James Hardie Industries Faces US Asbestos Lawsuits

James Hardie Industries Faces US Asbestos Lawsuits - Asbestos & Mesothelioma News

Asbestos Today is an online magazine that aggregates the latest asbestos and mesothelioma news, since 2003.
Site Navigation
Asbestos News
Contact a Mesothelioma AttorneySpecial Report
Understanding Asbestos & MesotheliomaAsbestos facts:Asbestos exposure and risk:How can families reduce the risk of exposure to asbestos?How can asbestos affect my health?What is mesothelioma?How is mesothelioma treated?Asbestos medical testingAsbestos Related DiseasesNews Archives
September 2006
October 2005
February 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
News Search

Contact Us
information [at] asbestostoday dot comJames Hardie Industries Faces US Asbestos Lawsuits

The Australian reports the James Hardie Industries faces lawsuits in the United States, specifically California, by former employees who handled Asbestos. The bigger story is that James Hardie Industries may have asbestos liability in the United States.

The workers were employed by Californian distributor Industrial Building Materials Inc, which they claim imported and installed Hardie asbestos products. Mr Kazan's firm has won a number of similar cases in the past.

News Source: The Australian  |  Published: February 21, 2005  |  Read Full Story Contact an Asbestos and Mesothelioma Attorney, Lawyer, Law Firm Please fill out the form below to contact an attorney. Provide as much information as possible to speed the processing of your inquiry (Only United States residents are eligible). Contact Information   *Are required items. *First Name: *Last Name: Email Address: *Daytime Phone: Evening Phone: *Zip Code: Case Information Have you, or the person you are contacting us on behalf of, been diagnosed with mesothelioma: Yes:   No: Date of diagnosis:

*Comments: (Please describe your legal issues and needs.)

Terms I understand submission of information submission of information for review does not create, is not intended to create, and must not be relied upon as creating, an attorney-client relationship. I understand such a relationship can only be created by the agreement of both the client and the attorney, evidenced by a written retainer agreement that has been signed by client and counter-signed by the attorney.By submitting your expression of interest you are consenting to receive telephone calls from participating law firms even if you are currently on the do-not-call list. *I Agree to these terms: All contents copyright ©2008, eJustice All rights reserved. Asbestos Today is part of the eJustice Network. Your use of this web site constitutes acceptance of the Asbestos Today Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

View the original article here

New York City’s Inspection Scandal

New Yorkers are rightly alarmed at the ease with which an inspector who was licensed to test buildings and construction sites for lead or asbestos risks got away with filing hundreds of false reports for at least a decade. The Bloomberg administration says reforms that were already in progress when the deception was uncovered will make it less likely to happen in the future.

But the jaw-dropping scope of the fraud carried out by just one inspector raises legitimate concerns about city oversight. It also raises the possibility of collusion between builders and property owners and the inspectors they hire to perform legally required safety tests.

The inspector, Saverio Todaro, who was at one point certified by city, state and federal agencies, operated a company through which he claimed to perform environmental inspection and testing services, including lead clearance testing, asbestos air monitoring and asbestos inspection in the New York City area. Favorable reports allow property owners to certify that their apartments presented no lead risks to young children or that proposed demolition projects would be asbestos-free. That means they do not require special filings with the city or costly abatement efforts.

As William K. Rashbaum reported in The Times on Tuesday, Mr. Todaro submitted results for more than 200 buildings and apartments, including some renovated for the city’s affordable housing initiative, without performing a single test.

The city environmental agency suspended Mr. Todaro’s license in 2004 but failed to notify other public agencies for which he did asbestos-related work. As a result, he continued to file reports until 2008, when an employee of the city’s health department noticed a suspicious pattern in his work.

City officials say that they would notify other agencies of suspensions and irregularities in the future. The city also says it is well on the way to a system that will make it impossible for inspectors who have been suspended from filing subsequent reports.

City Hall should also consider strengthening and consolidating oversight of the testing regime, which currently is spread across several city agencies.

View the original article here