Mesothelioma Lawsuits lawyers attorney referral service law firm lawsuit

Asbestos and Mesothelioma lawsuits against negligence of Asbestos Manufacturers Every year, thousands of people die or become ill due to the negligence of asbestos manufacturers. If this has happened to you or a loved one, you should contact a mesothelioma lawyer as soon as possible. You may have been powerless to prevent current medical problems, but you do have legal options. Hiring a lawyer with extensive experience and knowledge of asbestos claims can help you receive compensation from those responsible. Mesothelioma, which is almost exclusively caused by asbestos exposure, and other asbestos-related illnesses are attributed to negligence because asbestos companies knew about the associated health risks and decided not to tell employees or leak this information to the general public. As early as the 1920s asbestos companies were completely aware that their product not only caused harm to human health, but that it held the potential to claim the lives of those exposed to the substance. We have helped many families get experienced legal and medical help for their mesothelioma cancer and asbestos cancer cases. We will actually walk you though the process of contacting an experienced mesothelioma lawyer that we have worked with to get you the best possible settlement for your mesothelioma claim. We connect you with experienced Asbestos, Mesothelioma lawyers who have successfully tried cases in your state. Mesothelioma Help Canter is a FREE consumer service. Our goal is to help legal consumers get in touch legal professionals and to keep the public aware of new discoveries in treatments for Mesothelioma. Mesothelioma has received much publicity in recent years, due to the high number of lawsuits against companies involved with the use asbestos. Virtually all documented cases of mesothelioma stem from inhaling large amounts of asbestos material, and due to the prevalence of asbestos in many different applications, total compensation numbers have been staggering. So extensive were the number of lawsuits, the U.S. government has limited the amount of compensation one can receive, and also the conditions under which one can file a lawsuit.   Before the U.S. government passed The Fairness in Asbestos Compensation Act in 1999, one did not need to develop any signs of mesothelioma to begin litigation. One only needed to have worked in an environment where asbestos exposure occurred. Over 200,000 cases in the Federal Courts during that year alone prompted the government action. As a result, there must be a diagnosis of mesothelioma in order to file for compensation, and punitive damages are no longer awarded. While it may seem that The Fairness in Asbestos Compensation Act was a blow to the rights of workers exposed to asbestos, in reality, it proved to be a positive for those legitimately filing to obtain compensation for mesothelioma. Because so many people were filing lawsuits where they had not actually developed mesothelioma (and therefore did not require compensation), insurance companies began to file for bankruptcy. This left those who had legitimate claims to compensation for mesothelioma without the necessary resources to fund their treatment. The reasons why mesothelioma litigation can be difficult are twofold. First, the symptoms of this particular cancer are very non-specific, and therefore many times to not prompt those afflicted to seek medical attention as soon as they should. It can take decades to develop after the initial exposure to asbestos, but after the onset of the disease, the patient's condition can deteriorate rapidly. Second, in most states, there is a specific deadline by which you must initiate litigation involving compensation for mesothelioma that begins on the day of diagnosis. Another aspect of mesothelioma compensation is often more difficult to face. When a relative of someone diagnosed with mesothelioma dies as a result of the cancer, a wrongful death lawsuit may be filed. Generally, the primary action that an attorney will perform to prove wrongful death will be interviewing fellow employees of the deceased, as well as supervisors and other people affiliated with the company