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

Vermont Mesothelioma Lawyer Shepard helping Mesothelioma Victims in Rhode Island, Boston, New York, New Hampshire

The Mesothelioma Lawyer expresses his concern over the student’s health risks as asbestos that was used in these old school buildings as the primary insulation and fireproofing construction material is now projecting from the school building sites due to poor maintenance. It is contaminating the schools environment posing students, teachers and the staff to mesothelioma cancer and asbestos related respiratory diseases.

The school going students and the staff working in these schools are exposed to the risk of asbestos related respirator diseases thus laying the foundation for mesothelioma. This fact is also reviled by the Mesothelioma and Asbestos Awareness Centers report. The school buildings in New York have now grown old and need maintenance. Due to lack of maintenance in the old building the asbestos which had been used in construction is now exposed. It is polluting the environment endangering the lives of students, teachers and staff exposing them to the risk of contracting asbestos related respiratory diseases and mesothelioma cancer.

During an emergency inspection in NY schools which was carried as a NY City School was blamed for an incident of asbestos exposure. It was reveled during the inspection that 80% of the building built prior to 1980 used asbestos as insulation and fire proof material during the construction phase. Now due to the poor maintenance the risk of exposure of asbestos has increased manifolds posing risk of health to all the occupants of the school buildings. The report by the Mesothelioma and Asbestos Awareness Centers Report also state that in 2004 one Brooklyn School was forced to open late as they had to ensure the safety of the school building, staff and the students.

Even a small amount of asbestos exposure contaminates the environment, increases the possibility of inhalation of asbestos particles thus marking a start of respiratory disorders leading to mesothelioma cancer.

Mesothelioma lawyer Shepard studies all such cases, takes the path of law to bring relief to the injured who had not known about the risks of being exposed to asbestos. At present Shepard Law Firm is assisting Mesothelioma victims in:

• Boston
• New Hampshire
• Vermont
• Rhode Island

However, due to large network Shepard Law firm enjoys, cases from other areas such as Dallas, New York, Houston and other areas where school buildings are getting old and may be of concern resulting in asbestos exposure can contact: The Shepard Law Firm at http://www.shepardlawfirm.com

To learn more about Mesothelioma / Asbestos Risks visit Mesothelioma Cancer Resource
for free informaation

Source

READ MORE - Vermont Mesothelioma Lawyer Shepard helping Mesothelioma Victims in Rhode Island, Boston, New York, New Hampshire

Alfacell Deals U.S. Rights for Onconase to Strativa

Alfacell Corp. licensed U.S. commercialization rights for the Phase III cancer drug Onconase (ranpirnase) to Strativa Pharmaceuticals in a deal worth up to $225 million.

Just $5 million will change hands up front, but both Alfacell and Strativa stand to gain much more if their gamble in choosing each other as partners pays off. Specifically, Alfacell could get $30 million for FDA approval of Onconase in unresectable malignant mesothelioma (UMM) and up to $190 million for milestones tied to Onconase sales as well as development and commercialization of the drug in additional indications. Alfacell also would receive double-digit royalties and retains a co-promotion option.

For Alfacell, the gamble lies in choosing Strativa, the recently-launched specialty pharmaceutical division of Par Pharmaceutical Cos. Inc. So far, Strativa markets just one product: Megace ES for anorexia, cachexia and unexplained weight loss in HIV patients. Although the company has deals in place for three additional late-stage products, all three are for HIV or cancer supportive care, and Onconase would be Strativa's first true oncology therapeutic.

Lawrence Kenyon, executive vice president and chief financial officer for Alfacell, told BioWorld Today that Onconase has been the subject of "bids from multiple companies for a number of years." Strativa was selected because it had the hunger of a start-up looking to build an oncology business focused on niche products, combined with the resources and infrastructure of Par Pharmaceuticals, he said.

For Strativa, the gamble lies in Onconase's somewhat checkered development history. The drug, a natural ribonuclease isolated from frog eggs, failed a Phase III trial in pancreatic cancer and its first Phase III trial in UMM.

In the pancreatic cancer trial, a preliminary analysis showed that Onconase plus tamoxifen failed to improve survival compared to 5-fluorouracil. Kenyon said part of the problem was an inability to recruit sufficiently healthy patients into the trial, and the pancreatic cancer program subsequently was discontinued. (See BioWorld Today, July 16, 1998.)

The first Phase III UMM trial compared Onconase as a monotherapy to doxorubicin. Again, there was no survival difference in the overall population, but Kenyon said a retrospective analysis showed that the sickest patients had been disproportionately weighted to the Onconase group. Backing them out of the analysis resulted in a two-month survival difference.

Onconase is now being studied in a Phase IIIb trial designed to confirm the positive data seen in the Phase III subset analysis. The trial, which was designed in coordination with the FDA, compares Onconase plus doxorubicin to doxorubicin alone in the less-severe groups of UMM patients. Enrollment of 428 patients is complete, and Kenyon said the company is "very close" to obtaining the number of clinical events needed to analyze the data.

