Personal Injury Resources

This blogger writes a harrowing tale of a car accident he was involved in. Luckily, he's okay. Below are his thoughts on how bad things could get as result of the accident. This is what psychologists call negative fantasies. Before you have negative fantasies about a car accident, consider calling a lawyer to represent you. A car accident lawyer can clarify your personal liability and help you understand your legal rights.

he accident is effectively a no-fault since the actual cause of it (the black car) got away completely. So I don't get handed the bill. Otherwise, it's more-or-less squarely on my shoulders, and the damages would likely land squarely on me since it's very easy for the lawsuits and so-forth this is sure to generate vastly exceeding any obtainable insurance anyone can get, since there was three minors involved so it's likely their parents will start being handed M60's loaded with hundreds of lawyers and start spray-and-praying until one sticks somewhere. Ergo, I'll either get off scott free, or end up screwed so hard I'll effectively never be able to earn an income as long as I live, and likely go to jail as a side-effect.

This blog on workplace safety has a piece on the Bush Administration's plan to limit medical malpractice liability.

A story in the New York Times exposes Bush's lies about medical malpractice "reform," one part of the administration's drive to weaken people's ability to sue companies (or physicians) for negligence and products (such as asbestos) that kill; or as Bush says, "costly and frivolous lawsuits."

The myth, according to the President and the business lobbyists is that the high costs of malpractice insurance "don't start in an examining room or an operating room," the president declared. "They start in a courtroom."

The truth, according to the Times is that there has not been a rise in medical malpractice awards causing malpractice insurance rates to skyrocket. Rising insurance rates are a product of poor investments by the insurance companies that they are trying to recoup by raising their rates.

An investor point of view on Vioxx, Celebrex, Bextra and COX-2 inhibitors vis a vis the FDA.

For more than four months, COX-2 inhibitors like Vioxx, Celebrex, and Bextra have created monumental headaches for their makers, investors, patients, doctors, and regulators. As concerns over elevated risks of heart attack and stroke mounted, Merck (NYSE: MRK) withdrew Vioxx, and Pfizer (NYSE: PFE) faced increasing pressure to do the same with Celebrex and Bextra.

Pummeled by the reality of lost sales and the fears of potential lawsuits, Merck shareholders have suffered in the wake of the company's voluntary withdrawal of Vioxx. Though Pfizer didn't suffer quite as much, the stock still came under pressure as investors feared the possibility of withdrawal and future lawsuits.

Now it looks as though COX-2 inhibitors will stay on the market after all. On Friday, an FDA advisory panel summoned to evaluate the safety of Vioxx, Celebrex, and Bextra (and COX-2 inhibitors in general) gave its blessing to permitting sales of all three drugs. Although the FDA is not obligated to follow the advice of its specialty panels, it generally does.

It should be noted that the FDA panel was not exactly overwhelmingly supportive of COX-2 inhibitors. Rather, the panelists acknowledged that other painkillers have high risks as well and that the risk-benefit analysis of using COX-2 drugs was best left between physicians and their patients.

This opinion piece derides the new Class Action Fairness Law as a strike against consumers and unfair protection for corporations.

President Bush gave corporations what will be one of their most prized possessions for years to come: "tort reform." Much like "social security reform," the bill he signed into law protects corporate profits at the expense of the citizen.

Let's say you took Vioxx for arthritis, as prescribed by your doctor. Unknown to both of you, Merck, the pharmaceutical giant that produces this drug, already knew that it significantly increased the risk of heart disease. You and your doctor are both aware of the history of heart disease in your family, and had you been furnished with more information, you would have taken something different, maybe generic. Effective and cheaper for you, but not nearly as much of a profit for Merck.

Well, now that the information has come out that Merck deliberately misled consumers and doctors to make a buck, it seems only fair that you and all the other people misled by this unethical giant should have your day in court.

Bush just made it likely to never happen. With the so-called "Class Action Fairness Act," none of the more than 600 lawsuits pending against Merck (which gave $365,854 to Republicans in 2004) will be heard in a state court, if more than a third of the plaintiffs are not from the same state. Vioxx was distributed nationwide. The case can only be heard in a federal court, which will take years longer, and is much more friendly to business interests.

As reported earlier (see below), consumers have started a class action suit against ChoicePoint. This tape snafu at Bank of America looks like a class action suit waiting to happen. For one thing, pockets are little deeper at BofA then ChoicePoint. BofA's public relations may be satisfied with the story that the data tapes were lost and not stolen, but its customers may not feel the same way.

