location of some of the most significant plaintiff verdicts in recent history.
The New York Court of Appeals has recently made significant changes to the NYCAL docket. In 2015 the political establishment in Albany was shaken to its core when the former Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver was convicted on federal corruption charges. Silver was accused of killing every reasonably designed tort reform bill in the legislature for more than a decade while working for the plaintiffs firm Weitz & Luxenberg.
Justice Sherry Klein Heitler, the long-time supervisor of the NYCAL docket, retired in April 2014 amidst reports that she had offered the Weitz & Luxenberg law firm "red-carpet treatment." She was replaced by Justice Peter Moulton, who introduced a variety of changes to the docket.
Moulton instituted a new rule for the NYCAL docket, which requires defendants to submit proof that their products were not responsible for mesothelioma in plaintiffs. He also implemented an updated policy that states that he would not dismiss cases until the expert witness testimony had been completed. This new policy may have a significant impact on the pace of discovery in cases on the NYCAL docket, and could lead to an outcome that is more favorable to defendants.
In other New York asbestos news, a federal judge in the Eastern District of Virginia recently dismissed MDL 875 and ordered all future asbestos cases to be transferred to another district. This will result in a more uniform and efficient treatment of these cases. The current MDL is known for its abusive discovery practices as well as its unjustified sanction and low evidentiary standards.
Central New York Asbestos Litigation Dockets
After years of corruption and mismanagement by the former Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver, the scandals concerning his ties to asbestos lawyers have finally focused attention on the asbestos docket, which is rigged. Justice Peter Moulton is now presided over NYCAL and has already held a town hall with defense attorneys to listen to complaints about the "rigged" system that favors a powerful asbestos law firm.
Asbestos lawsuits differ from the typical personal injury lawsuit, with many of the same defendants (companies who are being sued) and plaintiffs (people who file the lawsuits). Asbestos lawsuits also usually involve similar job sites where many people were exposed to asbestos attorneys, often leading to mesothelioma, lung cancer, or other illnesses. This can lead to large case verdicts, which can clog the courts dockets.
To combat this issue, several states have passed laws to limit the types of claims that can be filed. These laws typically cover issues like medical guidelines, two-disease rules expedited case scheduling, forum shopping, joinders punitive damages and successor liability.
Despite these laws states continue to see an influx of asbestos lawsuits. Certain courts have created special "asbestos Dockets" to help reduce the number of asbestos lawsuits and accelerate the resolution of these cases. These dockets follow a variety of rules specifically designed for asbestos cases. The New York City asbestos docket for instance demands that claimants meet specific medical criteria and also has a rule of two diseases and has an expedited trial schedule.
Certain states have also enacted laws to restrict the amount of punitive damages that can be awarded in asbestos cases. These laws are designed to discourage particularly harmful conduct and allow for more compensation to be awarded to victims. Regardless of whether your case is filed in a state or federal court, you must work with an New York mesothelioma lawyer to understand how these laws affect your specific case.
Alfred Sargente focuses his practice on toxic tort and environmental litigation including commercial litigation, product liability and general liability matters. He has extensive experience in defending clients against claims of exposure to asbestos, lead and World Trade Center dust in both New York and New Jersey. He is also frequently defending cases that claim exposure to other hazardous substances and contaminants, such as vibration, noise, mold and environmental contaminants.
Southern New York Asbestos Lawsuit Litigation Dockets
New York has seen thousands of deaths due to asbestos exposure. Across five counties, mesothelioma sufferers and their families have filed lawsuits against manufacturers of asbestos-based products in order to receive compensation. Mesothelioma lawsuits that succeed make asbestos companies liable for their reckless choices.
New York mesothelioma attorneys have expertise in representing clients from all backgrounds in court against the largest asbestos producers in the nation. Their legal strategies could lead to an enormous settlement or verdict.
Asbestos litigation in New York has a rich history, and continues to make headlines. According to the 2022 national report on mesothelioma claim submissions by KCIC, New York is the third most popular state in which to file a mesothelioma suit after California and Pennsylvania.
The state's judiciary has been impacted by the influx of asbestos lawsuits. In 2015, former Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver was convicted on federal corruption charges partly related to the millions of dollars of referral fees he earned for the politically-powerful plaintiffs law firm Weitz & Luxenberg from handling asbestos cases. Following the scandal, Justice Sherry Klein Heitler, who had managed NYCAL since 2008, was replaced amidst reports that she provided "red-carpet treatment" to Weitz & Luxenberg asbestos attorney lawsuits.
Justice Peter Moulton succeeded Justice Heitler as NYCAL judge. He has declared that defendants will not be able to obtain summary judgment unless they have the existence of a "scientifically credible and admissible study" that proves the amount of exposure a plaintiff received was not enough to cause a mesothelioma. This effectively eliminates the possibility that NYCAL defendants will be able to obtain summary judgment.
Justice Moulton also ruled that plaintiffs must prove health harm suffered as a result of asbestos exposure in order for the court to award compensation. This ruling, when combined with a decision made in the beginning of 2016 that ruled that medical monitoring is not a tort claim, makes it virtually impossible for an asbestos defense lawyer to win a NYCAL motion for summary judgment.
The most recent case on which Judge Toal is presiding, a mesothelioma lawsuit filed against DOVER GREENS, alleges that the company was in violation of asbestos work practices regulations when it renovated buildings on the Manhattan campus in October 2013 for a fundraising event. The lawsuit asserts that DOVER GREENS didn't adhere to CAA and asbestos NESHAP regulations because it failed to inspect and notify the EPA prior to starting renovations, or to properly remove, store and dispose of asbestos and appointing a trained representative present at renovation activities.
Eastern New York Asbestos Litigation Dockets
At one point asbestos personal injury/death lawsuits filled state and federal courts and drained judges' judicial resources and prevented them from addressing criminal cases or other important civil disputes. This bloated litigation impeded the prompt compensation of deserving victims, frustrated innocent families, and caused companies to devote inordinate amounts of money and resources for defense of these cases.
Asbestos claims can be filed by those diagnosed with mesothelioma, or other asbestos-related illnesses after exposure to asbestos while at work. Most cases are filed by shipyard workers, construction employees, employees and other tradesmen working on buildings that were or were constructed using asbestos-containing materials. These individuals were exposed by asbestos fibers that were dangerous during the process of manufacturing or when working on the actual structure.
Asbestos litigation was the first mass tort. From the late 1970s to the early 1980s, asbestos exposure caused an explosion of personal injury and wrongful deaths lawsuits. This occurred in state and federal courts across the country.
The plaintiffs in these lawsuits claim that their ailments resulted from the negligence in the production of asbestos products and that companies did not inform them of the dangers of asbestos exposure. More than half of asbestos lawsuits are filed in federal court.
In the early 1990s, when they realized that this litigation constituted "terrible calendar congestion," District Judge Jack B. Weinstein and New York Supreme Court Justice Helen Freedman jointly consolidated for settlement as well as pretrial and discovery purposes hundreds of state and federal lawsuits which claimed asbestos exposure at the Brooklyn Navy Yard. Judge Weinstein and Justice Freedman handled these cases that were later referred to as the Brooklyn Navy Yard consolidation, under the supervision of a Special Master.
Many defendants were involved in other asbestos lawsuit claims. The defendants were Garlock, Inc, H & A Construction Company, as successors and individually to Spraycraft Corporation, CRH, Inc., successors to E.I. Dupont; W.R. Grace and Company; Empire-Ace Insulation Manufacturing Company Bell/Atlas Asbestos Corp.; and DNS Metal Industries, Inc.
