Getting the Asbestos Mess Under Control : The System Is Bogged Down in Litigation; Justice Has Been All Too Blind
Two federal judges recently moved to end one of the most expensive and waste-riddled legal free-for-alls in U.S. history. They want to consolidate the ongoing flood of litigation brought against asbestos manufacturers by individuals who have been exposed to the toxic fiber. The judges are calling for a comprehensive and innovative resolution to this bitter litigation, which has taken so long that thousands of victims literally die before their cases are heard.
Any asbestos exposure can cause cancer, and long-term exposure can cause disabling or fatal pulmonary diseases. Although the oldest claimants were exposed to the insulating material while working under federal contract, the government has denied responsibility.
A creative solution is needed because the number of claims is mushrooming--at present, about 100,000 cases are pending nationwide. In Los Angeles alone, some 5,000-8,000 cases have been closed since the 1970s, and a similar number are believed to be pending. Estimates of the cost of compensation surpass the GNPs of some Third World countries.
Even though the substantive legal issues have been decided, defendants continue to fight the claims. Manufacturers and insurers are also fighting each other over whose asbestos injured a given claimant. Amid this legal war of attrition, some defendants threaten or declare bankruptcy before all victims are compensated.
Judges Jack Weinstein of New York and Thomas Lambros of Ohio want to stop this protracted litigation from siphoning off any more of the dwindling funds. The system has satisfied no one except the attorneys collecting lucrative fees.
Judge Weinstein (who settled the massive Agent Orange case) took the first step toward clearing the growing thicket of briefs when he ordered restructuring of the nation’s largest asbestos compensation trust so that there will be enough assets to pay all present and future asbestos victims. Judge Lambros took an equally bold step, establishing a national class- action suit, joining all present and future asbestos claimants. Both judges say that justice in this case has been so blind--to waste and inefficiency--that it is too often rendered posthumously or not at all.
The tort system is failing asbestos victims. Either judge’s plan may offer a path out of the tragic impasse. What is most important is to pay all claimants quickly and fairly, limit legal fees and establish health monitoring for asbestos victims. The right solution could set important precedents for other mass product-liability suits.
