The man, 57, whose identity and current city of residence are withheld at his request, sued last August after he was diagnosed less than one year earlier with mesothelioma, an always fatal cancer linked to asbestos exposure, according to court documents.

Weitz & Luxenberg attorney Daniel Wasserberg, Esq., said, “Our client was a construction worker who, in the 1970s and 1980s, helped install underground water and sewer lines. These pipes — 6 to 48 inches in diameter — were made of a concrete-asbestos composite material for strength but also for ease of fabrication. The defendants made, sold or delivered them.”

The plaintiff’s job in part was to cut asbestos-concrete pipes so they could be properly laid and connected beneath public and private streets in and around the Sacramento Valley city of Chico, court documents show.

However, according to the court filing, the task of cutting this particular type of pipe posed extreme health risks.

“Our client performed his work with a gasoline-operated saw,” said Brent Zadorozny, Esq., a Weitz & Luxenberg California mesothelioma attorney. “The cuts generated an enormous amount of cement-asbestos dust, which flew in every direction from the saw’s whirring blades and engine exhaust blast. This veritable snowstorm of asbestos dust was at times so thick you couldn’t see the person standing three feet away from you.”

By the end of each workday, the plaintiff was covered from head to toe in a thick layer of asbestos dust, said Stephen Healy, another Weitz & Luxenberg California mesothelioma attorney and the author of a law textbook on asbestos litigation.

Asbestos is a mineral once widely used in the U.S. as an ingredient in the manufacture of more than 3,000 consumer and industrial products, including shipboard thermal insulation, automobile brake pads, and home roofing and siding products. However, inhalation of “asbestos dust and particles is known to cause malignant mesothelioma, lung cancer, other cancers, asbestosis, and other life-threatening health problems that typically surface decades after exposure,” explained Healy.

Malignant mesothelioma is a rare form of cancer that affects the thin membranes lining organs in the chest (pleura) and abdomen (peritoneum), Healy said. “Mesothelioma is closely linked with asbestos; the only known and scientifically established cause of malignant mesothelioma is from asbestos exposure,” he continued. “Malignant mesothelioma is generally fatal within eight to 16 months of initial onset of symptoms.”

In the litigation just settled, the defendants — two from Southern California, the others from out of state — contended there was no asbestos exposure because their products were not delivered to the construction sites where the plaintiff worked or at the times he worked there, court records show.

The Weitz & Luxenberg California mesothelioma lawyers countered with documents they uncovered indicating that the pipes at issue were in fact delivered where and when the plaintiff worked, said Benno Ashrafi, Esq., head of Weitz & Luxenberg in Los Angeles.

“As so often happens in these kinds of cases, the key to eventually prevailing is solid detective work,” Ashrafi said. “It’s a lot like looking for a needle in a haystack because the evidence is often buried way down deep somewhere within thousands and thousands of pages of records. Weitz & Luxenberg happens to be exceptionally good at hunting down information we hope will tip the scales of justice in favor of our clients.”

The trial originally was to be held in Los Angeles, although the injury occurred in and around Chico. “Los Angeles was where most of our client’s expert witnesses were,” explained Ari Friedman, Esq., a Weitz & Luxenberg Los Angeles office California mesothelioma attorney who also worked on the case. “However, despite our objections, the defendants were able to have the trial be moved to Chico, more than 400 miles to the north. In the end, this did nothing to prevent us from fully pressing our case. If anything, the relocation handed us yet another opportunity to demonstrate that Weitz and Luxenberg will go anywhere and do everything to fight for justice for our clients.”

CPSC staff alleged that E&B’s subsidiary, EB Brands, LLC (EB Brands), knew of 25 incidents related to the defective balls as early as 2007, but failed to immediately inform the Commission as required by federal law. Some of these incidents led to consumers being injured.  By October 2008, when EB Brands reported to the Commission, EB Brands knew of at least 44 incidents involving the fitness balls.

EB Brands sold three million of the fitness balls from May 2000 through February 2009. They were recalled in April 2009.  At that time, there were 47 reports of the fitness balls unexpectedly bursting when overinflated by consumers, resulting in injuries, including a fracture and bruises.

Federal law requires manufacturers, distributors and retailers to report to CPSC immediately (within 24 hours) after obtaining information reasonably supporting the conclusion that a product contains a defect which could create a substantial product hazard, creates an unreasonable risk of serious injury or death, or fails to comply with any consumer product safety rule or any other rule, regulation, standard or ban enforced by CPSC.

In agreeing to the settlement, E&B denies CPSC staff allegations that it knowingly violated the law.

The settlement resolves CPSC staff’s allegations that Henry Gordy knowingly failed to report the safety defect and hazard with the “Auto Fire Target Set” immediately to CPSC, as required by federal law. CPSC staff also alleges that the firm made a material misrepresentation to CPSC staff in the course of staff’s investigation into the target sets.

CPSC staff alleges that Henry Gordy knew on or about May 2006 that the target set was defective and could cause harm but failed to report this to CPSC. CPSC staff alleges that the target set is defective because if a child places the soft, pliable, plastic toy dart into his or her mouth, the toy can be inhaled into the throat and can prevent the child from breathing.

CPSC staff also alleges that Henry Gordy made a material misrepresentation to the staff in the course of the staff’s investigation into the target sets in May 2009 by not reporting all of the information Henry Gordy was then aware of.

