Sign In to access content. New user? Sign up!

Video Collections

CVN Announces “Large Verdicts” Video Collection

May 18th, 2010  |  Published in Announcements, Video Collections

CVN is pleased to announce its newest video collection, “Large Verdicts,” which includes more than 25 of CVN’s largest verdicts to date. The Large Verdicts collection will be constantly growing, as we continue to add multi-million dollar verdicts and punitive damage awards.

CVN’s entire Large Verdicts collection is available for as little as $49 per month, and includes these cases:

Attorneys Will Kemp, Ted Wells, and Bill Levin recovered large damage awards for their clients.

$505M – Chanin v. Desert Shadow Endoscopy. Punitive damages were awarded based on inadequate warnings on vials of the anesthetic Propofol that caused the spread of Hepatitis C.

$364M – Bondi v. Citigroup. Citigroup was awarded damages as a result of the Parmalot fraud.

$316M – McDavid v. Turner. Owner of the Atlanta sports teams “Hawks” and “Thrashers” breached a contract to sell the teams.

$233M – Rowatt v. Wyeth. Three breast cancer survivors who had used Wyatt’s Hormone Replacement Therapty (HRT) drug, Prempro recovered compensatory and punitive damages.

$208M. Evans v. A.W. Chesterton. The plaintiff contracted mesothelioma from asbestos fibers on the clothing of her husband, who sawed pipes.

$78M.  U.S. Global v. Progress Energy. Commercial litigation involving breach of asset purchase, commission, and services agreements. 

$54M. Godfrey v. Precision Automotive. A private airplane crashed due to a defective carburator.

$50M. Thomas v. Global Vision. Defendant violated California’s Consumer Legal Remedies Act (CLRA) by marketing its hair regrowth treatment Avacor as “natural” and “herbal”, even though it had same active ingredient as Rogaine.

$47.5M. Hermans v. Merck. Pharmaceutical products liability trial against Merck for heart attacks allegedly caused the painkiller drug Vioxx.

$38M. IREF v. Pfizer. Trade secret misappropriate claim arising from Coronary Artery Bypass Graft (CABG) clinical drug trials for Bextra, a second-generation Cox-2 inhibitor. 

NEW $30M. Buonomo v. R.J. Reynolds. $25M in punitive damages were awarded to the wife of a man who started smoking as a teenager, and died of emphysema after a lifetime of smoking three packs per day.

$30M. Cohen v. R.J. Reynolds. The plaintiff’s husband in this Engle-progeny tobacco trial was a smoker who died of lung cancer in 1994.

$25M. McCarrell v. Hoffman La Roche. The plaintiff developed inflammatory bowel disease and had his colon removed after he took the acne medication Accutane. 

$20M. Putney v. R.J. Reynolds. The plaintiff’s wife in this Engle-progeny tobacco trial was a smoker who died of lung cancer in 1995.

$18M. E*Trade v. Deutsche Bank. E*Trade won a breach of contract claim based on an accounting error that overstated the value of a business it purchased from Deutsche Bank.

$18M. Watson v. Ford. A Ford Explorer sudden acceleration case resulting from an allegedly faulty cruise control.

$18M. Moreno v. Ford. A Ford Explorer roll-over accident was caused by a tire dealer’s installation of a Firestone tire that had been recalled.

$17.7M. Wheeler v. Ford.  A Ford Explorer’s defective rear seat occupant protection system left the plaintiff a permanent, complete quadriplegic. The case settled while the jury was deliberating over a punitive damages award.

$16M. Schein v. Ernst & Young. The plaintiffs recovered $10M and $6M respectively based on negligent audits conducted by Ernst & Young.

$14.7M. Kentucky v. Watson. AstraZeneca misstated the wholesale price on its drugs.

$13.5M. McDarby v. Merck. The defendant withheld information about its pain killer Vioxx, which caused a heart attack. 

$12M. Cannon v. E&D. The plaintiff was severely burned when a tow truck smashed into the rear of his stalled Ford Mustang.

$11M. Citrus Canker Litigation. Inverse condemnation proceeding seeking compensation for 133,720 citrus trees that were destroyed in a failed effort to contain a bacterial plant disease.

