Second Talc Bankruptcy Case

Second Talc Bankruptcy Case Involving Johnson & Johnson Thrown Out

/in /by

The courts have once again denied Johnson & Johnson and its subsidiaries from filing bankruptcy. This allows people to move forward with litigation if they have developed ovarian cancer or mesothelioma due to exposure to asbestos in the company’s talcum powder.

John Maher: Hi, I’m John Maher. I’m here today with Paul Kelley. Paul is a partner with the Kentucky Personal Injury Law firm, Satterley & Kelley, which has over 30 years of collective experience in handling cases involving mesothelioma and asbestos exposure. Today we’re talking about the second talc bankruptcy case involving Johnson & Johnson being thrown out. Welcome, Paul.

Paul Kelley: Hey, John. How are you doing today?

NJ Court Denies J&J Subsidiary From Filing Bankruptcy

John: Good, thanks. So, Paul, tell me a little bit more about what happened in the most recent bankruptcy case involving Johnson & Johnson and their LTL Management LLC subsidiary.

Paul: Sure, John, I’ll cut to the punchline. Last Friday, the bankruptcy court in New Jersey dismissed the LTL bankruptcy and so, effective that day, it’s over. LTL, Johnson & Johnson, and any related entities are all outside of the bankruptcy system and they’re back in the tort system.

John: Okay, so give us a little bit of background. I know we’ve talked about this before, but for people who might not have heard about it, what is the Texas two-step and what was Johnson & Johnson trying to do with this bankruptcy claim?

Ovarian Cancer Caused by Asbestos in Talcum Powder

Paul: Sure. So, what happened was, probably a little bit less than 10 years ago it became more widely known that Johnson & Johnson Baby Powder and other talcum powder products contain trace levels of asbestos. And lawyers, such as myself, started filing lawsuits. And as it turned out, the science has demonstrated that asbestos causes, of course mesothelioma, which is uniquely associated with asbestos exposure, and it also causes ovarian cancer.

And a lot of women have suffered from ovarian cancer historically, and until fairly recently, it was not known at all that ovarian cancer could be caused by talcum powder exposure and really the asbestos in the talcum powder. So, Johnson & Johnson was inundated with lawsuits when this became more commonly known. In the United States, mesothelioma is very rare, and so there’s probably only about 3000 cases of mesothelioma diagnosed every year. Ovarian cancer is far more common, and there’s thousands of ovarian cancer cases that are diagnosed each year as well.

And so, a lot of lawsuits were filed, and I think the current number actually may be closer to 60,000, that are currently pending against Johnson & Johnson in various corners of the United States, prominently in New Jersey, which is where J&J is located. But there’s pockets of cases all over. And so, after a series of trials…and I think there’s been 23 trials that have occurred over the last six, seven years, and to be fair, J&J has won several of those trials, but they’ve lost a significant portion.

And some of those verdicts have been exceeding billions of dollars. And Johnson & Johnson’s paying tens of millions of dollars per case to defend them to their lawyers, experts. It’s a lot, and obviously I’m not privy to those exact figures, but I’ve been around the block enough to know that they’re spending a lot of money.

We tried one, four or five years ago, and there were a dozen lawyers in the room for Johnson & Johnson, big law firms, big national firms. These lawyers are billing five hundred to a thousand dollars an hour, their experts are charging $50,000 a case, and they’ve got six or seven of them. So, they’re spending a lot of money. So rather than trying to allocate the cost of litigation to fairly resolving the cases, J&J devised another plan. And that plan was to create a subsidiary. And it was through this Texas law.

J&J Created a Subsidiary to Carry Its Litigation Liabilities

It’s got a variety of names. I think they call it the divisive merger, and some folks call it the Texas two-step. But essentially what it entails is you take an existing company, you spin it off into two different entities, and entity number one is going to carry on the business of the company as if nothing ever stopped.

Entity number two gets the liabilities. And in this particular case, it was very specific liabilities. It was just the talc litigation liabilities. So, they didn’t dump in their other products that they’ve been litigating. They didn’t dump in accounts receivable and accounts payable, liabilities, mortgage, stuff like that. It was just talc liabilities. And so, one of the companies they formed was called LTL Management LLC. LTL Management LLC is the company that got the talc liabilities.

The Subsidiary (LTL Management) Filed for Bankruptcy

Very shortly after they formed that company, it went into bankruptcy. And it was formed in North Carolina, which has absolutely nothing to do with Johnson & Johnson. Johnson & Johnson have been based out of New York or New Jersey for years. Everything that has to do with this talc has been in New Jersey. So, they filed this bankruptcy in North Carolina and the North Carolina bankruptcy court. And by the way, John, the reason why they filed it there is because they thought they had a favorable judge that would go along with this plan.

That judge ultimately determined that North Carolina had no connection to this bankruptcy. It was an inappropriate jurisdiction and, actually, on its own, pretty much transferred the case to the bankruptcy court in New Jersey, and that’s where the first LTL / Johnson & Johnson bankruptcy was handled. So, one question that our listeners may have is, well, who cares if LTL declares bankruptcy?

Johnson & Johnson’s still an ongoing entity. So, what they did was they went to the New Jersey bankruptcy court and said, we deserve the protection that LTL gets from lawsuits because we basically are on the hook for LTL’s liabilities.

Filing Bankruptcy Halted All Litigation Against J&J

Once a bankruptcy is filed by a debtor, LTL in this case, there’s what’s called an automatic stay that gets put into place. So, all these cases, all these thousands of lawsuits that have been filed all over the country, they came to a screeching halt and Johnson & Johnson was able to convince the bankruptcy court back in 2021 to stop not just lawsuits against LTL, but lawsuits against Johnson & Johnson. No trials, no discovery, nobody could settle outside that system. It just came to a screeching halt.

And if there were other defendants that were pursued in cases involving Johnson & Johnson, in some instances, some of those cases came to a halt as well because the courts didn’t want to proceed without J&J being there. So, this Texas two-step, it’s controversial for sure; it’s been utilized by some other asbestos defendants over the last several years to try to avoid liability such as what Johnson & Johnson’s done. Or limited its liability, really.

But it’s a significant problem because you’ve got a company that’s not really bankrupt. You’ve got a company that’s not really under any kind of financial distress. So, what ultimately occurred, we will try to keep it short, is eventually the creditor’s committee, so people like me, an attorney representing victims of exposure from these products, we’re just creditors in the bankruptcy system, and there are existing creditors and there’s future creditors.

And we had filed a motion to dismiss the bankruptcy to try to keep it out of that system and put it into the tort system where it belongs. The bankruptcy judge in New Jersey felt that it was just impossible to get through all of these cases through the ordinary common tort system. And so, he refused to dismiss the bankruptcy.

A Court of Appeals Dismissed the Bankruptcy Case

And what occurred after that was there was an appeal, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals, and long story short, the Third Circuit dismissed the bankruptcy. The Third Circuit ultimately determined that LTL, which had access to this huge pool of money that J&J was kind of offering behind the scenes, that LTL had plenty of money to deal with the lawsuits and whatever liabilities it had, at least for the foreseeable future. And then of course, J&J, which is a massive Fortune 50, Fortune 100 company, J&J is certainly not under financial distress.

And that’s the standard. You can’t take advantage of the bankruptcy process unless you are in significant financial distress. And you and I as individuals would not be able to do what Johnson & Johnson and LTL did, and certainly corporations should not be treated better than people. And that’s what the Third Circuit did. After a series of stuff that occurred after that, ultimately the Third Circuit’s decision becomes final, and it goes back to the bankruptcy court with what’s called a mandate.

J&J Refiled for Bankruptcy, Courts Dismissed the Case

And the mandate requires the bankruptcy court to dismiss the bankruptcy. That’s the Third Circuit’s instructions of the New Jersey bankruptcy court. And that’s exactly what happened. The judge there dismissed it, and about three hours later, Johnson & Johnson / LTL filed another bankruptcy. And again, the whole process began; they requested a stay of not just cases involving the debtor, LTL, but also requested a stay of all litigation everywhere in the United States.

