Articles Posted in Uncategorized

An asbestos cancer lawsuit brought by a 73-year-old former Duke Energy technician recently went to trial in Spartanburg, South Carolina. In this case, the mesothelioma plaintiff alleges that the defendants, several energy equipment manufacturers, utilized asbestos-tainted products that caused the plaintiff’s cancer. The plaintiff alleges that although his employer, Duke Energy, took proactive steps to mitigate the risk of mesothelioma and other serious diseases, the defendants, Fisher Controls International LLC and Crosby Controls International LLC, supplied asbestos-tainted gaskets for pipe valves.

According to the lawsuit, the plaintiff began working for Duke Energy in 1979 as a pipefitter in its various nuclear facilities in South Carolina before retiring as an ultrasonic quality control inspector in 2003. The plaintiff claims he suffered from asbestos exposure during final inspections of gaskets and pipe valves. The plaintiff’s start date at the facility is of particular importance in the trial, as asbestos has been heavily regulated and designated a known carcinogen since the mid-1970s.

As is often the case in asbestos cancer lawsuits, the defendants claim that although the plaintiff’s mesothelioma was most likely caused by asbestos exposure, the dangerously designed and manufactured products were not the cause of the disease. The counterclaims are an all too common example of the lengths many powerful asbestos manufacturers often go to avoid taking responsibility for producing such dangerous products, knowing all the while doing so put innocent people at risk.

A retail chain popular with teenaged girls recently pulled one of its makeup products off the shelves over reports the cosmetic contained dangerous amounts of asbestos, a carcinogenic mineral known to cause the deadly lung cancer mesothelioma. While the company denied its Just Shine Shimmer Powder contained asbestos, Justice Stores none the less pulled the product out of what it characterized as an abundance of caution towards its customers.

The sudden move came after a local ABC media outlet in Durham, North Carolina sent several samples of Just Shine powder for analysis to Scientific Analytical Institute in Greensboro to determine if there were any ingredients not listed on the label. According to the report, the Director of Research and Analytical Services deemed the results to be shocking after discovering the potentially deadly substance in a child’s cosmetic product.

In addition to asbestos, the analysis contained Barium, Chromium, Lead, and Selenium. Speaking about the asbestos-laced makeup in an interview with ABC11, the Director of Research and Analytical Services told reporters “I would treat it like a deadly poison, because it is.” He went on to note “In this powder designed for children, they could die an untimely death in their thirties or forties because of the exposure to asbestos in this product.”

A New York bankruptcy court finally put to rest an attempt by General Motors Corp. (GM) to recoup money paid to the widow of a former long time Ohio employee who contracted mesothelioma from various GM products over his 37-year career with the auto giant. In addition to filing claims against the victim’s widow, GM attempted to recover funds paid out to the victim’s estate by several asbestos bankruptcy trusts connected to the asbestos contaminated products that allegedly played a role in the deceased auto worker’s condition.

GM filed its lawsuit against the defendants in Henry County, Ohio, in August 2016 claiming, among other things, the auto giant made workers’ compensation payments to the sickened auto worker ranging from $2,000 to $4,000 before reaching a final disability settlement. GM argued the companies running the asbestos bankruptcy trusts owed the automaker a legal duty under Ohio law to inform any parties which may have claims to the settlements from the trusts.

GM eventually withdrew its Ohio complaint and filed claims in federal courts in Delaware, Pennsylvania, and New York but was met with stiff defence from attorneys representing those trusts. Attorneys for those entities cited a “channeling injunction” that bars claimants and bankruptcy trusts from continuing litigation related to asbestos claims. Specifically, The injunction bars “any actions against the trust for the purpose of directly or indirectly collecting, recovering, or receiving payments or recovery with respect to any asbestos-related claims, including, but not limited to, claims for subrogation.”

Mesothelioma is a rare and very aggressive form of cancer, often affecting the thin lining of tissues surrounding the lungs and abdomen, and although there is no definitive cure for the disease, medical advancements have helped many live longer, more comfortable lives. Traditional mesothelioma treatments include standard oncology practices of surgery, chemotherapy, and radiation, but in recent years there have been numerous other advancements, including immunotherapy.

Immunotherapy helps mesothelioma patients by boosting the individual’s immunal response to the disease and is used in concert with various other treatments. While immunotherapy drugs cannot defeat the disease on its own, the hope is that a multi-pronged approach can help alleviate symptoms and give patients longer survival time.

How does Immunotherapy Work?

Asbestos is a naturally occurring mineral once commonly used in many industrial, commercial, and military applications for its heat-resistant properties. Sadly, the substance is also causally related to developing mesothelioma, a rare and deadly form of cancer that typically affects the thin lining of tissue surrounding the lungs and abdomen.

Despite what many asbestos-industry advocates purported throughout the years, there is no safe or acceptable level of asbestos exposure, nor is there any type of asbestos less prone to causing mesothelioma. Although some health organizations deem certain types of asbestos more toxic than others, they all pose serious health risks and are heavily regulated, if not banned outright.

Depending on the application and country of origin, manufacturers have used different types of asbestos to create their products. There are six different types of asbestos, which include chrysotile, amosite, crocidolite, tremolite, anthophyllite, and actinolite.