Under the deal with Strativa, Alfacell will continue to fund development, manufacturing and regulatory work with Onconase, including the ongoing Phase IIIb trial. Strativa will fund U.S. commercialization.

Previous deals with US Pharmacia affiliate USP Pharma Spolka Z.O.O. and Genesis Pharma SA cover Onconase commercialization in Eastern Europe and certain Southeast European countries, respectively.

As of Oct. 31, Alfacell reported $5.4 million in cash and equivalents, most of which was earmarked to support the Onconase trial and new drug application filing. Once the filing is submitted, Alfacell intends to work with Strativa on additional indications for Onconase, including the possibility of moving a non-small-cell lung cancer program into Phase II.

Kenyon said the money from Strativa also will allow Alfacell to "ramp up" its preclinical work on AC 03-636 for glioma and antiviral indications, AC CJ-001 for glioma, and AC CJ-002 for non-Hodgkin's lymphoma.

Shares of Somerset, N.J.-based Alfacell (NASDAQ:ACEL) rose 25 cents, or 14.3 percent, to close at $2 on Tuesday. Meanwhile, shares of Woodcliff Lake, N.J.-based Par Pharmaceuticals (NYSE:PRX) rose 52 cents to close at $21.49.

Source

READ MORE - Alfacell Deals U.S. Rights for Onconase to Strativa

Mesothelioma drug listed on PBS

SUFFERERS of the asbestos-linked disease mesothelioma will have access to cheap treatment from today, after a long campaign to secure federal government subsidy paid off.

The government says the chemotherapy agent Alimta - the only treatment available specifically for the killer cancer of the lung or stomach lining - will be listed on the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS) from today.

Health Minister Nicola Roxon said the listing of Alimta was an important announcement that followed the "tireless campaigning" of Bernie Banton, who died, aged 61, in November from the disease.

"Bernie was a great Australian hero and it is due to his efforts that many people will understand the significance of this decision," she said.

About 600 Australians are diagnosed annually with mesothelioma, but the long lag time between exposure to asbestos and the onset of symptoms means its prevalence is tipped to rise in the future.

Medical studies have estimated 18,000 people will have become victims of the disease by 2020.

Alimta, which can increase survival time and improve a sufferer's quality of life, has been out of reach for many patients at $20,000 or more for six treatments.

From today, sufferers will pay a maximum of $31.30 for each prescription. Eligible concession-patients will pay $5 for each prescription.

The subsidy will cost the government about $26 million annually and is expected to benefit about 300 people a year.

The listing of the drug became an election issue after Mr Banton criticised then health minister Tony Abbott for failing to personally receive a 17,000-signature petition brought to his Sydney electoral office in October.

Mr Abbott was forced into an embarrassing apology after questioning whether the dying campaigner's motives for speaking out were "pure of heart".

A week later, a government-appointed board recommended the drug be added to the PBS after three times rejecting its listing since 2004.

Mr Abbott bypassed the normal process of cabinet approval by immediately announcing the drug's listing.

Until now, only about half of Australians suffering mesothelioma were getting easy access to the palliative care drug through state government subsidy and workplace compensation schemes.

Source

READ MORE - Mesothelioma drug listed on PBS

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

Mesothelioma sufferer pioneers new hope

Leigh Carlisle, a 27-year-old cancer sufferer who is pioneering new treatment for a deadly asbestos-related form of the illness, mesothelioma, is beginning to beat the disease.

Leigh, who is believed to be the country’s youngest sufferer, has been taking part in clinical trials at Manchester’s Christie Hospital.

Leigh may have contracted the disease after she took a short-cut through a Failsworth factory yard, where asbestos was cut, when she was a schoolgirl.

She may also have breathed in the fibres from clothes of a relative who worked there.

Leigh was diagnosed with the condition, which affects her abdomen, in 2006.

Her treatment includes a drug which knocks out a tumour’s resistance so chemotherapy has a better chance of working.

To Leigh’s delight, doctors told her last week that her lungs and stomach are clear of cancer cells, her lymph nodes have returned to near-normal and the tumours in her abdomen have broken down significantly.

Leigh said: "I was overjoyed at being told there had finally been a breakthrough with my clinical trial for Mesothelioma. I have been scared and often faced doubted that treatment wouldn't prove effective, but my consultant and nursing team at 'The Christie' always provided optimism and great support. I know I have some way to go, but the news on my progress is fantastic and I'm looking forward to getting my energy back during my break from treatment now!"

Leigh's solicitor, Geraldine Coombs, said to Rochdale Online: "I am really pleased for Leigh that she has had such good news about her cancer treatment. The results of the trial sound very exciting. Mesothelioma does not usually respond well to treatment and the trial may give hope to others suffering with mesothelioma. 2,000 people every year in this country are diagnosed with mesothelioma.

