After years of working as a commercial fisherman on ships he’d been told were contaminated with asbestos, Riccardo Ciolino began experiencing symptoms that he feared signaled mesothelioma. His doctors diagnosed him with a different disease that is also caused by exposure to asbestos, and he filed a claim against his former employer. Facing accusations of negligence, Keystone Shipping Company moved to disallow testimony from his treating physicians and to dismiss the entire case. The U.S. District Court of Massachusetts denied the company’s motions.
Asbestos Victim Feared Mesothelioma When Lung Symptoms Arose
In 2019, Mr. Ciolino began experiencing shortness of breath, fatigue, and other symptoms that resembled those of malignant pleural mesothelioma. He had spent the years between 1997 to 2011 as a seaman or bosun on several vessels owned by Keystone Shipping and worked for other companies before and after, but while working for Keystone he had been warned by the ship’s officers about asbestos that was found throughout the ship.
Rather than malignant pleural mesothelioma, the diagnosis was chronic Benign Asbestos Pleural Effusion, which though not terminal, has had a significant impact on his quality of life. He filed suit against the company, alleging negligence under the Jones Act, unseaworthiness, and maintenance and cure. The company moved to strike his expert disclosure from his treating physicians based on the lateness of that filing, and the case in general based on its position that he could not prove his claim.
Court Denies Shipping Company’s Argument Against Asbestos Liability
In its review of the company’s motion to dismiss Mr. Ciolino’s claim, the court agreed that his submission was late, but also noted that the asbestos victim had submitted valid reasons for his delayed submission. In light of that, the harm that he would suffer by not having their testimony, and the relative lack of harm the defendant had suffered due to its lateness.
Additionally, the company argued that there was insufficient proof of causation that asbestos onboard their vessels was tied to his illness, but the court indicated that it could not agree with this argument. Because the company’s representatives had warned him of asbestos on the ships, and his medical records reflected evidence of an asbestos-related disease, they said that there was sufficient evidence “to support at least a circumstantial case that he was exposed to asbestos on their vessels.”
If you or someone you love has been diagnosed with mesothelioma or any other asbestos-related disease, you may be entitled to compensation. For assistance, contact the Patient Advocates at Mesothelioma.net today at 1-800-692-8608.
