How long has it been known that welding rod exposure causes disease?
2004-12-31

Astonishingly, the first published report linking manganese exposure to Parkinson's-type symptoms came out in 1837. In 1932, another published report stated that welding rods containing manganese should not be used and in 1937, an insurance company actually... (Read Article)

The welding industry has known for quite a long time that there is a link between exposure to manganese in welding and neurological disorders. However, safety information has not always been available to the welding industry, let alone people who use welding in their hobbies.

The companies that manufactured the welding supplies that you used may be liable to you as well as the companies that sold the supplies to you under a theory of strict product liability. That theory states that the manufacturer or distributor of a product that poses an unreasonable danger leading to your injury is liable to you for that injury. If you wore any type of ventilator as part of your safety equipment, the manufacturer and/or supplier of that ventilator may also share in the liability. If you used a ventilator and still came up with injuries linked to welding rod exposure, your ventilator may not have been effective.

Be aware that the link between welding rod exposure and the injuries associated with it is still somewhat weak, mostly because the injuries in question tend to have many possible causes, not just welding rod exposure. Your case is further complicated by the fact that your exposure was a result of the hobby use of welding supplies. The defendants in your case would be expected to argue that you are responsible for your injuries - that you used the welding supplies incorrectly, that you assumed the risks of welding when you chose to weld as a hobby. The defendants may also argue that your homeowners insurance should cover your damages since you were doing the welding at your home. These arguments, combined with the difficulty of linking welding rod exposure to your injuries, may be enough to deny you any relief in a lawsuit. You need to discuss your case with an attorney who has a great deal of experience with welding rod exposure cases to evaluate your case - to tell you what the pros and cons of your case are and whether you are likely to prevail or not.

...used with permission of www.freeadvice.com copyright owner

Possibly. Even as little as three months of heavy exposure to manganese fumes can lead to symptoms of manganese poisoning or, possibly, Parkinson's disease. It appears that manganese exposure can be found through the use of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) and your doctor may be able to suggest other tests to see if excessive exposure to manganese has led to your Parkinson's.

However, this will still be a tough case to prove. There is still a medical debate over how much exposure to welding gases is required to prove a link to Parkinson's and other neurological diseases. Parkinson's, in particular, has quite a few known causes and it is not completely certain why many people get it. You can anticipate a very tough fight from the defendants in your case, particularly since you know that your exposure to welding gases was quite limited.

If your attorney believes a link between your exposure and your Parkinson's can be proven, the next step will be to decide who will share in the liability. Possible parties to your case may include your employer, under a theory that you were negligently exposed to the gases or that your employer negligently failed to provide you with adequate ventilators; the manufacturers of the welding supplies that you used under a strict product liability theory; or the suppliers of your welding supplies, also under product liability.

...used with permission of www.freeadvice.com copyright owner

There are many potential parties that your spouse may have recourse against for the development of his Parkinson's other than his former employer. However, locating records from his former employer will be crucial to bringing suits against any other parties. Your husband may have recourse against the manufacturers and suppliers of the welding rods and wires that contained manganese under a theory of product liability - that the products were unreasonably dangerous and they caused his illness. If his former employer provided any type of ventilation equipment, your husband may have recourse against the manufacturers of the ventilation equipment if the equipment was somehow defective and didn't protect your husband against the fumes.

It is unlikely that your husband will have any recourse against his former employer, although your attorney should look into that possibility. Depending on how the company was dissolved, the principals may or may not retain liability for the company or they may have an insurance policy set aside to deal with these types of cases.

You will most certainly want to call as a witness whoever, presumably your husband's doctor, has linked your husband's disease to his job. However, you should expect that this witness will be challenged by the defense, and furthermore, that the defense will bring witnesses of its own in to show that there is no link between your husband's old job and his Parkinson's disease. Your attorney will be able to decide what other expert witnesses you will have to call to prove your case.

Another possibility to explore with your attorney is whether your spouse would be better off filing as part of a class action. While class action awards are often less than individual awards might be, other considerations might be whether anyone outside of a class will get a damage award due to a party's potential bankruptcy or whether your husband's award against a particular party is likely to be fairly small anyhow. Your attorney can help your husband decide how to structure his case to maximize any recovery.

...used with permission of www.freeadvice.com copyright owner

Your property and liability insurance is the logical place to look for assistance when dealing with injuries which occur in the home. However, your homeowners' policy is not likely to provide much, if any, help.

Most standard homeowner's insurance policies do not cover willful exposure to toxic substances - in other words, to cover exposing yourself to toxic substances by engaging in activities that produce toxic substances such as welding. Your policy probably has a section called "Exclusions" or "Covered Risks" that can tell you what types of activities and injuries are and are not covered by the policy, and you can also check with your insurance agent to see if this type of damage is covered. But unless your insurance policy was set up to cover the fact that you were welding at home and were being exposed to dangerous welding fumes at home, your insurer will probably deny coverage, stating that your injuries are outside the common injuries contemplated by the policy.

If neither your medical nor your homeowners' insurance covers your medical problems, you may still have causes of action against the manufacturers of your welding supplies or any ventilation safety equipment that you used. This may be difficult to prove, however, as the manufacturers will probably argue that you were using the supplies or other equipment incorrectly and therefore caused your illness. You should talk to an experienced attorney to see if you might have a case against other parties as soon as possible.

...used with permission of www.freeadvice.com copyright owner

In a class action suit, individuals who have similar cases would be "joined together" in a "class" to prosecute their claims in a "more efficient" manner. This process begins when one person (or more) agrees to serve as the class representative. This "class rep" is then subject to approval by the court. There are a series of requirements that the court reviews -- but most significantly, whether the claims of the "class rep" are typical of the claims of other members of the proposed class. The class representative is proceeding not only on his or her own behalf, but also on behalf of all others who are similarly situated. In this case, there is only ONE lawsuit, the result of which binds all class members. In order to determine if the class will receive fair and adequate representation, the court will generally consider whether the attorney for the class has experience in handling class actions and/or claims similar to those of the proposed class. In addition, the court will determine whether there are any conflicts in the interests of the class members.

In individual welding rod litigation, each person's lawyer prosecutes their case, apart from any other cases. If a lawyer has multiple clients, each client would receive individual attention and would have their own lawsuit.

Even with individual welding rod litigation, some cases end up in Federal court, due to a diversity of citizenship between the claimant and the defendants. In these cases, the individual claim gets temporarily consolidated with other cases in Federal court. But this consolidation is ONLY for the purposes of discovery, and does not impact the right to an individual trial for that person's lawsuit. The MDL gives each person the benefit through judicial economy and efficiencies of scale. For example, if the defendant is also being sued by 1,000 other plaintiffs across the country, just taking depositions in all the various jurisdictions could delay the trial date by years. But when all those individual lawsuits are consolidated for discovery, it helps to save time and money for the clients. In addition, it places the plaintiffs on a more level playing field with the defendant.

...used with permission of www.freeadvice.com copyright owner