Addressing the "Elephantine Mass" of Asbestos Cases: Consolidation Versus Inactive Dockets (Pleural Registries) and Case Management Plans That Defer Claims Filed by the Non-Sick

Abstract

This article will examine the current trends in the litigation in greater detail, and show how these trends have combined to exacerbate the current "asbestos-litigation crisis. Next, this article will examine the two procedural approaches that are increasingly being used by courts to handle asbestos claims-trial consolidations versus inactive dockets (also called pleural registries or deferred dockets) and docket management plans that seek to give trial priority to the truly sick while deferring the claims of the unimpaired or very mildly impaired until they become sick. The article will then discuss aspects of the asbestos litigation problem each approach attempts to address, and explain the reasons why these options may appeal to courts that are at a crossroads of how to handle burgeoning asbestos dockets. The article concludes that courts should adopt inactive dockets or similar case management plans to give trial priority to the truly sick while preserving the claims of the non-sick until such time as they may develop an asbestos-related impairment.