A "small" number of backup tapes with records detailing the financial information of government employees were lost in shipment to a backup center, Bank of America said on Friday.

The tapes contained information on the customers and accounts of the U.S. government's SmartPay charge card program, which has more than 2.1 million members and annual transactions totaling more than $21 billion, according to the General Services Administration. Reports have pegged the number of cards affected at 1.2 million.

"Federal law enforcement officials were immediately engaged when the tapes were discovered missing, and subsequently conducted a thorough investigation into the matter, working closely with Bank of America," the bank said in a statement. "The investigation to date has found no evidence to suggest the tapes or their content have been accessed or misused, and the tapes are now presumed lost."

The acknowledgment comes as several other cases of businesses losing consumer information have come to light. Last week, data collection company ChoicePoint announced that it had given information on approximately 150,000 subscribers to about 50 fake business fronts created by fraudsters.

On the face of it, this seems like a lame suit. Auctions never force people to pay more money.

EBay Inc. (EBAY.O: Quote, Profile, Research) is being sued by a Pennsylvania man who charges that it illegally forces up prices when certain high bidders raise their maximum bid to guard against last-minute offers, an attorney for the plaintiffs said on Wednesday.

In a proposed class-action lawsuit filed Feb. 17 in Santa Clara County Superior Court, lead plaintiff Glenn Block claims that eBay raised his bid from $111 to $112.50 after he responded to an e-mail from auction site that said he was the highest bidder for an item.

The email warned that he could be outbid if he did not increase his maximum.

Block alleged that he could have won the auction at $111, and accused eBay of forcing him to overpay by $1.50.

"Based on what we know about what's being alleged, it appears the plaintiff completely misunderstands the functionality of the eBay bidding system," eBay spokesman Hani Durzy said. He said the company had not yet seen the lawsuit.

Armstrong World Industries filed for bankruptcy protection in 2000 as a result of a settlement of its asbestos personal injury suits. The company thought it had a viable workout plan in 2002, but it was denied reorganization plan approval again this week.

A federal bankruptcy judge Wednesday refused to confirm a reorganization plan filed by Armstrong World Industries.

In denying the Lancaster-based company's plan, Judge Eduardo C. Robreno said it violates a portion of bankruptcy law.

"Bluntly put, no amount of legal creativity or counsel's incantation to general notions of equity or to any supposed policy favoring reorganizations over liquidation supports judicial rewriting of the Bankruptcy Code," the judge wrote. "The plan, therefore, cannot be confirmed."

New York City paid $570 million in personal injury lawsuits in 2004, an increase of $12 million from 2003. Medical malpractice law suits represented about one-third of the settlements.

The payouts included $6.9 million in the case of Joel Fernandez, an 11-month-old gastrointestinal surgery patient who was discharged from Metropolitan Hospital Center although he had a serious infection.

His mother then took him to Lincoln Hospital, where doctors failed to diagnose the sepsis infection, which led to serious brain damage.

Also, $5.15 million to Daury Espinal who went to Bellevue Hospital to treat nosebleeds he kept getting after a motorcycle accident. His lawyer said doctors did not treat a pseudoaneurysm in a brain artery and later also suffered brain damage.

Leoussis said the increase was caused the city settling more cases faster and cutting the backlog down and also because appellate courts are letting more expensive verdicts stand.

A new study shows mesothelioma deaths peaking in 2015 in the U.K.

Mesothelioma is a type of cancer in the lining of the lungs or the lining of the abdomen. It is thought that the majority of cases are the result of exposure to asbestos, but the disease can take up to sixty years to develop.

Mortality in Britain rose from 153 deaths in 1968 to 1,848 in 2001 and is still increasing, but the new study suggests the rate will begin to decline by 2015.

Researchers from the Health and Safety Executive ( HSE ), together with Professor Julian Peto of the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine and The Institute of Cancer Research, have improved on previous forecasts by taking account of the changing patterns of exposure to asbestos following the sharp reduction in asbestos use around 1980.

Professor Peto says: "The peak in mesothelioma deaths will be earlier and at a lower number than formerly thought. The abrupt reduction in asbestos exposure in 1980 has altered the lifelong patterns of exposure that people have experienced. This makes the previous age-related models inaccurate.

