Garlock: Lifting the Veil on Asbestos Trust Claims

by Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP
Contact

Over the past four decades the landscape of asbestos litigation has been changing, influenced in large part by many asbestos defendants filing for bankruptcy. In search of solvent defendants, plaintiffs’ attorneys expanded their roster of potential targets from the traditional “big dusties” to manufacturers of products that were never formulated to contain or be used with asbestos.

Although most “real” asbestos exposures undoubtedly came from the “big dusties,” compensation from these companies is severely curtailed because claims against those entities must be made to litigation trusts created in bankruptcy. That creates a significant incentive for plaintiffs’ attorneys to sue solvent “asbestos” defendants even if the real causative agent was the product of a bankrupt entity. A recent bankruptcy court decision, In re Garlock Sealing Tech., LLC, 504 B.R. 71 (Bankr. W.D.N.C. 2014), reveals that the trust system has created the risk of asbestos plaintiffs’ “double dipping”—bringing both tort claims against solvent defendants and trust claims against bankrupt entities without any offset.

Garlock was a gasket manufacturer that became a major target of asbestos litigation after the more traditional asbestos defendants filed for bankruptcy. Faced with thousands of pending personal injury claims arising from alleged exposure to asbestos from Garlock’s products, Garlock sought bankruptcy protection to establish a trust to resolve current and future claims. As part of that process, the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Western District of North Carolina scheduled a hearing on Garlock’s estimated asbestos liability.

In preparation, the company sought access to information submitted in asbestos-related bankruptcy claims filed in Delaware by plaintiffs who had previously settled tort cases against Garlock. In re Motions for Access of Garlock Sealing Technologies LLC, 488 B.R. 281 (D. Del. 2013). Trust claims provide powerful evidence of the true cause of many plaintiffs’ asbestos-related disease because many require sworn affidavits that the claimant was exposed to an asbestos-containing product of the bankrupt entity. Despite this materiality to pending asbestos lawsuits, this evidence is not easily obtained by asbestos defendants. Many of the more than 30 asbestos-related litigation trusts require subpoenas before they will even confirm whether an individual has filed a claim. It was thus significant when Garlock gained access to details on 15 plaintiffs who filed trust claims following settlements with Garlock.

At the estimation hearing, the trust claims-related discovery obtained in Delaware affirmed Garlock’s suspicions: After disclaiming exposures to traditional asbestos defendants’ products (like insulation) in their tort cases against Garlock, each of the 15 plaintiffs investigated went on to file trust claims alleging exposure to one or more of those insulation products after extracting large settlements from Garlock. In some instances, the plaintiffs had actively opposed listing the bankrupt asbestos defendants on the verdict forms, moved to preclude references to potential exposures to the bankrupt asbestos defendants’ products at trial, and/or purported to have no personal knowledge of exposure while they were litigating against Garlock. The court found that, on average, the 15 plaintiffs disclosed two exposures to bankrupt companies’ products, but after settling with Garlock, made claims against about 19 such companies’ trusts.

The full disclosure of potential exposure sources had a significant impact on Garlock’s trials. In a survey of cases where exposure evidence was suppressed, Garlock either paid settlements or lost verdicts ranging from $250,000 to $9 million. By contrast, in the four trials where trust claim forms were admitted into evidence, Garlock won three defense verdicts and was assigned only 2% of the liability in the fourth.

After a 17-day hearing that included 29 witnesses, the court set Garlock’s asbestos liability at $125 million—drastically lower than the plaintiffs’ requested $1.3 billion. The court found that the aggregate settlements and verdicts typically relied on to value asbestos liabilities were “infected with the impropriety of some law firms” where “certain Plaintiffs’ law firms used [their] control over the evidence to drive up the settlements demanded of Garlock.”

In an interesting twist, Garlock has since filed fraud and federal RICO claims against the four plaintiffs firms involved in the confirmed double dipping. The initial pleadings were filed under seal, and the case remains in its earliest stage.

State and federal legislators are also taking steps to address the potential for fraud. The U.S. House of Representatives passed the Furthering Asbestos Claim Transparency (FACT) Act of 2012, a bill mandating quarterly disclosure of trust claim demands and payment information from the trusts as a way to shed light on the process and permit the type of analysis that occurred in Garlock to be possible in every litigation. Ohio, Oklahoma, and Wisconsin have all recently passed similar transparency laws.

