Asbestos exposure

Asbestos exposure is the single known cause of mesothelioma. Inhaled or ingested asbestos fibers may cause an inflammation of internal tissue and disrupt organ function which leads to the development of the disease. Asbestos products were used extensively throughout the 20th century in a wide variety of applications. Many of these products were responsible for Asbestos exposure sustained by both the individuals who manufactured the products as well as those who used them at commercial and industrial jobsites including shipyards, refineries, power plants, steel plants and more. Several asbestos companies continued to produce these products even after they were known to be hazardous and harmful to workers and their families. Those who have become sick because of exposure to these products may now be eligible for financial compensation if they were wrongfully exposed.

Asbestos was also used at many New York jobsites including Ground Zero and the former World Trade Center site. Common asbestos exposure sites in New York include the Brooklyn Navy Yard, Todd Shipyard, and the Con Edison power plant in New York City.

Asbestos exposure ,exposure asbestos ,Asbestos exposure ,Asbestos exposure ,Asbestos exposure ,Asbestos, exposure ,Asbestos exposure ,Asbestos,exposure Asbestos ,exposure, Asbestos exposure ,Asbestos, exposure, Asbestos exposure ,Asbestos,about exposure Asbestos, about exposure,about Asbestos exposure ,defiinitionAsbestos exposure ,Asbestos exposure

READ MORE - Asbestos exposure

Razed home's owner takes step to sue city

$1M NOTICE OF CLAIM: Columbia Street residence, called 'the cat house,' was torn down after fire Nov. 12

The man who owns a home on Columbia Street that was referred to as "the cat house" by neighbors has filed a notice of claim for $1 million against the city of Watertown for razing its remains after a fire last year.

A notice of claim is a precursor to filing a lawsuit against a municipality.

Oliver J. Wisner is seeking compensation for the "arbitrary, capricious and malicious charging and billing for outrageous unnecessary work on the cleanup of ashes and debris" the claim states.

The Watertown lawyer owns the property at 1205-07 Columbia St., which burned down Nov. 12, forcing neighbors to evacuate their homes during the early morning hours. The heat from the blaze damaged nearby homes, one of which is still uninhabitable.

The city requested that Mr. Wisner remove the remaining debris from the duplex immediately following the blaze. In late December, the city hired Independent Commercial Contractors Inc., Lorraine, for $28,600 to clean the site and remove asbestos. Mr. Wisner was then billed for the job.

Mr. Wisner bought the home June 21, despite the previous owner not allowing him to completely inspect it beforehand, the notice states.

Once the purchase was complete, Mr. Wisner hired cleaners to clear debris from the home.

"The cleaners discovered more than 10 bodies of long-dead cats in the building," the notice states. "The odor from the house and the Dumpsters brought numerous complaints from neighbors."

In June, the city Code Enforcement Office found that an upstairs bathtub in 1205 Columbia St. was filled with cat feces, and cat skeletons were found throughout the apartment.The property was condemned and the tenant, Michael J. Sias, was removed.

Mr. Sias, 58, now of 536 Emerson St., Apt. 103, is facing an animal-cruelty charge on allegations that between June 25 and July 3 he deprived seven cats of necessary sustenance in his former home, "permitting unjustifiable physical pain, suffering and death," according to a city police document. He was charged Tuesday and faces prosecution in City Court.

Some live cats were taken from the home by the SPCA, others were euthanized and six frozen bodies that were found in an operating freezer were sent to Cornell University, Ithaca, for a forensics examination.

Mr. Wisner claims that "it was a matter of public knowledge that persons in the city of Watertown, New York, had called for the burning of the duplex." Throughout the notice, he maintains that an arsonist started the fire and that police did not properly follow leads.

The cause of the fire was never determined and police never made an arrest.

"My position is that there was no emergency and the demolition charges were unlawful and unreasonable and should be reviewed by a court and disallowed as an unlawful taking of private property," the notice states.

Mr. Wisner is asking for $100,000 for the loss of the house and $900,000 for "harassment causing great mental stress and depression." He plans to retain an attorney, the notice states.

City Attorney Robert J. Slye said he did not want to comment about the notice when contacted Friday afternoon.

"We'll certainly wait to see what Mr. Wisner has to say and if he files a suit," he said.

Times staff writer David C. Shampine contributed to this report.

