newtaxblog.com

There is a troubling trend that has been cropping up recently of faulty and fraudulent asbestos and silica related lawsuits which was recently addressed by the state affairs committee. The solution to the problem might come from a freshman member of the House, who has called on his years as a medical doctor to craft a bill that is supported by many in the business world who have groused about the rising number of fraudulent claims now in the court system. These supporters have long complained about personal injury lawyers and mercenary trial lawyers who often take advantage of potential victims, usually with the assistance of friendly doctors who will provide liberal readings of x rays. They believe that there are their companies are spending far too much money defending themselves from claims that hold no water. As a person looking for compensation lawyers melbourne you should visit that site.

 

Recent changes in tort law, in which a single judge is responsible for all new asbestos cases in the state, inspire personal injury lawyers to say there isn't a need for legislative action. However, in spite of their defense personal injury lawyers continue to create these fraudulent claims and are now particularly fond of a new variety which focuses on silica exposure.

 

Certain business interests contend that the honest claims can be singled out from the fraudulent claims by simply requiring claimants to show proof of physical effects suffered from exposure to asbestos rather than simply producing an X-ray. The bill would modify the bar association's proposal to require claimants to meet with detailed medical standards, including having X rays taken, breathing tests done, and a thorough exam by a doctor before they could go forward with a lawsuit.

 

The legislation would incorporate a pair of safeguards for those who can claim asbestos exposure, but have yet to suffer physical manifestations. One of those protections would be to remove the application of a two year statute of limitations. A worker prevented from opening a claim who experiences severe symptoms would still be able to file a lawsuit regardless of time passed. The second measure of protection is that insurance companies would no longer be able to deny coverage to any worker who had been exposed to asbestos. Go to this site for further information on workers compensation lawyer melbourne.

 

Protecting the workers is an important element of this legislation, but some critics indicate that the medical requirements are unfair. The new proposal would keep the current medical standards in place to allow a worker to file suit, but allow the judge in the case the opportunity to refer the claim to verify medical validity. The effort is in trying to weed out cases which are truly fraudulent, while also safeguarding the rights of workers who have been exposed.

 

As one House member pointed out, if the doctors performing the tests are in fact lying, as some advocates claim, then raising the medical standards won't change anything. These same doctors would just say whatever needed to be said to keep the case in court. Whatever the motives of either side are, it's clear that the state should take a real interest in ridding itself of false claims. Those whose exposure has truly resulted in harm should be able to commence litigation upon discovery of the damage. The specific amendment under consideration would only apply to the current house bill, but the house member feels it should be examined in the senate as well.

Tags: Asbestos Cases, Asbestos Exposure, Breathing Tests, Business Interests, claim, Claimants, compensation lawyers, Fraudulent Claims, Fraudulent Lawsuits, Freshman Member, law, Lawyers, legal, Legislative Action, Medical Standards, personal injury lawyers, Physical Manifestations, Potential Victims, Silica Exposure, State Affairs Committee, tort law, Trial Lawyers, X Ray, X Rays