A Tennessee man suffering from mesothelioma filed an asbestos lawsuit in Madison County Circuit Court June 27, claiming his disease was wrongfully caused. 

James Weese claims he was employed from the early 1940s through the early 1990s as a pipefitter, laborer and welder in various locations including Illinois.

Weese claims that during the course of his employment and during home and automotive repairs he was exposed to and inhaled, ingested or otherwise absorbed asbestos fibers emanating from certain products he was working with and around.

He names 118 defendant corporations that include Alcoa, CBS, Discount Auto Parts, Dow Chemical, Exxon Mobil, Ford Motor Company, General Motors, Goodyear, Honeywell International, Ingersoll-Rand, John Crane, Owens-Illinois, Pabst Brewing, Sears and U.S. Steel.

"The plaintiff's exposure and inhalation, ingestion or absorption of the asbestos fibers was completely foreseeable and could or should have been anticipated by the defendants," the complaint states.

Weese claims the defendants knew or should have known that the asbestos fibers contained in their products had a toxic, poisonous and highly deleterious effect upon the health of people.

According to Weese, he was diagnosed with mesothelioma on March 16, and later learned his disease was wrongfully caused.

Weese alleges that the defendants included asbestos in their products even when adequate substitutes were available and failed to provide any or adequate instructions concerning the safe methods of working with and around asbestos.

He also claims that the defendants failed to require and advise employees of hygiene practices designed to reduce or prevent carrying asbestos fibers home.

As a result of the alleged negligence, Weese claims he was exposed to fibers containing asbestos. He developed a disease caused only by asbestos which has disabled and disfigured him, the complaint states.

He seeks damages to help pay for the cost of his treatment.

Weese also suffers "great physical pain and mental anguish, and also will be hindered and prevented from pursuing his normal course of employment, thereby losing large sums of money," the complaint states.

He is seeking at least $250,000 in damages for negligence, willful and wanton acts, conspiracy, and negligent spoliation of evidence among other allegations.

"In addition to compensatory damages, an award of punitive damages is appropriate and necessary in order to punish the defendants for willful, wanton, intentional and reckless misconduct and to deter them and others from engaging in like misconduct in the future," the complaint states.



We're here to help!

We live by our creed of "helping those who need it most" and have helped thousands of clients get the justice they desperately needed and deserved. If you feel you have a case or just have questions please contact us for a free consultation. There is no risk and no fees unless we win for you.

Fields marked    may be required for submission.
  1. I'm an attorney

Ban Asbestos Now Act of 2017 proposed in Senate

At the end of October, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced it would be adjusting the...

EPA limits reach of toxic chemical evaluations

The EPA is reneging on promises to evaluate some of the most dangerous chemicals used by the public,...

Prevention remains the only way to end mesothelioma...

Mesothelioma is a deadly cancer that can affect the lining of the heart, the lining of the abdomen or,...

Controversial FACT Act headed to House floor for vote

The Furthering Asbestos Claim Transparency Act of 2017 (FACT Act) or H.R. 906, uses the guise of...
asbestos dust hazard perimeter tape

Canada joins countries implementing asbestos bans

Asbestos, a group of fibrous silicate minerals, is a known carcinogen and is closely linked to the...

Asbestos in schools poses mesothelioma risk. Who is...

According to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), approximately 15 million students and 1.4...

Best firm by far

Our case was handled with the utmost integrity and professionalism. If I could give them 10 stars, I would. This is the best legal firm I have ever dealt with by far.

—Pat