$10.5M. Kendall v. Hoffman La-Roche. The defendant failed to adequately warn that its acne medication Accutane could cause Inflammatory Bowel Disease.

$9M. Wisconsin v. Abbott Laboratories. Defendant, Pfizer’s Pharmacia, misstated its drug prices in this Average Wholesale Price (AWP) Medicare fraud litigation.

$8.5M. Starrh v. Aera. Oil production field waste water was placed in unlined percolation pits, which contaminated a neighboring farmer’s groundwater.

$8M. Hess v. R.J. Reynolds. The plaintiff’s husband in this Engle-progeny tobacco trial died of lung cancer in 1997 because he was addicted to tobacco.

$4.6M. Alterman v. Zep. Road construction companies failed to adequately warn drivers of a rolling roadblock. 

$4.5M. Kornak v. North Broward Hospital. The plaintiff’s 35-year old husband died after he was placed under anesthesia even though he was experiencing respiratory distress.

$4.3M. Kroll v. Zolfaghari. The plaintiff suffered brain, liver, and kidney damage as a result of the failure to diagnose an enterovirus infection at the time of her birth.

CVN’s entire Large Verdicts collection is available for as little as $49 per month. Or try CVN’s two free days offer, no obligation. 

Toxic Torts Litigation Video Collection

March 16th, 2010  |  Published in Asbestos, Lead, Mesothelioma, Pesticide, Pharmaceutical, Products Liability, Toxic Torts, Video Collections, Welding Rods

CVN is pleased to announce our new Toxic Torts Video Collection, featuring 30 cases (see list below). Among the subjects covered are:

Accutane  |  Arsenic  |  Asbestos  |  DBCP
 
Dioxin  |  Lead Paint  |  Paraquat  |  Prempro
 
Tobacco  |  Vioxx  |  Welding Rods  |  Zyprexa 
 
Here are brief summaries of just four of these cases, one of which resulted in a plaintiff verdict in excess of $200M:
 
Plaintiff Attorney Thomas Brandi's Closing Argument in Welding Rod Manganese Trial Thomas v. Lincoln Electric 
In Thomas v. Lincoln Electric, Welder Butch Thomas allegedly suffered irreversible neurological damage (Parkinson’s Disease or Parkinsonism) from Manganese poisoning allegedly caused by toxic Manganese gas emitted by welding rods during the 1970′s and 1980′s. Thomas used welding rods provided by Lincoln Electric, Hobart, and ESAB.
 
According to the Plaintiff, Lincoln Electric admitted that they had known about the dangers of Manganese gas since the 1940′s, but attempted to minimize the risk, rather than effectively warn. A warning label added in 1967 did not include the word “Manganese,” and was not placed where the worker was likely to see it. The plaintiff asserted that this was a conscious, intentional decision to deny the worker his or her right to know.
 
Documents showed that in 1981 the American Welding Society knew that Manganese fumes were dangerous to welders even at low levels, and that safety warnings requiring “adequate” ventilation were ambiguous and did not reach the welder.  Labels mentioning the word “Manganese” did not appear until the late 1990′s or after 2000.
 
 Plaintiff Attorney Allen Stewart in Dioxin and Arsenic Toxic Tort Trial Turner v. Chevron
Turner v. Chevron was a wrongful death action against Chevron based on exposure to the herbicide Paraquat between 1973 and 1979. The decedent was a CalTrans landscape maintenance officer who sprayed Paraquat as part of his job, and died of pulmonary fibrosis (scarring of the lungs).  The decedent sprayed Paraquat on numerous occasions over a number of years. His primary exposure was dermal (skin contact).
 
The plainitff argued that Paraquat is so toxic that one teaspoon was a lethal dose for humans, and that one-trillionth of a gram causes scarred lungs in rats.  According to the plaintiff, more people have died from Paraquat than from any other herbicide, and no other herbicide causes pulmonary fibrosis. The plaintiff argued that Chevron failed to disclose known risk of chronic latent disease resulting from Paraquat exposure, and that safer alternative herbicides existed.
 
The defense argued that no person ever died from a Paraquat exposure, and the decedent was exposed to a toxicologically insignificant dose. Also, the alleged scarring would not have manifested itself only 20 years later.  Instead, according to the defense, the decedent’s plumonary fibrosis resulted from aspiration of stomach acid as a result of the decedent’s gastrointestinal disorders.
 
