Asbestos Is Gold For Trial Lawyers

Asbestos litigation has spun so far out of control that the U.S. Supreme Court has agreed to hear an appeal directly from an intermediate state court. Multi-million dollar verdicts are being awarded to healthy plaintiffs based on speculation about possible future harm from past exposure to asbestos.

A West Virginia state court awarded millions of dollars to a few workers without evidence of physical or independently corroborated emotional harm from exposure to asbestos, and without apportioning damages based on relative culpability. The case, based on the Federal Employers' Liability Act (which pertains to railroad workers), is Norfolk & Western Railway Co. v. Ayers, Freeman et al.

The Supreme Court has repeatedly implored Congress to save the courts from having to handle asbestos lawsuits. But the usual victims of this litigation are engineering companies that lack political muscle and are no match for the political clout of the trial lawyers.

America's top asbestos producer, Johns Manville, was forced into bankruptcy in 1982. By 1992, Lloyds of London was averaging nearing $3 billion a year in losses, due mostly to asbestos claims.

Asbestos litigation has pushed at least 54 companies into bankruptcy, and judgments are often imposed with little regard for proof of wrongdoing or causation. Encouraged by porous legal standards, asbestos attorneys have filed claims for more than 1.4 million persons, against more than 1,400 companies.

In 2000, the four major companies sent into bankruptcy by asbestos were Armstrong World Industries (construction products), Babcock & Wilcox (boilers), Burns and Roe (engineering and construction), and Pittsburgh Corning (glass insulation). In 2001, asbestos litigation casualties included the chemical and materials giant W.R. Grace, the prominent construction materials company G.A.F., the gypsum wallboard maker USG, and the auto-parts maker Federal-Mogul.

Just in the past six months, Fortune 500 victims of the asbestos litigation monster have seen sudden drops in their stock prices. Hit with a Texas-sized verdict last December, Halliburton stock abruptly dropped 43 percent.

In February, a Manhattan jury awarded $53 million to the estate of a deceased auto mechanic who allegedly died from exposure to asbestos in brake linings. That decision jeopardizes the entire auto industry; full-page ads for auto mechanics with lung cancer now run in New York newspapers.

In March, a West Virginia jury ordered DuPont to pay $6.4 million to a bank officer who died of mesothelioma. The banker was allegedly injured by fibers that might have attached to the clothing of his father who worked with asbestos at DuPont.

Some of the cases involve heavy, lifelong smokers who claim they have asbestosis, an asbestos-related disease. Plaintiffs and defendants bring in medical experts who testify to contrary diagnoses, and the jury is left to decide, often against the corporate defendants.

In February, 2,645 plaintiffs sued asbestos attorneys, claiming that "this case arises from corruption within the asbestos personal injury bar." Reports are that the majority of asbestos settlements enrich the attorneys, rather than going to the allegedly harmed individuals.

The demonizing of asbestos is an odd fate for a substance that exists widely in nature, including the rocks supporting highly populated cities such as San Francisco. No material can approach its versatility and effectiveness and, for decades, asbestos saved countless lives because of its remarkable strength, durability, and resistance to fire.

In 1998, the prestigious New England Journal of Medicine reported no increased risk of death from cancer because of prolonged exposure to asbestos. Based on a thorough study of mines and mills that have the world's greatest concentration of asbestos, the researchers concluded: "The [Environmental Protection Agency] model overestimated the risk of asbestos-induced lung cancer by at least a factor of 10."

Until now, the U.S. Supreme Court has been unwilling to curtail the legal circus and its calamitous consequences. The Court has manifested unusual restraint as verdicts were rendered, sometimes without any proof of wrongdoing or causation by the defendants who have been forced to pay astronomical damages.

As more claims were decided for workers involved in the manufacture of asbestos, the trial attorneys began casting their nets wider. Any firm that had any contact with asbestos is at risk for unjustified litigation, so asbestos is hastily excluded and removed at great expense.

Meanwhile, observers have noted that the replacement of asbestos with less effective material may have played a role in (1) the explosion of the Challenger, (2) the great New Orleans Rail Yard Fire of 1987, and (3) the premature collapse of the World Trade Towers on 9/11. The government is now contradicting itself by claiming that, while asbestos lining within the towers would have been unsafe, asbestos emitted by the collapse of the towers is safe.

The unusual consideration by the Supreme Court of the Norfolk & Western Railway case may signal that the Court is no longer waiting for congressional action. But will Court action be too little and too late?

