What’s toughest to prove in cases of asbestos product exposure?

You may have heard of asbestos in the late-night law ads played on cable television. But what is asbestos and why is it so dangerous? Many of the problems attributed to asbestos are due to products produced or handled years ago that contained asbestos before we knew that it was unsafe and harmful. Some afflicted with asbestos product exposure know that it is their right to seek compensation for the wrongs they have suffered due to asbestos-related illness.

Depending on how one came into contact with asbestos, there are a few ways to seek damages. Seeking reparations on the grounds of negligence or strict liability are both based on four elements that, if proven, can bring financial recovery to the injured party. Of the four elements, there is one element to prove that can be tougher than the others. That portion of proving product liability is called causation.

This is mostly due to the nature of asbestos injury. Oftentimes, people suffering from asbestos product exposure have a large gap of time between exposure and injury symptoms. The defense likes to use this time gap to suggest that other things could have caused the injury besides asbestos exposure. While not impossible to prove causation, it is one of the more difficult elements of the four.

To answer the previously asked question, asbestos is a now illegal substance that is banned from all products. But, at one time, it was not a banned substance. This is what accounts for most product liability cases concerning asbestos today. Previous exposure to asbestos can come back to haunt those who crossed its path.

Source: injury.findlaw.com, “Asbestos exposure: Proving fault and liability,” Accessed Oct. 17, 2016