"Leigh has been through a very hard time with this illness. Despite that she has been working hard to raise awareness about the dangers of asbestos and raising money for cancer charities which is a great credit to her and does not surprise me having got to know Leigh.

"Asbestos is not a problem that is ‘in the past.’ People are still coming into contact with asbestos today around the world. The campaign in Rochdale to push for the risks of environmental contamination by asbestos is very important."

Save Spodden Valley spokesman Jason Addy commented: "I met Leigh earlier this year. She is an incredible person with a positive outlook on life. To contract this illness at such a young age is a particularly cruel blow. I am sure many will join in our prayers and best wishes for her health.

"It is a stark reminder of how low levels of exposure to asbestos fibre may be so dangerous. That is why it is important that safe, open and accountable decisions are made about the former TBA site.

"Mesothelioma takes decades after exposure to asbestos before its symptoms are presented.

"The late Abdul Chowdry, T&N's former Health & Safety manager, suggested on Radio 4 that disturbing soil on the TBA site could 'unearth a monster'. That certainly was an emotive choice of language from the then serving UK Health and Safety Commissioner.

"As the Independent Atkins Report has acknowledged, there is huge potential for gross contamination of the site.

"We all owe a debt to future generations of Rochdalians to ensure that the Spodden Valley becomes a safe amenity for all.

"When you see Leigh and read about what she has faced this year, it really does bring it home to everyone in Rochdale how important it is to get things right in Spodden Valley."

SOURCE

READ MORE - Mesothelioma sufferer pioneers new hope

Firm Probed on Asbestos Claim Billing

NEW YORK (Associated Press) - The Justice Department plans to seek a wider investigation into the billing practices of L. Tersigni Consulting PC, a firm that advised asbestos-injury claimants in several big bankruptcy cases.

The U.S. Trustee's Office, an arm of the department, has already asked the courts overseeing the Chapter 11 cases of Congoleum Corp., Federal-Mogul Global Inc., W.R. Grace & Co. and G-I Holdings Inc. to appoint examiners to investigate allegations that the consulting firm overbilled its clients in those proceedings.

In new court papers, the trustee's office said L. Tersigni Consulting could also have overbilled clients in other cases. The office said it would seek similar investigations "in all asbestos cases in Pennsylvania, New Jersey and Delaware, in which LTC was employed as a financial adviser."

Representatives of L. Tersigni Consulting couldn't be reached for comment Tuesday afternoon.

The consulting firm's clients were the official committees representing asbestos claimants in major bankruptcy cases.

Since April 2006, the U.S. Trustee's Office and federal prosecutors have looked into allegations that the firm's sole owner and principal, Loreto Tersigni, submitted bills for services that weren't performed. Tersigni died in May.

"The appointment of an independent fiduciary to investigate these serious allegations of fraud and dishonesty related to the affairs of the debtors is both warranted and necessary," the trustee's office said in court papers. An examiner, it added, could help companies that paid the bills discover whether they have "causes of action" against L. Tersigni Consulting.

The trustee's office is still waiting to hear whether the courts overseeing the bankruptcy cases of Congoleum, Federal-Mogul, W.R. Grace and G-I Holdings will appoint examiners.

However, the judge overseeing W.R. Grace's bankruptcy case has questioned whether she should appoint an examiner.

At a hearing in late September, Judge Judith K. Fitzgerald of the U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Wilmington, Del., pointed out that the federal government had been conducting a probe into L. Tersigni Consulting's billing practices for more than a year. "I don't know why the estates have to be charged with additional money to do an investigation that may already be complete," Fitzgerald said. "There are creditors in these cases who deserve at some point in time to get whatever little money they're going to get out of these cases and to the extent that this work has already been done, they shouldn't be charged with duplicating that work."

The judge also said money could be saved by appointing one examiner to look at the books and records for all of the bankruptcy cases in which the firm is suspected of overbilling.

At the hearing, Fitzgerald also criticized the trustee's office for requesting an examiner only in recent months when it knew for more than a year that there could have been a billing problem involving L. Tersigni Consulting.

READ MORE - Firm Probed on Asbestos Claim Billing

Family raises £1,300 in memory of dad

The family of an Eastbourne man who died of cancer caused by asbestos exposure have raised more than £1,300 in his memory.

Bob Tolley, 67, of Wartling Road, died in September last year after contracting mesothelioma, an aggressive form of cancer.

His daughter Christine Dennis said, "We raised £1,373 for Mesothelioma Research after organising a charity event in aid of it on behalf of The British Lung Foundation, The Mick Knighton Mesothelioma Research Fund and The June Hancock Mesothelioma Research Fund."

The family held a charity auction, raffle and disco at Eastbourne United Football Club on September 29.

Mrs Dennis said, "My brothers and some of my dad's friends also played a charity golf match earlier in the day at Horam Park Golf Club on the same day.