 Defense Attorney Heidi Hubbard Examines Dr. Lisa Rarick in HRT Prempro Products Liability Trial Rowatt v. Wyeth
Rowatt v. Wyeth involved an HRT (Hormone Replacement Therapy) products liability claim by three women whose breast cancers allegedly resulted from pharmaceutical manufacturer Wyeth’s menopause treatment drug Prempro.
 
According to the plaintiff, Wyeth inadequately studied the combination of Estrogin and Progestin. Wyeth allegedly failed to do long-term studies, and ignored red flags that should have alerted Wyeth of a breast cancer risk when Estrogin and Progestin were taken in combination.
 
The defense asserted that Prempro was safe and effective, providing proven osteoporosis benefits at a very low risk. In addition, Wyeth conducted extensive testing for breast cancer risk.  Further, Prempro was provided with adequate warnings. Finally, according to the defense, the plaintiffs’ cancers were not caused by Preempro.
 
Defense Attorney Deborah Kuchler's Closing Argument in Dioxin and Arsenic Toxic Tort Trial Ladner v. Dupont 
Ladner v. Dupont was a wrongful death toxic tort claim against Dupont based on a child who contracted liver cancer as an infant and died of liver cancer at age 11 after allegedly being exposed to arsenic and dioxin emitted by Dupont’s titanium dioxide pigment plant.
 
The plaintiff presented video showing that Dupont’s titanium dioxide plant had been dusty, and that the dust tested positive for large quantities of arsenic and dioxin. Because Dupont had claimed that its plant was not dusty, the plaintiff argued that Dupont had a negligent habit of routinely hiding the truth about the dangers of its TiO2 pigments plants from the public — both how much Arsenic and Dioxin they were releasing, and how dangerous those chemicals were.  The plaintiff also presented evidence that the plant manager had prepared comments for the press indicating that dioxin levels at the plant were low, on the same day he had received an email alerting him to the exact opposite.  
 
According to Dupont, the dioxin release did not cause the decedent’s cancer. 
 _____________________ 
 
CVN’s Toxic Torts Litigation Video Collection is available by one-year subscription for just $49 per month (email sales@courtroomview.com).
 
These are just some of the Toxic Torts cases included:

Medical Malpractice Litigation Video Collection

March 1st, 2010  |  Published in Medical Malpractice, Video Collections

Medical Malpractice Litigation

CVN is pleased to announce that our Medical Malpractice Litigation Video Collection now includes nine trials: Belaski v. Doctors Hospital, Kornak v. North Broward Hospital District, Smith v. Parker, Evans v. Deshazo, King v. Greathouse, Kroll v. Zolfaghari, Cuppy v. Surgical Professionals, Pullin v. Team Physicans, and Konke v Mayer.

These nine trials bring to practitioners a broad range of medical malpractice litigation issues, and experts, including:

  • - Obstetrics
  • - Anesthesiology
  • - Drug Overdose
  • - Chiropractic
  • - Failure to Diagnose
  • - Internal Bleeding
  • - Ventricular Dysfunction
  • - Orthopedic Surgery
Belaski v. Doctor’s Hospital.  The plaintiff’s sciatic nerve was permanently injured during hip replacement surgery, resulting in chronic pain. The plaintiff sought over $1M in damages.

The defendant orthopedic surgeon had undergone eye surgery for a detached retina 20 days before the defendant performed the hip replacement surgery on the plaintiff.
 
The plaintiff allegedly did not know that the defendant would be performing surgery with impaired vision.
 
The defendant asserted that his vision was only impaired in his left eye, due to an incident that occurred when the defendant was 20 years-old, and the defendant had been right-eyed for his entire career.  The defendant allegedly has previously performed 2,500 hip replacement surgeries without complication. Therefore, the defendant’s overall rate of complications was not below the standard of care.
 
The jury found for the defendant.
 
Kornak v. North Broward Hospital District. Plaintiff Martha Kornak’s husband, 35 year-old James Kornak, died after surgery to install a pacemaker.  The pacemaker was successfully implanted, but due to a complication, two surgeries were performed — the second operation was a continuation of the first, but performed the following day. Kornak died of respiratory complications 17 days later.
 
