New York Asbestos Litigation

In New York, mesothelioma and lung cancer victims can find compensation with the help of an experienced mesothelioma lawyer. These illnesses are often caused by exposure to asbestos. The symptoms may not be apparent for many years.

Judges who oversee NYCAL's caseload have crafted an inclination to favor plaintiffs. Recent rulings could further erode the rights of defendants.

Upstate New York Asbestos Litigation Dockets

Asbestos litigation is very different from the typical personal injury lawsuit. These cases involve many defendants (companies which are being sued) and law firms representing plaintiffs, and multiple expert witnesses. These cases are often focused on specific work locations because asbestos was used to make various products, and a large number of workers were subjected to it at work. Asbestos-related victims are often diagnosed with serious illnesses like mesothelioma or lung cancer.

New York has a unique approach to asbestos attorneys litigation. It is one of the largest dockets across the nation. It is managed by a special Case Management Order. This CMO was designed to handle huge numbers of asbestos cases, involving a multitude of defendants. The judges on the NYCAL docket have extensive experience in asbestos cases. The docket is also the scene of some of the most significant plaintiff verdicts in recent times.

The New York Court of Appeals has recently made some significant changes to the NYCAL docket. In 2015, the political establishment in Albany was shaken to its core when former Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver was convicted on federal corruption charges. Silver was accused of destroying every reasonable designed tort reform bill in the legislature for more than a decade while working for the plaintiffs' firm Weitz & Luxenberg.

Justice Sherry Klein Heitler retired in April 2014 following reports that she gave the Weitz & Luxenberg firm "red carpet treatment". She was replaced by Justice Peter Moulton who implemented some changes to the docket.

Moulton introduced new rules in the NYCAL docket that requires defendants to submit proof that their products are not accountable for the mesothelioma that plaintiffs suffer from. He also instituted a new policy in which he wouldn't dismiss cases until the expert witness testimony had been completed. This new policy will significantly alter the speed of discovery in cases on the NYCAL docket and could result in more favorable outcomes for defendants.

In other New York asbestos news, an federal judge from the Eastern District of Virginia recently dismissed MDL 875 and ordered all asbestos lawyer cases in the future to be transferred to a different district. This should result in more uniform and efficient treatment of these cases. The MDL in its current MDL is well-known for its abusive discovery practices and unjustified sanctions, as well as low evidentiary standards.

Central New York Asbestos Litigation Dockets

After years of mismanagement and corruption by the former Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver, the scandals regarding his connections to asbestos lawyers have finally focused attention on the asbestos docket that is rigged. Justice Peter Moulton, who is now the head of NYCAL, has already held a Town Hall meeting with defense lawyers to discuss complaints regarding the "rigged" system that favors an asbestos law firm with a strong reputation.

Asbestos litigation is different from a typical personal injury lawsuit because it involves a number of the same defendants and plaintiffs. Asbestos litigation also involves similar job sites where a lot of people were exposed asbestos, leading to mesothelioma and lung cancer. This can result in large verdicts that can block dockets of the courts.

To address the issue In order to tackle the issue, a few states have passed laws to limit these types of claims. These laws typically deal with issues such as medical criteria, two-disease rules, expedited case scheduling, forum shopping, joinders, the right to punitive damages and successor liability.

Despite these laws states are still seeing an influx of asbestos lawsuits. Certain courts have created special "asbestos Dockets" to help reduce the number of asbestos lawsuits and accelerate the resolution of these cases. These dockets follow a variety of rules specifically designed for asbestos cases. The New York City asbestos docket for instance is one that requires applicants to meet certain medical requirements, has a two-disease rule and uses an accelerated trial plan.

Certain states have also passed laws to limit the amount of punitive damages awarded in asbestos cases. These laws are designed to discourage bad conduct and provide more compensation to the victims. Regardless of whether your case is filed in a state or federal court, you must work with an New York mesothelioma lawyer to learn more about the laws that affect your specific situation.

Alfred Sargente concentrates his practice in toxic tort and environment litigation including product liability, commercial and toxic tort litigation. He also is a specialist in general liability issues. He has extensive experience defending clients against claims of exposure to lead, asbestos and World Trade Center dust in both New York and New Jersey. He is also frequently defending cases alleging exposure to other hazards and contaminants, such as vibration, noise, mold and environmental toxics.