"Our new model for predicting mesothelioma mortality rates is more complex and takes account of the varying exposure to asbestos of different age groups at different times of their lives."

The U.S. Congress is working on malpractice legislation, so this Harvard report is apt. The study doesn't say that malpractice suits in and of themselves are bad. It simply points out that the malpractice system isn't working very well to achieve better medicine. That's like saying the health insurance system isn't working very well to achieve better medicine.

The current tort-based medical malpractice system fails to meet any of three basic goals:

It does not identify patients injured as the result of medical care.

It fails to reimburse injured patients commensurate with the degree of their injury and loss.

It does not identify "bad" physicians and is counterproductive to developing systems that would help reduce medical errors.

The Harvard Medical Malpractice Study reviewed 30,000 hospital admissions in New York State in 1984. It is the largest and most detailed study published that evaluates hospital medical care.

The study identified 1,278 adverse events among this patient population, including 306 instances of negligence. Of these 306 negligently injured patients, eight entered the current malpractice system--fewer than 3 percent.

Failure to identify injured patients precludes any effective remuneration to the injured patient. Further data from the same study helps explain why the system is so terribly expensive.

Customers claim Dell used bait-and-switch. Since Dell does just-in-time manufacturing, this is a class action claim based on either a problem with Dell manufacturing talking to Dell web operations or something more willful.

Two San Francisco residents have filed a class-action lawsuit against computer manufacturer Dell, alleging the company regularly uses bait-and-switch techniques, and promises favorable financing terms that it doesn't deliver.

The suit was filed Feb. 14 in San Francisco County Superior Court by Rosemary M. Weber and Jonathan V. Holtzman, both San Francisco residents.

In the lawsuit, Weber said she called Dell in July 2003 to order a laptop computer she had seen advertised for $599. She also decided to buy a printer for $89 and opted to finance the purchase with Dell, though she did not learn exact terms of the financing. When her bill came, the complaint said, Weber was surprised that it was for more than $1,300.

Plaintiff Holtzman alleged that when he purchased two new computers from Dell in November 2003, the company shipped him ``lesser-quality computer systems at the price at which Dell agreed to sell the higher-quality systems.'' His repeated efforts to resolve the problem failed, the complaint said.

Also named as defendants in the lawsuit were Dell Financial Services and CIT Bank.

Legal perspective from Wired on the ChoicePoint case.

[F]or the individuals whose identities were actually stolen, there is likely to be no recourse for their ruined credit histories and the countless hours it will take them to restore their good names.

Attorney Charles Merrill pointed to a case in South Carolina as an example of what could happen to victims who try to sue ChoicePoint for not screening buyers of their data carefully.

In that case, a victim of identity theft tried to sue Citibank and two credit card companies for damages suffered after an unknown perpetrator stole his identity and opened accounts with Citibank, Capital One and Premier Bankcard in his name. The district court threw the case out, saying that the consumer had no valid claim against the financial companies because he wasn't their customer. Two other cases in different states have had the same outcome.

Consumers could find themselves in the same dilemma with ChoicePoint, since they are not customers of ChoicePoint.

But Andrea Matwyshyn, an assistant professor of law at Northwestern University who specializes in technology regulation and information security best practices, said that judges could determine that ChoicePoint did have a relationship with the public, albeit an indirect one, and assumed a certain level of responsibility for individuals' data when it decided to collect and sell private information.

"Different judges make different decisions," she said. "There's a lot of room for maneuvering here, and the case law involving identity theft is going to develop in a very uneven, messy fashion for a while until it settles out."

ChoicePoint has billions of credit records on businesses and individuals. It sells those records to companies doing credit research. Criminals posing as businessmen gained access to ChoicePoint's data. 700 cases of identity theft related to the illegal ChoicePoint have been reported in Los Angeles alone. A California woman has sued ChoicePoint for fraud and negligence.

ChoicePoint maintains a database of information, including bank and criminal data, on virtually ever U.S. consumer. That information is sold to government agencies, prospective lenders and others.

The identity thieves were able to access Social Security numbers, credit histories, criminal records and other sensitive data, ChoicePoint has said.

The suit seeks to represent anyone whose personal records were maintained by ChoicePoint from October 2004 through the completion of the suit, regardless of whether or not that data was actually released to anyone.

It also claims that prospective class members, possibly numbering at least 145,000 in total, have suffered damages of less than $75,000 each.

