The United States has a long and fascinating history of asbestos litigation, which can be traced back to the early 20th century. This article aims to comprehensively explore the origins of asbestos litigation and examine its current state.
A Brief History
Asbestos-related lawsuits gained momentum in the early 20th century as more evidence regarding the health risks associated with asbestos exposure came to light. The first recorded lawsuit involving asbestos in the United States can be traced back to the early 1920s, when individuals began seeking compensation for work-related asbestos illnesses. These initial cases set a precedent for future legal actions and contributed greatly to raising awareness about the dangers posed by asbestos.
Among these landmark cases is the case of Nellie Kershaw, an English textile worker who tragically succumbed to an asbestos-related disease in 1924. Notably one of the earliest instances recorded pertaining to asbestos litigation, this case received widespread attention and significantly raised awareness about what asbestos fibers can do to the body.
Subsequent cases, including the groundbreaking decision in Jenkins v. Raymark Industries in 1973, continued to lay the groundwork for future litigation. This ruling recognized “take home” or secondary exposure as a concept and allowed individuals (including spouses and children of asbestos workers) affected fibers brought home by their family members to seek compensation.
Present-day Litigation
Despite progress made over time, present-day asbestos litigation involves several challenges. A notable issue lies in establishing a connection between talc products and asbestos. Many individuals have discovered that they unknowingly used talc products containing traces of this toxic material, resulting in an increased number of ovarian cancer cases and introducing intricate legal considerations. Consequently, the convergence of asbestos and talc litigation has necessitated a continually evolving legal landscape that demands thorough analysis and a nuanced approach.
Proving causation in asbestos cases also continues to be a significant challenge due to the lengthy time gap between exposure and the onset of symptoms. It is crucial to conduct extensive research, secure a detailed medical history, and provide scientific evidence in court in order to win a case.
The Importance of Expert Testimony in Asbestos Lawsuits
Expert testimony is often used to establish a clear connection between past exposure and subsequent illnesses, and the burden of proof in these cases often requires meticulous documentation, thorough investigation, and collaboration among medical professionals, legal experts, and affected individuals.
Additionally, concerns have arisen regarding the use of asbestos in construction materials imported from foreign countries with less stringent regulations. The global nature of asbestos production and distribution presents obstacles when it comes to ensuring product safety and preventing exposure. As a result of the increasing number of asbestos-related lawsuits, many asbestos manufacturers have filed for bankruptcy. To address this issue, bankruptcy trusts were established to compensate victims and streamline the legal process. These trusts are funded by the assets of bankrupt companies and aim to provide financial compensation for medical expenses, pain and suffering, as well as other damages
The creation of asbestos bankruptcy trusts has established a unique system for compensating individuals harmed by asbestos. These trusts evaluate and handle claims based on predetermined criteria allowing claimants to receive compensation without the need for lengthy legal battles.
The Texas Two-Step
Companies involved in asbestos litigation will be motivated, of course, to avoid large payouts and significant debt. One method that these companies have used over the years is termed the “Texas Two-step.” Employing this strategy, an asbestos company with liabilities will become a Texas entity, and then the new company will undertake a “divisive merger” splitting that entity into more than one companies – a process allowed under Texas’ divisive merger statute.
Essentially, a company can create a smaller company (or companies) that may take on certain aspects, departments, and/or finances of the original, and after doing so, the newly formed entity will file Chapter 11 bankruptcy, allowing the asbestos company to retain its assets while securing funds to pay off creditors. This move makes it challenging for claimants to truly hold a party accountable for the damage its caused.
Even if the Texas two-step method isn’t used, cchallenges can still arise in determining the appropriate amount of compensation to be awarded, particularly given the long-term health effects of exposure and the potential for multiple asbestos exposures throughout a person’s lifetime. Asbestos-related diseases often have long latency periods, meaning symptoms may not surface until several decades after exposure. And the severity of these symptoms depends on various factors like the duration and intensity of exposure, the type of asbestos fibers encountered, and individual susceptibility. Thus, it is often not a cut-and-dry process attempting to hold accountable a particular party for asbestos-related health consequences.
The Future of Asbestos Litigation
Efforts aimed at seeking justice for victims and providing appropriate compensation are poised to shape the future of asbestos litigation. An anticipated decline in cases related to diseases caused by exposure can be attributed primarily to heightened awareness regarding this issue and scientific progress forged through research initiatives driven by stringent regulations imposed over the years. Continued scientific advancements will no doubt contribute to deeper understanding of the health consequences caused by asbestos exposure and broaden the landscape of asbestos litigation over time.
As the use of asbestos has declined, the number of new cases is expected to continue to decrease. This decline may present challenges for individuals seeking compensation for their asbestos-related diseases in the future. Lingering cases will likely continue for some time despite the fact that asbestos has been replaced by safer alternatives, making these cases potentially more difficult to prove. This is why it is essential to work with an experienced asbestos attorney who is well-versed in the legal process and able to help a client put forth his or her best case.
Conclusion
Asbestos litigation has been a significant legal issue for decades, with its origins dating back to the mid-20th century. Over the years, countless individuals have filed lawsuits against asbestos manufacturers and companies for the health consequences they have suffered due to asbestos exposure. Thus, the United States has faced complex asbestos litigation throughout its history, which underscores the devastating consequences of asbestos exposure for public health. Historical cases and landmark rulings have had a significant impact on shaping legal framework over the years.
Addressing current challenges such as establishing causation as well as emerging matters like talc-related litigation necessitates persistent attention along with thorough examination. The emergence of scientific evidence and expert testimony has become increasingly important in asbestos cases, as plaintiffs must demonstrate a clear link between exposure to asbestos and resulting health conditions.
Asbestos Trusts: Compensation Without a Lawsuit
The establishment of bankruptcy trusts dedicated specifically to compensating victims offers a viable avenue; however, this process can be challenging due to its intricacies. Moreover, it is still necessary to pursue a lawsuit if a person is seeking a substantial payout.
Increased regulatory measures and scientific progress provide hope for reducing instances of diseases related to asbestos exposure. Nonetheless, unwavering vigilance and continued efforts, including extensive research, remain critical in confronting new problems effectively while ensuring justice prevails. As the number of asbestos cases decreases, those who develop asbestos-related illnesses will have to work harder to prove causation. This is why it’s necessary to work with an experienced attorney who is able to help their clients navigate the often-complicated legal system and receive the compensation they deserve.
Exposure to asbestos: past, present and future, Pira, E., Donato, F., Maida, L. and Discalzi, G., 2018. Journal of thoracic disease, 10(Suppl 2), p.S237.