All About Lawsuits™ » Featured

BP Oil Spill

admin — Tue, 11 May 2010 18:24:44 +0000

On Tuesday, Apr 27, 2010, the U.S. Government’s Department of Interior and Department of Homeland Security started a Joint Investigation into the cause of the Transocean rig explosion. Their plan is to coordinate the already ongoing investigation of the United States Coast Guard Minerals Management Service. Department of Energy Secretary Ken Salazar and Department of Homeland Security head Janet Napolitano will now have the power to issue subpoenas and hold hearings.

Deepwater Horizon Explosion Cause & Investigation

As you know, Gordon, Elias & Seely, LLP, filed the Kleppinger family’s lawsuit in the 234th Judicial District Court of Harris County, Texas. Another claimant has intervened in that matter and the Court entered a Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) in the Transocean Deepwater Horizon explosion that took place on April 20, 2010. A TRO is filed for many reasons – one of which would be to preserve evidence or not to cause spoliation of evidence.

Since an ongoing investigation of great magnitude is already being conducted by The Coast Guard, The Minerals Management Service, The Department of the Interior and the Department of Homeland Security on possible causes of the explosion, the law firm of Gordon, Elias & Seely, LLP, is satisfied that the evidence will be safely maintained.

Workers Suffered Great Fear and Mental Anguish

So far, based upon the investigation of Gordon, Elias & Seely, LLP, they have determined that there were a series of explosions prior to the main explosion. This means that the people that may have died in the main explosion suffered great, great fear and mental anguish. This further means that the families of these great workers that gave their lives to Transocean have a very large monetary Jones Act claim for what is called conscious pain and suffering. These are very important facts that apparently have been attempted to be suppressed by Transocean and British Petroleum (BP) that will be revealed in the Coast Guard investigation.

Production casing was being run and cemented at the time of the accident. Once the cementing was done, it was due to be tested for integrity and a cement plug set to abandon the well for later completion as a subsea producer. According to Transocean executive Adrian Rose “undoubtedly abnormal pressure” had accumulated inside the marine riser and as it came up it “expanded rapidly and ignited”, an event known as a blowout.

British Petroleum, BP, the entity that owns the leased land that the Deepwater Horizon was drilling over when it exploded, fought the United States government tooth and nail over whether there should be 3 or 4 back-up systems to actuate and close the blow out preventer. BP prevailed with the blessings of the Bush – Chaney oil advocates and it was only required to have triple redundancy. This is quite different than in Europe. BP spent years battling federal regulators over how many layers of safeguards would be needed to prevent a deepwater well from this type of accident.

One area of immediate concern, industry experts said, was the lack of a remote system that would have allowed workers to clamp shut Deepwater Horizon’s wellhead so it would not continue to gush oil. The rig is now spilling 210,000 gallons of oil a day into the Gulf of Mexico.

In a letter sent last year to the DOI/MMS, BP objected to what it called “extensive, prescriptive regulations” proposed in new rules to toughen safety standards. “We believe industry’s current safety and environmental statistics demonstrate that the voluntary programs…continue to be very successful.”

Read Letter to MMS

Additionally, in March 3, 2000, BP, Transocean and other drillers were specifically warned about BOPs and they were told about two near disasters that would have also resulted in the environmental damage that is being caused in this event.

Read MMS Safety Alert #186

Toyota Acceleration Lawsuits Combined in California

admin — Mon, 12 Apr 2010 18:12:55 +0000

Judges announced that the Toyota lawsuits related to Toyota’s acceleration issue will be consolidated in a federal court in Santa Ana, California near Toyota’s U.S. sales headquarters.

So far a combination of over 200 consumer and potential class action shareholder lawsuits have been filed, over 50 of which are individual lawsuits claiming personal injury or death as a result of the accelerator issue.

U.S. District Judge James V. Selna will be overseeing the cases.

Study Suggests Carbon Nanotubes can cause Mesothelioma

admin — Thu, 04 Feb 2010 22:57:44 +0000

A major study published in Nature Nanotechnology suggests some forms of carbon nanotubes — a poster child for the “nanotechnology revolution” — could be as harmful as asbestos if inhaled in sufficient quantities.

The study used established methods to see if specific types of nanotubes have the potential to cause mesothelioma — a cancer of the lung lining that can take 30-40 years to appear following exposure. The results show that long, thin multi-walled carbon nanotubes that look like asbestos fibers, behave like asbestos fibers.

Discovered nearly 20 years ago, carbon nanotubes have been described as the wonder material of the 21st Century. Light as plastic and stronger that steel, they are being developed for use in new drugs, energy-efficient batteries and futuristic electronics. But since their discovery, questions have been raised about whether some of these nanoscale materials may cause harm and undermine a nascent market for all types of carbon nanotubes, including multi- and single-walled carbon nanotubes. Leading forecasting firms say sales of all nanotubes could reach $2 billion annually within the next four to seven years, according to an article in the U.S. publication Chemical & Engineering News.

“This study is exactly the kind of strategic, highly focused research needed to ensure the safe and responsible development of nanotechnology,” says Andrew Maynard, Chief Science Advisor to the Project on Emerging Nanotechnologies and a co-author on the paper. “It looks at a specific nanoscale material expected to have widespread commercial applications and asks specific questions about a specific health hazard. Even though scientists have been raising concerns about the safety of long, thin carbon nanotubes for over a decade, none of the research needs in the current U.S. federal nanotechnology environment, health and safety risk research strategy address this question.”

