Supreme Court Disappoints Asbestos Group

Supreme Court Disappoints Asbestos Group

By Steven Brostoff, Washington Editor

NU Online News Service, Oct. 8, 12:50 p.m. EST, Washington?Asbestos litigation reform advocates expressed disappointment over the United States Supreme Court decision yesterday allowing a major liability case in West Virginia to go forward.

Mark A. Behrens, an attorney in the Washington office of Shook, Hardy and Bacon, which represents the Coalition for Asbestos Justice, said it is disappointing that the high court did not decide at this time to set standards for due process protections in mass aggregation cases.

This continues to put the burden on Congress and state courts to look for solutions, Mr. Behrens said.

The Coalition for Asbestos Justice is comprised of several insurance companies, including ACE-USA, Chubb, CAN, Fireman's Fund, Hartford, Argonaut, General Cologne Re, Liberty Mutual, St. Paul Fire and Marine, and Great American.

The issue in the case?Mobil v. Adkins?involves a decision by a trial court in West Virginia to aggregate thousands of disparate asbestos liability cases into a single action.

Critics of this approach say it is unfair to defendants in that it allows virtually no opportunity for any defendant to contest the individual claims against it.

In a brief filed with the Supreme Court, the Coalition for Asbestos Justice said that the mass aggregation approach is designed to produce settlements with low transaction costs even if it means trampling over the due process rights of defendants.

"Efficiency is promoted over fairness or reason," the Coalition said.

The Coalition joined the defendants in the case in asking the United States Supreme Court to review the procedure, but the high court yesterday declined, without comment, to hear the case.