And I won’t bore everybody with all the details, but for the most part they got the benefit of that. And since they filed the new bankruptcy in April, only one case was allowed to be tried anywhere in the United States, and that was through the blessing of the bankruptcy court. But all other cases, trial stayed, and Johnson & Johnson essentially got to hang back and preserve its money until last Friday, and now the bankruptcy’s dismissed.

And there will be some further appellate scenarios that will occur, but for all intents and purposes, as of this moment, it’s back in the tort system and folks can proceed for these deadly cancers, mesothelioma and ovarian cancer.

Now, Personal Injury Lawsuits Against the Company Can Move Forward

John: Right, absolutely. So, you mentioned that, I had read there were 40,000 lawsuits pending against Johnson & Johnson. You’re saying that there’s maybe even upwards of 60,000 relating to ovarian cancer and mesothelioma cancer cases. So, what’s the status now of all of those cases after this ruling?

Paul: So, John, the status is certainly that now those cases can all move forward. Of course, when you’re talking about those kinds of numbers, it’s difficult to imagine how some of the courts will move forward. I have a handful of cases that are spread out through the United States, and I’ve had an expectation that our cases will be able to get tried within the next year or two.

But there’s something called a multi-district litigation, MDL, where most of the ovarian cancer cases sit, and that’s also in New Jersey. And there’s going to be a bit of a challenge to get some of those cases to trial and for any of those claimants to get proper recourse for what’s happened to them. But those are challenges that all of the attorneys that are representing the claimants are willing to take on. The court system is certainly going to encourage settlements and other resolutions in any way.

And to a certain extent, it’s going to be up to Johnson & Johnson. Is it going to continue this charade? Is it going to continue fighting these cases despite the massive amount of evidence demonstrating that its product contains asbestos and causes disease? Or at some point, will somebody make a sensible decision to try to fairly resolve cases because that’s really what it comes down to. And the bankruptcy process was intended to resolve cases, but not fairly, fairly to Johnson & Johnson, but not the people and their families who have to live with this terrible cancer or in many instances die with this terrible cancer.

Can Johnson & Johnson File for Bankruptcy Again?

John: Right. Now, Johnson & Johnson has filed for bankruptcy twice. Is there anything preventing them from filing again. Is this the end of that process?

Paul: That’s complicated and I would say that the answer to the first question, nothing’s stopping them from filing again. I mean, anybody can file whatever they want, but they’ve been told twice now that they have plenty of money, that they’re not under financial distress.

I would certainly proceed cautiously if I was counseling Johnson & Johnson / LTL, if I was their attorney. My suspicion is that at some point they will file again. And I don’t know whether it’ll be this year, next year, five years from now. The bankruptcy court has essentially said, as things stand right now, you’re not under financial distress. And that is really the sole factor. And so, any future filing, it would have to demonstrate a lot more sufficiently than it has up to this point that either of the entities are under financial distress.

John: So, they have to demonstrate that significant things have changed since the initial ruling. And maybe it’s that, yeah, a couple of years worth of cases have been resolved and they’ve had to pay out settlements or something like that. And then they say, okay, now we’re in distress. But until that happens, they really need to proceed cautiously.

Paul: And I would think that it’d be very difficult for a company like Johnson & Johnson to ever really prove that. I mean, it has its hands involved in a lot of things. I won’t tell you that I know its exact number on the Fortune 500 list, but it’s pretty high up there. And jury verdicts, some verdicts have been high, some verdicts have been lower, and I think that Johnson & Johnson and its subsidiaries and anybody else paying can pay quite a bit of money to claimants without ever really being in financial distress.

I think the problem is its insistence. The fight and everything has really increased its cost significantly. I mean, if you’ve got 40 or 50 cases that have gone to trial over the last several years and it’s paying five or 10 million dollars a case to its lawyers, I mean, you do the math, it’s going to get into the billions of dollars just paying its own lawyers.

I get it, everybody has a right to a defense. They have a right to make whatever decisions they want, but when you get dinged for 30 and 40 million in some instances, 2 billion dollars for a series of 22 women, those litigation costs are really significant. And I would suggest that they could probably resolve a lot of cases without spending a lot of money and without really putting itself in any jeopardy.

But they’ve got a lot of motives that quite frankly, aren’t in good faith. And that’s really what two bankruptcy dismissals have demonstrated, that it’s conducted itself in bad faith and we have no reason to believe that it suddenly is going to change course and start behaving in good faith.

Why J&J’s $8.9 Billion Cancer Claim Settlement Is Not a Good Deal for Victims

John: Sure. So, Johnson & Johnson’s latest bankruptcy claim included a settlement deal of 8.9 billion to cover existing and future cancer claims, and some of the plaintiff’s law firms actually supported this settlement. Why do you think that that was a bad deal and that jury trials should be allowed to continue?

Paul: And that’s a great question because 8.9 billion dollars certainly sounds like a heck of a lot of money. But my understanding of the current number is that now there are 58,000 cases, ovarian cancer, mesothelioma. Most of those are ovarian cancer cases that have been filed. But this proposed settlement in bankruptcy would also pertain to future claimants.

And so, if we have this many past claimants, well, my goodness, Johnson & Johnson didn’t stop manufacturing this product with asbestos until 2020, 2021. So, there is the potential of 50 to 60 more years of claims, maybe longer, to be filed. And so, the money that’s being paid would have to not just compensate and protect the interest of current claimants, but it would also have to protect the interest of future claimants. So, there’s two reasons why this is not a good deal. Number one, most people would only end up with 40 or $50,000.

That’s gross. That’s before they pay their attorneys. That’s before they pay Medicare, health insurance companies, which we can probably get into a long discussion over that. But when we’re talking about what they net, I mean they may not get anything or net 5, 10, $15,000. I’ve been doing this for a long time, regardless of whether it’s ovarian cancer or mesothelioma, I mean medical bills are astronomical, the impact to one’s ability to earn money and do their job is devastating.

I mean, most people die of mesothelioma, and so they can’t work. If they’re young, 40 or 50 years old, I mean, their life expectancy and earning expectancy has been shattered, not to mention pain and suffering and those sorts of things.

So, to give somebody that’s dying of a terminal cancer or to give to a family of a loved one who died of terminal cancer and say, here you go, here’s $15,000. I mean, it’s a slap in the face and it’s a total insult. The other reason why it’s a problem is that the proposed agreement or proposed settlement would pay out over a period of years, and I’ve heard 10, 20 years. So even if it was $200,000, I mean they’re getting $10,000 a year. Not helpful. Not helpful at all. And obviously when you’re talking about paying something over time, so many things can happen over 20 years. Who knows if people would get paid for the full term, even if it was a fair amount.

John: Right, or that the payments would stop after they potentially have passed away or something like that. And then, yeah, that would be the end of it.

Paul: Absolutely.

Filing Cases Against J&J for Causing Cancer With Its Talcum Powder

John: What comes next then in this, and this is a pretty complex case involving Johnson & Johnson and mesothelioma and ovarian cancer cases. What sort of happens next now?

Paul: Well, we keep fighting, those of us that are representing people that have been afflicted by cancer from exposure to this product. We keep fighting. We keep fighting in the tort system. We keep trying these cases and file cases against Johnson & Johnson and these entities for causing this cancer.

It will be a challenge. As I mentioned before, there’s a lot of cases and it’s imposed a burden on the trial courts. Hopefully Johnson & Johnson will try to deal fairly with some folks, even if they don’t want to, just as a business practice.

But our plan is to try every case that we can, if the defendant will not resolve them. What’s Johnson & Johnson’s plan? Your guess is as good as mine. I suspect that it will continue to seek strategies to avoid having to pay fair value to people. It will continue to misrepresent what’s in its product and what historically has been in its product. And that’s just what’s going to happen.

But we will continue to fight that until we reach resolution for each and every person that’s been afflicted or eventually Johnson & Johnson gets what it wants. But I think it’s going to be a long journey for J&J to ultimately get what it’s been seeking for these last three or four years.

Contact Satterley and Kelley to Learn More

John: All right, well that’s really great information, Paul. Thanks again for speaking with me today.

Paul: Thanks, John.

John: And for more information about mesothelioma and asbestos exposure, visit the law firm of Satterley and Kelley at satterleylaw.com or call 855-385-9532.