A U.S. District Court judge recently sentenced a Cleveland businessman to almost five years in jail and imposed a $7.8 million fine for the defendant’s failure to properly abate his property of asbestos before demolishment. The defendant, a 53-year-old ohio man, will spend 57 months in prison for violating the Clean Air Act and several counts of fraud committed against a Louisiana company by submitting false invoices.

According to reports, the defendant owned and operated several waste disposal companies throughout the city of Cleveland and the state of Ohio including Reach Out Disposal, All Points Rubbish Disposal and Axelrod Rubbish Recycling. Prosecutors alleged the defendant leased the National Acme plant in 2011 and subsequently purchased the property in 2012 with the intent to demolish the building and parcel out the scrap metal for sale.

The defendant failed to obtain a permit to demolish the factory but went ahead with the project anyways, creating an open air dump in a residential area with a school nearby. The rubble dumped at the waste site contained asbestos fibers and contaminated the air, a serious violation of The Clean Air Act that put local residents at risk for potentially deadly health conditions like mesothelioma.

A study conducted by the University of Alabama at Birmingham and recently published in medical journal Lung Cancer suggests adding zoledronic acid to treatment regimens may help mesothelioma cancer victims combat the rare and deadly lung cancer. The drug is in a class of bisphosphonates commonly used to treat osteoporosis and prevent skeletal fractures in cancer patients. Researchers believe the drug may be particularly useful for treating patients in the later stages of malignant mesothelioma.

According to the study, the drug reduced the buildup of fluid in the lungs, known as pleural effusions, and helped growth of new tumor blood vessels in animal trials. Zoledronic acid may help block cell signaling pathways essential for the growth of cancer cells. Although the drug may not be the knockout punch to kill mesothelioma tumors, the research suggests zoledronic acid, sold as Reclast or Zometa for bone disease, can help put the brakes on tumor growth.

Researchers evaluated a number of factors including the patients’ levels of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) and biomarkers mesothelin and osteopontin. Clinicians used positron emission tomography (PET) imaging to track the patient’s’ response to the drug. Patients who failed to respond to treatment were found to have already higher levels of VEGF and osteopontin prior to treatment.

After almost 50 years in the same building at the Municipal Center in Princess Anne, Virginia, the city of Virginia Beach is finally prepared to move its seat of government to a new City Hall, one that is free of asbestos. In fact, city employees were finally able to convince the powers that be that the time was right to make the move by highlighting the dangers the asbestos-laden insulation and floor tiles could pose to municipal workers doing the city’s business.

The City of Virginia Beach Facilities Engineer recently released a short video detailing some of the issues plaguing the half-century old structure including central heating, the electrical grid, plumbing, insulation, and how they all are hampered by asbestos-related concerns. While the asbestos in the building does not pose a threat to workers in the material’s current form, even modest repairs or alterations to some of the building’s core systems could result in a serious environmental hazard.

Were the city to attempt any repairs, the entirely building would likely need to be evacuated to ensure innocent people did not come in contact with cancer-causing asbestos. Unfortunately, there have been far too many stories of public and private sector workers developing serious health problems, particularly mesothelioma, from inhaling asbestos and other carcinogenic debris while working in buildings undergoing renovations.

A recent report by KXAN revealed that as many as 120 workers for the city of Austin, Texas were likely exposed to asbestos during renovations to offices at the Austin-Bergstrom International Airport’s Maintenance Complex Building. As a result, eight construction workers directly involved with the renovations where the asbestos was reported will receive lifetime medical monitoring to ensure any adverse health events are diagnosed and treated immediately.

According to the news outlet’s investigation, preliminary surveys of the work area showed no asbestos contaminated building materials, but some workers raised concerns to supervisors early on into the renovations. Unfortunately, these concerns were dismissed by management, citing the aforementioned survey that failed to show any trace of asbestos in the building.

Sources quoted in the article claim that workers discovered carcinogenic black mastic adhesive underneath carpet and tile and demanded the work be stopped and the area cordoned off to prevent any asbestos from contaminating the facility. However, the work continued as scheduled during February and June 2016. Black mastic is a type of adhesive once commonly used to bind tiles to the floor.

New York City’s asbestos courts recently issued new orders expanding the rights of mesothelioma cancer victims to seek enhanced damages from defendants for the harm caused by dangerously designed and manufactured products. The order is a reversal of a previous New York City Asbestos Litigation (NYCAL) declaration that deferred claims for punitive damages indefinitely and deprived mesothelioma victims the opportunity to hold wrongdoers accountable for their indifference to public safety.

Until this order, claims asking for punitive damages were relegated to the court’s Deferred Docket system under the guise of promoting pretrial settlements to avoid monopolizing the court’s limited resources. Unfortunately, these types of administrative actions can hamper the rights of plaintiffs to fully recover all possible forms of damages. The order had effectively put a stay on claims for punitive damages, until such a time as the court saw fit to reverse the directive.

Currently, asbestos cancer plaintiffs with punitive damages claims in the Deferred Docket system may file an amended complaint within 30-days to either the court’s Accelerated or Active dockets and allow their case to move forward in its entirety. Furthermore, filed complaints not currently seeking punitive damages may be amended to include prayers for such relief, so long as the plaintiffs can show just cause for doing so.