Asbestos awards have had no impact on debt ratings of The St. Paul Travelers Companies.

Fitch Ratings has affirmed the 'A-' long-term issuer and senior debt ratings of The St. Paul Travelers Companies, Inc. (STA), Travelers Property Casualty Corp. and Travelers Insurance Group Holdings. The 'AA-' insurer financial strength (IFS) ratings of the members of the Travelers Property Casualty Group (TPC) and St. Paul Fire and Marine Inter-company pool (SPC), which are rated on a group basis, have also been affirmed by Fitch. The Outlook for all ratings is Stable.

These actions follow today's announcement by STA that its fourth quarter 2004 earnings will include a $922 million pre-tax asbestos-related reserve charge and that the company is considering strategic alternatives to divest its 79% interest in Nuveen Investments (JNC).

The charge follows completion of the company's annual asbestos study and predominantly reflects increased loss cost projections due to elevated trial activity that has resulted in higher litigation costs in recent periods.

Changes in workman's compensation in Califoria got this Schwarzenegger supporter all excited.

It took almost a year to realize the benefits of Workman's Compensation reform in California, but Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger's promise to fix the system to make the Golden State more friendly to business seems to be paying off, now:

California business owners saw the average annual premium for workers' compensation insurance drop between 13.9 percent and 16.6 percent in the last six months, according to records from the state Department of Insurance.

These would be the first double-digit percentage rate cuts since deregulation in 1995, savings that arose out of legislative overhauls the last two sessions.

"Rates are coming down. Right now, it appears medical cost inflation has been impacted by the reforms. Medical costs were one of the primary drivers pushing rates up," said Jack Hannan, a spokesman for the Workers' Compensation Insurance Rating Bureau of California, an industry research group.

That news is, in a word, 'fantastic'!

The finanical point of view on Vioxx, Celebrex and Bextra. FDA actions may change the course of class action law suits.

Merck voluntarily withdrew Vioxx from the market on Sept. 30, saying that research showed a higher cardiovascular risk among patients taking the drug for more than 18 months vs. patients receiving a placebo.

If the FDA approves a return of Vioxx even with a host of restrictions, "this could be an effective response to trial lawyers who have argued that Vioxx should not have been on the market in the first place," said Risinger, who has neutral ratings on Merck and Pfizer.

Favorable FDA action plus the enactment of recent changes in tort law "suggests to us that our previously published $4 billion to $18 billion range can come down," said Risinger. (He doesn't own shares; his firm says it "does and seeks to do business" with companies mentioned in research reports.)

Although Pfizer is being sued over Celebrex and Bextra, the heaviest litigation involves Merck and Vioxx. As of Dec. 31, the company had counted 575 lawsuits alleging personal injuries caused by the arthritis drug. Merck also has been named as defendant in some 70 class-action suits relating to personal injury claims. It has been named as a defendant in 30 lawsuits involving claims of violations of federal securities laws and laws governing employee retirement plans. Merck also is defending Vioxx suits filed in several other countries.

With all the mudslides in Southern California this winter due to the unusually high rain totals, consumers are finding out their homeowner policies don't cover pesky problems like mudslides. Will there be a class action suit as a result?

Are flooding and mudslides covered by most common homeowners insurance policies? No. Standard homeowners insurance covers rain and wind damage but not property ruined by flooding, landslides or mud. The rule of thumb is that if the damage is caused by falling rain, it's covered; if it's caused by rising water, it's not. advertisement advertisement Flood insurance is available but takes 30 days to activate and costs $300 to $600 a year, according to the Insurance Information Network of California. Although no carrier protects against landslides, flood insurance may cover minor mud damage, said Pete Moraga, a spokesman for the network.

During the last presidential election, medical malpractice was in the political limelight since Democratic Vice Presidential candidate John Edwards was a personal injury lawyer specializing in medical malpractice. While the following tax may discourage medical malpractice cases somewhat, news stories during the election pointed out that medical malpractice is a very small percentage of overall health care costs.

The state's power to tax is quite broad and everyone knows the rule of optimal taxation: If it moves tax it! Other rationales for taxes exist do exist of course. One of my favorites is the use of the tax power to encourage or discourage behaviors the legislature believes are worthy of this particular type of incentive.