that exposed him/her to asbestos. Actual figures can vary wildly, depending on factors such as length and severity of exposure to asbestos, the stage of the mesothelioma, applicable state laws, and of course the goals of the person filing the lawsuit. Generally speaking, however, compensation for mesothelioma ranges between one and three million dollars, minus a contingency fee for the attorney. This fee can, of course, vary also, but usually falls between 30% and 40% of the total compensation. Source: www.EzineArticles.com We are proud of these recent signficant mesothelioma verdicts of our lawyers JANICE YANCEY AND JOLENE MUDGETT VS. PLANT INSULATION COMPANY You can't request more than 20 challenges without solving them. Your previous challenges were flushed. San Francisco Jury Awards $9,057,775 for Wrongful Death On November 19, 2008, a San Francisco jury awarded a total of $9,057,775 to the widow, sons and daughter of two pipefitters who died of an asbestos cancer. The jury rendered their verdict against Plant Insulation Company, formerly known as Plant Asbestos Company. Jolene Mudgett, the daughter of Joseph Sandra, was awarded $1,250,000 for the death of her father, who succumbed to mesothelioma, a cancer of the lining of the lungs whose only established caused is that of inhaled exposure to asbestos fibers. Mr. Sandra was 87 years old at the time of his death. Mr. Sandra is survived by his daughter, Jolene Mudgett, his son, John Sandra, and his wife, Molly Sandra. Plant Insulation Company was the Northern California exclusive supplier of asbestos-containing pipecover, block and asbestos cement products, made by Fiberboard Corporation, known as "Pabco." Plant Insulation Company was a major industrial insulating contractor that exposed Mr. Sandra at a number of bay area oil refineries from 1955 to 1975. The jury found that Plant Insulation company was found liable for failing to warn Mr. Sandra about the unsafe insulation products he was exposed to. Plant Insulation company was found to be 18% at fault, with other manufacturers, distributors and suppliers of asbestos products, who were not present at the trial, found to be 82% at fault in causing Mr. Sandra's mesothelioma. Co-worker and eye-witness James Szuch testified for the Plaintiffs. Franklin Yancey died of mesothelioma at the age of 68 at the University of Texas, M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, in Houston, Texas. He was survived by his wife of 25 years, Janice Yancey, and two adult sons, Jeff Yancey and Monte Yancey. The jury awarded $7,807,775 in damages. Mr. Yancey worked at San Francisco oil refineries in the bay area in the 1960s, and his two adult sons followed in the footsteps of their father. Mr. Yancey's co-worker and eye-witness, Vern Gosney, testified for the Yancey family. Plant Insulation company was found to be 10% at fault, with other manufacturers, distributors and suppliers of asbestos products, who were not present at the trial, found to be 90% at fault in causing Mr. Sandra's mesothelioma. Plaintiff's expert witnesses included Charles Ay, a career insulator and pipefitter, Dr. Barry Horn, a pulmonologist from Berkeley, California; Dr. Richard Cohen, a physician who testified regarding the state-of-the-art, from Saratoga, California; Dr. Brian Dolan, a Southern California internist; John Templin, an industrial hygienist and materials analyst from Long Beach, California; Dr. Allan Smith, an epidemiologist from Berkeley, California, and Dr. Barry Ben-Zion, an economist from Santa Rosa, California. Hearn, Harris, Wetch Verdict vs. Plant Insulation Company   San Francisco Jury Awards $4.3M to Families of Three Bay Area Pipefitters for Asbestos-Related Cancer Deaths January 5, 2009 Following a month-long trial, a San Francisco jury awarded a total of $4,327,598.75 to the surviving widows and children of three industrial plumbers who died of asbestos-caused lung cancer. The jury also included an award for punitive damages in their verdict against defendant Plant Insulation Company, formerly a major Northern California industrial insulation contractor. The jury of eight women and four men deliberated for two days before announcing their verdict. They awarded $2,122,860.69 for the