"We had support from local businesses and retailers who kindly donated prizes for the auction and money donations for the research funds.

"The event was in memory of my dad Bob Tolley who sadly passed away last year from this terrible disease.

"We as a family wanted to do something to raise funds and awareness for the treatment and research into this disease caused by asbestos.

"We are still searching for witnesses who worked with my dad on a firm called Humphreys & Glasgow Ltd.

"We have the help of a solicitor from Manchester who specialises is asbestos cases.

"But at the end of the day it is not about the money, it is about making someone take responsibility for what happened to my dad, who was only just 67 when he died and still actively working for Hotchkiss Ltd, a local firm.

"There are more and more cases of mesothelioma in Eastbourne so it is not confined to large industrial towns, and because of the latency period of the disease, between five to 60 years, it is very hard to find information about companies sufferers previously worked for."

Asbestos was used in thousands of products and buildings all over the world.

But from the 1980s it was realised that the material had a damaging effect on health.

It was not until the mid 1980s that blue and brown asbestos were banned in the UK, and not until November 1999 that white asbestos was finally banned from use.

SOURCE

READ MORE - Family raises £1,300 in memory of dad

How is a Mesothelioma Diagnosis Determined?

If you've been exposed to asbestos and suspect that you may have asbestosis or mesothelioma, it's very important that you see a doctor who has experience dealing with asbestos related diseases as soon as possible. The doctor will determine a mesothelioma diagnosis by taking a full medical history and performing a series of diagnostic tests.

One of the reasons that mesothelioma is so deadly is that it is often not diagnosed until it has reached late stage malignancy. New tests and more sensitive instruments have made it possible to get a mesothelioma diagnosis earlier in the progress of the disease. As with most types of cancer, the earlier that it's caught, the more treatment options you'll have. The sooner you have a mesothelioma diagnosis, the sooner treatment can begin. Here's what you can expect if you see a doctor to pursue a mesothelioma diagnosis.

Medical History
The doctor or a nurse will take a complete medical history to determine the symptoms you're experiencing and discover any risk factors. The history will include questions about when and where you might have been exposed to asbestos in the past. Among the symptoms the doctor will be looking for are frequent, painful cough, difficulty breathing and a history of lung function problems like pneumonia, emphysema and bronchitis.

Physical Examination
The doctor will also do a physical examination to discover any symptoms of mesothelioma. The examination will include listening to your breathing and heartbeat, as well as feeling (palpating) your abdomen. Patients with mesothelioma often have fluid buildups, known as effusions, in the tissues and cavities around the heart, lungs or in the abdomen.

X-rays and Imaging Tests
The next step in making a mesothelioma diagnosis is usually a series of chest X-rays. The X-rays may show any thickening of the lung tissues, irregularities in and around the lungs and mineral deposits or calcifications on the lung or pleural tissues. X-rays will also show any fluid buildup around or in the lungs. Any of these can suggest a mesothelioma diagnosis.

The doctor may then order other imaging tests, specifically CT scans and MRI scans. Together, the CT and MRI can help doctors to locate any lesions or tumors, and determine the extent and stage of the cancer. The imaging tests will tell the doctors what they need to know to suggest a course of treatment or further diagnostic testing.

Tissue and Fluid Samples
Your doctor may also want to take samples of fluid from around your lungs, heart or abdomen to determine if there are cancerous cells in it. This is usually done by inserting a needle into your chest cavity and withdrawing a small amount of the fluid for testing. The doctor may also recommend doing this to relieve uncomfortable pressure on the lungs and make breathing easier.

If the X-rays or other images show abnormal areas, your doctor may also want to take a tissue sample to examine for cancerous cells. Getting a sample for biopsy used to invariably involve surgery, but newer methods and equipment make it possible to obtain tissue samples without actually opening your chest. Only your doctor can determine if these methods will be appropriate in your case.

A thoracoscopy is performed with the help of an instrument called a thoracoscope - a telescope like instrument connected to a video camera. The doctor will make a small incision in your chest and insert the thorascoscope through it into your chest cavity. The video camera will allow the doctor to view and examine the tumor without opening your entire chest. He or she can then use a small, specially designed forceps to collect tissue from the tumor for testing. Doctors may also use the occasion of a thoracoscopy to remove fluid surrounding the lungs or pericardium.

Two other methods use similar instruments to obtain tissue samples and view close-ups of tumors and tissue. In a bronchoscopy, the doctor will insert a flexible, lighted tube through your mouth and thread it down through your trachea into the bronchia to find any masses or growths that may indicate pleural mesothelioma. Mediastinoscopy uses a lighted tube that is inserted beneath the sternum and into the chest cavity to view the lymph nodes in that area and examine them for growths abnormal appearance. In both of those procedures, doctors can remove tissue samples for testing.

Surgery is the most invasive method used in determining a mesothelioma diagnosis, but is sometimes the only way to remove a larger sample of the tumor. In some cases, if the cancer is still localized enough, the doctors may remove the entire tumor.

