North Carolina Personal Injury Law Blog

Right up through the 1980s, asbestos was referred to as the "miracle material" and was used in machines for everything from insulation to fireproof coatings. It is a strong and flexible fiber, can resist fire and extreme heat, and was relatively cheap to get. For these, and other, reasons, asbestos was used widely in many manufacturing and construction industries.

When the dangers associated with ingesting or inhaling the toxic fiber became well known, employers and manufacturers in those industries had to make a decision. They either needed to warn employees, properly have the asbestos removed, and invest in new products, or they could just keep the information to themselves. Far too many chose to keep the dangers of asbestos a secret.

Up until the late 1980s, asbestos was used in all kinds of materials from insulation to brake pads. This is a well-known fact. However, going back and determining what products were handled in determining the source of asbestos exposure can be difficult. In order to figure that out, it may take some significant legal assistance. Recently, victims of asbestosis were able to reinstate their lawsuits against a company they claim is responsible for their exposure.

The victims in this case worked as mechanics that used a brake grinding product, manufactured by Hennessy Industries, to grind down brake shoe linings. The asbestos was released when the workers would grind the asbestos-containing brake linings. Initially, their claim was dismissed in June 2010 on the basis that Hennessy did not use any asbestos in their products. Therefore, they should not be liable for exposure.

Workers and a student at the University of South Carolina may have been exposed to asbestos on campus, despite recent fines imposed on the school. Over the course of just the past four years, the school has had to pay over $175,000 for failure to correct irresponsible asbestos-related practices. Because of this, a number of workers were exposed to asbestos.

Over the course of the past few years, the school has failed to properly protect staff and students by not improving their asbestos handling practices. The school has reportedly broken several rules and does not change asbestos procedures even when they say they will. Each of the fives times they have been cited for violations, the school has made a promise to improve. Each time they have failed to do so.

Victims of asbestos-related diseases have a right to hold those responsible for their condition accountable. The sooner that happens, however, the better the outcome may be. An unfortunate reality of the legal process is that it can take time for personal injury cases to work their way through the system. Lawyers defending companies charged with negligence may use additional stalling tactics in an attempt to save themselves money. Recently, a man tragically and needlessly passed away just minutes after he finished answering questions from the defense. Was this their goal?

The 69-year-old man was in great health before discovering that he had developed malignant mesothelioma. The aggressive lung disease acted fast and his condition worsened quickly and considerably. With his family members supporting him, the man sued 44 companies who he felt were responsible for his condition.