Page Updated enero 1, 2026

As Mesothelioma Trial Approaches, Both Sides Argue Against Other’s Witnesses

Página revisada y editada por

Abogado de mesotelioma Paul Danziger

One of the most important elements of any personal injury lawsuit, including those about malignant mesothelioma, is the testimony of expert witnesses. Though these individuals are not directly associated with the victim’s exposure, they are asked to provide background information and opinions that the jury relies upon to help them understand complex issues. In a case about to be heard in the Louisiana court system, both the plaintiffs and the defendants tried to have expert witnesses being called by the other side prevented from testifying.

Expert Witness Testimony Essential in Mesothelioma Lawsuits

The case involved the mesothelioma death of Terry Legendre, which is being heard in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana. In addition to having worked for Avondale Shipyard for a short time, he suffered secondary exposure to asbestos from the clothing of his family members and friends who worked for the notorious asbestos-contaminated site. His survivors planned to have two different physicians, as well as a certified industrial hygienist, called to explain how his interactions with all of these people would have contributed to his risk of mesothelioma.

Several of the companies named in the family’s mesothelioma lawsuit as defendants planned to submit expert witness testimony from an anatomic pathologist asserting that the only secondary exposure that would have played a role in his illness would have been from his father’s clothing.

Judge Denies Requests to Block Expert Witnesses in Mesothelioma Lawsuit

The mesothelioma victim’s family and the asbestos companies each objected to the others’ witnesses and asked the judge hearing the case to block their testimony, but the judge denied requests from both sides. In his decision, he wrote, “It is the role of the adversarial system, not the court, to highlight weak evidence’ and that the fact that opposing parties do not agree with the facts relied upon by the experts or their interpretation of those facts does not render their opinions irrelevant or unreliable.”

The decision means that the jury will have the opportunity to fully weigh all available information when making its decision about the asbestos companies’ role in Mr. Legendre’s mesothelioma death.

The ruling underscores how central expert testimony is in mesothelioma trials, particularly in cases involving secondary exposición al amianto. By allowing competing experts to testify, the court affirmed that disputes over causation, dose, and exposure pathways are questions for the jury, not grounds for pretrial exclusion. For mesothelioma plaintiffs, the decision reinforces that testimony from physicians and industrial hygienists can coexist with defense experts and still meet admissibility standards. It also signals that defendants connected to sites like Avondale Shipyard cannot narrow causation theories prematurely when evidence supports multiple sources of asbestos exposure.