According to the plaintiff, Kornak’s lungs were clear before the first surgery, but bilateral congestion subsequently developed, and the anesthesiologists should have recognized the respiratory distress and waited a few days before placing Kornak under anesthesia for the second time, given that the procedure was elective and non-urgent.
 
The defense argued that Kornak did withstand the second anesthesiology, and instead his respiratory distress did not result from the surgery, but instead that pulmonary hemorrages in his lungs were caused by Kornak’s underlying anatomy. 
 
The jury found in favor of the plaintiff against all defendants, and awarded total damages of approximately $4.5M.
 
Smith v. Parker involved a baby who suffered a brachial plexus injury, allegedly as a result of a vacuum-assisted vaginal delivery without complications.  
 
The jury found in favor of the defendant.
 
Evans v. Deshazo. On April 11, 2005, 28 year-old Bobby Evans died of a drug overdose after consuming alcohol, the recreational drug Ecstasy (methamphetamine), and the pain killer oxycodone.
 
According to the decedent’s plaintiffs (the decedent’s parents), people rarely die from using Ecstasy, but oxycodone is a highly addictive drug that is incredibly dangerous when taken with alcohol or other medications.
 
The plaintiffs asserted that the defendant’s treatment fell below the standard of care because even though the defendant prescribed increasing doses of oxycodone over nearly a year, there was no documented treatment plan, nor a sufficient medical history or examination adequate to support the prescription, nor did the defendant adequately explain the risks of taking oxycodone in combination with alcohol or recreational drugs, even though the decedent disclosed his use of alcohol.
 
The defendant, a doctor of osteopathy, claimed that he prescribed the decedent medication for back pain — first hydrocodone, then oxycodone, then roxicodone.  The defense claimed that there was no indication of addition or drug-seeing behavior.  Instead, the decedent was the classic presentation of a chronic pain patient, experiencing actual pain from actual accidents.
 
The jury found in favor of the defendant.
 
King v. Greathouse. The plaintiff visited the defendant chiropractor due to lower back pain. After the defendant performed a cerebrovascular assessment, the plaintiff allegedly reported nausea and dizziness. The defendant remained by the plaintiff’s side for six seconds, after which the plaintiff fainted (syncopy), fell off the examination table, and landed face down on the floor, allegedly suffering a permanent spinal cord injury.
 
The defense asserted that the standard of care was not breached because the plaintiff only reported temporary nausea, which cleared up immediately. According to the defense the plaintiff’s injury was not foreseeable because the defendant did not know that the plaintiff had a congenitally narrow spinal cord, as well as preexisting degenerative disc disease. Moreover, the defense claimed that the plaintiff’s spinal cord injury more likely resulted from a trauma that occurred six weeks earlier, when the plaintiff hit his butt on the bottom of a swimming pool after dong a “cannon ball” jump.
 
The jury found that the defendant was not negligent.
 
Kroll v. Zolfaghari. Haylee Kroll, age 15 at the time of trial, was allegedly born with an enterovirus infection, contracted from her mother at birth, the late diagnosis of which resulted in brain, liver, and kidney damage in the child.  The mother’s amniotic sac had ruptured weeks before delivery, and the mother had a fever at the time of Haylee’s birth.
 
Although the infant was placed in the neonatal intensive care unit, the doctors did not diagnose and treat the viral infection in time to prevent the damage.
 
The jury returned a $4.3M verdict in favor of the plaintiff.
 
Cuppy v. Surgical Professionals. An appendectomy patient who had been taking the anti-coagulant Coumadin (due to a prior heart valve replacement) died after the attending surgeon allegedly overlooked internal bleeding before completing the operation.
 
The plaintiff also alleged that the physician failed to obtain informed consent for emergency surgery, and that the patient’s acute symptoms had subsided at the tiem fo the surgery decision because the plaintiff did not in fact have appendicitis.
 
The plaintiff also alleged that the physician over-prescribed Lovenox (a form of Heparin, another anti-coagulant) for DVT prophylaxis, and that the physician did not appropriately respond to the patient’s deteriorating condition.
 
The jury returned a verdict in favor of the defendants.
 