death of James M. Harris, who succumbed to lung cancer caused by his exposure to asbestos during his career as a pipefitter working in San Francisco Bay Area oil refineries. Mr. Harris was 81 years old at the time of his death, and was survived by his widow, Grace L. Harris, of Elverta, California, and their children Rodger A. Harris, Susan B. Smith, James R. Harris and Guy O. Harris. Plant Insulation Company was the exclusive Northern California supplier of asbestos-containing pipe insulation products known as "Pabco" and provided insulation contractor services at a wide variety of industrial sites. The jury found that Plant Insulation Company was liable for exposing Mr. Harris to asbestos dust which caused him to develop lung cancer. Plant Insulation Company was found to be 79% at fault, while other manufacturers, distributors and suppliers of asbestos products, who were not present at the trial, were found to be 21% at fault. The same jury awarded $1,277,000.00 in damages to the family of William C. Hearn of Concord, California. He is survived by his wife of 48 years, Anna May Hearn, and his son, Gilbert Hearn, of Antioch, California. Like Mr. Harris, Hearn died of lung cancer caused by exposure to asbestos at a variety of Bay Area industrial sites. He was 72 at the time of his death. The jury allocated 59% of the fault for Mr. Hearn's illness and death to defendant Plant Insulation Company. The jury awarded $858,738.06 in damages to the family of George P. Wetch of Sebastopol, California. He died at age 84, of lung cancer caused by exposure to asbestos. Mr. Wetch worked as a pipefitter at chemical plants and oil refineries in Contra Costa County for thirty years beginning in the late 1950s. Plant Insulation Company was found to be 69% at fault in causing the lung cancer that took Mr. Wetch's life. Mr. Wetch was survived by his wife Frances Wetch and his son Mark Wetch of Santa Rosa, California. The plaintiffs were represented by Wes Wagnon and Selby Lighthill, of the law firm of Paul & Hanley LLP, located in Berkeley, California. DWIGHT ODLE vs. GASKET HOLDINGS, INC.   July 17 2001, San Francisco Superior Court, Case number: 317966 Description of Case: Flexitallic Gaskets are 50-90% asbestos, but there is still debate over how much of the asbestos is released in normal use. Resolution: Over $1 million verdict against Flexitallic Gaskets. Economic damages: $224,645 for Mr. Dwight Odle Non-economic: $250,000 for Mr. Dwight Odle, $350,000 for Mrs. Pearl Odle. Gasket Holdings was found to be 1.75% responsible for the damages to Dwight and Pearl Odle. GEORGE SMITH vs. AP GREEN INDUSTRIES INC. ET AL   May 23, 2001, San Francisco Superior Court, Case number: 315105 Description of Case: George Smith worked as a pipefitter at the Mobil Oil refinery in Torrance, California in 1966. He was exposed to asbestos on the job and later developed lung cancer. The asbestos exposure came from the insulation products he used, and from asbestos dust raised by other employees, of which he had no warning. Resolution: $4.3 million verdict against Mobil Oil Corporation Economic damages: $2.5 million Non-economic damages: $319,000 Non-economic damages: to his wife, Hanna, $1.5 million for loss of consortium Mobil Oil was held to be 12.5% responsible for George's illness, for "failure to use reasonable care." CHRISTINE AND CHARLES PEREZ vs. AP GREEN INDUSTRIES INC. ET AL   Aug. 23, 2000, San Francisco Superior Court, Case number: 301375 Description of Case: Christine Perez was exposed to asbestos through her work as a pipe hanger and also as a homemaker. She worked at Moore Dry Dock in Oakland, California, during the war effort as a pipe hanger on ships, using Kaylo asbestos containing insulation products. Her husband, Charles, was a commercial plumber who came home from work each day with asbestos fibers clinging to his clothing, which Christine came into contact with while doing the family laundry. At the time, this was the highest jury verdict award for compensatory damages for an asbestos case in California. Resolution: $10.3 million verdict against Owens-Illinois, Inc. Economic damages: $350,000 to Christine Perez Non-economic damages: $7 million to Christine Perez, $3 million to Charles