Source

READ MORE - Razed home's owner takes step to sue city

Anxiety over Amaca asbestos case

Elizabeth Gosch and Ean Higgins

October 24, 2007 05:58am

LAWYERS for asbestos victims fear the new board of the James Hardie subsidiary Amaca is using a WA case to attempt to limit the number of successful lawsuits.

Denis Walter John Moss and his wife, Patricia Margaret Hannell, won a case against Amaca Pty Ltd, the James Hardie asbestos-producing subsidiary, in December last year and were awarded $5million.

Mr Moss, who died in June, was exposed to asbestos in the mid-1980s and 1990 as a result of occasional work on asbestos cement products in and around his home. He was diagnosed with mesothelioma in November 2005.

Amaca appealed against the West Australian Supreme Court decision earlier this year to award damages. The Court of Appeal overturned the trial judge's decision, stating Amaca did not breach its duty of care by failing to advertise the dangers of asbestos in the mass media.

Today in Perth, Mrs Hannell is seeking special leave to appeal against that decision in the High Court.

For decades, the key tenet of asbestos disease litigation, particularly in New South Wales, has been the finding by the courts that James Hardie had actual knowledge of the dangers of asbestos as early as 1938 but did not do enough toprotect workers and warn customers.

Slater and Gordon asbestos litigation specialist Tanya Segelov said it was possible the new Amaca board - appointed by James Hardie and the NSW Government - was testing the water in Western Australia, and if successful, might take a harder line in other jurisdictions.

If Amaca won such cases, it could reduce the ability of thousands of future victims to obtain compensation.

SOURCE

READ MORE - Anxiety over Amaca asbestos case

Union Efforts Called Racketeering

A lawsuit filed by Smithfield Foods charges the UFCW with extortion and a smear campaign in the union's efforts to convince the meat processor to agree to voluntarily accept the union without an employee vote. The union says the company has a long history of worker intimidation.

By Joseph A. Slobodzian

It's been used against mobsters, corrupt labor unions and anti-abortion protesters.

Now Smithfield Foods Inc., the Virginia-based meat-processing giant, has joined companies turning to federal racketeering law to try to block a campaign geared to unionization of its employees.

Smithfield Foods' lawyers filed the civil racketeering lawsuit Oct. 17 in federal court in Richmond, Va., the latest development in Smithfield's 14-year fight to prevent the United Food and Commercial Workers from unionizing 4,650 hourly workers at its largest pork-processing plant in Tar Heel, N.C.

The lawsuit contends that the union has resorted to "smear tactics," including trying to undermine the company's stock price by leaking false statements to Wall Street stock analysts.

The lawsuit seeks damages of at least $5.9 million for business losses Smithfield Foods says can be traced to the union campaign, as well as an injunction barring the unions from continuing their activities.

The lawsuit -- Smithfield Food Inc. vs. United Food and Commercial Workers International Union -- has been assigned to U.S. District Judge Robert E. Payne.

UFCW officials issued a statement maintaining that Smithfield has a long history of worker intimidation and calling the lawsuit an attempt by Smithfield to avoid a union vote.

UFCW officials noted that the suit was filed two days after negotiators for the company walked out of talks that were close to setting a mutually agreed-upon process for holding a unionization election at the Tar Heel processing plant.

"It is truly shameful that Smithfield is willing to spend millions of dollars on high-priced lawyers and frivolous lawsuits rather than committing the resources needed to provide basic safety and health improvements for Tar Heel workers," the union statement read.

According to the lawsuit, union members have demonstrated at food stores carrying Smithfield Foods products and at public appearances of celebrity chef Paula Deen to urge her to break her contract with Smithfield. Deen's Food Network cable television program, Paula's Home Cooking, features Smithfield products.

The lawsuit contends that in September 2005, the UFCW's Local 400 "decided to abandon all efforts to convince Smithfield employees of the benefits of union membership in favor of a new plan aimed not at the employees, but at Smithfield itself."

The lawsuit says UFCW decided to "extort" Smithfield's recognition of Local 400 "regardless of the degree of actual employee support for such representation, by injuring Smithfield economically until Smithfield either agreed to [union] demands or was run out of business."

In addition to the UFCW international union, in Washington, and Local 400, the Smithfield lawsuit names three groups and seven individuals it describes as "co-conspirators" with the union.

