ARTICLE -WILENTZ LAW ON ASBESTOS PANEL

Two From Wilentz Firm Named to Asbestos Panel

Two partners at Woodbridge's Wilentz, Goldman & Spitzer have been named to the interim steering committee of what could become a national asbestos class-action pending before a federal judge in Texas.

The two, Christopher Placitella and Philip Pahigian, say the appointment will probably lead to their being named to powerful and lucrative positions on the final steering committee if the class action is certified. Wilentz, Gold-Zaframan and seven other firms across the country were appointed to the committee by Federal District Judge Robert Parker of the Eastern District of Texas.

Parker is expected to hold hearings on the certification issue later this fall, hearings that could result in the certification of a class of 130,000 asbestos victims. Wilentz, Goldman & Spitzer, which has long had a major role in asbestos litigation in New Jersey and New York, represents about 3,000 asbestos victims.

The two Wilentz, Goldman & Spitzer lawyers say the focus of their work on the committee will be to help their colleagues in other jurisdictions overcome what they call a national strategy on the part of some asbestos defendants to slow the pace of litigation and avoid paying claims. Placitella and Pahigian believe their experience in helping to move New Jersey cases led to their appointment.

Judges, lawyers, and court administrators in New Jersey enjoy a reputation for moving complex asbestos suits comparatively quickly, according to the two plaintiffs' lawyers, and they want to bring their knowledge and expertise to bear on cases around the country.

Placitella explains that the class action itself "arose out of the assertions by some defendants that there was not enough money to pay all the victims nationwide." Some companies contend that they do not have enough assets or that their insurance coverage is not sufficient to pay claims, "which is a lot different than whether their equity is sufficient to pay the claims."

Andrew Berry, a partner in Newark's McCarter & English, which has represented asbestos defendants, calls the idea that there is a deliberate national effort to slow litigation "nonsense."

He maintains that there are defendants who do not have the money required to pay claims at the levels at which plaintiffs have become accustomed. "That's part of a deliberate scheme to spread limited resources in the direction of those who truly need them," Berry says.

Berry adds that the cause of the delays in litigation is the large number of plaintiffs who have initiated legal action even though they are not sick. These individuals have X-rays that show changes in their lungs, but they are not likely to get sick, according to Berry. These people sue, however, because the statute of limitations on their actions begins to run when the changes show up.

How Much Money Is There?

The main function of the steering committee at this point will be to determine whether there is a limited amount of money available to pay claims, as some defendants contend. These defendants have suggested that plaintiffs should "reduce their expectations," Pahigian says. "We've never suspected that that's really the way it is."

"For many years, especially in New Jersey, very few cases were tried . . . 99 percent of the cases were settled," Placitella says. The cooperation between plaintiffs' attorneys and defense counsel was good and the settlements were fair, the two lawyers say. Defendant companies would offer a fixed amount, in many cases less that $500, and would not budge, forcing more cases to go to trial. "Probably more cases have been tried in New Jersey alone in the last year than in the previous nine years put together," Placitella says.

The effect of the alleged defense strategy has been to make it harder for victims to collect, because more cases have to go to trial, the plaintiffs' attorneys charge. Although the defense strategy began to manifest itself in New Jersey within the last year, the problem in New Jersey is not as severe as it is elsewhere, most notably Boston and Mississippi, Pahigian says. "This is really a pat on the back to the defense lawyers in New Jersey as well . . . we've been able to work very well with defense lawyers, the McCarter & English firm and some other firms, to move files," he adds. "If everybody nationally could be working to move files like they do here in New Jersey, I don't' think we'd have the problem."

Pahigian and Placitella argue that these plaintiffs are unemployable and cannot get life or health insurance. "The national push, form a defense perspective, is to just wipe out those cases, put them on a list, and someday if they get cancer, come back," says Placitella. But then, there won't be any money left, the plaintiffs' lawyers contend.

Despite his disagreements with the perceptions of the two Wilentz, Goldman & Spitzer lawyers, Berry confirms that the level of cooperation in New Jersey has been high. "The bench time required to process cases is relatively low," he says. Berry acknowledges, though, that the number of trials in the state has gone up slightly in recent months.

Pahigian says that there have been no dramatic changes in the way the New Jersey litigation is being handled. "But it's real obvious that the pressures are there."

The two Wilentz lawyers say that New Jersey presciently began managing the asbestos cases carefully a decade ago. Court administrators begin coordinating cases and trying to arrange settlements early in the process, rather than on the eve of the trial as is done in some other states. Virginia has also been particularly successful in moving cases, committing a great deal of judicial resources to asbestos litigation. That state's court system has earned the sobriquet "The Rocket Docket" because of the speed at which cases move, according to plaintiffs' lawyers.

The Texas class action, which defense lawyers insist will not be certified, is not the only big asbestos cases in which Wilentz, Goldman & Spitzer lawyers are involved. The firm also serves as liaison counsel to the New York state courts for asbestos cases. Placitella also serves as a selected counsel representing the plaintiffs' bar in negotiations between the Manville Trust and the Manville Corp. over how much money the company will contribute to the trust.

More than 100,000 claims are pending against the Manville Trust, which owns 85 percent of Manville Corp. stock. Placitella says he hopes that he and the five other selected counsel will be able to make a "substantial progress report" on the confidential negotiations within the next several weeks.

The other law firms on the interim steering committee, besides Wilentz, Goldman & Spitzer are: Robert Sweeney, Cleveland; Ness, Motley, Loadholt, Richardson & Poole, Charleston, S.C.; Rose, Klein & Marias, Los Angeles; Glasser & Glasser, Norfolk, Va.; Patten, Wornom & Watkins, Newport News, Va.; Henderson & Gold-Zafraberg, Pittsburgh; and Umphrey, Eddins & Carver, Beaumont, Texas.

» top