In an ongoing asbestos litigation case spearheaded by plaintiff Robert Waldon, the New York Supreme Court of New York County recently denied a motion for summary judgement by defendant Goodyear. Goodyear, a gasket manufacturer, claimed that asbestos exposure from its sheet gaskets could not have been responsible for Waldon’s lung cancer. Read More Here
To bolster the validity of its claim, Goodyear offered the expert reports of Certified Industrial Hygienist (CIH) John Spencer and Dr. Robert Sussman. However, countering this evidence, Waldon’s attorneys presented expert reports from CIH Kenneth Garza and Dr. Mark Ginsburg. It’s yet another episode in the chess game that characterizes such legal skirmishes, as both sides marshal resources and employ tactics to sway the court in their favor.
These types of asbestos litigation cases have long been a subject of concern for industries and trading firms, with past cases having extensive financial implications. If this decision by the New York Supreme Court is a sign of things to come, corporations and law firms dealing with similar ongoing cases might have to rethink their legal strategies and how they manage asbestos-related claims.
In the wake of the Supreme Court’s judgement, the legal fraternity – law firms and corporate legal departments alike – must remain vigilant and responsive to significant court rulings such as these. As such, actions of these organizations and professionals are integral in shaping the terrain of the future industrial and legal landscapes.