New Jersey has struck a chord for good taxation (Newsday). It is now imposing taxes on lawyers because, in part, the legislature believed lawyers are causing the med mal crisis. The president of the NJ Bar Association is suing the state as he thinks this $75 tax is "grossly unfair" and he denies there is a crisis. In fact, he repeats the ridiculous trial bar argument that the reason med mal premiums are increasing is due to bad investments by the insurers. So the question for the day is "Is the suit to stop the lawyer tax frivolous given the states broad power to tax?" Alternatively, if the litigant does succeed would the winning lawyers get big legal fees and some coupons for the members of the bar?

This is a tragedy. Personal injury lawyers may be able to help you after a car accident, but it may be hard if you are advocating against a safety measure. Please buckle up!

In the supreme irony, a young college student who had advocated against government regulation of wearing seat belts was killed in a car accident where he was not wearing a seat belt. It is a tragedy that this guy was killed in an auto accident but there is a reason why the government recommends (and state govenments have laws) that you wear a seat belt. Seat belts have proven effective in keeping you from being ejected from a vehicle when you get in an account according to the article about the college student. The following is a quote from an editorial Derek Kieper by:

As laws become increasingly strict for seat belts, fewer people will respond positively by buckling up in response to the laws. There seems to be a die-hard group of non-wearers out there who simply do not wish to buckle up no matter what the government does. I belong to this group.

You can find the full editorial in the Daily Nebraskan and the article about the car crash in the Lincoln Journal Star. And lastly you can find a full complete story about the anti-seat belt law advocate over at Snopes.com.

Here's a good analysis of the practical impact of the class-action law just passed by the Senate. Click on link above for the full implications.

This week, the U.S. Senate has been working on the committee-reported text of the Class Action Fairness Act of 2005 (S5). According to press reports like one from Reuters, the bill will "move most large multi-state class action lawsuits into more stringent federal courts." The measure is widely expected to pass Congress and be signed by President Bush. Here are some quick thoughts from a class-action lawyer about the bill and what will happen if it's signed into law as currently proposed:

* The new law will mean a lot of work for federal trial and appellate courts. As has been reported, almost every class action will become a federal case;
* The law won't affect plaintiffs' firms like Cohen Milstein and Milberg Weiss that primarily limit their class-action practices to federal courts;
* The law won't affect those plaintiffs' firms that specialize in federal laws and remedies such as ERISA; by its nature, the law only affects class actions based on state law;
* Since filing objections to class-action settlements is much more difficult in federal court than in state court, the law may put a lot of professional objectors out of business;
* Class-action lawyers unfamiliar with the rules and procedures of federal court will have to adapt or find a new line of work;
* Class-action lawyers unfamiliar with the rules and procedures of the MDL will also have to adapt or find a new line of work;
* Many lawyers accustomed to state court won't adapt. By driving the small-firm competition away from class actions, the law will strengthen many large plaintiffs' firms;
* Companies that have wronged consumers might find themselves faced with more lawsuits, not less, since one response to the new law, which makes multistate class actions harder to achieve, will be to file the same lawsuits in the federal court of every state with a large population; even though these various lawsuits will be consolidated by the MDL, there might be strategic reasons for the multiple lawsuits;

A good report on the changes to class-action law recently passed in the U.S. Senate.

This is terrific news. (H/T OTB)

The Senate voted overwhelmingly today to shift many class-action lawsuits from state courts to federal courts, handing President Bush and his supporters in the business world a major legislative triumph. The 72-to-26 vote sends the bill to the House of Representatives, where it will probably be quickly passed and sped on its way to the desk of the president, who is eager to sign it. Passage in the House seems assured, since that chamber overwhelmingly endorsed similar legislation last year, before it stalled in the Senate. This time, though, the idea was backed by enough senators, Democrats as well as Republicans, that passage was not in doubt.

A nice margin on that vote as well. Passage in the House is guarranteed. Still there are critics. Including this via Kevin Drum.

But critics of the bill have said it may effectively create an impossible situation for many plaintiffs, since federal courts are barred under a 1985 Supreme Court ruling from considering class actions in which there are "material" differences in the laws among the affected states. Thus, the critics say, the law may create a "Catch-22" in which class-action plaintiffs find both federal and state courthouse doors locked.

The catch-22 is fictional. The jurisdiction of the federal courts is set by the legislature. This bill gives them jurisdiction on these grounds:

Here's good background information on mesothelioma and asbestos.

The Mesothelioma Applied Research Foundation (MARF) has started a petition to increase funding for mesothelioma research. Mesothelioma is a terminal cancer caused by exposure to asbestos. It kills 2,500 to 4,000 people each year. You can get more information about mesothelioma here.

