Mesothelioma and Asbestos Lawsuits

Legal claims for injuries resulting from asbestos exposure have led to decades of contentious litigation and calls for Congressional action. Much of this litigation involves mesothelioma, a rare form of cancer usually caused by asbestos exposure. Some of the issues raised by the lawsuits have included the mechanics of class action, the threshold of injury sufficient to justify compensations, and the "government contractor defense."

Ortiz v. Fibreboard (1999)

· Fibreboard Corp., the defendant in thousands of asbestos lawsuits brought throughout the 1970s and 1980s, sought to resolve its liability in one stroke through the creation of a global agreement, which would involve the certification by a federal district court of mandatory classes, meaning settlements would be binding for people who had not participated in the litigation.

The certification was struck down by the U.S. Supreme Court, which has historically been suspicious of global settlements of mass torts.

Corporate Reorganization

· Much of the litigation concerning asbestos liabilities has taken place within bankruptcy courts, since corporations such as Johns Manville and USG have employed Chapter 11 protection to limit and renegotiate their liabilities.

USG in particular was a holding company whose subsidiaries included United States Gypsum, a maker of drywall and plaster. USG, established in 1985, declared bankruptcy in June 2001. It emerged from chapter 11 in June 2006 and made its final payment to the United States Gypsum Asbestos Personal Injury Settlement Trust six months later.

Oxford v. Foster Wheeler LLC (2009)

· Between 1963 and 1967, Calvin Oxford was exposed to asbestos while assigned to the USS Klondike, a Navy vessel that repaired other warships. Oxford's exposure occurred at various shipyards including the Long Beach Naval Shipyard in California.

In 2005, Oxford was diagnosed with mesotheliona, and he died that same year. His heirs brought an action against Foster Wheeler, a manufacturer of the boilers that were installed into Navy ships during World War II, and against several other defendants for negligence, product liability, and failure to warn.

A jury found that Foster Wheeler was not liable, because the U.S. government had approved precise specifications for the manufacturers of its boilers and Foster Wheeler had conformed to them. Oddly, though, the jury did find against Foster Wheeler in the negligence theory.

The defendant appealed the judgment entered against it. The state appellate court agreed with the defendant that the finding of negligence was inconsistent with the jury's other findings, so it reversed and remanded for a new trial.

Meshotelioma News Information

Pages

Jan 5, 2012