SOURCE

READ MORE - How is a Mesothelioma Diagnosis Determined?

Asbestos disease victim goes to court

VICTIM of asbestos-related cancer has launched a high court legal battle against the government for compensation of up to £200,000.

David Parker (67) has developed malignant mesothelioma, a terminal cancer of the tissues surrounding his lungs, according to a high court writ.

It relates to his job as an executive officer at the Prestwich Unemployment Benefit Office in the Longfield, where he was exposed to deadly asbestos dust and fibres.

Now Mr Parker, of Prenton Way, Walshaw, Bury, is claiming damages from the secretary of state for work and pensions, whom he blames for his condition.

The writ says he developed mesothelioma after being exposed to asbestos when he worked as a civil servant for the secretary of state's predecessors, the Ministry of Labour, between 1967 and 2000.

The office was subdivided with asbestos partitions, which were in poor condition, and between 1978 and 1984 the office underwent major refurbishment, when the partitions were demolished and false ceilings fitted, it is alleged.

Mr Parker says conditions were dreadful, and that it was very dusty, and that asbestos was released into the air as the partitions were demolished. Elsewhere in the building there was asbestos, on the boiler and pipework, and he thinks it likely that this too produced asbestos dust, which he inhaled.

At the end of the refurbishment work, he was given a letter on June 12, 1984, confirming that asbestos had been found inside the office, the writ claims.

It says that he became breathless in June 2006, and then developed chest pain. His condition of malignant mesothelioma was diagnosed in February 2007, and he is undergoing chemotherapy but the writ claims the disease is expected to cut his life short by around 14 years.

Mr Parker accuses the secretary of state of negligence and breach of statutory duty and says this caused his illness. He says there was a failure to provide a safe place or system of work, failure to warn him of the dangers of asbestos, and failure to keep his workplace properly ventilated.

SOURCE

READ MORE - Asbestos disease victim goes to court

Heavy smoker' dies of cancer, benefactor sues for asbestos exposure

A plant operator for most of his life, Jack Jones sued and received a settlement for his asbestos-related disease. Now deceased, Jones' benefactor is suing for a "different malignant asbestos-related injury." Jones had an "extensive" cigarette smoking history.

Attorney Bryan Blevins of Provost Umphrey filed the lawsuit on behalf of Barbara Jones against the A.O. Smith Corp. and 41 other corporations, claiming the companies knowingly and maliciously manufactured and distributed asbestos-containing products throughout Jefferson County.

The suit was filed with the Jefferson County District Court on Oct. 2, 2007.

The plaintiff's original petition says the 42 defendants entangled in his lawsuit were negligent for failing to adequately test their asbestos-laced products before flooding the market with dangerous goods and warn the consumer of the dangers of asbestos exposure.

Some of the defendants listed in the suit include aerospace giant Lockheed Martin, Viacom and iron supplier Zurn Industries.

In addition, the petition faults Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Corp. (3M Corporation) and American Optical Corp. for producing defective masks that failed to "provide respiratory protection."

Although Jones sued and received a claim while he was alive, the suit says, "Plaintiff now seeks damages against defendants not released in the previous actions pursuant to Pustejovsky v. Rapid-American Corp."

"The court must apply a separate accrual rule in these cases because a single action rule would forbid a second suit and in doing so force the asbestos plaintiff to file premature litigation on speculative claims, which the court in Pustejovsky notes is neither efficient or desirable," the suit said.

Medical documents attached to the suit indicated Jones was "a heavy smoker." He died sometime between the years of 2005 and 2007.

Upon attorney Blevins' request, Dr. J.D. Briton of the Texas Occupational Medicine Institute reviewed Jones' medical history and wrote in the suit that, "It is my current medical opinion that within reasonable medical probability Mr. Jack Jones has pulmonary asbestosis and respiratory impairment."

According to the suit, "Decedent was engaged in the course of his employment as an Operator, and in other various roles and capacities where he was required to work with, and/or around asbestos and asbestos containing products and materials, which caused him to suffer from asbestos-related diseases and other industrial dust diseases caused by breathing the asbestos-containing products."

The plaintiff is suing for physical pain and suffering in the past and future, mental anguish in the past and future, lost wages, loss of earning capacity, disfigurement in the past and future, physical impairment in the past and future, and past and future medical expenses.

Judge Gary Sanderson, 60th District Court, has been assigned to the case.

SOURCE.

READ MORE - Heavy smoker' dies of cancer, benefactor sues for asbestos exposure

Heavy smoking, asbestos exposure 'synergistically' causes lung cancer, suit says

At the request of Provost Umphrey attorney Bryan Blevins, the Texas Occupational Medicine Institute reviewed Clothilde DeJean's medical records and concluded Dejean's "heavy smoking history" combined with asbestos exposure "synergistically" caused her cancer.