Perez. Owens-Illinois was held to be 19% responsible for the damages to Christine and Charles Pere BRAYTON PLAINTIFFS vs. METROPOLITAN LIFE   BRAYTON PLAINTIFFS vs. METROPOLITAN LIFE 1994 Description of Case: Successfully presented conspiracy case involving Met Life, Johns Manville, and others resulting in significant resolutions for hundreds of plaintiffs with asbestos-related diseases. Resolution: This was a confidential closed settlement. BRAYTON ASBESTOS PLAINTIFFS vs. OWENS-CORNING   BRAYTON ASBESTOS PLAINTIFFS vs. OWENS-CORNING 1992, Solano City Superior Court, California Description of Case: Asbestosis and other asbestos-related diseases. Resolution: Over $12 million for 32 plaintiffs suffering from asbestosis and other asbestos-related diseases. HAMILTON vs. ASBESTOS CORPORATION LTD.   HAMILTON vs. ASBESTOS CORPORATION LTD. 1995 Description of Case: This California Supreme Court decision significantly liberalized the statute of limitations in asbestos cases, and therefore was a very important case in te history of asbestos litigation allowing many more victims of asbestos exposure to sue for damages. JOHN BERNING vs. AP GREEN INDUSTRIES, INC.   JOHN BERNING vs. AP GREEN INDUSTRIES, INC. San Francisco Superior Court, Case number: 319733 Description of Case: John Berning was exposed to Bendix brake linings while repairing the brakes on his family's vehicles. Since this was the only exposure that could be proven, Allied Signal was found to be 100% responsible. Resolution: $1.2 million verdict against Allied Signal, the successor in interest of Bendix Corporation. Economic damages: $275,579 Non-economic damages: $850,000 Allied Signal was found to be 100% responsible for the damages to John Berning. DONALD ROSE vs. OWENS-CORNING   Description of Case: Donald Rose was exposed to asbestos in his work as a plumber and pipefitter. A number of years later he developed asbestosis. Resolution: $2.8 million verdict NEWMAN vs. LORILLARD, AND HOLLINGSWORTH & VOSE, INC.   Description of Case: Mr. Newman smoked a brand of cigarettes that had a filter that contained asbestos, and subsequently came down with an asbestos-related disease. Lorillard made Kent cigarettes. For four years in the 1950's, from1952-56, Kent cigarettes contained the "Kent Micronetic Filter", an asbestos containing filter made by Hollingsworth and Vose. This was a high profile case because it was only the second time a trial in the United States ended with a verdict against these tobacco companies for their asbestos containing filter. CHARLES PALLMORE vs. AEROJET and PITTSBURGH-CORNING   Description of Case: This case involved two lung cancer cases that the judge grouped together. Both of the plaintiffs were exposed to asbestos while working as pipefitters. Resolution: Paul Lysen vs. Pittsburgh-Corning and Combustion Engineering, $2.5 million. CHANDLER, VINUM, PAUL and SMITH vs. EXXON   Description of Case: This case grouped four plaintiffs together who had lung cancer. Emery Chandler, Alan Vinum, Albert Paul, and Darlan Smith had all been exposed to asbestos on the job as pipe fitters, while working in ships, commercial buildings, and industrial buildings. Resolution: $3.5-4 million. This is a high amount to be awarded for lung cancer. POLENSKY vs. KYOCERA INTERNATIONAL, INC.   May 31, 1996, California Appellate Court, 4th District, Case number: G014464 Description of Case: This case involved a worker exposed to Beryllium who came down with beryllium disease also known as chronic beryllium disease or CBD. This was the highest reported beryllium disease verdict ever. Resolution: $1.5 million McGINNIS vs. BAXTER HEALTHCARE   Description of Case: Baxter Healthcare was a maker of latex gloves. The plaintiff had a latex allergy and was exposed to latex gloves and other supplies on the job as a nurse. This is the highest reported verdict for latex allergy in the United States. Resolution: $1.5 million for a nurse with latex allergy. HENDERSON vs. ETERNIT INC.   Description of Case: Paul & Hanley's plaintiff Mr. Henderson was exposed to asbestos in his job as a salesman of cement asbestos board. Mr. Henderson later developed mesothelioma. This is the first verdict against Eternit in the United States. Resolution: $11.5 million.