Asbestos Exposure at US Steel in Pittsburgh

Asbestos Exposure at US Steel in Pittsburgh

/in /by

If you worked at US Steel, you may have been exposed to asbestos in many different ways through a significantly long time period during the company’s operation. Family members of employees may have experienced secondary exposure. Although US Steel has facilities around the country, this post looks at the operations near Pittsburgh, PA.

To talk with an asbestos attorney now, contact us today at Satterley & Kelley, PLLC.

History of US Steel

Founded in 1901, US Steel was created through a merger of the well-established companies Carnegie Steel and Federal Steel Company. In its second year of existence, it produced over two-thirds of the country’s steel. It was the world’s first billion-dollar company, and at that time, it was the largest company in the world. 

(US Steel Execs)

Currently, the company has plants in Alabama, Arkansas, California, Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Texas. Historically, its reach was even broader.

The Pennsylvania US Steel facilities include the Mon Valley Works (short for Monongahela Valley) facilities at the following locations:

  • Clairton Plant in Clairton
  • Edgar Thomson Plant in Braddock
  • Fairless Plant in Fairless Hills
  • Irvin Plant in West Mifflin
  • Duquesne Steel Works (shut down in 1984)

In contemporary times, the company is still the second-largest steel producer in the United States. However, even though it has expanded internationally over the last 20 years, it is only about the 38th biggest steel company in the world.

Asbestos Exposure During Steel Production

Employees of US Steel In Pennsylvania were exposed to asbestos through many different types of equipment and processes. Asbestos was used throughout the steel facility to insulate a wide range of equipment.

Asbestos was used to insulate pipes for steam, hot water, and chemicals. The coke ovens that turned coke into coal contained asbestos. Additionally, the furnaces where the steel was manufactured were lined with fire brick, a refractory material used as insulation. Even ceiling and floor tiles contain asbestos.

(Blast Furnace at Duquesne Steel Works)

Additionally, the hots tops that covered the steel molds and helped keep out contaminants also contained asbestos. When they got very hot, these tops would become ashy and the asbestos would get released into the air.

Ironically, even employees’ protective clothing such as gloves, aprons, and welding coats also contained asbestos. At one point, the welding rods contained asbestos. The brakes on the railroad cars that brought in the raw materials also contained asbestos.

Employees Exposed to Asbestos at US Steel

Nearly anyone who worked at US Steel was likely exposed to asbestos. The people who built the plant, maintained its equipment, or worked around the asbestos in the plant were likely to be exposed. That includes employees in the following positions:

  • Boilermakers
  • Bricklayers
  • Dust collectors
  • Electricians
  • Furnace operators
  • Insulators
  • Maintenance workers
  • Millwrights
  • Outside contractors
  • Pipefitters
  • Plumbers
  • Supervisors
  • Train operators

The above is not an exhaustive list. Managers and administrators may also have been exposed if they were in unloading, production, or shipping areas on a regular basis.

Statute of Limitations for Work-Based Asbestos Injury in PA

In Pennsylvania, you can bring an asbestos injury lawsuit against your former employer as long as you are diagnosed more than 300 weeks after exposure. This is just under six years, and the latency period for asbestos is usually 10 years or more. That means that most former employees of US Steel who contract mesothelioma can bring a lawsuit against this company.

If you are diagnosed in fewer than 300 weeks after working for the company — for instance, this may happen if you were exposed early in your career or if you were diagnosed with lung cancer due to asbestos exposure. In this situation, you can pursue compensation through the state’s workers’ compensation program. However, you may be able to bring a lawsuit against one of the suppliers or manufacturers of the asbestos-laden products.

Get Help If You Have Been Diagnosed With Mesothelioma

If you have been diagnosed with mesothelioma, you need to focus on your medical care and quality of life, but we can focus on your legal rights. US Steel knew the risks of asbestos, but the company continued to expose its employees, their families, and the company’s contractors to asbestos.

People who contracted mesothelioma or other serious illnesses due to exposure at US Steel may be entitled to compensation for medical treatment, lost work, pain and suffering, and other losses. To get help, contact us at Satterley & Kelley, PLLC today. We’ll talk with you about your situation and help you decide if you should bring forward a lawsuit.

https://www.satterleylaw.com/blog/2022/08/common-asbestos-exposures-that-can-lead-to-mesothelioma-podcast/

Asbestos Exposure at Rockwell International in Russellville, KY

/in , /by

Former employees of Rockwell International were exposed to asbestos. The exposure affected nearly everyone who worked at the facility before 1980 and potentially even later. If you or a loved one has been diagnosed with mesothelioma due to your exposure, you have a right to compensation.

The legal team at Satterley & Kelley, PLLC has over three decades of collective experience representing clients with mesothelioma diagnoses, and we have even represented former Rockwell employees. To get help now, contact us today.

(Asbestos fibers By Aram Dulyan (Wikimedia Commons User: Aramgutang))

Overview of Rockwell International

Rockwell International was a die-casting facility in Russellville, KY, a small town in the southwest part of the state. Opened in about 1957, the facility made a variety of aluminum products including water meters, gas meters, typewriter covers, and many different car parts. It operated under the name Rockwell until 1989. Then, it operated under the names of British Tyre and Rubber and Precision Die Casting, and eventually, the plant shut down.

Asbestos at Rockwell International

Asbestos was primarily used as an insulator at Rockwell International. It was used to insulate the steam and water pipes that ran through the facility — the insulation ensured that the materials moving through the pipes stayed at their target temperature.

Asbestos was also used in the furnaces used to melt and store the aluminum. To melt the aluminum so that it could be injected into a die cast, these furnaces got to over 1,000 degrees, and to protect their integrity, they were lined with firebrick and refractory materials that contained asbestos.

Who Was Exposed at Rockwell International?

The people who installed the furnaces and the pipes were exposed to asbestos. So too were the people that worked on this equipment. Once a year or every other year, the employees removed the firebrick and replaced it with a new lining, which  helped to ensure that the lining continued to insulate the furnace effectively., Unfortunately, relining these furnaces also exposed workers to asbestos.

Ripping out the old lining filled the air in the facility with microscopic asbestos fibers. This meant that everyone in the area — even managers and administrators who only occasionally came into the production space — was exposed to asbestos. That includes people in the following roles at Rockwell:

  • Electricians
  • Engineers
  • Equipment operators
  • Furnace installers
  • Furnace operators
  • Maintenance workers
  • Managers
  • Mechanics
  • Officer workers
  • Pipefitters

That is not an exhaustive list. Keep in mind that Rockwell had about 30 furnaces, and they contained asbestos from the 1950s at least to the mid-1970s. As a result, there was usually a furnace being relined every 10 to 12 days. In other words, there was nearly always asbestos in the air.

Determining the Site of Exposure

Mesothelioma takes at least 10 years from the time of exposure to the time of diagnosis, and often, the latency period is 30 to 40 years. Because so much time has passed, it can be challenging for people to pinpoint the cause of exposure.

Most people are exposed occupationally. Consider that fewer than one in a million people get diagnosed with mesothelioma. However, at this plant, there have been a handful of diagnoses even though there were just a few thousand employees. The drastic difference between average rates of diagnosis and rates of diagnosis from former Rockwell employees indicates that this is a significant exposure site.

Deadline to File a Lawsuit

In Kentucky, you have a year from the date of discovery to file a lawsuit. In most cases, that’s a year from diagnosis. However, in some situations, you can argue that the date of discovery was the date you realized the site of your exposure, even if this is later than the date of diagnosis.

If you’re bringing forward a lawsuit for a deceased family member, the deadline is one year after the date you set up the estate and no later than two years after the date of death. Note that you cannot file this  type of lawsuit on behalf of a deceased loved one without an estate.

Can Former Employees Sue Rockwell?

Unfortunately, if you were a former employee of Rockwell, you cannot bring a lawsuit against them. However, you may be able to file a suit against other negligent parties such as the manufacturers of the ovens or of the linings. When you consult with an asbestos attorney, they will talk with you about your options.

Can Relatives of Employees Sue Rockwell?

