Thursday, October 4, 2007

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.

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.