Pullin v. Team Physicians. The defendant suffered from right ventricular dysfunction, and she eventually died of right ventricular failure. According to the plaintiff, the decedent’s condition could have been and should have been easily diagnosed with an echocardiogram during her 20 hours in the intensive care unit (ICU), and if diagnosed and followed the condition could have been resolved with thrombolytic therapy.
 
The defense asserted that the patient was stable, and even improving, until moments before her collapse, and never met the critical care guidelines for hemodynamic instability or shock, and therefore the standard of care did not require thrombolytic therapy.
 
The jury found in favor of the plaintiff.
 
CVN is continuing to expand its Medical Malpractice Litigation Video Library. Purchase online access to the entire collection for just $59 per month.

Tobacco Litigation Video Collection

February 22nd, 2010  |  Published in Cohen v. RJ Reynolds, Engle Progeny, Products Liability, Tobacco Litigation, Toxic Torts, Video Collections

Tobacco Litigation Trial Video Library

CVN is pleased to announce that our Tobacco Litigation Video Collection now includes six trials: Hess v. RJ Reynolds, Ferlanti v. Liggett Group, Kalyvas v. Phillip Morris, Sherman v. RJ Reynolds, Brown v. RJ Reynolds, and Barbanell v. R.J. Reynolds. In addition, CVN has been approved to cover Cohen v. RJ Reynolds live, starting March 1, 2010. CVN is also approved to cover Williams v. Brown & Williamson, which is likely to be tried in spring, 2010, in Missouri.

These trials are mostly Engle-progency cases in Florida. In Engle v. RJ Reynolds, the Florida Supreme Court vacated a $145 billion class action punitive damages judgment, and decertified the class. 

The Court ruled that the class action had adequately established that cigarettes were harmful, addictive, and defective, and that the Tobacco companies had negligently misrepresented facts when the cigarettes were supplied.

However, the Court concluded that each individual plaintiff had to establish that cigarettes were in fact the legal cause of injury, and the amount of damages, including punitive damages. Approximately 8,000 individual cases were filed within one year of the court’s decision, and thus entitled to rely on the res judicata effect of the decertified class action’s factual findings.

February 3, 2009. The first Engle-progeny case to be tried was Hess v. RJ Reynolds. Stuart Hess’s widow Elaine Hess sued cigarette maker Philip Morris, claiming that her husband could not stop smoking because he was addicted to nicotine. Mr. Hess died of lung cancer at age 55, in 1997. The jury awarded $8M to the Elaine and her son — $3M in compensatory damages, and $5M in punitive damages.

February 23, 2009. Ferlanti v. Liggett Group involved a plaintiff who died at age 81 of lung cancer after suffering chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) as a result of cigarette smoking for over 55 years. The jury awarded the plaintiff $700,000 against Liggett Group (a part of Vector Tobacco and Vector Group).

April 8, 2009. Kalyvas v. Phillip Morris. Spyros Kalyvas was a baker (pastry chef) who died of lung cancer at age 42. The defense argued that 90% of smokers do not get lung cancer, and Kalyvas actually stopped smoking for a while during a hospitalization, then started again, and thus could have quit. The jury returned a verdict for the defense.

April 20, 2009. In Sherman v. RJ Reynolds, plaintiff Melba Sherman’s husband, John Sherman, died of lung cancer in 1996, after smoking 3-4 packs of Lucky Strike and Winston cigarettes for over 50 years. According to the defense, Sherman enjoyed smoking, chose to smoke, knew the risks, and made no serious attempt to quit.

The jury found that Sherman was addicted to nicotine and that Sherman’s addiction was the legal cause of death. The jury apportioned liability 50% each to John Sherman and RJ Reynolds, based on RJ Reynolds’ concealment of the dangers, and found damages of $1.55M.

May 11, 2009. Brown v. RJ Reynolds involved a life-long smoker who allegedly started smoking when he was 12 years old. He died of lung cancer and esophageal cancer.

The plaintiff claimed that the smoker was addicted to cigarettes that contained nicotine, and that the nicotine addiction caused his death. The defense claimed that the smoker chose to smoke and wanted to smoke, for most of his life.

The jury ruled in favor of the plaintiff and found damages of $1.2M.

