IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nbr/nberwo/10308.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Asbestos and the Future of Mass Torts

Author

Listed:
  • Michelle J. White

Abstract

Asbestos was once referred to as a miracle mineral' for its ability to withstand heat and it was used in thousands of products. But exposure to asbestos causes cancer and other diseases. As of the beginning of 2001, 600,000 individuals had filed lawsuits for asbestos-related diseases against more than 6,000 defendants. 85 firms have filed for bankruptcy due to asbestos liabilities and several insurers have failed or are in financial distress. More than $54 billion has been spent on the litigation higher than any other mass tort. Estimates of the eventual cost of asbestos litigation range from $200 to $265 billion. The paper examines the history of asbestos regulation and asbestos liability and argues that it was liability rather than regulation that eventually caused producers to eliminate asbestos from most products by the late 1970s. But despite the disappearance of asbestos products from the marketplace, asbestos litigation continued to grow. Plaintiffs' lawyers used forum-shopping to select the most favorable state courts techniques for mass processing of claims, and substituted new defendants when old ones went bankrupt. Because representing asbestos victims was extremely profitable, lawyers had an incentive to seek out large numbers of additional plaintiffs, including many claimants who were not harmed by asbestos exposure. The paper contrasts asbestos litigation to other mass torts involving personal injury and concludes that asbestos was unique in a number of ways, so that future mass torts are unlikely to be as big. However new legal innovations developed for asbestos are likely to make future mass torts larger and more expensive. I explore two mechanisms-- bankruptcies and class action settlements--that the legal system has developed to resolve mass torts and show that neither has worked for asbestos litigation. The first, bankruptcy by individual asbestos defendants, exacerbates the litigation by spreading it to non-bankrupt defendants. The second, a class action settlement, is impractical for asbestos litigation because of the large number of defendants. As a result, Congressional legislation is needed and the paper discusses the compensation fund approach that Congress is currently considering.