While the use of the federal racketeering statute in a union-organizing dispute may seem unusual, other companies have turned to the racketeering law, says Lynn C. Outwater, a labor relations lawyer and managing partner of the Pittsburgh office of the law firm Jackson Lewis.

Outwater cited the March ruling by U.S. District Judge Brian M. Cogan, of the Eastern District of New York, allowing a civil-racketeering conspiracy case to proceed against the Laborers' International Union.

The lawsuit by the Asbestos & Lead Removal Corp. contended that Laborers Local 78 and business manager Edison Severino carried out a campaign of violence and extortion designed to force the company to agree to a collective-bargaining agreement with Local 78.

The stakes are high in the protracted unionization struggle between Smithfield and the UFCW. With annual sales of $12 billion, Smithfield Foods calls itself the largest producer of hogs and the "leading processor and marketer of fresh pork and processed meats in the United States."

The Tar Heel plant is the largest meat processing plant of its type, according to Smithfield Farms, and slaughters, processes and packages more than 32,000 hogs per day.

The UFCW, on the other hand, represents 1.4 million workers and Landover, Md.-based Local 400 claims 40,000 members.

Local 400 began trying to organize Smithfield's Tar Heel workers in 1994, two years after the sprawling processing plant opened.

SOURCE

READ MORE - Union Efforts Called Racketeering

Asbestos Exposure only Known Link to Pleural Mesothelioma

Los Angeles, CA: Even though asbestos has been a dirty word for decades, and its use and prevalence has dramatically declined, the toxic substance is still making its presence felt, and is still at the root cause of serious health problems including pleural mesothelioma. In many cases it is claiming lives.

Walter Kot of Illinois is just the latest worker to file a lawsuit against a host of corporations he claims were negligent in their responsibility to inform workers about the presence of asbestos and ways in which, through hygiene and other practises, to mitigate its spread and prevalence.

Kot is upset that on numerous occasions he transported, unknowingly, asbestos fibres home.
Kot toiled as a labourer, sheet-metal worker, shipper, forester and firefighter at the behest of a number of companies from 1940 through 1980. This past July he was diagnosed with mesothelioma, and is litigating a total of 49 corporations for damages and compensation, which will ultimately help cover his medical bills.

In his lawsuit, filed last week in Madison County, Kot claims that the defendants should have known about the hazards of asbestos, and should have been more diligent in protecting its employees from needless exposure.

The suit also alleges that the various defendants could have used asbestos substitutes in their products, but did not.

It has also been alleged that some, or all of the defendants - which were not named publicly - may have destroyed documents and certain evidence, which would have proven Kot's claims.

As a result Kot is seeking at least $550,000 in compensatory damages for pain and suffering, and lost wages. He is also seeking punitive damages representing an undisclosed sum.

Meanwhile, a navy sailor last week was awarded $35.1 million in compensatory damages for exposure to asbestos while serving more than fifty years ago.

John R. 'Jack' Davis was diagnosed, like Kot, with pleural mesothelioma - a disease linked to asbestos exposure. In his suit, Davis claimed that he was exposed to asbestos-covered pipes and vales during his tour of duty in the U.S. Navy, as well as his private-sector career.

The Navy, along with a number of un-named defendants, will have to pool in order to pay the lion's share of the award, 85.8 per cent. The remaining 14.2 per cent of the award is the responsibility of Leslie Controls of Florida, and Warren Pumps of Massachusetts, which will each pay 7.1 per cent. The latter two companies were identified as having supplied asbestos-based material to the Navy.

The verdict, delivered by a jury in Los Angeles Superior Court after a five-week trial, came after deliberations of less than a day, and breaks down to $100,000 for economic damages, $25 million for Mr. Davis' pain and suffering, and a further $10 million for his wife.

Pleural mesothelioma is a deadly cancer that is linked exclusively to the inhalation of asbestos particles in the air. Various countries have implemented an outright ban of asbestos use, something the United States tried but failed, after the ban was overturned in the courts. As a result, there are still products which contain asbestos, such as brake linings.

The incubation period is a long one: the lag time between asbestos exposure and the onset of pleural mesothelioma can be anywhere from 20 to 50 years.

Little wonder that Mr. Kot and Mr. Davis, identified above, litigated so long after exposure. Both men were diagnosed in 2007, decades after the fact.

It is a reasonable expectation there will be many more to come.

SOURCE

READ MORE - Asbestos Exposure only Known Link to Pleural Mesothelioma