HOUSEHOLD EXPOSURE TO ASBESTOS

“[W]hen they were really dusty, I would shake some of the dust out in the basement before I put them in the washing machine, and then, you know, I would sweep the dust up off the floor.”

th_1

said a Satterley & Kelley client, we’ll call “Jane”, who was diagnosed with asbestos cancer mesothelioma after 18 years of washing her husband’s asbestos laden working clothing. Our client’s husband, “Bill”, worked with asbestos materials at numerous facilities in Kentucky and Indiana until the mid-1980s. His job activities included installing, removing, cutting, sawing, drilling and mixing asbestos containing insulation and muds. Cutting, sawing and tearing these materials out created clouds of dust, which settled on Bill’s clothing, hair and person nearly every day for twenty years.

Bill worked in a lot of powerhouses insulating boilers that were 10-12 stories high, turbines that were 125 feet wide and miles and miles of steam pipes. Insulating powerhouses required dozens of insulators working around the clock. It looked like it was snowing in the powerhouse while it was being insulated. By the time he left work each day, Bill’s clothes and hair was covered in grayish-white dust. Jane’s husband always wore his own clothing to work. His employers never provided protective clothing or laundry services despite OSHA regulations requiring them to do so. Bill frequently drove his own car to work (often times carpooling with other insulators). Dust from his clothing settled on the seats, floor and dashboard of his vehicles. When Bill got home, he normally removed his dusty clothing and either preserved them for the next day’s work, or when they became too dusty and dirty, he put them in the wash. On numerous occasions, he did not remove his work clothing immediately. He greeted his family, sat down on a chair or couch and spent time with his wife and kids before showering. The dust from his clothing settled on the furniture and in the carpet. Jane did the laundry nearly every day. She tried to avoid dust getting all over the house, by shaking off Bill’s clothing on the back porch or in the garage. Jane breathed the dust from the contaminated clothing on nearly a daily basis.

Until the 1970s, thermal insulation used to insulate boilers, turbines, pipes and equipment, was manufactured with asbestos. Even after it was not used in new insulation, insulators, like Bill, came into contact with asbestos containing insulation on nearly every job for more than a decade, from existing insulation that was installed in the 1950s and 1960s. Bill and Jane had no idea that asbestos could cause a deadly cancer.

While Jane’s asbestos exposure ceased in the mid-1980s, her risk of developing mesothelioma did not decline. Asbestos has a lengthy latency period, often times, resulting in disease 20-50 years after exposure to asbestos. Nearly 30 years following her last exposure to asbestos, Jane was diagnosed with malignant mesothelioma. Her only known asbestos exposure was from Bill’s asbestos contaminated clothing.

Jane’s exposure is known as household exposure, take home exposure or secondhand exposure. Kentucky law holds manufacturers, property owners and employers responsible to spouses or children of an exposed worker, who ultimately contract asbestos diseases. Jane asked Satterley & Kelley to represent her in a lawsuit against her husband’s former employers, the powerhouses at which he worked, and the manufacturers of asbestos products with which he worked.

Unfortunately, Jane is not the only person, who experienced “household” exposure to asbestos whom the lawyers at Satterley & Kelley have represented. We have also represented:

1. the spouse of man who worked at a plant that made electrical products with asbestos containing phenolic molding compounds;

2. the daughter of a man who worked at a plant that made electrical products with asbestos containing phenolic molding compounds;

3. the daughter of a man who worked at a powerhouse and was exposed to asbestos containing thermal insulation;

4. the son of a man who worked at a powerhouse and was exposed to asbestos containing thermal insulation;

5. the son of a man who worked at plastic manufacturing plant and was exposed to asbestos containing phenolic molding compounds; and

6. the wife of an automobile mechanic who was exposed to asbestos containing brakes and clutches.

It makes no difference that you never personally worked around asbestos. If your spouse or parent worked with asbestos, there is s strong likelihood you were also exposed, which caused your disease. If you or a loved one has been diagnosed with mesothelioma, please contact the lawyers at Satterley & Kelley immediately for a free and confidential evaluation of your case.

Learn more about what to do if you develop mesothelioma from household exposure to asbestos.

Tort Reform only applies to the little guy

John Oliver gave a humorous spin to a very serious problem. Companies buy debt from the original creditors and then file lawsuits against the debtors to recover the debt, often times at interest rates that double, triple or quadruple the original debt. While perhaps not the focus of Mr. Oliver’s show, he has identified a very significant problem concerning these debt purchasing practices. They are clogging up courts across the country trying to collect these debts, many of which were forgiven or written off by the original creditor years ago. Essentially, these debt purchasers have bought debt with the expectation they would be filing lawsuits to collect the debt.

While Mr. Oliver’s comments were in the context of debt purchasing, they speak to a bigger issue that impacts citizens throughout the Commonwealth of Kentucky and the United States – – the so called need for “Tort Reform.” State and Federal Legislators have been making efforts for more than a decade to limit the rights of ordinary citizens’ access to the Courthouse. At the request of industry, they have enacted or proposed legislation imposing caps on damages, creating medical review panels and limiting the right to file lawsuits for some injuries unless a certain threshold is reached.

Yet. everyday, corporations file lawsuits, which the common person would find silly. While corporations and people file lawsuits with which some of us may not agree, the Constitution gives them that right. Overwhelmingly, judges and juries reject claims that lack merit, Our judicial system works and has worked for two hundred years. Corporations routinely avail themselves of our court system to right a perceived wrong committed against them, yet they don’t want injured individuals to have the right to do the same.

What can you do? When you read about legislation proposed in Kentucky or your state, which seeks to limit your access to the Courthouse, contact your legislators and let them know you oppose the bill. Recently, Kentucky legislators proposed Senate Bill 6, which would have required victims, injured by negligent nursing homes, to have their case heard before a medical review panel, before they could file a lawsuit and have their case heard by a jury of their peers. The result would have been increased costs to both parties and an even more prolonged resolution. Fortunately, Senate Bill 6 was sent back to committee without a vote due to lack of support. However, it will resurface again in future legislative sessions.

Satterley & Kelley fought against Senate Bill 6 and will fight against any legislation or regulation, which is intended to limit the rights of individuals to recover for injuries caused by defective products or the negligence of another.

If you or a loved one has been injured from asbestos exposure, a defective product or the negligence of another, contact Satterley & Kelley, 502-589-5600, Louisville, Kentucky.