In May 2010, Family Dollar Stores, Inc. and CPSC announced the recall of about 1.8 million Auto Fire Target Sets because Henry Gordy refused to conduct the recall. By that time, there were three deaths associated with the target set. Auto Fire Target Sets were sold exclusively by Family Dollar between September 2005 and January 2009 for about $1.50 each. Each set came with a toy gun; soft, pliable, plastic toy darts and a small target.

Federal law requires manufacturers, distributors and retailers to report to CPSC immediately (within 24 hours) after obtaining information reasonably supporting the conclusion that a product contains a defect which could create a substantial product hazard, creates an unreasonable risk of serious injury or death, or fails to comply with any consumer product safety rule or any other rule, regulation, standard or ban enforced by CPSC.

Companies also must specifically report to CPSC choking incidents involving small balls, latex balloons, marbles, or toys or games containing these items or other small parts. Companies that receive information about children choking on any of these items and, as a result, dying, suffering serious injury, ceasing breathing for any length of time or being treated by a medical professional must report this information to CPSC immediately.

In agreeing to the settlement, Henry Gordy denies CPSC staff allegations as to the existence of a defect or that it knowingly violated the law.

Pursuant to the Consumer Product Safety Act, CPSC must consider the appropriateness of the penalty to the size of the business of the person charged, including how to address undue adverse economic impacts on small businesses.

The settlement resolves CPSC staff allegations that Bad Boy Enterprises failed to immediately report, as required by federal law, a defect involving Classic Buggies off-road utility vehicles with Series brand and SePex brand electric motors that resulted in sudden acceleration incidents and injuries to consumers. The off-road utility vehicles with Series motors were sold between 2003 and June 2007 and the off-road utility vehicles with a SePex motors were sold between 2007 and June 2010. Both the Series and SePex off-road utility vehicles could suddenly accelerate during use or while the ignition is in the idle position, creating a runaway vehicle situation.

In 2008, Bad Boy Enterprises implemented a repair program for the SePex off-road utility buggies to address the sudden acceleration defect without notifying the Commission. The firm did not report to the Commission until August 2009. CPSC and Bad Boy Enterprises announced the first recall for sudden acceleration on October 21, 2009.

Subsequent investigation conducted by CPSC staff uncovered that the firm failed to notify the Commission about the sudden acceleration defect and incidents involving the off-road utility vehicles with a Series motor. The firm did not give CPSC full information about the Series buggies until May 2010. The firm also reported in May 2010 that a new repair was necessary for the previously recalled off-road utility vehicles to repair the sudden acceleration defect. The second recall for sudden acceleration in these off-road utility vehicles was announced in December 2010. By that time, there were over 50 reports of sudden acceleration incidents, resulting in injuries such as arm and leg fractures, a fractured toe, rotator cuff injury, and sore muscles.

These off-road utility vehicles were sold nationwide by authorized dealers from Spring 2003 through June 2010 for about $10,000. CPSC urges consumers with recalled Series and SePex off-road utility buggies to call the firm toll-free at (855) 738-3711 between 8 a.m. and 5 p.m. CT Monday through Friday for a free repair.

Federal law requires manufacturers, distributors and retailers to report to CPSC within 24 hours after obtaining information reasonably supporting the conclusion that a product contains a defect, which could create a substantial product hazard, creates an unreasonable risk of serious injury or death, or fails to comply with any consumer product safety rule or any other rule, regulation, standard or ban enforced by CPSC.

In agreeing to the settlement, Bad Boy Enterprises denies CPSC staff allegations as to the existence of a defect or hazard or that it violated the law.

According to Burden’s attorney, they had turned down CSX’s offer to settle the case for $600,000 to avoid trial.  The jury in the case saw it differently and awarded Mr. Burden $10 million.  The amount was later reduced by 10% (to $9 million) for contributory negligence.

The U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) announced today that Winter Bee Inc. of Los Angeles, Calif., has agreed to a civil penalty of $200,000. The penalty settlement (pdf), which has been accepted provisionally by the Commission, provides that Winter Bee must pay $40,000 of the $200,000 penalty. The Commission agreed to suspend $160,000 of the penalty because the firm demonstrated an inability to pay the full amount. The full amount could become due immediately if CPSC finds that Winter Bee misrepresented its financial condition. The settlement resolves CPSC staff allegations that Winter Bee knowingly failed to report to CPSC immediately, as required by federal law, that children’s hooded sweatshirts it manufactured and sold had drawstrings at the neck.

Children’s upper outerwear with drawstrings, including sweatshirts, poses a strangulation hazard to children that can result in serious injury or death. In June 2009, CPSC and Winter Bee announced a recall of 80,000 children’s hooded sweatshirts with drawstrings at the neck. Winter Bee manufactured and sold two styles of these sweatshirts under the brand name “Speedy” at various retailers in the Los Angeles area.

CPSC issued drawstring guidelines (pdf) in 1996, to help prevent children from strangling on or getting entangled in the neck and waist drawstrings of upper outerwear, such as jackets and sweatshirts. In 1997, industry adopted a voluntary standard for drawstrings that incorporated the CPSC guidelines. In May 2006, CPSC’s Office of Compliance announced (pdf) that children’s upper outerwear with drawstrings at the hood or neck would be regarded as defective and as presenting a substantial risk of injury to young children.

Federal law requires manufacturers, distributors, and retailers to report to CPSC immediately (within 24 hours) after obtaining information reasonably supporting the conclusion that a product contains a defect which could create a substantial product hazard, creates an unreasonable risk of serious injury or death, or fails to comply with any consumer product safety rule or any other rule, regulation, standard, or ban enforced by CPSC.

In agreeing to the settlement, Winter Bee denies CPSC staff allegations that it knowingly violated the law.