Southern New York Asbestos Litigation Dockets

Many people have died from asbestos exposure in New York. Mesothelioma patients and their families have filed lawsuits in five counties against companies that manufacture of asbestos products to seek compensation. The successful mesothelioma lawsuits hold negligent asbestos companies accountable for their reckless decisions to prioritize profits over public safety.

New York mesothelioma lawyers are experienced in representing clients from diverse backgrounds against the country's largest asbestos manufacturers. Their legal strategies could result in an enormous settlement or verdict.

Asbestos litigation in New York has a rich background, and it continues to be the subject of headlines. The 2022 national mesothelioma claims report from KCIC declares New York as the third most popular jurisdiction for mesothelioma lawsuit filings, following California and Pennsylvania.

The state's judiciary has been buffeted by the flood of asbestos lawsuits. Sheldon Silver, the former Assembly Speaker, was convicted in 2015 on federal corruption charges relating to millions of dollar referral fees that he received from the politically powerful plaintiffs law firms Weitz & Luxenberg for handling asbestos attorney cases. After the scandal, Justice Sherry Klein Heitler who was in charge of NYCAL since 2008, was fired amid reports that she provided "red-carpet treatment" to Weitz & Luxenberg asbestos lawsuits.

Justice Heitler was succeeded as NYCAL judge by Justice Peter Moulton, who has clarified that defendants cannot obtain summary judgment unless they have an "scientifically solid credible, admissible and reliable scientific study" that shows the measured amount of exposure a plaintiff received was not enough to cause mesothelioma. This effectively eliminates the possibility that NYCAL defendants are able to get summary judgment.

Additionally, Justice Moulton has ruled that a plaintiff must show an injury to their health from exposure to asbestos for the court to make a decision on compensatory damages. This ruling, combined with a decision from early 2016 that held that medical monitoring was not a tort claim makes it nearly impossible for an asbestos defense lawyer to win a NYCAL Summary Judgment motion.

The most recent case, in which Judge Toal is presiding on, a mesothelioma suit filed against DOVER GREENS, alleges that the company was in violation of asbestos work practices regulations when it renovated buildings on the Manhattan campus in October 2013 for an event for fundraising. The lawsuit claims that DOVER GREENS didn't adhere to CAA and asbestos NESHAP regulations, failing to inspect and notify the EPA prior to beginning renovations, and properly removing, storing and dispose of asbestos and having a trained representative at renovation activities.

Eastern New York Asbestos Litigation Dockets

At one point asbestos personal injury/death lawsuits filled state and federal court dockets and drained judges' judicial resources and prevented them from addressing criminal cases or other crucial civil disputes. The overflowing litigation prevented prompt compensation of deserving victims and innocent families, and prompted companies to devote inordinate amounts of money and resources to defense of these cases.

Asbestos claims are filed by people diagnosed with mesothelioma, or other asbestos-related diseases, after exposure to asbestos in the workplace. Most cases are filed by shipyard workers, construction employees, employees, and other tradesmen who worked on buildings that contained or were made with asbestos-containing materials. They were exposed to asbestos fibers that were dangerous during the manufacturing process or when working on the structure itself.

The first significant mass tort was asbestos Lawsuit litigation. In the late 1970s to the early 1980s, asbestos exposure led to an influx of personal injury and wrongful death lawsuits. This occurred in state and federal courts across the country.

The plaintiffs in these lawsuits claim that their illnesses resulted from negligent manufacture of asbestos products and that companies did not inform them of the dangers associated with such exposure. More than half of asbestos lawsuits are brought in federal courts.

In the early 1990s, recognizing that the litigation was a "terrible overload of the calendar," District Judge Jack B. Weinstein and New York Supreme Court justice Helen Freedman consolidated hundreds of state and federal cases that alleged asbestos exposure at the Brooklyn Navy Yard for settlement, pretrial, and discovery purposes. Under the supervision of Special Master, Judge Weinstein and Justice Freedman consolidated these cases, referred to as Brooklyn Navy Yard consolidation.

While the bulk of these cases were related to the Brooklyn Navy Yard, many of the defendants were common defendants in other asbestos lawsuits. The defendants listed included Garlock, Inc; H & A Construction Company, as a successor and individually to Spraycraft Corporation; CRH, Inc. as the successor to E.I. Dupont, W.R. Grace and Company, Empire-Ace Insulation Manufacturing Company, Bell/Atlas Asbestos Corp., and DNS Metal Industries, Inc. were all defendants.