Meanwhile, observers have noted that the replacement of asbestos with less effective material may have played a role in ...(3) the premature collapse of the World Trade Towers on 9/11......reminds me of a story I heard several months ago but have heard nothing of since - maybe it's been debunked, or just buried by the PC police...apparently when the WTC was being built engineers specified that the supporting towers be sprayed with an asbestos/tarlike substance precisely because they were fearful that an out of control fire caused by something like a plane crashing into the building would weaken the structure...environmentalists found out about this when the building was up to about the sixtieth floor and made such a fuss about how "dangerous" it was that from that point on up a less effective insulating material - one without asbestos - was applied...estimates were that had the original substance had been used throughout, it would have been two hours more before the towers collapsed, and probably thousands more lives saved...disgusting-outrageous if true...maybe we should have some lawyers suing for the non-use of asbestos.....

You beat me to the punch re Humphreys. As soon as I saw this title, I thought HUMPHREYS. He is a slimy piece of crap who has made MANY millions off of asbestos. He lives within minutes of me here. Many years ago I was involved in a legal matter against a client of Humphreys (not asbestos, heheh). My attorney laughed when he heard Humphreys was the opposition. "Lightweight ambulance chaser", he called him. It's pretty bad when a fellow attorney uses terms like that. We kicked his ass.

It is nice to see Humphreys having to use piles of his dirty money on his mud-slinging commercials against Margaret Workman. She's slinging right back too. A Workman commercial I heard today talked about Humphreys slinging mud now, and how he also did "when he lost to Shelley Moore-Capito." Nice touch Margaret; make him spend it all, then Shelley will take care of business in November.

Permit me to share an article written for Reuters by a friend of mine:

CHARLESTON, W.Va. - For the second time in two years, a wealthy asbestos lawyer is trying to buy his way into Congress.

Democrat Jim Humphreys, who spent almost $7 million losing a bid for West Virginia's 2nd Congressional District seat in 2000, already has spent $2.2 million on his primary campaign, set for a May 14 election.

Humphreys lost by less than 1 percent of the vote in 2000 to Republican Shelley Moore Capito. The seat had been vacated by Democrat Bob Wise, who left an 18-year Congressional career for a successful run at West Virginia's governorship.

As a freshman Congresswoman with the ear of President Bush, Capito quickly made her mark in Washington, but she knows the November general election will be another close call, whether she faces Humphreys or his Democratic challenger, former West Virginia Supreme Court Justice Margaret Workman.

West Virginia remains a largely Democratic state, despite having given the majority vote to Capito and Bush in 2000, and since the 2nd Congressional District carries the state capital, the campaign trail is difficult, to say the least. Capito has said being a Republican in a Democratic state "presents a huge challenge" and she knows she cannot take any of her first-term successes for granted.

But Humphreys is proof that money does not always guarantee victory. He staged one of the most expensive campaigns in the country in 2000. His campaign was largely self-financed, with about $6 million of his $7 million expenditures coming out of his own pocket, outspending Capito roughly 5.6-1.

Humphreys' 2002 campaign manager Erika Bailey said the attorney uses mostly his own money so that "he is a candidate who is unbought and unbiased, not beholden to special interests."

So far this year, Humphreys has spent $2.2 million and Bailey said the expenditures are needed in large part due to untrue accusations made publicly by the Workman campaign. "It takes money to defend yourself," she said.

Calls to the Workman campaign were not returned.

According to data from the 2000 election, Humphreys' loss was an aberration. Of the 431 races for the U.S. House of Representatives that were clearly decided by noon the day after the general election, 406 were won by the top-spending candidate. Only eight House winners were outspent by 2-to-1 or more and Capito was considered the biggest financial underdog to win.

She may be the underdog again, if Humphreys' wins the primary and keeps his current spending habits. All three candidates - Humphreys, Workman and Capito - are considered millionaires, although Humphreys surpasses the other two in net worth, thanks to a long career successfully pursuing asbestos and black lung cases.

Polling data conducted for the primary indicate Workman and Humphreys are neck and neck, with former state legislator Humphreys holding a higher name recognition, but the former judge and justice Workman having a better public image.

Both candidates have similar agendas - fix Social Security and Medicare, provide better prescription drug coverage, bring more quality jobs to West Virginia, and, of course, prove to voters that Capito was an ineffectual Congresswoman. And each Democratic candidate has been endorsed by a number of powerful backers, so no matter who wins May 14, Capito has her work cut out for her. If she ends up facing off against Humphreys again, which she expects, she knows he'll empty his war chest before conceding defeat.

But she has the strong support of the Bush administration and the Republican Party in her corner. In April, Vice President Dick Cheney made an appearance in West Virginia on her behalf and she is one of six GOP freshmen selected by Majority Whip Tom DeLay, R-Texas, and Chief Deputy Whip Roy Blunt, R-Mo., to receive between $75,000 and $100,000 from the Retaining Our Majority Program.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.