July 27, 2009. In Barbanell v. RJ Reynolds, Shirley Barbanell died after smoking two packs of cigarettes per day for 50 years. Barbanell allegedly attempted to quit smoking but did not succeed. The plaintiff, Barbanell’s husband, contended that Barbanell was addicted to tobacco and that the addiction was partly responsible for Barbanell’s death, which allegedly resulted from lung cancer or emphysema, as evidenced by the tumor in her chest.

The defendant contended that Barbanell died of liver cirrhosis, not lung cancer or emphysema, and Barbanell’s death did not result from smoking.

After Phase 1 of the trial, the jury found that Barbanell was in fact addicted to cigarettes, and the addiction was the legal cause of her death from lung cancer.

After Phase 2 of the trial, the jury assigned 36.5% fault to the defendant, and 63.5% of the fault to Barbanell. Damages were found to be $5,339,198.

____________ 

The largest verdict in any Engle-progeny suit was Naugle v. RJ Reynolds. In November, 2009, a jury awarded Cindy Naugle over $300M – $56.6M in medical expenses, and $244M in punitive damages. However, the judge in the case subsequently declared the award excessive and said he would reduce it.

According to one attorney, the threat of an attorney fee award against unsuccessful Engle-progeny Tobacco plaintiffs creates pressure to settle.

Tobacco companies have been offering the state’s 8,000 smoker plaintiffs minuscule amounts of money — typically $500 to $2,500 — to settle wrongful death and negligence cases potentially worth millions of dollars. The catch: Florida law says plaintiffs who obtain a significantly smaller judgment than a rejected settlement offer must pay the other side’s attorney fees.

Smokers’ attorneys say the exposure to potentially tens of thousands of dollars in attorney fees is another tactic being used to intimidate their clients as thousands of liability cases go to court.

Florida law states plaintiffs could be forced to pay attorney fees and costs if they reject a settlement offer, even a nominal one, and lose or obtain a judgment at least 25 percent less than the offered amount…

A plaintiff in a Pinellas Circuit Court tobacco case agreed to pay $100,000 in defense fees following a defeat. A Hillsborough Circuit Court judge ordered a smoker plaintiff to pay nearly $30,000 in costs after a loss.

With stakes high on both sides, the next Engle-progeny case CVN will cover is Cohen v. RJ Reynolds, before Judge Jeffrey Streitfeld, starting March 1, 2010.  CVN will webcast the trial live.

Asbestos Litigation Video Collection

February 18th, 2010  |  Published in Asbestos, Mesothelioma, Video Collections

Types of Asbestos Slide Presented in Asbestos Llitigation

CVN is pleased to announce that our Asbestos Litigation Library now includes five trials: Roth v. Goodrich, Thacker v. 3M, Miller v. AW Chesterton, Rich v. Bingham, and Kuhnke v. Alfa Laval.

These five trials bring to practitioners a broad range of asbestos litigation issues, including:

  • - Vocational and non-vocational exposure
  • - High-level and low-level exposure
  • - Lung cancer and mesothelioma
  • - Pleural mesothelioma and testicular mesothelioma
  • - Many different fiber types
Summary of each of the cases:
 
Kuhnke v. Alfa Laval

Mesothelioma-Trial-Defense-Attorney-David-Spezialli-Opening-Statement-for-General-Electric-in-Kuhnke-v-Alfa-Laval

The plaintiff, who died of mesothelioma, was a carpenter who spent 33 years working at power plants and switching stations. He was also a steamfitter on Navy ships.
 
The plaintiff asserted that General Electric was uniquely situated to prevent the plaintiff’s death. GE allegedly sold five turbines to the plaintiff’s employer, Wisconsin Electric Power Company (WEPCO), to be located at WEPCO’s Oak Creek Power Plant, which was where the plaintiff did most of his work. The GE turbines allegedly were insulated with thousands of pounds of asbestos, including an especially potent form of asbestos.  
 
GE also supervised the tear-down and removal of the asbestos insulation. According to the plaintiff, Mr. Kuhnke’s exposure to the asbestos contained in the GE turbines was a substantial contributing factor to the plaintiff’s mesothelioma.
 
According to the defense, Mr. Kuhnke had many asbestos exposures other than to General Electric power turbines. GE is the only remaining defendant.
 
UPDATE: The case settled during closing arguments. 
 
