Posted on July 14, 2022
Over the past few decades, many asbestos companies have established settlement trusts that provide compensation to mesothelioma victims and others suffering from asbestos-related illnesses as a result of exposure to their products. Organized as part of bankruptcy filings, the trusts have allowed companies to evade millions of dollars of liability for individual personal injury lawsuits. However, some companies are irritated by having to pay sums to victims, as was the case during a recent hearing in Pennsylvania. A bankruptcy judge overruled the company’s objections.
Pennsylvania bankruptcy judge intrigued by Honeywell claims about mesothelioma claims
The case heard by US Bankruptcy Judge Thomas Agresti was filed by Honeywell, a company whose asbestos-contaminated products have been blamed for countless cases of malignant mesothelioma and other asbestos-related injuries. On behalf of Honeywell, attorney Greg Primis claimed that the trustees of the $2.3 billion trust set up for their subsidiary, the North American Refractories Company asbestos trust, were using “formal allegations of exhibition” and paid sums into the fund. too easily. He argued that the trust had promised to stop approving claims based on “tick-off” affidavits that did not contain sufficient details or evidence of asbestos exposure.
When Mr. Primis reported that the NARCO Trust was submitting asbestos and mesothelioma disease claims from “81 different people across the country saying the same thing,” Judge Agresti cut him off, asking “By how many other ways can you say it? They say the same thing. When Honeywell’s attorney repeated his objection to the buffered language, the judge reiterated, saying, “Maybe 81 people across the country have the same exposure experience.” How many different ways can you say it?
Judge repeatedly questions Honeywell’s objection to similar language in mesothelioma claims
While Honeywell’s attorney continued to argue that having multiple claims for mesothelioma and asbestos-related diseases using the same language diminished their veracity, the judge repeatedly pushed back, indicating that the lawyer had not answered his question as to why different language should be evident on each form. “You’re saying that just because there’s commonalities, you can’t believe the affiant?” Looks like we’re dancing around the same thimble. I just wanted to hear what you thought, but frankly, you didn’t clear it up for me.
Echoing the judge’s words, the lawyer representing the trust agreed that Honeywell’s argument against the language used in the mesothelioma and asbestos claims was insufficient to justify compensation or reflected a lack of due diligence on the part of the administrators. of the trust. Joseph Baio noted that when the trust was established, language used in documents between Honeywell and trustees of the trust specifically stated that an affidavit “contains allegations of exposure that use descriptive language identical to that contained in d ‘other affidavits of exposure submitted to the trust’.
Many mesothelioma victims are eligible to file claims with asbestos settlement trusts and quickly receive the compensation they need and deserve. For more information, contact Patient Advocates at Mesothelioma.net at 1-800-692-8608.
FREE mesothelioma package