With just a few notable exceptions, companies involved with asbestos have not taken responsibility to fund the search for a cure, and many now face bankruptcy. Law firms representing asbestos plaintiffs have earned handsome fees, but until now have not seen fit to give back by funding mesothelioma research. And even though many mesothelioma patients were exposed to asbestos while serving in the Navy, the Federal Government has not funded mesothelioma research proportionately to other cancers. In 2001, the National Cancer Institute (NCI) -- the single largest provider of cancer research money, with a budget of over $3 billion -- allocated only $1.6 million for research on mesothelioma. The NCI operates potentially life-saving clinical trials for many cancers, but does not currently offer adequate clinical trial options for mesothelioma patients.

If you're in Wisconsin and need a personal injury lawyer, here's the ticket.

A lot of online resources are cropping up that are state-specific. Wisconsin dwellers may appreciate the Wisconsin Personal Injury Lawyers Blog run by Frank Pasternak

The Warsaw Convention has a two year limit of statute of limitations that applies to certain personal injury cases.

Thermal Burns Sustained by Airline Passenger On Flight From Denver to Chicago Barred Under Two Year Statute of Limitations of Warsaw Convention, Because Flight Was Part of Itinerary Including International Travel.

In Robertson v. American Airlines, the plaintiff was flying from Denver to Chicago, and was using a gel cooling pad on her back. She asked the flight attendant for something to keep the gel pack from warming up, and he put the gel pack in an air sickness bag along with some dry ice. Plaintiff suffered thermal burns, and sued American Airlines within D.C.'s three year statute of limitations.

However, summary judgment was granted to the airline, on the grounds that the applicable statute of limitations was two years under the Warsaw Convention, not three years. The Warsaw Convention applied because the flight was one leg of a larger itinerary that included international travel.

New York City is thinking about trying to use Cybersettle to make Personal Injury claims easier to process and resolve, especially if they are smaller claims.

Over at My Shingle , I've posted on this article from Crains that reports on New York City's proposed two year pilot program of a computerized, on-line settlement system for litigants who have suits against New York City. The system will use Cybersettle which according to the article has processed roughly 75,000 settlements in its six years in business. NYC expects to refer less serious personal injury cases - roughly 1/3 of the 24,000 suits filed annually against the City - to the on-line settlement system. Though I do not have personal experience with Cyber-settle, this proposal sounds like a great idea. It will expedite settlements against New York City and facilitate the time involved in negotiating claims, which hopefully will bring savings to litigants (I say hopefully because I fear that attorneys working on contingency will not take the expedited system into account when taking a percentage cut - which in my view, is unethical). Moreover, perhaps with an on-line settlement system, more litigants will be able to settle smaller claims without attorney intervention. This is one initiative that I'll be watching closely.

More on the debate on contingency fees and whether they should be the same from case to case.

Each client's case needs to be treated separately and the percentage fee charged must be related to the risk in that case, after fully informing the client and negotiating on the fee level. That is the ethics issue. I'll put some links up in a reply posting at ethicaEsq later today, in case you or your clients are interested. ABA Formal Ethics Opinion 389 lays all this out clearly and convincingly, interpreting the same ethical rule on fees that exists in Illinois and Missouri.

David Giacalone, a lawyer who blogs about ethics, discusses contingency fees for personal injury lawyers.

I've never attacked the basic concept or use of contingency fees, and instead support it. (see the many listings on our Fees resources page). My gripe is with the use of a standard contingency fee -- with a firm offering virtually all of its clients the same fee, with no offer to negotiate the level, regardless of the merits of their case -- rather than tailoring the fee to the risk involved to the lawyer in each case. At best, Evan's argument above explains why a contingency fee can be good for many clients. Well, sure.

Asbestos exposure can take as long as 30 years to cause cancer. It is important to find out what companies knew about asbestos and when.

From the St. Louis Post-Dispatch: "Asbestos Indictments Are Called a First Step," by Andrew Schneider--

The federal indictment announced Monday against W.R. Grace & Co. should be used as a blueprint for criminal investigations in at least 40 other states - including Missouri - where Grace operated, public health and worker safety leaders said.

Grace and seven of its current and former officials were accused of knowing that the asbestos-contaminated vermiculite being mined in Libby, Mont., was endangering workers and residents.