Read the full Story at Science Daily here: Carbon Nanotubes That Look Like Asbestos, Behave Like Asbestos, Could Lead to Asbestos-Related Disease

Asbestos Case Spotlight – Merlin Olsen vs Many

admin — Thu, 04 Feb 2010 22:38:26 +0000

Football legend Merlin Olsen is suing NBC Studios, NBC Universal, 20th Century Fox Film Corporation, Sherwin Williams, Lennox Industries and other companies, in an asbestos lawsuit, claiming he developed a rare form of cancer as a result of being negligently exposed to asbestos.

Read the story at TMZ here: Merlin Olsen Suit: Asbestos Caused my Cancer

View the case filing at TMZ here: Merlin Olsen Asbestos Lawsuit

Jones Act Case Spotlight – Smith vs Weeks Marine

admin — Thu, 04 Feb 2010 22:12:54 +0000

The plaintiff-appellee, Clarence Smith (Mr. Smith), sustained multiple injuries while quartered on the barge of the defendant-appellant, Weeks Marine, Inc. (Weeks). In June of 2005, Mr. Smith was awakened after midnight by two other crew members who dragged him from his bunk and severely beat him. Mr. Smith filed a petition naming as defendants the two attackers and Weeks, the barge owner/employer. He subsequently amended his petition to add the employer/payroll company, apparently a subsidiary of Weeks, Atlantic Sounding Company, Inc. (Atlantic). Mr. Smith alleged Jones Act negligence and unseaworthiness of the vessel. He also claimed entitlement to maintenance and cure benefits as well as to damages and attorney fees.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=a2VTbbq40EM

Mr. Smith, Weeks, and Atlantic filed cross motions for summary judgment. The trial court granted Mr. Smith a partial summary judgment on the issue of Weeks’ failure to provide a seaworthy vessel. The trial court denied the motions for summary judgment of Weeks and Atlantic which were based upon Jones Act negligence and seaworthiness. Weeks filed this appeal. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

Read the case review and affirmation from Leagle.com – SMITH vs WEEKS MARINE, INC.

SMITH v. WEEKS MARINE, INC.

CLARENCE SMITH,
v.
WEEKS MARINE, INC., ET AL.

No. 09-980.

Court of Appeals of Louisiana, Third Circuit.

February 3, 2010.

MARK GERARD ARTALL, Counsel for: Plaintiff/Appellee — Clarence Smith.

KEVIN REEVE DUCK, Duck Law Firm, Counsel for: Plaintiff/Appellee — Clarence Smith.

MATTHEW FRANCIS POPP, Waits, Emmett & Popp, L.L.C., Counsel for: Defendant/Appellant — Weeks Marine, Inc.

Court composed of THIBODEAUX, Chief Judge, SAUNDERS, and GENOVESE, Judges.

THIBODEAUX, Chief Judge.

FELA Case Spotlight – DOI vs Union Pacific Railroad Company

admin — Thu, 04 Feb 2010 21:55:44 +0000

Eric Doi, an employee of the appellant Union Pacific Railroad Company, sued Union Pacific under the Federal Employers’ Liability Act (FELA) after he suffered life-altering injuries (quadriplegia) in a rollover accident that occurred when Robert Torres, a fellow-employee, lost control of the company-owned truck he was driving. Respondent Doi and Torres were members of one of Union Pacific’s “zone gangs,” which traveled on an as needed basis to and worked at various locations in several states. The accident occurred in July, 2007, on a travel day, after Torres had picked up Doi at the Tucson airport and while they were en route to their hotel after stopping at a store to purchase food and “Pedialyte” (a liquid containing electrolytes) which they would eat and drink during the following work day in the Arizona desert.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=EoQ4aCAcsZg

The principal question is whether Doi and Torres were acting within the scope of their employment when the accident occurred. A jury decided they were and awarded Doi damages of $48,493,120, a sum that included $35.7 million in noneconomic damages for past and future physical pain and mental suffering. Union Pacific appeals, contending Doi and Torres were not acting within the scope of their employment as a matter of law. Alternatively, the company claims a new trial is necessary because of instructional error and an excessive award of noneconomic damages. Finally, Union Pacific contends that the judgment should be modified to provide that postjudgment interest accrues at the federal rate rather than the rate provided by state law. We affirm the judgment in all respects.

Read the case review and affirmation from Leagle.com -- DOI vs UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY

DOI v. UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY

ERIC DOI, Plaintiff and Respondent,
v.
UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD COMPANY, Defendant and Appellant.

B214287.

Court of Appeals of California, Second Appellate District, Division Eight.

January 27, 2010.

Randolph Cregger & Chalfant and Joseph P. Mascovich; Union Pacific Railroad Company Law Department, Adrian L. Randolph and William H. Pohle, Jr., for Defendant and Appellant.

The Crow Law Firm, Donald S. Britt, John D. Gilbert and Janet Manrique for Plaintiff and Respondent.

Ban on Texting for Truck Drivers

admin — Tue, 26 Jan 2010 18:25:26 +0000

The U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood announced a Federal Ban on Texting for Commercial Truck Drivers. This may help lower the number of truck accident incidents.

U.S Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood today announced federal guidance to expressly prohibit texting by drivers of commercial vehicles such as large trucks and buses. The prohibition is effective immediately and is the latest in a series of actions taken by the Department to combat distracted driving since the Secretary convened a national summit on the issue last September.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=gvIXIVXBIXk

“We want the drivers of big rigs and buses and those who share the roads with them to be safe,” said Secretary LaHood. “This is an important safety step and we will be taking more to eliminate the threat of distracted driving.”

Read the full release here: Federal Ban on Texting for Commercial Truck Drivers