DeJean, 77, was allegedly exposed to asbestos while laundering her husband's clothing. She has already sued and received a claim for her asbestos injury, but is suing again for a "different malignant asbestos-related injury."

Acting on DeJean's behalf, Blevins filed suit with the Jefferson County District Court on Sept. 28 against the A.O. Smith Corp. and 43 other corporations, claiming the companies knowingly and maliciously manufactured and distributed asbestos-containing products throughout the county.

The plaintiff's original petition says the 44 defendants entangled in the lawsuit were negligent for failing to adequately test their asbestos-laced products before flooding the market with dangerous goods and warn the consumer of the dangers of asbestos exposure.

Some of the defendants listed in the suit include aerospace giant Lockheed Martin, Viacom and iron supplier Zurn Industries.

According to the medical documents attached to the suit, DeJean's husband was an operator at the Texaco refinery for many years. She was indirectly exposed to asbestos while laundering her husband's clothing and rags from 1945 to 1980.

The documents also note DeJean was exposed to asbestos while working as a custodian at a Mid County school, "which later underwent asbestos abatement."

DeJean, who suffered from diabetes, hyperlipidemia and heart disease, had a "heavy smoking history, the medical documents stated.

"Tobacco is a human carcinogen that significantly increases the risk of lung cancer," the suit said. "Asbestos is also a well-recognized human carcinogen, which acts synergistically with tobacco in increasing the risk for lung cancer. In this case, Ms. Dejean has radiographic evidence of asbestos exposure in the form of asbestos-related pleural disease and pulmonary asbestosis.

"Given the clinical diagnosis of asbestosis, it is my (Dr. Steven Haber) opinion that asbestos played a role in the cause of Ms. Dejean's lung cancer. Based upon the records I have reviewed, it is my opinion that asbestos acted in synergy with tobacco in causing this cancer. My opinions are to a reasonable degree of medical probability."

Although DeJean has sued and already received for her asbestos-related injury, the suit says, "Plaintiff now suffers from a different malignant asbestos-related injury… and seeks damages against defendants not released in the previous actions pursuant to Pustejovsky v. Rapid-American Corp."

"The court must apply a separate accrual rule in these cases because a single action rule would forbid a second suit and in doing so force the asbestos plaintiff to file premature litigation on speculative claims, which the court in Pustejovsky notes is neither efficient or desirable," the suit said.

In addition, the petition faults Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing Corp. (3M Corporation) and American Optical Corp. for producing defective masks that failed to "provide respiratory protection."

The plaintiff is suing for physical pain and suffering in the past and future, mental anguish in the past and future, lost wages, loss of earning capacity, disfigurement in the past and future, physical impairment in the past and future, and past and future medical expenses.

Judge Donald Floyd, 172nd Judicial District, has been assigned to the case.

SOURCE.

READ MORE - Heavy smoking, asbestos exposure 'synergistically' causes lung cancer, suit says

Asbestos Claim won by Air Guard mechanic's widow

A Windsor Locks woman whose husband died of respiratory failure in 2003 while suffering from asbestosis, apparently stemming from asbestos exposure during his 32-year career as an aircraft mechanic for the Connecticut Air National Guard, will receive workers compensation benefits.

The woman, Rita M. Fredette, won the right to the benefits through a state Supreme Court decision this month, following an extended legal tussle with the state that turned entirely on procedural issues.

Fredette is the widow of John O. Fredette, who died at age 65 on March 25, 2003. He worked as a civilian mechanic for the Air National Guard from July 1960 until he retired at the end of 1992.

The medical validity of the claim never was litigated before the state Workers Compensation Commission because the state claims administrator missed a 28-day deadline for contesting Rita Fredette's claim. As a result, a workers compensation commissioner granted a motion by her lawyer to preclude the state from contesting the compensability of her claim.

But the state fought back, arguing that the Workers Compensation Commission lacked jurisdiction over the case because Rita Fredette filed her claim too late.

The case turned on the interrelationship of two provisions in the state's workers compensation law setting different deadlines for filing claims. The issue was technical and legally complex, but the state Supreme Court ultimately ruled that Rita Fredette filed her claim on time because it came less than three years after her husband's diagnosis with asbestosis of the lung.

It isn't entirely clear whether Rita Fredette's workers compensation claim would have succeeded if the state claims administrator had met the deadline for contesting it.

The notice of workers compensation claim filed in May 2003 by Rita Fredette's former lawyer, Richard L. Gross, lists the nature of John Fredette's injury as follows: "Occupational disease/pulmonary asbestosis from exposure to asbestos as an aircraft mechanic and death caused by complications of occupational disease."

Different picture

But in a death certificate on file at the Windsor Locks town clerk's office, Dr. Martin Forrest of Hartford, who was John Fredette's internist, certified the cause of death as respiratory failure due to "pneumo thorax," which, in turn, was due to "bullous emphysema."

