Asbestos News

As many as 80,000 inactive cases could be dismissed from the dockets of asbestos and silica multidistrict litigation courts, if Gov. Rick Perry signs a bill that both chambers of the Texas Legislature passed unanimously.

The Assembly also passed a measure that would slow asbestos-exposure lawsuits until plaintiffs reveal how many businesses their attorneys plan to go after.

As it argues for attorneys fees in a fraud case against Pittsburgh asbestos attorneys, CSX Transportation says it is incurring even more fees and wants repaid.

The state House Judiciary Committee recently held a hearing on House Bill 1150, also known as the Fairness in Claims and Transparency Act, or FACT, which would provide for transparency of claims made against asbestos bankruptcy trusts and in the tort system.

On the heels of a Wall Street Journal editorial questioning the motives behind prominent plaintiffs attorney Peter Angelos’ attempt to revive 13,000 asbestos claims, the Maryland Attorney General’s office said it would not comment on the matter yet.

Readers of these columns may recall federal Judge Janis Graham Jack, who in 2005 blew the lid off the silicosis scam and shut down that fraudulent tort industry. A similar opportunity is unfolding in Baltimore City Circuit Court, but this time the subject is asbestos litigation.

When U.S. District Judge Eduardo C. Robreno was appointed to handle the Asbestos Products Liability Litigation in October 2008, he was startled by the magnitude of the case.

A state judge has ruled that lawyers for victims of asbestos exposure in Libby are entitled to more than $4 million in fees and expenses out of a $19.6 million settlement with chemical manufacturer W.R. Grace and Co.