• Asbestos Litigation History Part 2 Father of Asbestos Litigation Ward Stephenson Perseveres

    Asbestos Litigation History Part 2

    For More on the Story, Read The Rest of the Asbestos Litigation Story at:
    Part 3 of Asbestos Litigation

    Stephenson, the founder of Asbestos Lawsuits Perseveres

    Yet Attorney Stephenson not being deterred from losing the first round, filed his 2nd case October of ’69 for one of Tomplait's co-workers, by the name of Clarence Borel. As before, Stephenson named several asbestos product manufacturers as defendants on behalf of Borel. But this round, the different trial netted a different, more positive result for his client as jury members returned successfully for Borel to the tune of $79,436.24. This verdict was of course appealed. Then, Stephenson died in September 1973 just 4 days after the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the award $79,000 award to Stephenson’s client.
    The litigation fighting for the victims of asbestos then made a shift to different areas in the US, not even days after the death of Stephenson the same year of1973, where legal cases picked up where Stephenson’s work stopped and were filed in multiple different jurisdictions.

    Landmark Rulings in Asbestos Litigation

    1974 brought a precedent lawsuit filed by Steven Kazan for client, Reba Rudkin that had contracted asbestosis following a 29 yr career for the corporation, Johns-Manville at one of their Pittsburg plant which was located in Pittsburg, CA. Kazan moved with a lawsuit against Johns-Manville, even though Rudkin technically was not allowed to file civilly due to the fact that he was an employee and employees were generally barred from civil lawsuits because worker’s compensation was the only option for legal action in the legal landscape of the day. Because Rudkin had been an industrial employee of Johns-Manville, the corporation would generally be able to preclude any kind of suit because of the fact that workers' comp had been set forth as the only remedy which an employee could use to sue employers. Legal representation asserted that Johns-Manville along with its upper management and executives did not legally have claim on any kind of litigation shield because they had participated in clear and intentional fraud with conspiracy.

    For the Previous Part of the Story, Read The Previous Asbestos Litigation Article at:

    Part 1 of the Beginning of Asbestos Litigation: Clarence Borel's Texas Asbestos Suit Against Manufacturers Marks First in History
  • Ask a Legal Question