You cannot sue Rockwell on behalf of your relative if they are a former employee of Rockwell. However, if you contracted mesothelioma due to secondary exposure from a Rockwell employee, you can bring a lawsuit against the company. For example, if your spouse worked at Rockwell and you breathed in asbestos fibers while doing their laundry,. that is secondary exposure, for which you can  sue Rockwell for causing your disease.

Get Help Today

When you’re dealing with an asbestos-related lawsuit, you need an experienced attorney in your corner, and that’s what we can provide. At Satterley & Kelley, PLLC, we have decades of experience with asbestos litigation, and we have even represented former Rockwell employees in the past. To get help now, contact us for a free consultation today.

Health Risks Associated with Asbestos

Asbestos Exposure at the P. Lorillard Tobacco Company

/in /by

In the early to mid-1950s, many people who were employed at the P. Lorillard Tobacco Company in Louisville, KY were exposed to asbestos, and decades later, many of them were diagnosed with mesothelioma, a deadly form of cancer. Additionally, many people were secondarily exposed through relatives who worked at the plant, while others were exposed to asbestos while smoking Kent cigarettes manufactured with asbestos filters at the Louisville plant.

This post explains how people were exposed to asbestos due to Lorillard. Then, it outlines your legal options and how to get help. To talk about your case now, contact us at Satterley & Kelley, PLLC today.

What Is the P. Lorillard Tobacco Company?

Founded in 1760, the P. Lorillard Tobacco Company manufactured Newport, Maverick, Old Gold, Kent, and other popular cigarettes. From 1952 to 1956, Lorillard used an asbestos filter (called the Kent Micronite) to manufacture Kent cigarettes. Many Kent smokers and Lorillard employees contracted mesothelioma or lung cancer due to exposure to asbestos fibers in those filters. 

What is Asbestos?

Asbestos is a group of minerals resistant to fire, heat, electricity, and corrosion. Over the centuries, asbestos fibers have been used in about 3,000 products, including pipe insulation, building materials, floor tiles, cigarette filters, vehicle brakes, and clutches. These fibers are strong, durable, light, and microscopic.

Why is Asbestos Dangerous?

Asbestos was incorporated into products because its fibers are tiny, light, strong, and durable. Those same qualities make them incredibly toxic to the human body. The fibers aren’t acid-covered or will immediately cause a deadly reaction in people who inhale or swallow them. It may take years or decades for asbestos’ hazards to become apparent.

Fibers become stuck in human tissue. The immune system tries to get rid of them, but the fibers destroy the cells meant to dissolve them instead. This results in scar tissue, inflammation, and, over time, severe breathing problems and genetic cell mutations that result in cancer tumors.

Asbestos causes or increases the risk of several cancers, including lung cancer and mesothelioma. Mesothelioma is an aggressive and deadly cancer that can affect several parts of the body. It can involve the linings covering organs (including the heart and lungs) and the chest and abdominal cavities.

Micronite Asbestos Filters in Kent Cigarettes

The P. Lorillard Tobacco Company manufactured Kent cigarettes with Micronite filters from 1952 to 1956. It removed these cigarettes from the market in 1957.

Due to the filter, the company marketed the Kent as a “safe” cigarette — allegedly, the asbestos filters protected smokers from inhaling other carcinogens. Unfortunately, however, the cigarettes contained multiple carcinogens, and both smokers and factory employees were exposed to asbestos fibers.

Asbestos at Lorillard Tobacco in Louisville, KY

In the early to mid-1950s, P. Lorillard Tobacco opened a cigarette manufacturing plant in Louisville, Kentucky. The plant manufactured Kent cigarettes with Kent Micronite filters as well as other types of cigarettes. To manufacture the filters, Lorillard purchased rolls of asbestos-containing material from Hollingsworth & Vose.

Employees were exposed to asbestos when they carried the rolls of material into the building and throughout the manufacturing process. In the plug room, Lorillard employees cut the rolls into tiny pieces to make the filters. Then, the filters were sent to the cutting machines where a single wrapper would go around a piece of filter and enough tobacco for two cigarettes.

The cutting machine cut through the filter and created two cigarettes from a single wrapper. Each of the cigarettes went in a separate direction on the machine to be inspected and packaged. Everyone operating the machines breathed in asbestos fibers as the machine cut through thousands of filters every hour.

The tray handlers gathered the finished cigarettes to prepare them for packaging, and they were also responsible for discarding the broken cigarettes. They salvaged the tobacco to be put through the process again. Then, they put the ripped wrappers and broken filters into the garbage. During this process, they inhaled asbestos fibers.

Legal Options for People Who Contracted Mesothelioma From Kent Cigarettes Manufactured by Lorillard Tobacco

If you worked for Lorillard Tobacco between 1952 and 1956, you most likely inhaled asbestos fibers on the job. This leads to mesothelioma, asbestosis, and lung cancer. If you develop any of these diseases, you may have a right to pursue claims against Lorillard and the manufacturer of the filter material.

Further, if you smoked Kent cigarettes, you have the right to pursue compensation against Lorillard Tobacco as the manufacturer of these cigarettes. Indeed, Lorillard gave Kent cigarettes to its employees many of whom smoked them outside of work. You may also be able to hold the manufacturer of the filter material liable for your injuries. When you talk with a personal injury attorney, they will help you understand more about your options.

Secondary Asbestos Exposure

You also have a right to compensation if you contracted mesothelioma due to secondary exposure — for example, inhaling asbestos fibers from your parent’s or spouse’s clothing when they returned home from working at Lorillard Tobacco.

As of 2023, a recent decision from the Kentucky Court of Appeals improves the outlook for people who were exposed due to secondary exposure. The Appellate Court’s ruling established that employers have a duty to protect their employees’ families from foreseeable harm. During the time period Lorillard manufactured Kent cigarettes, the risks of asbestos were already well established.

In fact, safety journals published in that time period advised employees to remove their clothes before leaving manufacturing plants to prevent the toxins from leaving the work sites.

Statute of Limitations on Asbestos Litigation in Kentucky

A statute of limitations is a deadline to file a lawsuit against a party. If you or a loved one has contracted mesothelioma due to exposure at P. Lorillard Tobacco or from smoking Kent cigarettes with Micronite filters, you only have one year from the date of diagnosis to bring forward a lawsuit.

However, the law focuses on the date that you discovered the injury, and technically, you have one year from the date of discovery to sue the party that injured you. With asbestos-related lawsuits, the date of discovery is generally the date of diagnosis, but there can be exceptions depending on whether the defendants concealed the presence of asbestos in their products.  Regardless, time is of the essence.  You should contact an attorney immediately following diagnosis of an asbestos disease. 

Can You Sue the Successor of Lorillard Tobacco?

Yes, the company that acquired Lorillard Tobacco Company also acquired all of its legal liabilities for previously manufactured products. That means you can sue the new owner.

Reynolds American, Inc. bought Lorillard Tobacco in 2014 for $27 billion. Reynolds is the second largest tobacco manufacturer in the United States, and it is a subsidiary of British American Tobacco. British American bought Reynolds for $49.4 billion in 2017.

These billion-dollar companies subjected many employees and customers to asbestos. This cost people years of their lives, time with their family members, and millions of dollars in medical bills. These corporations did this although the risks were well documented.

Get Help If You Were Exposed to Asbestos Fibers at the Lorillard Tobacco Company

At Satterley & Kelley, PLLC, we have represented dozens of clients who were employed at Lorillard Tobacco in Louisville, KY as well as people who contracted mesothelioma and/or lung cancer from smoking Kent cigarettes. We focus on asbestos-related litigation, and we fight hard to get our clients and their families the compensation that they deserve.

We know that no amount of money can compensate you for your health or time lost with your family, but we will treat you like family and help you get the justice you deserve. If you’ve contracted mesothelioma due to the negligence of Lorillard Tobacco or any other company, you deserve compensation. Don’t wait — contact us for help today.

Asbestos

Asbestos Exposure at Louisville Gas and Electric

/in /by

Many employees of Louisville Gas and Electric, as well as outside contractors, were exposed to asbestos numerous  facilities built, owned and operated by the Company. If you or a loved one was diagnosed with mesothelioma or lung cancer and you worked at this power plant between the 1940s and the 1990s, you may be entitled to compensation due to your exposure.

