In a mesothelioma case Judge Amy D. Hogue granted a summary judgment in the favor of the company. The plaintiffs were the surviving members of the family of Donald Smalley who was a shade-tree mechanic who died due to mesothelioma. According to the family members of Donald the illness resulted from his exposure to asbestos fibers which were used as an ingredient in the products made by the defendant company, Pueumo Abex LLC.
The family members of Donald sued the company in Los Angeles County Superior Court. According to the family members the braking products of the Alex Company contained the harmful asbestos fibers. The evidence that was given in the support of his disease was the product label which indicated the use of asbestos. The two sons of Donald namely: Michael and Mitchell also testified that they can recall that their father went to auto repair supply shops and bought Alex products from the same.
According to his sons they saw Donald using the brakes in Alex labeled boxes. The defendant company said that the family members of Donald were not able to prove anything as the only evidence used by them to prove the connection of their products with Donald’s disease was his children’s testimony which should be an inadmissible hearsay. The judge agreed that one cannot be accused on the basis of its product labeling. In addition to this she characterized that the testimony of children cannot be sufficient to prove product identification.
She also said that in a case of DiCola v. White Bros. Performance Products, 158 Cal. App. 4th 666 (Cal. Ct. App., 4th Dist. 2008), it was said that the company cannot be accused only on the basis of package containing the product. The judge gave the judgment in favor of the company. The plaintiffs appealed to the California 2nd District Court of Appeal. The family members are demanding that Michael and Mitchell’s testimony should have been admitted.
In an asbestos related case in San Francisco, California the plaintiff was awarded $1.36 million in damages as a result of his asbestos lawsuit against Kent cigarettes.
In a case of mesothelioma the California jury awarded a compensation of more than $17 million to a plaintiff.
In a mesothelioma case Judge Amy D. Hogue granted a summary judgment in the favor of the company.
Mesothelioma is form of cancer which is caused due to prolonged exposure to asbestos fibers.
Federal charges were charged on three former Firm Build executives for allegedly violating various hazardous waste laws.
Asbestos was generally used in different kinds of products generally because of its fireproofing and insulating capabilities.
The owner of E&D Environmental Safety Training Inc., Rogelio Lowe, has admitted to issuing fake training certificates to asbestos workers.
The California State symbols seem to point to that and a lot of natural occurrences support the theory. The idea is that the state might be sitting on a lot of valuable resources
A group of teens being trained in construction by a now-closed non-profit agency in Merced called Firm Build may be at risk of developing mesothelioma from asbestos exposure during the training.
The verdict of a California appeals court that has overturned a $5.6 million ruling on an asbestos case might well mark the beginning of a turn in the tide