 

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP | Attorney Advertising

Written by:

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP
Contact
more
less

Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLP on:

Readers' Choice 2017
Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
Sign up using*

Already signed up? Log in here

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
Privacy Policy (Updated: October 8, 2015):
hide

JD Supra provides users with access to its legal industry publishing services (the "Service") through its website (the "Website") as well as through other sources. Our policies with regard to data collection and use of personal information of users of the Service, regardless of the manner in which users access the Service, and visitors to the Website are set forth in this statement ("Policy"). By using the Service, you signify your acceptance of this Policy.

Information Collection and Use by JD Supra

JD Supra collects users' names, companies, titles, e-mail address and industry. JD Supra also tracks the pages that users visit, logs IP addresses and aggregates non-personally identifiable user data and browser type. This data is gathered using cookies and other technologies.

The information and data collected is used to authenticate users and to send notifications relating to the Service, including email alerts to which users have subscribed; to manage the Service and Website, to improve the Service and to customize the user's experience. This information is also provided to the authors of the content to give them insight into their readership and help them to improve their content, so that it is most useful for our users.

JD Supra does not sell, rent or otherwise provide your details to third parties, other than to the authors of the content on JD Supra.

If you prefer not to enable cookies, you may change your browser settings to disable cookies; however, please note that rejecting cookies while visiting the Website may result in certain parts of the Website not operating correctly or as efficiently as if cookies were allowed.

Email Choice/Opt-out

Users who opt in to receive emails may choose to no longer receive e-mail updates and newsletters by selecting the "opt-out of future email" option in the email they receive from JD Supra or in their JD Supra account management screen.

Security

JD Supra takes reasonable precautions to insure that user information is kept private. We restrict access to user information to those individuals who reasonably need access to perform their job functions, such as our third party email service, customer service personnel and technical staff. However, please note that no method of transmitting or storing data is completely secure and we cannot guarantee the security of user information. Unauthorized entry or use, hardware or software failure, and other factors may compromise the security of user information at any time.

If you have reason to believe that your interaction with us is no longer secure, you must immediately notify us of the problem by contacting us at info@jdsupra.com. In the unlikely event that we believe that the security of your user information in our possession or control may have been compromised, we may seek to notify you of that development and, if so, will endeavor to do so as promptly as practicable under the circumstances.

Sharing and Disclosure of Information JD Supra Collects

Except as otherwise described in this privacy statement, JD Supra will not disclose personal information to any third party unless we believe that disclosure is necessary to: (1) comply with applicable laws; (2) respond to governmental inquiries or requests; (3) comply with valid legal process; (4) protect the rights, privacy, safety or property of JD Supra, users of the Service, Website visitors or the public; (5) permit us to pursue available remedies or limit the damages that we may sustain; and (6) enforce our Terms & Conditions of Use.

In the event there is a change in the corporate structure of JD Supra such as, but not limited to, merger, consolidation, sale, liquidation or transfer of substantial assets, JD Supra may, in its sole discretion, transfer, sell or assign information collected on and through the Service to one or more affiliated or unaffiliated third parties.

Links to Other Websites

This Website and the Service may contain links to other websites. The operator of such other websites may collect information about you, including through cookies or other technologies. If you are using the Service through the Website and link to another site, you will leave the Website and this Policy will not apply to your use of and activity on those other sites. We encourage you to read the legal notices posted on those sites, including their privacy policies. We shall have no responsibility or liability for your visitation to, and the data collection and use practices of, such other sites. This Policy applies solely to the information collected in connection with your use of this Website and does not apply to any practices conducted offline or in connection with any other websites.

Changes in Our Privacy Policy

We reserve the right to change this Policy at any time. Please refer to the date at the top of this page to determine when this Policy was last revised. Any changes to our privacy policy will become effective upon posting of the revised policy on the Website. By continuing to use the Service or Website following such changes, you will be deemed to have agreed to such changes. If you do not agree with the terms of this Policy, as it may be amended from time to time, in whole or part, please do not continue using the Service or the Website.

Contacting JD Supra

If you have any questions about this privacy statement, the practices of this site, your dealings with this Web site, or if you would like to change any of the information you have provided to us, please contact us at: info@jdsupra.com.

- hide
*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.