Kuhnke v. Alfa Laval is in progress now. Opening statements were heard February 17, 2010, in Milwaukee County Courthouse. 
 
Rich v. Bingham
Expert witness Dr. Kim Anderson testifies in Mesothelioma trial Rich v. Bingham
The plaintiff-mail carrier’s mesothelioma allegedly resulted not from vocational exposure, but from exposure to joint compounds in home improvement products that he allegedly purchased from hardware stores in the 1960′s and 1970′s to repair a recurring crack in the walls of his home.
According to the plaintiff, sanding the joint compound created fine asbestos dust that got into the plaintiff’s lungs, and the defense expert witness could only find a different type of asbestos was involved by violating his own methodology.
Defendants, which include R.T. Vanderbilt, Kaiser Gypsum, and Union Carbide, alleged that the plaintiff’s exposure to these products was not sufficient to cause his current cancer, and that some products were not sold at the stores where the plaintiff claims to have bought them.  In addition, the types of asbestos found in the plaintiff’s lung tissue allegedly did not closely match the fiber types used in the products the plaintiff allegedly used.
The jury returned a defense verdict, finding neither negligence nor the the delivery of a defective product by any of the defendants that was the legal cause of Fred Rich’s illness. The case was tried in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, before Judge Patti Henning.
 
Miller v. AW Chesterton

Testicular Mesothelioma trial Miller versus A.W. Chesterton plaintiff's opening statement

Testicular mesothelioma jury trial based on occupational asbestos exposure.
The plaintiff was born in 1930.  Starting in 1954, he spent 33 years working for the Lindmore Irrigation District maintaining pipes, including replacing concrete pipes with asbestos-cement transite pipes, which mostly were manufactured by Johns-Mansville in Stockton, and mostly relied upon chrysotile asbestos from Advocate Mines and Calaveras Asbestos.
He was diagnosed in February, 2009, as terminally ill from malignant mesothelioma in the tunica vaginalis testes, which had spread to a lymph node.
According to Advocate Mines, tunica vaginalis testes mesothelioma is a classic idiopathic ailment.  With only 100 cases in the world, there is not enough epidemiological evidence to establish that asbestos causes it.  In addition, the defense asserted that chysotile fibers were the least harmful type of asbestos fiber, and did not cause the plaintiff’s disease.
According to Calaveras, its products came with warnings.  Further, Calaveras claimed that its products were not dangerous unless used in such a way as to create dust, and it could not monitor how the product was eventually used.
 
The case was tried in Los Angeles, California, before Judge Terry Green. The parties settled while the jury was deliberating. 
 
Roth v. Goodrich

Roth v. Goodrich Asbestos trial plaintiff attorney Stephen Healy's opening statement

Plaintiff’s lung was removed due to lung cancer (not mesothelioma).  Plaintiff allegedly was exposed to asbestos as a teenager in the late 1950′s while working in the auto repair business at a Shell service station, and while maintaining his own 1937 Ford.
Defendants — Dana, Ford, Honeywell, Pep Boys, and Pneumo Abex — made and/or sold automotive products (e.g., gaskets, clutches, brakes) containing asbestos, which allegedly were not tested for safety and were not accompanied by any safety warnings.
Defendants alleged that the plaintiff’s lung cancer was actually caused by second-hand smoke.
The case settled approximately one week into the trial. 
 
Thacker v. 3M

Thacker v. 3M asbestos trial Judge John Shepard Wiley

Asbestos liability jury trial in Los Angeles Superior Court.
Plaintiff Robert Thacker contracted pleural mesothelioma from asbestos exposure in the 1970s, when he worked as a pipe fitter.  The plaintiff died after the cancer spread to his spine and brain.
The remaining defendant was Weil-McLain, which manufactured boilers that contained asbestos.  Weil-McLain argued that the plaintiff never worked around a Weil-McLain boiler.  Instead, according to the defendant, the plaintiff worked only around larger industrial boilers made by a different manufacturer.
The case settled during the second day of trial.
_______________ 
 
CVN is covering Kuhnke v. Alfa Laval live right now. Access to these five Asbestos trials may be purchased individually, or as a group. Subscribers to CVN’s complete research library will receive all of these cases, and hundreds more.