Benzene Case Taken to U.S. Supreme Court
Lawyer Blogs
[##_1L|1401660181.jpg|width="180" height="122" alt=""|_##]A lawyer urges the U.S. Supreme Court to reverse the state Supreme Court ruling that barred her Alabama client from suing the manufacturers of a chemical he blamed for causing his rare form of leukemia. Jack Cline died in January of acute myelogenous leukemia. Until retiring in 1995, he worked with benzene for 37 years for a company that made railroad wheels.
Cline tried to sue Ashland Inc., Chevron Phillips Chemical, and ExxonMobil Corp., which produced the benzene he believed caused his disease. The judge presiding over the case ruled in favor of the defendants, stating that Cline waited too long to sue.
The judge’s ruling was based on a 1979 precedent that held that the two-year statute of limitations begins on the date of the last incidence of chemical exposure.
In Alabama, another precedent allows lawsuits only by persons who can show “manifest harm” or demonstrable injury. But because Cline’s illness was not diagnosed until 1999—four years after his last exposure—there was no allowable time period during which he could have sued, according to both precedents.
Cline’s lawyer, Leslie Brueckner, is arguing that the state ruling violated the 14th amendment, denying Cline due process of law.
If the U.S. Supreme Court accepts the case, oral arguments should begin sometime in the fall or winter.
Related listings
-
Justice Department Aide Monica Goodling Resigns
Lawyer Blogs 04/07/2007Monica M. Goodling, one of the key aides who took part in planning the firings of eight US Attorneys who was formerly on voluntary leave from her post as special counsel to the US Attorney General, submitted her resignation without cause Friday. Good...
-
Suspect in Home Depot slaying pleads not guilty
Lawyer Blogs 04/06/2007Jason Russell Richardson pleaded not guilty Friday to shooting and killing Tom Egan, a night manager at the Tustin Marketplace Home Depot, while robbing the store Feb. 9. In a court appearance that lasted just seconds, Richardson, a convicted rapist ...
-
Judge blocks Vonage from adding new customers
Lawyer Blogs 04/06/2007[##_1L|1237509600.jpg|width="211" height="89" alt=""|_##]Vonage Holdings Corp. cannot add new customers while it appeals a finding that it infringed Verizon Communications Inc. patents for making phone calls over the Internet, a federal judge ruled o...
Illinois Work Injury Lawyers – Krol, Bongiorno & Given, LTD.
Accidents in the workplace are often caused by unsafe work conditions arising from ignoring safety rules, overlooking maintenance or other negligence of those in management. While we are one of the largest firms in Illinois dedicated solely to the representation of injured workers, we pride ourselves on the personal, one-on-one approach we deliver to each client.
Work accidents can cause serious injuries and sometimes permanent damage. Some extremely serious work injuries can permanently hinder a person’s ability to get around and continue their daily duties. Factors that affect one’s quality of life such as place of work, relationships with friends and family, and social standing can all be taken away quickly by a work injury. Although, you may not be able to recover all of your losses, you may be entitled to compensation as a result of your work injury. Krol, Bongiorno & Given, LTD. provides informed advocacy in all kinds of workers’ compensation claims, including:
• Injuries to the back and neck, including severe spinal cord injuries
• Serious head injuries
• Heart problems resulting from workplace activities
• Injuries to the knees, elbows, shoulders and other joints
• Injuries caused by repetitive movements
For Illinois Workers’ Compensation claims, you will ALWAYS cheat yourself if you do not hire an experienced attorney. When you hire Krol, Bongiorno & Given, Ltd, you will have someone to guide you through the process, and when it is time to settle, we will add value to your case IN EXCESS of our fee. In the last few years, employers and insurance carriers have sought to advance the argument that when you settle a case without an attorney, your already low settlement should be further reduced by 20% so that you do not get a “windfall.” Representing yourself in Illinois is a lose-lose proposition.