Advocates of civil litigation reform are applauding an Ohio judge's decision removing a plaintiff's lawyer from an asbestos lawsuit over misrepresentations including exaggeration of the injuries that were claimed.

Judge Harry Hanna of the Cuyahoga Court of Common Pleas removed attorney Christopher Andreas of the California-based Brayton Purcell law firm from the case of Kananian, et al., vs. Lorillard Tobacco Company, saying one of the firm's attorneys made false statements regarding a previous filing with the Johns-Manville Trust and other evidence in the case.

The family of Harry Kananian filed the suit after he died of mesothelioma in 2000. The defendant in the case, Lorillard, manufactured cigarettes with filters containing asbestos during the early 1950s.

The court found that Brayton Purcell law firm and their attorney in filing the original claim exaggerated Mr. Kananian's exposure to asbestos by claiming he worked in trades that led to the exposure.

According to Judge Hanna's ruling, Mr. Andreas told the court the filing was accurate even as his firm was working to amend it.

“The record before this court indicates that Brayton Purcell institutionally and Christopher Andreas individually have failed to abide by our rules,” Judge Hanna concluded in his order removing Mr. Andreas from the case.

“They have not conducted themselves with dignity. They have not honestly discharged the duties of an attorney in this case. Therefore, they have forfeited their privileges to practice before this court.”

The judge also criticized Mr. Andreas for his behavior, including showing up at a deposition proceeding wearing a T-shirt that read “KILLER SMOKES-KENT CIGARETTES-1952-1956-MADE BY LORILLARD TOBACCO.”

“If a lay witness had appeared so attired for a video deposition, the court would certainly have been offended–perhaps moved to censure the witness,” Judge Hanna noted. “For an officer of the court to show such lack of respect is shocking.”

Although he removed Brayton Purcell, Judge Hanna denied a motion to dismiss the case, arguing that neither the plaintiffs, nor the other lawyers, had been involved in any misdeeds.

Lisa Rickard, president of the U.S. Chamber Institute for Legal Reform, said Judge Hanna's decision “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.”

American Tort Reform Association President Sherman Joyce noted that Judge Hanna must have found “egregious ethical transgressions” to take as bold a step as he did, and said the decision was part of a growing list of actions taken by courts to investigate allegations of wrongdoing by plaintiffs' attorneys.

“It's never a pleasant task for any judge to police attorney wrongdoing, but Judge Hanna was courageous to do the right thing and take action in this case,” Mr. Joyce said.

In the long run, Mr. Joyce said, rulings like Judge Hanna's may lead to claims forms with bankruptcy trusts being admissible and part of discovery in asbestos and other lawsuits.

“A growing number of courts are allowing defendants to explore whether plaintiffs are attempting to tell one story to the bankruptcy trusts and another story in civil litigation,” he said. “Claim forms filed with asbestos bankruptcy trusts should be admissible so that juries can make fully informed decisions before assigning fault in asbestos cases.”

Special Reports /

Asbestos Injury Lawyer Bounced From Case

Related Stories

Recommended For You