What to know when gathering and presenting the evidence for a successful mesothelioma claim for asbestos injuries.

A successful asbestos exposure case hinges on evidence. Usually, compensation is available if an attorney proves negligence, or a lack of care, by a preponderancia de la evidencia, or more likely than not. 

Collecting evidence is only part of a lawyer’s job. Presentation and placement is just as important. A good chef knows how to combine ingredients, and a good coach knows where to place athletes on a field.

Proving a Mesothelioma Claim

A preponderance of the evidence is a very low standard. So, a lawyer doesn’t need much proof to make a basic negligence case. However, as most of us know, minimum efforts generally lead to minimum results. Maximum compensation is only available if the evidence in a personal injury case is strong enough to overcome some common defenses. More on that below.

The best asbestos exposure lawyers have the resources and experience to collect and present evidence in court. This combination usually ensures compensation for economic losses, such as medical bills, and noneconomic losses, such as pain and suffering.

Litigation skills aren’t enough. Most personal injury cases, including most asbestos exposure cases, settle out of court. So, a lawyer must be a top negotiator, as well as a top litigator. Only a handful of lawyers possess all these qualities.

Types of Exposure

All strong mesothelioma lawsuits begin with thorough case evaluations. When the rain comes, a house built on sand usually falls, but a house built on rock normally doesn’t fall. This foundation is the type of exposure in an asbestos exposure claim.

The type of exposure gives an asbestos exposure lawyer a vision for a case and helps determine the kinds of evidence needed.

Primary exposure victims usually include civilian workers or military servicemembers who worked in asbestos-laden facilities or directly handled this toxic substance. These civilian workers include:

  • Mineros: 

Asbestos mining was legal in the United States until 2002. For many years, workers used heavy equipment to pull raw asbestos out of mines. These mines usually contained other minerals as well, such as talc. So, talc miners often touched asbestos deposits.

  • Construcción: 

Asbestos does not conduct heat or electricity. These properties, along with its low cost, made asbestos a highly-prized insulator. Construction workers typically wrapped electrical wires and water pipes in asbestos as well. Other building materials, like roof shingles and ceiling tiles, were laced with asbestos as well.

  • Fabricación: 

Because the risk of fire was even higher in manufacturing facilities, they contained even more asbestos. Additionally, workers typically used asbestos to make many consumer products, particularly automotive and gun parts.

Servicemembers handled guns as well. They also used asbestos-lined gloves to handle hot machine guns and lived in asbestos-laced barracks. 

Sailors and naval support personnel faced additional risks. Before 1980, shipbuilders used asbestos all over naval ships, from small patrol boats to huge aircraft carriers. Since asbestos dust and fibers float for about three days, navy support personnel who hardly ever set foot aboard a ship were at risk for mesothelioma as well.

Briefly, pleural mesothelioma, a rare and aggressive kind of lung cancer, is probably the most serious asbestos exposure-related illness. This cancer grows undetected and spreads rapidly. Therefore, mesothelioma’s five-year survival rate is under 10 percent.

Housewives are the largest category of secondary exposure victims. Before 1980, when asbestos was heavily used, housewives usually took primary responsibility for laundry and other such household activities. Therefore, if workers unintentionally carried fibers home on their clothes, these victims often inhaled these fibers.

Kinds of Evidence

A medical diagnosis, a probable asbestos exposure window, and a lack of care are usually the three best pieces of evidence in an asbestos exposure claim.

Well-meaning general practitioners or general oncologists can accurately diagnose mesothelioma, at least in most cases. However, in court, there’s a difference between accuracy and reliability. A broken clock is accurate twice a day.

A medical diagnosis from a Board Certified environmental oncologist, or other such professional, is much more reliable. These doctors know how to locate mesothelioma tumors. They also know the treatment options these victims have, usually according to the stage of mesothelioma.

A strong mesothelioma claim or asbestos lawsuit requires Input from a medical professional.

Based on the stage of the disease, a Board Certified environmental oncologist can also pinpoint a probable asbestos exposure window. Then, proving exposure is simply a matter of matching the victim’s employment background with the probable exposure window,

Usually, lawyers ask victims to generate their own employment profiles. This approach helps ensure accuracy and also helps victims feel invested in their own mesothelioma cases.

A lack of care at the asbestos-using facility is usually the third bit of evidence in primary and secondary exposure cases. Usually, to establish the standard of care, an asbestos exposure lawyer partners with an industrial hygienist or other such expert. This individual testifies that the practices at that facility fell below the standard of care.

Frequently, evidence is most useful in the compensation portion of a primary exposure claim. Workers’ compensation and VA disability claims are no-fault matters. Subject to the defenses below, an asbestos exposure lawyer must only prove the exposure was work or service-related. 

Additional evidence on this point could include statements from co-workers who detail the victim’s daily duties and other tidbits that might not appear in a service record or other such document.

The same principles apply to bankruptcy victim compensation fund claims. A company that’s no longer in business usually cannot defend itself in court. It voluntarily surrendered that right when it declared bankruptcy.

However, evidence is critical on the issue of compensation. Fund Administrators usually take hardline negotiating positions. Without sufficient evidence that details the victim’s illness, maximum compensation is unavailable in these claims.

Secondary exposure victims, and some primary exposure victims as well, can file civil claims, at least in most states. In these claims, victims have the burden of proof to establish liability (responsibility for injury) and damages (amount of compensation).

Additionally, a full range of defenses, such as a lack of evidence and the bare-metal defense, are available in many asbestos exposure claims.

Without hard evidence, the connection between an asbestos provider and a victim’s illness is little more than speculation. Speculative evidence doesn’t hold up in court. The bare metal defense, which is available in some states, basically states that a company isn’t responsible for asbestos exposure damages if it didn’t know its products and/or facilities contained this substance. The aforementioned evidence regarding a lack of care usually refutes this defense.