Tyler, PA—A federal lawsuit filed November 2 in the Tyler Division of the Easter District of Texas alleges that two foreign companies operating in Texas exposed a worker to asbestos, which led directly to his diagnosis of mesothelioma. Robert Plummer, along with his wife Nadine, have filed the suit against T&N Limited and TAF International Limited. T&N Limited is a subsidiary of Federal-Mogul Corporation, and is a foreign corporation, and TAF International Limited is a United Kingdom subsidiary of T&N and a foreign corporation formerly known as Turners Asbestos Fibres Limited and Raw Asbestos Distributors Limited. Plummer alleges that he was improperly exposed to the toxic asbestos fibers, and that the defendants did not adequately warn him of the dangers associated with asbestos-containing materials. The suit also claims that the defendants did not take steps or measures to prevent or minimize the employee’s exposure to asbestos. Furthermore, he claims that the defendant companies also colluded with other corporations and representatives of the asbestos industry to minimize or actually hide the dangers of the asbestos products from employees.
Although usually considered safe when it is in place and remains undisturbed, asbestos fibers can be inhaled when they become airborne, and once inside the body, they represent a significant health hazard. Inhaled asbestos fibers can lead to a number of diseases and respiratory conditions, including the rare but aggressive asbestos cancer mesothelioma. A cancer which affects the lining of the thoracic and abdominal cavities, mesothelioma is unique in that it is often not diagnosed until 20 to 50 years after the exposure to asbestos has taken place. By this time, it has usually progressed to advanced stages, and is less receptive to treatment. The plaintiffs in this case are seeking damages for extreme physical and mental pain, medical expenses, mental anguish, loss of household services, loss of consortium and pre- and post-judgment interest. They are also asking for punitive damages because they believe the defendants’ conduct was intentional, willful and malicious.