To help you navigate this difficult time, this guide outlines what to do after a diagnosis. Then, it explains how employees of Louisville Gas and Electric were exposed to asbestos.

What to Do If You’ve Been Diagnosed With Mesothelioma

If you have been diagnosed with mesothelioma, you need to focus on your recovery. This is a rare and deadly disease. Treatment needs to be your first priority.

However, you should also contact a personal injury attorney experienced with mesothelioma cases. At Satterley & Kelley, PLLC, we have represented many former employees of Louisville Gas & Electric after they received a cancer diagnosis.

There are only about 3,000 mesothelioma cases diagnosed every year in the United States. When multiple people who worked for the same employer (such as Louisville Gas & Electric) have this diagnosis, it’s a clear indication that they were exposed to asbestos on the job.

Mesothelioma at Louisville Gas & Electric (LG&E)

Listen to our conversation with attorney Paul Kelley about mesothelioma at Louisville Gas & Electric (LG&E):

Louisville Gas & Electric

Louisville Gas & Electric is a power company based in Louisville, KY. Originally founded in 1838, the company has gone through several name changes and mergers. In 1998, it merged with Kentucky Utilities, and in 2010, it was purchased by the PPL corporation, its current owner, for just over $7 billion.

The company has several plants including the Trimble County Generation Station, Mill Creek Station, Ohio Falls Station, Muldraugh and Magnolia Compressor Stations, and Cane Run Station.

(Louisville Gas and Electric photo by Joseph @ Flickr)

Asbestos Injury Lawsuits Against Former Employers in Kentucky

In Kentucky, you cannot bring a lawsuit against your employer. You are limited to pursuing compensation through the state’s workers’ compensation program. However, due to the strict time limits of this program and the long latency of mesothelioma, people with mesothelioma typically can’t make claims under workers’ compensation laws.

However, this doesn’t mean that you don’t have a claim. In many cases, you may be able to hold a supplier liable. For instance, say that you were exposed to asbestos while refurbishing the firebrick lining in a boiler at Louisville Gas & Electric. Then, the fire brick manufacturer may be liable. Note this is just an example. Every case is unique, and when you talk with an attorney, they will help you identify a liable party in your situation.

Lawsuits for Secondary Exposure to Asbestos

Unfortunately, the family members of Louisville Gas & Electric may also have been exposed to asbestos. People who worked for this plant often brought home fibers on their clothing. When inhaled, these fibers can cause mesothelioma, lung cancer, and other serious illnesses.

If you have a mesothelioma diagnosis due to secondary exposure, you should also contact a personal injury attorney. You are likely to be eligible for compensation. Although you cannot file a lawsuit against your employer in Kentucky, you can file a suit against your relative’s employer. In fact, in 2023, a decision from the Kentucky Court of Appeals solidified this right for relatives of employees.

Asbestos Exposure at Louisville Gas & Electric

Louisville Gas & Electric was a power plant that supplied gas and electricity to residents of Jefferson County and the surrounding area. The plant used asbestos in the following products:

  • Insulation on turbines and boilers
  • Firebrick or refractory materials used to line furnaces
  • Gaskets
  • Packing in steam valves
  • Wiring
  • Panel box insulation
  • Electrical equipment

Through the above products and many others, employees were exposed to asbestos fibers. At the Cane Run Generating Station, crews took 15 to 20 years to build six to 10-story boilers, and at the Mill Creek Generating Station, this same construction process went on for about 10 years.

During the construction phase, people were exposed as they cut and sawed asbestos-containing materials, installed steam lines, and applied firebrick in the boilers.

Once the boilers were active, employees continued to be exposed when they operated, cleaned, or repaired the boilers. Additionally, they were exposed when they would overhaul the boilers and replace the interior lining. Because most employees were with Louisville Gas & Electric for 25 to 30 years, they faced repeated exposure.

Supervisors, administrators, maintenance workers, and anyone else who regularly passed through these areas may have inhaled asbestos fibers as well. Outside contractors such as electricians, engineers, plumbers, pipefitters, and others were also exposed.

Statute of Limitations for Asbestos Lawsuits in Kentucky

If you were diagnosed with mesothelioma due to asbestos exposure in Kentucky, you have one year to file a lawsuit. The statute of limitations starts on the day of discovery. In most cases, that is the date of diagnosis, but in rare cases, it may be a different date.

The courts have to be  very strict about the one-year deadline. Do not delay. Mesothelioma treatment is expensive, and a lawsuit can help you cover expenses. It can also provide you with some compensation for pain and suffering, loss of your family members, and other injuries.

Get Help If You Have Mesothelioma Due to LG&E

Louisville Gas & Electric and its suppliers knew about the risks of asbestos for decades, but the companies continued using the product. If you or a loved one has been harmed as a result of these actions, you have a right to compensation.

To get help, contact us at Satterley & Kelley, PLLC today. We will talk with you about your situation and help you find the best path forward. You can rely on our 30+ years of experience with asbestos litigation to guide your case so that you can focus on your health and spending time with your loved ones. Don’t wait — contact us today.

Trespassers Are Injured on Train Tracks

Liability When Trespassers Are Injured on Train Tracks

/in /by

Close to 95% of railroad injuries happen to trespassers or at railroad crossings, and it happens all over the country. In Kentucky, there were 18 trespasser injuries and fatalities in 2020, 13 in 2021, and 11 in 2022. There were an additional four incidents during the first four months of 2023. These stats do not count highway-rail incidents.

Nearby states with higher populations show significantly higher rates of injuries and fatalities. For example, Illinois is in the top 10 most dangerous states for railroad fatalities. Illinois had 59 injuries and fatalities in 2022, and 22 in the first four months of 2023.

Although these injuries are relatively common, it can be hard for victims to pursue compensation. Railroad companies often deny liability or incorrectly tell victims  they don’t have the right to a claim.

If you or a loved one were injured in a train collision, don’t assume that you don’t have rights because you were trespassing. In many cases, the railroad may be liable for your injuries. To get help now, contact us at Satterley & Kelley today. In the meantime, here’s what you need to consider.

Who Is Considered a Trespasser?

The term “trespasser” is not clearly defined by the Federal Railroad Administration, and the railroad companies often apply the term differently for pedestrians and drivers. For example, drivers who ignore a do-not-cross sign are usually not categorized as trespassers, even though they are on railroad property without permission. In contrast, a pedestrian in the same situation is generally considered to be a trespasser.

What Is Considered Trespassing?

Any time you are unlawfully on a railroad company’s property, it may be considered trespassing. This includes rail yards and stations, but it also includes train cars, locomotives, bridges, railroad tracks, and trestles.

In other words, if someone jumps on a train car for a free ride, they are trespassing. However, if someone crosses the tracks at a non-designated crossing they are also trespassing. Even a family that goes to a beautiful setting in the countryside to take family photos near the railroad track is technically trespassing.

Are Railroad Liable for Injuries to Trespassers?

The railroads may be liable when a trespasser gets injured. Generally, the Railroad’s  first line of defense will be to claim that the person was on its property illegally and thus it has no duty to the victim. However, if the railroad company acted negligently or contributed to the risk of trespassing, it  can be held liable.

To give you an example, imagine that someone is crossing the railroad tracks at an area that is not a designated crossing. The engineer sees the trespasser, but  doesn’t alert him  by blowing the train’s  horn. Or imagine that the train is behind schedule and to make up for the lost time, the engineer is operating the train  faster than normally allowed in an area with a lot of pedestrians. These types of actions may be considered negligence.

A Duty to Keep People Safe

Railroad companies have a duty to keep people safe at designated crossings. They must have proper safety mechanisms in place to prevent injuries, and if they don’t, they may be liable for injuries that occur. This same standard does not apply to trespassers. However, that doesn’t necessarily mean that the railroads have no duty to these people.

To reduce the risk of injuries related to trespassing, the railroad companies should post adequate signage warning people that they are trespassing. They should also take steps to ensure that people aren’t likely to trespass.

For example, the railroad company may want to have education outreach programs at schools where they tell students about the dangers of trespassing on railroad tracks. If a railroad finds out that there is a “rabbit path” (aka an unauthorized path over the railroad tracks), they should take steps to shut down the path and post signs.

