Our lawyers have defended asbestos cases beginning in the mid-1970's to the present time. The early cases involved naval shipyard cases. The alleged injuries include mesothelioma, asbestosis, various forms of lung cancer, other organ cancers and respiratory ailments. We have been involved in the defense of manufacturers, component manufacturers, suppliers, installers and premises owners. We have defended many different types of asbestos products, including, but not limited to, insulation, prepreg composite materials, foam cores used in aircraft, toasters, brake linings, gaskets and many other different types of products. Attorneys in the firm have also defended multi-plaintiff actions involving exposure to asbestos during the installation and removal of asbestos-containing insulation materials. Our lawyers have defended "living mesothelioma" cases, including "bystander" and "shaker" cases. We have defended cases brought by the Rose, Klein & Marias firm and the Waters & Krauss firm, which we have resolved for minimal amounts. Additionally, we have defended many asbestos premises liability cases filed by the Brayton firm and have successfully settled these cases for less than nuisance value. Our lawyers have also defended many "tire worker" cases, involving claimed asbestos and talc exposure. Also, our lawyers have tried asbestos exposure cases to verdict. Most recently, we have been involved in the emerging area of asbestos cases involving different sources of exposure, including premises liability and asbestos in small appliances. Some of these cases include:

• Representation of a major asbestos company in naval shipyard cases from the mid 1970s to the present time in various matters.
  
  
• We represented a bystander case, i.e., the spouse and children of a worker in a case involving asbestos exposure at a naval shipyard. The case received an early trial date due to the spouse's impending death. We resolved the case to the satisfaction of the client.
  
  
• We defended a wrongful death action on behalf of a manufacturer of component parts of small appliances in a case of alleged asbestos exposure by a small appliance repairman who died of mesothelioma during the pendency of the action. The case was resolved to the satisfaction of our client.
  
  
• In a recent asbestos mesothelioma case, we obtained an early dismissal from a multiparty case as a result of a creatively-drafted motion to quash based upon a lack of in personam jurisdiction, where the case turned on whether website and internet contacts were sufficient to establish jurisdiction. The case involved a component parts fabricator of asbestos-containing components and we prevailed on behalf of our client in this cutting-edge area.
  
  
• We were able to obtain a dismissal on behalf of a manufacturer of silica products from an action in which plaintiff claimed respiratory illness, fatigue syndrome (fibromyalgia), dermatitis, cardiovascular abnormalities, brain damage and kidney disease and underwent a kidney transplant. We paid a nominal settlement on behalf of a second defendant in that case, who allegedly supplied corrosion inhibiting primer and materials which were claimed to be carcinogenic.