Suggested Citation

  • Michelle J. White, 2004. "Asbestos and the Future of Mass Torts," NBER Working Papers 10308, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    • Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:10308
    Note: LE
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.nber.org/papers/w10308.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Steven Shavell, 2003. "Economic Analysis of Accident Law," NBER Working Papers 9694, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Michelle J. White, 2002. "Explaining the Flood of Asbestos Litigation: Consolidation, Bifurcation, and Bouquet Trials," NBER Working Papers 9362, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    3. White, Michelle J, 1989. "The Corporate Bankruptcy Decision," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 3(2), pages 129-151, Spring.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Ran An & Ying Zhou & Rongzhao Zhang, 2024. "The development, shortcomings and future improvement of punitive damages for environmental torts in China—a reflection and comparative research," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(1), pages 1-12, December.
    2. Ramello, Giovanni B., 2012. "Aggregate litigation and regulatory innovation: Another view of judicial efficiency," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 32(1), pages 63-71.
    3. Landeo, Claudia M., 2009. "Cognitive coherence and tort reform," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 30(6), pages 898-912, December.
    4. Landeo, Claudia M., 2009. "Tort Reform, Disputes and Belief Formation," MPRA Paper 13453, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Alex Coad & Gianluca Biggi & Elisa Giuliani, 2021. "Asbestos, leaded petrol, and other aberrations: comparing countries’ regulatory responses to disapproved products and technologies," Industry and Innovation, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 28(2), pages 201-233, February.
    6. Kristian Kallenberg, 2007. "The Role of Risk in Corporate Value: A Case Study of the ABB Asbestos Litigation," Journal of Risk Research, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 10(8), pages 1007-1025, December.
    7. Paul Rubin, 2005. "Public choice and tort reform," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 124(1), pages 223-236, July.
    8. Taillard, Jerome Ph. A., 2008. "Thriving in the Midst of Financial Distress? An Analysis of Firms Exposed to Abestos Litigation," Working Paper Series 2008-12, Ohio State University, Charles A. Dice Center for Research in Financial Economics.
    9. Eric Helland & Jonathan Klick & Alexander Tabarrok, 2005. "Data Watch: Tort-uring the Data," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 19(2), pages 207-220, Spring.
    10. Taillard, Jérôme P., 2013. "The disciplinary effects of non-debt liabilities: Evidence from asbestos litigation," Journal of Corporate Finance, Elsevier, vol. 23(C), pages 267-293.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Michelle J. White, 2004. "Asbestos and the Future of Mass Torts," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 18(2), pages 183-204, Spring.
    2. Annabi, Amira & Breton, Michèle & François, Pascal, 2012. "Resolution of financial distress under Chapter 11," Journal of Economic Dynamics and Control, Elsevier, vol. 36(12), pages 1867-1887.
    3. Blazy, Régis & Chopard, Bertrand & Nigam, Nirjhar, 2013. "Building legal indexes to explain recovery rates: An analysis of the French and English bankruptcy codes," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 37(6), pages 1936-1959.
    4. Hansen, Robert G. & Thomas, Randall S., 1998. "Auctions in bankruptcy: theoretical analysis and practical guidance," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 18(2), pages 159-185, June.
    5. Lillian Cheung & Amnon Levy, 1998. "An integrative analysis of business bankruptcy in Australia," Journal of Economics and Finance, Springer;Academy of Economics and Finance, vol. 22(2), pages 149-167, June.
    6. Scheepens, J.P.J.F., 1993. "Bankruptcy litigation and optimal debt contracts," Other publications TiSEM 64e785e4-4101-4604-a392-3, Tilburg University, School of Economics and Management.
    7. Burguet, Roberto & Ganuza, Juan-José & Hauk, Esther, 2012. "Limited liability and mechanism design in procurement," Games and Economic Behavior, Elsevier, vol. 76(1), pages 15-25.
    8. Régis Blazy & Laurent Weill, 2006. "The Impact of Legal Sanctions on Moral Hazard when Debt Contracts are Renegotiable," LSF Research Working Paper Series 06-09, Luxembourg School of Finance, University of Luxembourg.
    9. Régis Blazy & Nirjhar Nigam, 2019. "Corporate insolvency procedures in England: the uneasy case for liquidations," European Journal of Law and Economics, Springer, vol. 47(1), pages 89-123, February.
    10. Hoffmann, Sandra A. & Hanemann, W. Michael, 2005. "Torts and the Protection of 'Legally Recognized Interests'," Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley, Working Paper Series qt1j8691zn, Department of Agricultural & Resource Economics, UC Berkeley.
    11. J. Atsu Amegashie, 2021. "Advantageous Smallness in Contests," CESifo Working Paper Series 9419, CESifo.
    12. Simeon Djankov & Oliver Hart & Caralee McLiesh & Andrei Shleifer, 2008. "Debt Enforcement around the World," Journal of Political Economy, University of Chicago Press, vol. 116(6), pages 1105-1149, December.
    13. Bebchuk, Lucian Arye, 2001. "Ex Ante Costs of Violating Absolute Priority in Bankruptcy," CEPR Discussion Papers 2914, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    14. Schieren George A, 2007. "Economic Efficiency and Damage Awards in Personal Injury Torts," Journal of Business Valuation and Economic Loss Analysis, De Gruyter, vol. 2(1), pages 1-20, April.
    15. Henry van Egteren & R. Smith, 2002. "Environmental Regulations Under Simple Negligence or Strict Liability," Environmental & Resource Economics, Springer;European Association of Environmental and Resource Economists, vol. 21(4), pages 367-394, April.
    16. Zivin, Joshua Graff & Just, Richard E. & Zilberman, David, 2005. "Risk Aversion, Liability Rules, and Safety," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(4), pages 604-623, December.
    17. Dina Naples Layish, 2003. "A Monitoring Role for Deviations from Absolute Priority in Bankruptcy Resolution," Financial Markets, Institutions & Instruments, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 12(5), pages 377-410, December.
    18. Pagratis, Spyros, 2004. "Co-ordination failure and the role of banks in the resolution of financial distress," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 24939, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    19. Annabi, Amira & Breton, Michèle & François, Pascal, 2012. "Game theoretic analysis of negotiations under bankruptcy," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 221(3), pages 603-613.
    20. Kaplow, Louis & Shavell, Steven, 1996. "Accuracy in the Assessment of Damages," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 39(1), pages 191-210, April.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • K13 - Law and Economics - - Basic Areas of Law - - - Tort Law and Product Liability; Forensic Economics
    • K41 - Law and Economics - - Legal Procedure, the Legal System, and Illegal Behavior - - - Litigation Process

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:10308. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nberrus.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.