Risk Factors for Trespasser Injury

Research from the Federal Railroad Administration indicates that the following risk factors heighten your chances of getting hurt on railroad property.

  • Drugs and alcohol — Approximately two-thirds of all suicides and trespasser casualties involve drugs or alcohol.
  • Headphones or electronic distractions — In a 2014 report, the Department of Transportation noted a rise in headphone or electronics use during trespasser accidents. As the use of these devices has increased substantially over the last decade, the risk has also increased.
  • Multiple crossing points — When there are multiple places to cross the same track, the risk of injury increases.
  • No early train warning system — A lack of lights, horns, or other warnings about train tracks can increase the risk of people trespassing while a train is approaching.
  • Stations on curves — The lack of visibility increases the risk of injuries for both trespassers and people who aren’t aware they shouldn’t be crossing the tracks.

The hot spots for injuries tend to be places where there is a lot of pedestrian activity, such as schools, parks, and downtown areas. This increases the risk of trespassing and also the risk of injuries.

What to Do If You Are Injured While Trespassing on a Railroad

First and foremost, always seek medical attention. Even if you think your injuries are minor, go to the emergency room or urgent care and see a doctor. When talking with the railroad company’s employees, don’t admit that you were trespassing. If you make a claim against the railroad to cover your injuries, they will use anything you say to try to minimize or avoid liability.

Then, consult with a personal injury attorney, which is especially important if the railroad offers you a settlement or says it will help you pay for your medical bills. Generally, companies will only do this if they know that they are liable, and they often make a lowball offer to distract the victim from filing a lawsuit.

As a lay person, it’s nearly impossible to value losses from  personal injuries. To protect yourself, you should consult with a personal injury attorney who has experience with railroad claims.

At Satterley & Kelley, PLLC, we focus on personal injury cases with an emphasis on asbestos injuries, commercial truck accidents, and railroad injuries. Going up against a big company that’s trying to minimize liability by shifting the blame to you can be scary and confusing. You need the right help in this situation. To learn more, contact us today, and we’ll set up a free consultation to talk about your case.

How Does Asbestos Cause Mesothelioma

How Does Asbestos Cause Mesothelioma?

/in /by

If you’ve heard of mesothelioma, you’ve probably heard of asbestos. Asbestos exposure is the main confirmed cause of mesothelioma, accounting for over 80 percent of all cases. However, the exact way that a carcinogen like asbestos causes cancers like mesothelioma (and similar medical conditions) is not as commonly understood.  

What is Asbestos?

Asbestos is a mineral fiber that naturally occurs in rocks and soil. It is very strong and resistant to heat and corrosion. For this reason, asbestos was widely used in a range of industries, often serving as insulation or protection from friction, heat, or fire damage. It was also used in many products, including those used in residential construction (such as insulation, floor tiles, shingles, textured paint, pipes, electrical wiring, and boilers), and those used in car manufacturing (including heat-resistant fabrics, clutches, and breaks).

In the second half of the 20th century, it became increasingly clear that asbestos causes significant health problems. In the early 1970s it was officially declared to be a carcinogen and was mostly banned from use in the United States in 1978—though some manufacturers and industries continued to use it regardless, well into the 1980s and 1990s.

Who is at risk of asbestos exposure?

People have been exposed to asbestos in several major ways, but the main form of heavy asbestos exposure was traditionally occupational (meaning that it occurred at work). Many industries used asbestos throughout the 20th century, and workers in those industries may be at risk of developing mesothelioma. These include, but are not limited to:

  • Shipbuilding
  • Military (especially the U.S. Navy)
  • Construction/Demolition
  • Manufacturing
  • Mining
  • Chemical plants
  • Power plants
  • Steel mills
  • Automotive industries (including mechanics)
  • Industrial or residential repair (including HVAC technicians, electricians, plumbers, engine repairmen, and machinists)

Asbestos exposure can also occur “second-hand” when someone who was brings asbestos fibers home with them on their bodies or clothing. It may also occur environmentally, if a person is exposed to asbestos fibers where they live or work despite not being involved in an asbestos-related field. Additionally, people can be exposed through a product that contains asbestos, including insulation, tiling, flooring, boilers, and other parts of many American homes built before 1978, as well as certain car parts, protective clothing, and other items. This risk is particularly relevant for those attempting DIY home repair; if a home contains asbestos, these repairs could disturb the fibers and cause severe health risks if not handled by a professional.  

Overall, with strict regulation, asbestos exposure occurs much less frequently than it once did. However, exposure to asbestos was widespread for many years, and many people may therefore be at risk for mesothelioma. It is important to remember that while risk of mesothelioma rises significantly with the length of exposure (becoming especially high among those who are repeatedly exposed for a prolonged period of time), there is no safe amount of exposure to asbestos. According to NORD and other research, it is possible to develop mesothelioma after only one asbestos exposure—though most people diagnosed with mesothelioma were exposed repeatedly at work over the course of years.

How does Asbestos Cause Mesothelioma?

Asbestos is made up of many tiny fibers. When the material is disturbed or handled, these microscopic fibers are sent up into the air. Those exposed to asbestos may either inhale or swallow the airborne fibers.

Once asbestos fibers are inside the body, they may become lodged in the mesothelium, a thin protective tissue lining that covers several major internal organs. Asbestos fibers that are inhaled tend to lodge in the pleura (the lining between the lung cavity and the chest wall), while those that are swallowed and ingested tend to lodge in the peritoneum (the lining of the abdomen). In extremely rare cases, asbestos fibers can travel through the blood stream and lodge in the pericardium, the lining around the heart, or the tunica vaginalis, which protects the testicles.

Sharp asbestos fibers can pierce the mesothelial membrane and become embedded in the tissue. The mesothelial cells react to the asbestos fibers by becoming inflamed, in an attempt to remove the foreign body. However, the fibers often remain lodged in the tissue, since they are too durable and small for the body to remove. As a result, the mesothelial cells keep getting inflamed again and again, and scar tissue starts to form. Over time, this chronic inflammation harms the mesothelial cells. It can cause damage by interfering with cell division, and by physically altering the DNA code that tells the cell how to function which can lead to so much cellular damage that formerly healthy cells mutate and begin increasing uncontrollably, forming tumors. The result of this process is  mesothelioma, a cancer that causes malignant tumors to grow on the mesothelium, and to potentially spread (or metastasize) to other parts of the body.

The location of the lodged asbestos fibers and damaged tissue generally determines what sort of mesothelioma a person develops. Mesothelioma that forms around the lungs is referred to as pleural mesothelioma, and mesothelioma that forms in the lining of the abdomen is called peritoneal mesothelioma. The two much rarer types of mesothelioma affect the lining of the heart (pericardial mesothelioma) and the lining of the testicles (testicular mesothelioma).

Normally, this process of chronic inflammation, cell damage, and scarring takes many years, and mesothelioma patients are generally diagnosed with mesothelioma decades after their asbestos exposure. This is referred to as mesothelioma’s “latency period.” Each patient’s case is different, but on average, mesothelioma has a latency period of around 20-60 years, with a mean of 40 years between asbestos exposure and diagnosis. Generally, the longer and more intense a person’s exposure to asbestos, the shorter their latency period will be. Pleural mesothelioma also tends to have a longer latency period (30-60 years on average) than peritoneal mesothelioma (20-40 years on average).

Unfortunately, mesothelioma tends to be diagnosed at an advanced stage. There are many reasons for this, including the long latency period, late onset of symptoms, and the fact that the earliest symptoms (most commonly shortness of breath, chest pain, and fatigue) are often misdiagnosed as other conditions. Mesothelioma is relatively rare, and patients often don’t think to report asbestos exposure in the distant past, leading to further misdiagnosis.

Are you or a loved one looking for more information about mesothelioma? Call (855) 385-9532 or visit www.satterleylaw.com to learn more.