Pneumothorax - which John Fredette suffered in the last three days of his life, according to the death certificate - is a type of lung collapse caused by leakage of air into the space between the lungs and the chest wall.

Bullous emphysema - which the death certificate says he suffered for more than 20 years - involves complete destruction of lung tissue, producing an air space greater than a centimeter in diameter.

Smoking is the most common cause of emphysema. A Hartford Hospital discharge summary from the September 2000 admission during which John Fredette was diagnosed with asbestosis of the lung says he "quit tobacco use approximately 10 years ago."

Asbestosis is listed on the death certificate under the heading, "Other significant conditions: Conditions contributing to death but not related to cause."

Manchester lawyer Brian E. Prindle, an emeritus member of the Connecticut Bar Association's Workers Compensation Executive Committee who isn't involved in the Fredette case, said death certificates aren't the final word on the validity of a workers compensation claim.

"The legal test for workers compensation is if asbestos exposure is a substantial factor in causing his death," Prindle said. He said doctors aren't trying to make that legal determination when filling out death certificates.

John Fredette's death certificate shows that no autopsy was done on him, and Prindle said that is common.

"Death certificates typically might carry some evidentiary weight but not typically very much," said East Hartford lawyer Robert J. Enright, who heads the bar association's Workers Compensation Section. He said the determination of cause is typically based on medical records and the deposition testimony of doctors.

Matthew Shafner, a partner in the Groton law firm representing Rita Fredette, said the death certificate would "not really" have been a problem if she had had to prove her case.

Combined cause?

"They both combined to cause significant problems," Shafner said of the emphysema and asbestosis. "The last person in the world who should be exposed to asbestos is a person who has an emphysema problem. They don't have much margin of tolerance for another pulmonary insult."

Rita Fredette declined requests for an interview, citing the emotion surrounding her husband's death.

The amount of compensation she will receive hasn't yet been determined, according to Betty Rainey, the administrator of the Workers Compensation Commission's 8th District office in Middletown, which handles asbestos cases from throughout the state.

But Prindle said the calculation of workers compensation benefits is usually a straightforward process based on formulas - and often can be accomplished without a formal hearing. He said a dependent would be entitled to 75 percent of the employee's after-tax earnings - or the earnings of someone doing his former job - plus a $4,000 burial allowance.

John Fredette was diagnosed with asbestosis in September 2000, when he went to Hartford Hospital with chest pains after painting a snow blower and spreading fertilizer on his lawn, according to the hospital discharge summary, which is part of the court record.

He told medical personnel at that time that he had experienced difficult or painful breathing on exertion for several years, with the condition growing progressively worse.

John Fredette also reported a history "of significant asbestos exposure in the National Guard," and Forrest agreed that he had "extensive asbestos exposure and asbestosis," according to the discharge summary.

At the time of the hospital admission, John Fredette had an "intermittent nonproductive cough" and couldn't complete sentences without shortness of breath, the discharge summary says. He was sent home on oxygen therapy.

SOURCE.

READ MORE - Asbestos Claim won by Air Guard mechanic's widow

$3.4M asbestos verdict upheld

NEWPORT NEWS - The Virginia Supreme Court upheld a $3.4 million jury verdict to the family of a former Newport News shipyard worker who died in 2005 of mesothelioma, an asbestos-related cancer.

The court said Friday it unanimously rejected an appeal by John Crane Inc., the Illinois-based maker of gaskets and other asbestos parts that were handled by shipyard worker Garland F. "Buddy" Jones Jr. in the 1960s.

But the woman who spearheaded the case - Jones' wife of 41 years, Wanda T. Jones - won't see that money. She died of an unrelated cancer just three weeks ago. The couple's three children are the beneficiaries.

In July 2006, a Newport News jury determined that the family deserved $10.4 million in the wrongful death suit filed by Jones against three companies that made equipment with asbestos components.

Aside from John Crane, the defendants were Denver-based Johns Manville Corp., a maker of insulation industrial materials, and Garlock Sealing Technologies of Palmyra, N.Y.

A judge reduced the jury verdict to $10 million, the amount the family initially sought. John Crane, the jury said, was responsible for $3.4 million, with Johns Manville and Garlock Sealing each responsible for $3.3 million. However, Johns Manville and Garlock Sealing settled their cases before the verdict - for far less than the jury-determined amounts, Hatten said.

The $3.4 million award still ranks among the largest verdicts in a Virginia asbestos case, said Bob Hatten, the attorney with Patten, Wornom, Hatten and Diamonstein who handled the case.

Ansley Higginbotham, 29, Jones' daughter who lives in Orange, northeast of Charlottesville, said she and her two brothers are disappointed their mother didn't live to see the court uphold the verdict, but are grateful the "greatest legal minds in Virginia" found the award just. "It's a bittersweet day for our family," Higginbotham said. "It was important to our mother to receive justice in this case. She worked very tirelessly to make it happen, and I'm very proud of her for seeing it through during such a difficult time. She did not allow such a big company to intimidate her."

