Email
Password
(Forgot Password?)
Late yesterday a Cuyahoga County Ohio state court judge issued an order and opinion that make a significant statement about the consequences of litigation fraud and abuse.
Judge Harry Hanna revoked the law firm of Brayton Purcell’s admission to the Ohio court for violating legal and ethical standards through a series of improper and deceptive acts in pretrial discovery.
"We are pleased with Judge Harry Hanna's decision in the Kananian case" said Ronald S. Milstein, Lorillard's Senior Vice President of Legal and External Affairs. "We hope our efforts to bring to the court’s attention this reckless abuse of the judicial system and Judge Hanna’s refusal to tolerate such deception will make a loud and clear statement to all that our process of jurisprudence must be conducted in the most impartial manner possible to effectively enforce the law.”
“Lorillard also hopes that Judge Hanna’s decision will benefit other companies that may be subject to unethical conduct in asbestos personal injury and mass tort litigation.”
Jump to full article »
Case Number: CV-01-442750 Case Title: JACK KANANIAN AS EXECUTOR ETC ET AL ESTATE OF HARR vs. LORILLARD TOBACCO COMPANY ET AL Case Designation: ASBESTOS TORT-PRODUCT LIAB
An Ohio judge has removed the prominent Novato, Calif. law firm of Brayton Purcell from an asbestos lawsuit against Lorillard Tobacco, saying the firm made “patently false” statements about filings it made with bankruptcy trusts and evidence in the case.
The judge’s action on Thursday comes a few weeks after Brayton Purcell withdrew from the lawsuit by the heirs of Harry Kananian, a World War II veteran who died of mesothelioma, a cancer usually attributed to asbestos. The judge refused to dismiss the lawsuit against Lorillard, a Loews (nyse: CG - news - people ) unit, saying it would be unfair to the plaintiffs since they did nothing wrong.
The suit illustrates a pattern defense lawyers have complained bitterly about, in which plaintiffs first tap trusts set up by bankrupt asbestos manufacturers, then pursue solvent companies without disclosing prior payments. Lorillard is a frequent target because it manufactured cigarettes with asbestos-containing filters for a few years in the early 1950s. Brayton Purcell lawyer Chris Andreas is one of the few attorneys to have won such a suit against Lorillard.
"Judge Harry Hanna should be commended for taking the time to investigate corrupt 'double-dipping' by some asbestos plaintiffs' lawyers. His opinion exposes a world of fraudulent asbestos claims, where the lawyers allege injury as a result of exposure to one product after collecting from a bankruptcy trust by asserting the same injury occurred from another product, and elaborate schemes to keep those claims hidden from asbestos defendants and the courts. This type of activity hurts injured victims with legitimate claims by diverting money from a limited pool of available funds through deceit and deception.
"Asbestos defendants should have a legal right to know when a plaintiffs' lawyer is 'double-dipping,' as well as alleging conflicting sources of exposure in multiple claims. Defendants should also have a right to know how much money a plaintiff has collected from other sources for the same injury. We believe judges should require disclosure of this kind of information as a matter of course. If they fail to do so, legislative remedies may be in order.
An Ohio state court judge upbraided the Brayton Purcell law firm in Novato, Calif., and one of its partners Thursday, finding that they lied to the court, submitted fraudulent asbestos claim forms and broke other rules.
As a result, the judge said in a published ruling that they had forfeited pro hac vice privileges to practice law in the asbestos litigation hotbed of Ohio's Cuyahoga County.
Judge Harry Hanna's ruling offers a rare glimpse behind the scenes of a heated discovery fight, one that portrays the plaintiffs firm and partner Christopher Andreas as sloppy and deceitful in their representation of the estate of Harry Kananian, who died from mesothelioma, a cancer caused by asbestos exposure.
The decision won't put an end to the underlying claims Kananian's estate brought against Lorillard Tobacco, maker of Kent cigarettes. But it jeopardizes the ability of Andreas and the Brayton firm to practice in the Ohio county, which includes Cleveland; whether the ruling will sully their reputations elsewhere is unclear. . . .
When lawyers for Lorillard moved to disqualify the California firm and its partner in November, they contended that Andreas and the Brayton firm had submitted inconsistent claims to asbestos trusts in order to hit up multiple defendants for Kananian's exposure, then lied in court to cover their tracks. . . .
The judge also criticized Andreas for showing up at a deposition last summer wearing a T-shirt that said, "Killer Smokes -- Kent Cigarettes -- 1952-1956 -- Made by Lorillard Tobacco." . . .
As part of Thursday's order, Hanna denied Lorillard's request to dismiss the case, saying that Kananian's family and its current counsel did nothing wrong.
Judge Harry Hanna revoked the law firm of Brayton Purcell's admission to the Ohio court for violating legal and ethical standards through a series of improper and deceptive acts in pretrial discovery.
"We are pleased with Judge Harry Hanna's decision in the Kananian case," said Ronald S. Milstein, Lorillard's Senior Vice President of Legal and External Affairs. "We hope our efforts to bring to the court's attention this reckless abuse of the judicial system and Judge Hanna's refusal to tolerate such deception will make a loud and clear statement to all that our process of jurisprudence must be conducted in the most impartial manner possible to effectively enforce the law."
"Lorillard also hopes that Judge Hanna's decision will benefit other companies that may be subject to unethical conduct in asbestos personal injury and mass tort litigation."
Harry Kananian died in the year 2000 of mesothelioma -- a cancer almost always caused by asbestos. But the legacy that may survive him is the role he is posthumously playing in exposing evidence of asbestos litigation fraud.
In early 2000, the Ohio resident met with the law firm of Early, Ludwick, Sweeney & Strauss to see about collecting compensation from special trusts set up by companies to deal with asbestos liabilities. . . .
In the legal trade, this is known as "double dipping" -- the process by which lawyers file claims at many different bankruptcy trusts on behalf of a single plaintiff. Each trust is told a different story about how the client got sick, and the plaintiff collects from all of them. Of course, the lawyers collect too. This practice may well have remained unexposed had not Brayton Purcell decided to cash in on Kananian one more time. It sued Lorillard Tobacco, this time claiming its client had become sick from smoking Kent cigarettes, whose filters contained asbestos for several years in the 1950s. That suit has now exploded on Brayton, exposing one of the asbestos bar's more lucrative cash cows.
In response to the Dec. 5 editorial-page commentary "Trusts Busted" by Kimberley Strassel: In June of 2000, Harry Kananian died of mesothelioma, a rare cancer of the lining of the lungs, caused only by past exposure to asbestos fibers. Prior to his death, a personal injury lawsuit was filed on his behalf in California.
A number of companies that made or sold asbestos-containing products were named as defendants, including Lorillard Tobacco Co. . . .
The allegations leveled against the defendant companies, including Lorillard, in both California and Ohio have been entirely consistent. At all times, plaintiffs have asserted that it was the cumulative dose of asbestos inhaled by Mr. Kananian from all sources that caused his mesothelioma.
Lorillard, in conscious disregard for the health and safety of its customers, incorporated a particularly lethal form of asbestos fiber into its Kent "Micronite" cigarette filters from 1952-1956. . . .
Seeking damages from all of the companies who profited from the sale of this deadly material is not "double dipping," but rather is entirely proper under our system of civil jurisprudence to ensure full and complete compensation for injuries or death caused by an individual's cumulative past exposure to asbestos. . . .
I would hope the Journal could be more concerned with compensation of innocent people unwittingly exposed and injured by this deadly material rather than leveling unfounded allegations that somehow the attorneys representing these victims are trying to "double dip."