Guide to Blocked Railroad Crossings and Lawsuits

Guide to Blocked Railroad Crossing

/in /by

A Legal Overview and What to Do If You’re Injured

From December 2019 to mid-2023, the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) received over 71,000 reports about blocked railroad crossings. Close to 800 of these reports came from Kentucky, and about 336 Kentucky-based complaints were made  last year.  Over half of these reports (172) came from Jefferson County with the next highest coming from Pulaski County (34) Nine reports indicated  that the crossings were blocked for at least six hours.

These blockages prevent traffic from moving as designed through parts of Kentucky, but even more importantly, they create significant dangers for the community. Children have been captured on video, crawling under the trains to get past the blocked crossings on the way to school. Additionally, the blocked crossings often prevent fire trucks, ambulances, and other first responders from reaching people who need help.

Are Blocked Crossings Legal?

In Kentucky, blocked railroad crossings are illegal, which has been true since  since 1970.  However, the law has  been unenforceable since 2020.

Kentucky Revised Statute 277.200 states, “No railroad company shall obstruct any public highway or street… by stopping and permitting trains, engines, or cars to stand upon a public grade crossing or upon a drawbridge for more than five minutes at any one time.” However, the law also contains the following caveat: “unless such stopping or standing is caused by circumstances outside of the control of the railroad company.”

Why Isn’t Kentucky Enforcing the Blocked Crossing Law?

There are over three dozen states that have this type of law, and right now, it’s not really being enforced anywhere. After officials in Ohio repeatedly cited one railroad company for frequent  blockages, the issue went to court.

The Ohio Supreme Court held  that the Interstate Commerce Commission Termination Act gives the Federal Surface Transportation Board exclusive jurisdiction over transportation by rail carriers, while the Federal Railroad Safety Act gives states the right to enforce laws related to railroad safety.

After considering both of these laws, the Ohio Supreme Court decided that the state’s Blocked Crossing Statute didn’t relate to safety and thus states don’t have the right to make blocked crossing rules based on the Safety Act.

The State has petitioned the United States Supreme Court to hear the case, and at the time of writing, the case is still pending review. When petitioning the Supreme Court, the State of Ohio argued that the Ohio Supreme Court was overly limited in its interpretation of safety. In particular, it claims that the Safety Act should not just consider the safety of railroad employees and passengers. Instead, it also needs to consider all public safety concerns.

Is There a Federal Law About Blocked Crossings?

Right now, there are no federal laws related to blocked railroad crossings. However, the United States Supreme Court has ruled in the interest of public safety over the railroads in the past.

In 1921, Erie R. Co V. Bd. of Pub. Util. Comm’rs ruled that the public’s interest in using the streets trumped the railroad’s interest in using the crossings. A case from 1928, Lehigh Valley R. Co v. Bd. of Pub. Util. Comm’rs, echoed this ruling.

Why Do Trains Block Crossings?

Trains block crossings for a variety of reasons including

  • Mechanical issues
  • Waiting for a repair crew — Repair crews have strict limits on the hours they can work.
  • Domino effect — Sometimes, trains need to stop due to a train blocking the tracks ahead.
  • Unloading — Remember some trains have 1000s of cars. Part of the train may be in the station being unloaded, while the rest of the train is blocking a cross.

How to Report a Blocked Crossing

If you see a blocked crossing, you can report it online to the Federal Railroad Administration. You should not use this online application to report emergencies. Also, you shouldn’t assume that making a report will lead to changes or legal actions against the railroad.

The report is purely for informational purposes. It allows the FRA to learn more about the impacts of blocked crossings. When you enter the report, you must affirm that you understand there may be an operational or safety reason for the blocked crossing.

There is a toll-free phone number printed on the blue signs found at most train crossings. You can also call this number to report a blocked crossing or any other issues that occur at a crossing. In some cases, the railroad companies aren’t aware that the trains are blocking traffic, and they can sometimes move the trains after they receive notice.

What If You Get Injured Due to a Blocked Crossing

If you are injured at a blocked crossing, these are steps that you should take.

  1. Seek medical treatment — After an injury, adrenaline often convinces people that they aren’t hurt. Even if you feel fine, go seek medical treatment. This helps to ensure that you aren’t overlooking any injuries. It also creates a paper trail that connects your injuries to the blocked crossing.
  2. Note details about the blocked crossing — Note the location of the blocked crossing. There should be a blue sign showing which train company owns the crossing. Also, look for train company markings on the railcars. 
  3. Take photos — Photos can be critical if you’re trying to establish negligence and liability. Take photos of your injuries and the train.
  4. Talk with witnesses — If possible, talk with other witnesses in the area. See if they are willing to make a statement about the injuries. They may also have additional details about how long the train was stopped and any actions the employees took along the tracks.
  5. Consult with a personal injury attorney — Often, people just accept their losses, and they don’t realize that they could have received coverage for the losses. The railroad company may be liable for any injuries or deaths that occurred as a result of the blocked crossing.

Unfortunately, you generally won’t be able to hold the trains liable for losses such as missing hours from  not being able to get to work on time. It can also be very hard to assess liability in situations where someone dies or suffers due to a first responder being delayed by a blocked crossing. However, if you or a loved one is injured, you may be able to seek compensation.

Contact Us Today

At Satterley & Kelley, we are focused on helping our clients get justice when they are injured due to another party’s negligence. To provide our clients with the highest level of support, we focus on railroad liability, asbestos-related litigation, and truck accidents. Wondering if we can help you? Then contact us today for a free consultation.

East Palestine Train Wreck

What’s Happening With the East Palestine, OH Train Wreck? An Overview of Reactions and Lawsuits

/in /by

On February 3rd, 2023, a freight train passing through East Palestine, OH overheated and derailed. Its derailment caused toxic vinyl chloride – and other environmental toxins – to spill and contaminate the environment.

This train wreck had a major impact on the people who live and work in East Palestine. Depending on their location, they had to evacuate or shelter in place right after the accident, and many residents started reporting health problems within 30 minutes of returning home after the evacuation.

In one very sad story, a local woman showed pictures of her daughter’s rash to CNN Health – her tiny hands were red, shiny, and raw. The pediatrician said it was due to exposure to toxic chemicals.

The citizens of East Palestine have been subjected to losses and health problems due to what experts have labeled a completely preventable accident. Many of them have already pursued legal action, but others haven’t taken action, as they are still reeling from the injuries.

Here’s a quick history of what the residents of East Palestine have been through since the train wreck on February 3rd and an overview of their claims against the company.

February 5th, 2023: East Palestine Residents Evacuate and Shelter in Place

On February 5th, Governor Mike DeWine issued an evacuation order for people who lived within a mile of James Street (the nearest street to the accident). He issued a shelter-in-place order for the rest of East Palestine, which was about 5,000 people.

Officials were worried that the toxic vinyl chloride that spilled during the derailment would cause a lethal explosion. They needed to keep people away from the area so that they could perform a controlled explosion in an attempt to minimize the damages.

February 8th, 2023: Returning Home to James Street

DeWine lifted the evacuation order and allowed residents to come back to their homes near James Street. On this day, a resident couple filed the first class-action lawsuit against the company that owned the train, Norfolk Southern. In their complaint, they said that Norfolk Southern had not exercised reasonable care for the residents of East Palestine in the days after the accident, leading to personal and business losses.

February 10th, 2023: Residents Begin Falling Ill

Within a few days of returning to their homes, East Palestine residents started experiencing health problems. For some, the symptoms came on within 30 minutes of arriving home near the site of the train wreck.

People reported a range of illnesses including sore throats, nosebleeds, rashes, headaches, respiratory problems, eye irritation, and nausea. One resident reported that her children’s urgent care doctor said that their coughs and “raw” throats were the result of chemical exposure from the train crash.

Along with health problems, many residents reported a strong chemical smell caused by volatile organic compounds, which  is what gives new mattresses and other VOC-containing items their characteristic strong odor during off-gassing.

At the same time, at least seven government investigators developed the same health problems that East Palestine residents were reporting.

February 18th, 2023: East Palestine Residents Begin to Sue

By February 18th, about two weeks after the incident, at least six class-action lawsuits had been filed by residents of East Palestine.

One class-action lawsuit stated that Norfolk Southern’s freight train put more carcinogenic vinyl chloride into the environment in one week than every industry combined had done over the last 12 months. According to NBC News, a woman named Lisa Sodergen who is a plaintiff in this lawsuit says that her home was “surrounded by toxic black smoke” although it was five miles from the site of the accident.

A variety of complaints were listed in the lawsuits. For example, some plaintiffs sued because the accident caused their property values to drop dramatically. Other plaintiffs sought damages due to the increased risk of health problems in the future and the future costs they were likely to incur due to testing for cancer and other diseases related to vinyl chloride exposure.

March 31st, 2023: The US Justice Department Sues Norfolk Southern

On March 31st, the US Justice Department filed a suit against Norfolk Southern for damages resulting from the train derailment incident and the following environmental disaster.

The DOJ is seeking penalties, relief, and cost recovery for Norfolk Southern’s violations of the Clean Water Act. The suit also seeks to recover penalties and costs under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act, due to the railroad company discharging contaminants into the water under

According to CNN, the DOJ has accused Norfolk Southern of “[releasing] toxins into the air, soil, and water, endangering the health and safety of people in surrounding communities.” Seven local waterways were affected, plus all the surrounding air and soil.

The suit also accuses Norfolk Southern of increasing its income while dropping its costs dramatically, leading to drastic budget cuts for the care and maintenance of trains and freight cars. When you give a train car subpar care, its lifespan and performance will  negatively affected. If resources were properly allocated to safety, two alarm failures when the train car causing it to overheat would have been extremely unlikely.

April 6, 2023: Over 30 Lawsuits Have Been Filed

As of April 6, 2023, victims had filed over 30 lawsuits against the company alleging it  caused significant  damages. Residents and businesses that are represented in the lawsuit are seeking the following damages:

  • Compensation for property damage
  • Compensation for ongoing community-based medical monitoring, and
  • Punitive damages

Contact Us for Help If You Have Been Injured

If you have been injured due to a toxic spill from a train derailment or from any other train-related accident, you should reach out for help today. At Satterley & Kelley, we focus on providing our clients with customized legal help so that they can get the economic justice they deserve.

To learn more, contact us today. We’ll start with a free consultation, and then, we’ll help you figure out the next steps forward. Don’t let another company’s negligence ruin your health, harm your family, or hurt your livelihood. Instead, get help today.

The Dangers of Asbestos and the Cover Up

New Law on Secondary Asbestos Exposure

/in /by

A Decision From the Kentucky Court of Appeals Has Solidified the Law on Employers’ Legal Duty to People Exposed to Asbestos From Their Relatives Work Clothing

On July 7, 2023, the Kentucky Court of Appeals issued a decision that recognizes duties owed to people who contract mesothelioma due to secondary exposure from their parents’ or spouses’ work clothing.

The decision states that employers have a duty to protect their employees’ relatives from foreseeable harm. It says that in relation to secondary asbestos exposure from employees’ clothing, relatives are not mere bystanders.

The appellate decision also emphasized that pursuant to  Kentucky’s strict liability laws, manufacturers are liable to anyone harmed by their products. Manufacturers cannot escape liability by labeling someone as a bystander or nonuser. Here’s a breakdown of the specifics.

The History of the Williams Case

In 2016, Vickie Williams was diagnosed with mesothelioma, and she filed a lawsuit against Schneider Electric (Square D) and Union Carbide in Fayette Circuit Court. Her father was employed by Square D from the late 1960s to 2003, and Ms. Williams  was exposed to asbestos as a child from  hugging her father after he came home from work in asbestos-covered clothing. She also assisted with washing his clothing as she got older. Union Carbide manufactured the asbestos-containing molding products that were used at Square D.

When Vickie died in 2017, her husband and her son carried on with the lawsuit. In 2023, the trial court granted summary judgment to Square D and Union Carbide holding that neither owed a duty to Ms. Williams because she was a “bystander of a bystander.” In July 2023, the appellate court reversed summary judgment concluding  under Kentucky negligence and products liability law,  both of  companies owed a duty to the victim.

Strict Liability and Bystander Recovery

The Appellate Court’s decision highlighted Union Carbide’s duty to Ms. Williams based on Kentucky’s strict liability laws. When strict liability applies, bystander recovery is fait accompli. That means that it is an established fact.

The trial court claimed that denying the existence of Carbide’s duty was a matter of public policy. The Court of Appeals, however, pointed out that this was in direct conflict with the 1975 ruling of Embs Vs. Pepsi-Cola Bottling Co of Lexington, Kentucky, Inc, which stated that bystander recovery actually helps to promote public policy.

That ruling stated the following: “Our expressed public policy will be furthered if we minimize the risk of personal injury and property damage by charging the costs of injuries against the manufacturer who can procure liability insurance and distribute its expense among the public as a cost of doing business; and since the risk of harm from defective products exists for mere bystanders and passersby as well as for the purchaser or user, there is no substantial reason for protecting one class of persons and not the other.”

The Court of Appeals decision held the Embs duty applied to all manufacturers of products to product the public at large.  Labels and job titles are meaningless.  When a manufacturer makes a product and chooses to sell it, it owes a duty to everyone to make a safe product regardless of who is ultimately injured by any defects.

Duty to Relatives of Employees

In terms of Square D’s duty to Ms. Williams, the issue of public policy is more nuanced, but the Court of Appeal’s decision stated that public policy favors a duty to household members who “regularly and repeatedly” came into contact with an employee’s asbestos-related clothing over an extended period of time.

The trial court granted a summary judgment to Square D on the grounds that the company had no duty to a bystander of a bystander. In other words, the courts decided that Vickie’s father was a bystander at Square D due to its belief that  he primarily worked in the office and infrequently  came into contact with asbestos-containing molding compounds.

However, this characterization was inaccurate. Although Vickie’s father was an engineer stationed in the office, he was frequently in the molding department, and everyone in that area was exposed to asbestos. The Court of Appeals recognized  that her father was not just a mere bystander. He was an employee exposed to asbestos in the course of employment. He brought asbestos dust home on his clothes, and his daughter Vickie regularly inhaled asbestos fibers when she hugged her father to welcome him home.

Foreseeability of Harm

Kentucky law does not define duty based on concepts such as bystander or nonuser. Rather, duty is based on foreseeability. A business has a duty of reasonable care if it can reasonably anticipate that its activities or products may harm someone else, and when Vickie’s father was bringing home asbestos on his clothing, Square D should have known that there was a significant risk of harm to both Vickie’s father and his family.

Medical experts in Kentucky have known about the risks of asbestos dust since at least 1963. This was close to the beginning of Vickie’s father’s four-decade employment with the company. The risks of secondary exposure have been documented for an even longer time period.

In 1913, W.H. Tolman and L.B. Kendall wrote, “The ordinary street-clothes should be taken off and replaced by special suits to be worn during working hours…. by removing the working-clothes before meals and before leaving the factory, the poison is not carried into lunchrooms or into the homes of workers.”

About 60 years later, while Vickie’s father was employed at Square D, a 1972 OSHA guideline outlined the steps employers  should implement to prevent their employees from carrying  asbestos dust outside of the workplace. These historic documents, which were presented by experts in the trial court, prove that the dangers were well known and that the harm was foreseeable.

Employers’ Duty to Employees’ Family Members

This decision does not just help the Williams family. It affects the legal landscape of mesothelioma lawsuits in Kentucky going forward. In the past, employers  argued that they did not owe  a duty to their employees’ families. This ruling, however, has upended this defense.

Now, there is a clear decision recognizing  that the risks were foreseeable during the decades when asbestos use peaked in the United States and that employers have a duty to protect not only their employees but the families of their employees.

Get Help If You’ve Been Diagnosed With Mesothelioma

Mesothelioma is a terrible disease that steals years of people’s lives and destroys families. If you or a loved one has been diagnosed with mesothelioma, do not speculate with your doctor about where you may have come into contact with asbestos. Instead, work with your doctor on your treatment plan, and contact an experienced personal injury lawyer to talk about causes and recovery options.

You have a right to compensation and financial justice. However, you need to act quickly as the statute of limitations is short.

At Satterley & Kelley, we have extensive experience helping people who were exposed to asbestos at work, through a product, or from secondary exposure. To get help today, contact us now at 855-385-9532, or schedule a free consultation.