Because shipbuilding involved the use of asbestos for so many years, Hatten asserted, the Peninsula has one of the nation's highest rates of asbestos-related cancers.

Jones worked at Newport News Shipbuilding between 1963 and 1967, later becoming a computer programmer near Richmond. But he had enough exposure to asbestos fibers in those years to spur mesothelioma, a cancer that forms in the lungs, some decades later.

Jones was diagnosed with that cancer in January 2005 - 38 years after he last worked at the yard - and died within six months at age 60. He initiated the lawsuit in Newport News Circuit Court before he died.

Higginbotham testified that her father's death in a nursing home was an "absolute nightmare."

"It was intractable pain, pain that is not eliminated with any type of narcotics, and it's constant," Hatten said.

Jones' three children will share two thirds of the $3.4 million verdict against John Crane, or $2.27 million. Because the family had spent $100,000 for expert testimony at the trial, their effective award is $2.17 million.

The lawyers on the case, Patten Wornom, Hatten and Diamonstein, and the Colorado firm of Trine & Metcalf, will share the remaining one third of the verdict, or $1.13 million.

John Crane could still appeal the case to the U.S. Supreme Court. The company could also seek a rehearing by the Virginia Supreme Court.

Officials with John Crane did not return attempts to seek comment. The company had appealed the case on several grounds, including assertions that the trial court judge erred on evidence rulings and allowed the case to proceed under federal maritime law rather than Virginia law.

State and federal courts have the authority to hear federal maritime cases. Federal maritime law is considered a better route for the plaintiffs in wrongful death cases because it has a lower burden of proof and allows recovery for the suffering of the deceased.

But the Virginia Supreme Court disagreed with Crane on all counts and rejected the company's contention that the verdict was too big. "We cannot say the trial court abused its discretion in determining that the verdict was not excessive and not so out of proportion to the injuries suffered," the court's opinion noted.

SOURCE: DailyPress

READ MORE - $3.4M asbestos verdict upheld

Wisconsin laborer claims mesothelioma in Madison County suit

Philip Cieslek of Wisconsin filed an asbestos suit against 88 defendant corporations alleging he was exposed to asbestos while working from 1959 to 2003 as a laborer, environmental engineer and wastewater treatment supervisor at various locations.

Cieslek claims that during the course of his employment and during home and automotive repairs he was exposed to and inhaled, ingested or otherwise absorbed asbestos fibers emanating from certain products he was working with and around.

According to the complaint filed Sept. 6 in Madison County Circuit Court, Cieslek was diagnosed with mesothelioma on May 21.

"The plaintiff's exposure and inhalation, ingestion or absorption of the asbestos fibers was completely foreseeable and could or should have been anticipated by the defendants," the complaint states.

Cieslek claims the defendants knew or should have known that the asbestos fibers contained in their products had a toxic, poisonous and highly deleterious effect upon the health of people.

Cieslek also alleges that the defendants included asbestos in their products even when adequate substitutes were available and failed to provide any or adequate instructions concerning the safe methods of working with and around asbestos.

He also claims that the defendants failed to require and advise employees of hygiene practices designed to reduce or prevent carrying asbestos fibers home.

Cieslek also claims that he has sought, but has been unable to obtain, full disclosure of relevant documents and information from the defendants leading him to believe the defendants destroyed documents related to asbestos.

"It was foreseeable to a reasonable person/entity in the respective positions of defendants, that said documents and information constituted evidence, which was material to potential civil litigation-namely asbestos litigation," the complaint states.

He claims that as a result of each defendant breaching its duty to preserve material evidence by destroying documents and information he has been prejudiced and impaired in proving claims against all potential parties.

"Plaintiff has been caused to suffer damages in the form of impaired ability to recover against defendants and lost or reduced compensation from other potentially liable parties in this litigation," the complaint states.

As a result of the alleged negligence, Cieslek claims he was exposed to fibers containing asbestos. He developed a disease caused only by asbestos which has disabled and disfigured him, the complaint states.

He seeks damages to help pay for the cost of his treatment.

Cieslek also suffers "great physical pain and mental anguish, and also will be hindered and prevented from pursuing his normal course of employment, thereby losing large sums of money," the complaint states.

He is seeking at least $550,000 in damages for negligence, willful and wanton acts, conspiracy, and negligent spoliation of evidence among other allegations.

"In addition to compensatory damages, an award of punitive damages is appropriate and necessary in order to punish the defendants for willful, wanton, intentional and reckless misconduct and to deter them and others from engaging in like misconduct in the future," the complaint states.

Cieslek is represented by Shane Hampton and Tim Thompson of SimmonsCooper in East Alton.

The case has been assigned to Circuit Court Judge Daniel Stack.

SOURCE: Madison Record

READ MORE - Wisconsin laborer claims mesothelioma in Madison County suit