If your company is defending against an asbestos lawsuit, there is a lot at stake. These types of claims aren’t just complex and costly; the impact on a business can go beyond the direct legal and financial consequences of litigation. Due to the potential for negative publicity, which can lead to a decline in customer base and threaten financial instability, it is crucial to prepare a strong defense to protect a company’s reputation and bottom line.
While asbestos claims involve long latency periods, evolving medical research, and challenges in proving causation, there are several effective defense strategies companies and their legal teams can implement, including the following:
1. Challenging the Statute of Limitations
Asbestos-related diseases have long latency periods, which means they are often diagnosed decades after a plaintiff’s alleged exposure. While every jurisdiction imposes a strict statute of limitations for filing a lawsuit in connection with these types of injuries, based on the date of discovery, a defendant may be able to challenge the timeliness of a plaintiff’s claim. In addition, a state’s statute of repose may bar an asbestos-related lawsuit after a certain number of years, regardless of the date the plaintiff’s injury was discovered.
2. Establishing Alternative Exposure
The alternative exposure defense is a legal strategy that asserts the plaintiff’s asbestos-related illness was caused by a source other than the company’s product or premises. A defendant’s legal team would investigate the plaintiff’s background and medical history to identify other potential sources of exposure, such as workplaces, homes, or schools that may have contained asbestos. If alternative exposure is identified, it can shift responsibility to another party and reduce a company’s liability — or eliminate it entirely.
3. Arguing Insufficient Exposure
This defense does not contend that exposure had not occurred. Rather, it allows a defendant to argue that the exposure was too minimal to be a substantial contributing factor to the plaintiff’s asbestos-related disease. A company’s defense team will often bring in a medical expert, such as a toxicologist or epidemiologist, to challenge the reliability of the “any exposure” theory typically used by plaintiffs.
4. Raising the “Bare Metal” Defense
If a company did not manufacture, distribute, or supply the asbestos-containing components that allegedly caused the plaintiff’s injury, the “bare metal” defense may be argued to avoid liability. A defendant may also assert that there was no duty to warn of the dangers of these components, since they did not design the parts or place them into the stream of commerce. This defense focuses on the premise that a manufacturer should only be held responsible for the “bare metal” product that was free from asbestos when it left its control.
5. Arguing Lack of Product Identification
To prove their claim, a plaintiff must establish a connection between their injury and the specific product that caused it. In the event a plaintiff is unable to link their exposure to a company’s specific product, the defendant can move for summary judgment. This would shift the burden of proof to the plaintiff to set forth the specific facts in dispute for trial purposes. If the plaintiff is unable to raise a genuine issue of material fact, the case may be dismissed at the summary judgment stage.
Contact an Experienced Toxic Tort Attorney
Asbestos lawsuits are often complicated and time-consuming, making it critical for defendants to work with an experienced legal team as they navigate this treacherous landscape. By taking a client-driven approach and developing a tailored defense strategy in each case, Cosmich aggressively protects clients facing asbestos litigation. With coast-to-coast offices, our attorneys are equipped to handle matters involving multiple claimants across jurisdictions and vigorously defend your company against asbestos claims. Contact us to schedule a consultation.