Asbestos-related lung cancer and malignant mesothelioma are both aggressive and deadly outcomes of asbestos exposure. The vast majority of those diagnosed with these diseases trace their exposure to their careers, and many take legal action against product manufacturers and others who were negligent in failing to warn or protect them. When victims find they were exposed in similar circumstances and by the same companies, it can make sense to join their lawsuits.
Asbestos Companies Argue Against Joining Mesothelioma and Lung Cancer Claims
The law allows mesothelioma and other asbestos exposure victims to join their claims under certain circumstances, but defendants argue against this practice out of concern that seeing multiple victims will make them look worse to a jury. As a result, plaintiffs need to meet certain criteria before a judge will allow a joint trial. Those criteria include:
- Common worksites
- Similar occupation
- Similar time of exposure
- Type of disease
- Whether plaintiffs are living or deceased
- Status of discovery in each case
- Whether all plaintiffs are represented by the same counsel
- Type of cancer
The law does not require mesothelioma and lung cancer victims to prove all of these elements to warrant joinder, but defendants often point to the lack of one or more commonalities to stop it from happening.
New York Judge Grants Joinder of Asbestos Lung Cancer Claims
In a recent case, asbestos lung cancer victims Guiseppe Rullo and Paul Scandaliato were both exposed to asbestos while working for Consolidated Edison Company of New York, working on similar equipment and machinery. While Mr. Scandaliato was exposed from 1963 to 1980, Mr. Rullo was exposed from 1969 through 1980. Both developed lung cancer and are currently living with the disease, both are in the same phase of discovery and are represented by the same attorney.Â
Though the asbestos companies all opposed the request to join the cases, arguing that the plaintiffs had failed to establish sufficient commonalities, the court found that with seven of the eight factors being satisfied, judicial economy supported joining the lawsuits. The judge noted that safeguards could be put in place to avoid juror confusion, and then granted the request.
