![]() ![]() Once determined if the plaintiff does have high-exposure to asbestos, which caused his alleged condition, then the timeframe of his exposure can be determined. Plaintiff needs to provide documents clearly stating that he has been diagnosed with high exposures of asbestosĪsbestos can be present other than in the workplaceĪsbestos was common in construction material during the 1800s as well as the 1900s, it can be found in plaster, ceramics as well as tiles. Only higher levels of exposures can cause Mesothelomia, which requires the inhalation of products containing asbestos. A reliable test also to determine exposure to asbestos is the detection of asbestos fibers in pieces of lung tissue, which can be obtained by surgery.Īsbestos fibers can also be detected in mucus, urine or feces. A test such as gallium 67 lung scanning using a tomography (high-resolution) can detect changes in the lungs. Plaintiff needs to provide sustainable documents proving his conditionĪ chest x-ray will not be able to detect the asbestos fibers themselves, yet will be able to detect any early signs of lung disease which can be caused by asbestos. Which should be provided by any corporation suspected of producing materials containing asbestos. “Employee exposure” means that exposure to airborne asbestos that would occur if the employee were not using respiratory protective equipment. “Asbestos” can be defined as material which includes chrysotile, amosite, crocidolite, tremolite asbestos, anthophyllite asbestos, actinolite asbestos, and any of these minerals that have been chemically treated and/or altered.Īsbestos-containing material (ACM) means any material containing more than 1% asbestos. This would include chest x-rays, reliable test results, medical billings, and doctor’s diagnosis.Īll that must be shown is that the discovery requested possibly might be relevant or reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. The United States Supreme Court has held that Federal courts are to construe discovery rules liberally in _ case to provide the defendant with “broad access to all plaintiffs’ medical records regarding the diagnosis of Mesothelioma”. The information sought need not be admissible at the trial if the information sought appears reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence.įed. In support, Defendant’s arguments are as follows:įederal Rule of Civil Procedure 26(b)(1) provides that: Parties may obtain discovery regarding any matter, not privileged, which is relevant to the subject matter involved in the pending action, whether it relates to the claim or defense of the party seeking discovery or the claim or defense of any other party, including the existence, description, nature, custody, condition, and location of any books, documents or other tangible things and the identity and location of persons having knowledge of any discoverable matter. Smith under Mays Williams & McCovey, requests that this Honorable Court compel Plaintiff, John Doe, to answer Interrogatories and Request for Production of Documents and to deem admitted Requests for Admission. These admissions are needed to determine the condition the plaintiff allegedly developed by working for the defendants.ĪBC Corporation, Defendant, by and through their attorney Mark A. The plaintiff has yet given timely responses to the defendant’s request for admissions. The Plaintiff claims that the defendants produce asbestos-containing products which caused him to develop Mesothelioma. ![]() Mesothelioma is a cancer developed when working with products containing the chemical asbestos which he had worked with his entire career. Plaintiff allegedly was diagnosed with Mesothelioma. ![]() For this reason, defendant’s motion to compel should be granted to defendants. Defendants reserve the right to view documents revealing the status of the Plaintiff’s health in regards to his claim in order for the dispute to be resolved. The Plaintiff has also failed timely responses regarding special interrogatories regarding the request for production of documents and request for admissions. Plaintiff has withheld documents regarding his condition despite the court’s holdings that he reveals such documents relevant to the trial. ![]() Plaintiff is an American by the name of John Doe who accuses his former employee, Mays Williams and Covey, of manufacturing products which caused him to develop a cancer called Mesothelioma. Relation of Global Warming and Extreme Weather Condition Power Point Presentation With Speaker Notes ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |