Scott Monge Wins Wrongful Death Case for Client Exposed to Asbestos

FACTS: plaintiffs decedent was employed for about 14 years at the facility for the manufacture of glass, which was located in Johnson City, Tennessee. During employment, the deceased worked as a laborer on a treadmill. In July 2000, after the plaintiff had been retired for many years, was diagnosed with mesothelioma in August 2002, the deceased died from the disease. The plaintiff alleges that the home repair project and the employment of the deceased at the facility for the manufacture of glass, the decedent was exposed to more products containing asbestos, and were manufactured and distributed by various companies accused. Furthermore, the plaintiff claimed that the decedent developed mesothelioma and died because of their exposure to these products. The plaintiff pursued products liability theories, including the failure to justify the theory of negligence against the accused, the accused claimed their individual products contained asbestos could have released enough individual fibers that are the cause of mesothelioma. Furthermore, the defendants argued that some of the products that the plaintiff is claiming were harmful, it does not contain asbestos. All rights to use duplication of this case summary are reserved for JAS Publications, Copyright 2003.

ALLEGED VIOLATION: wrongful death. The deceased is survived his wife and two grown children.

Experts: Plaintiff: Eugene J. Mark, MD - Pulmonary pathologists, Boston, MA Arnold Brody, Ph.D. - Biologist / Asbestos Diseases, New Orleans, LA Edwin C. Holstein, MS - Occupational Medicine, Auburndale, MA William Ewing - The industrial hygienist, Atlanta, GA Richard Hatfield - The industrial hygienist, Atlanta, GA Defendant: N / A

Editor's Note: Per plaintiff's counsel Guerry, accused AC & S is in bankruptcy and subject to automatic stay provision, when the case is resolved. The settlement consisted of several villages including some confidential settlements with various manufacturers distributors of products containing asbestos to which plaintiff was allegedly exposed. Furthermore, plaintiff attorney Guerry said the settlement in the case were influenced by the quality of the assets of the evidence and the quality of the product identification.