Asbestos Litigation

Dozens tried. Thousands defended. Decades of experience defending asbestos cases nationwide.

What We Do

We represent manufacturers, sellers, suppliers, distributors, and other types of companies that have been sued for asbestos liability. Our decades of experience have given us the knowledge to navigate the specialized dockets in which these cases are filed, enabled us to build a network of experts to support our clients’ defenses against allegations that often date back over 50 years, and draw on relationships with other defense and plaintiff counsel to reach resolutions outside of the courtroom.

We serve as National Coordinating Counsel for half a dozen companies in asbestos litigation, defend our clients in so-called “judicial hell holes” like New York, Illinois, and South Carolina, and maintain expertise on asbestos litigation trends in every state in the country. Our offices in Boston, Northern California, and Southern California position us to litigate cases in California, Connecticut, Massachusetts, Nevada, Rhode Island, Washington, and beyond.

How We Help

National Coordinating Counsel

We serve as NCC for multiple companies, providing strategic oversight and coordinated defense across jurisdictions nationwide.
Litigation Defense

We defend companies against asbestos exposure claims in state and federal courts across the country, including in the most plaintiff-friendly jurisdictions.
Trial

We have started trial in over 40 asbestos cases in Massachusetts, New York, and California, and are responsible for one of only six defense verdicts in Massachusetts asbestos cases in the past 15 years.
Appellate

We protect favorable outcomes and challenge adverse rulings, including precedent-setting appeals that have shaped asbestos litigation nationally.
Settlement Negotiations

We leverage our deep experience, national network, and established relationships with major plaintiff firms to achieve efficient, cost-effective resolutions.
Expert Coordination

We maintain an extensive network of medical, scientific, and industrial hygiene experts to support our clients’ defenses against complex exposure allegations.

Why Clients Choose Us

Trial-Tested

We have started trial in over 40 asbestos cases and secured over 175 verdicts across products liability, construction, contracts, dram-shop, and child abuse cases. We are responsible for one of only six defense verdicts in Massachusetts asbestos cases in the past 15 years.
Trendsetters and Industry Leaders

We have successfully argued trend-setting motions in California and Massachusetts asbestos cases. We are keynote speakers at renowned conferences and industry group seminars, including the DRI Asbestos Conference.

Our attorneys are elected members of the Massachusetts Asbestos Executive and Discovery Committees, where they effectuate change to the docket for the entire defense bar. Our Partner, Geoff Davis, was part of the appellate team that successfully argued the O’Neil decision in California’s appellate courts, which significantly impacted the asbestos litigation trajectory nationally thereafter.
National Reach

We defend clients in so-called “judicial hell holes” and maintain a presence in the jurisdictions that matter most. Our extensive national network of defense attorneys, expert witnesses, and opposing counsel allows us to stay informed of jurisdictional developments and provide insights into national trends.

Representative Work

Hart v. Keenan Properties, Inc.

CMBG³ was retained to appeal a $1.6 million jury award in an Alameda County, California asbestos case. We were not involved in the underlying trial. The trial involved a 63-year-old laborer who installed thousands of feet of asbestos-cement pipe, that was allegedly supplied by our client, on a six-month job in northern California between 1976 and 1977. The only evidence to connect our client to the pipe was testimony from the plaintiff’s foreman who claimed to recall signing invoices 40 years ago that contained our client’s name.

None of the alleged invoices were ever produced. Nevertheless, over objections, the trial court allowed the testimony to be presented. At oral argument before the Appellate Court, we argued that the evidence produced against our client was inadmissible hearsay — an extremely difficult argument to make given that finding in CMBG³’s favor would require the Appellate Court to overturn not only the trial judge’s rulings on the issue, but also the conclusions of the jury during the trial. However, the Appellate Court agreed with us, finding that the trial judge should have excluded the testimony of the foreman since the documents were not produced. The 16-page ruling in favor of our client gave the company a major victory, as it reversed the damages awarded by the jury. This case gained national notoriety due to the difficulty of the argument and received media attention, notably from the San Francisco Chronicle.