As the first decade of the new millennium draws to a close and we reflect on the past ten years, Baron & Budd would like to share with you what we consider some of our law firm’s major accomplishments—our “Greatest Hits” of the decade, if you will. So, in the spirit of Casey Kasem, here is our countdown of the decade. We wish all of you happy holidays and a prosperous new year—and new decade—to come.

2000: Major Texas Supreme Court victory for mesothelioma victims with previous asbestos-related disease

Our crowning accomplishment at the dawn of the new millennium was a victory many told us we could not win: a decision by the Texas Supreme Court that Texas mesothelioma victims who had previously settled cases for separate and distinct diseases like asbestosis could have a second lawsuit for their cancer. Previously, Texas law was considered a “single injury” state, meaning that once a person was diagnosed with an asbestos-related disease—regardless of whether he ever developed a more serious asbestos cancer like mesothelioma in the future—he only had one chance to seek compensation for his injuries.

With our victory in the case of Pustejovsky v. Rapid-American Corp., 35 S.W. 3d 643 (Tex. 2000), Texas joined several other states recognizing the unfairness of the “single injury rule” to mesothelioma asbestos victims.

2001: Precedent-setting mesothelioma trial victory

Baron & Budd has long enjoyed a reputation as a strong trial firm, especially in mesothelioma cases. In 2001, we further cemented this reputation with a $55.5 million trial verdict that at the time was widely believed to be the largest ever for a single mesothelioma victim. Our client, a 47-year-old father of four, had been exposed to joint compound as a young man while working in construction in San Diego, California. Rather than fighting the case on appeal over a number of years, we negotiated a post-trial settlement; when combined with other settlements in the case, the net amount to the client and his family after attorneys fees and expenses totaled $10,603,660.

2002: Halliburton Trust Fund for Asbestos Victims

Around the beginning of the decade, several manufacturers of asbestos-containing products filed for bankruptcy and in many cases the bankruptcy courts set up trust funds for asbestos victims with assets from these companies. Baron & Budd has played a leading role in many of these bankruptcy proceedings, working to negotiate the best terms for present and future asbestos victims throughout the U.S.

A subsidiary of the massive Halliburton Co. filed for bankruptcy reorganization during this time frame, and in December 2002, Baron & Budd managing shareholder Russell Budd served as the chief architect representing asbestos plaintiffs in reaching an agreement with Halliburton that created a trust fund for asbestos victims recognized as the largest asbestos trust fund of its kind.

2003: U.S. Supreme Court Victory for Asbestos Workers with “Fear of Cancer” Claims

In Norfolk & Western Railway Co. v. Ayers, 123 S. Ct. 1210 (2003), Baron & Budd represented the nonprofit organization Public Justice as amicus curiae (or “friend of the court”). An amicus curiae is not a party in the case but offers information to help the court make a good decision. Baron & Budd’s amicus curiae brief helped persuade the U.S. Supreme Court that when a railroad worker develops asbestosis, the jury may award him damages for his reasonable fear of developing an asbestos-related cancer. While this case was decided under federal law (which applies to claims by railroad employees and does not require states to recognize damages for an asbestosis victim’s fear of cancer), this opinion by the nation’s highest court has been influential in protecting the rights of asbestos victims nationwide.

2004: Landmark California Settlement for MTBE Groundwater Contamination

Baron & Budd has long been considered a pioneer of cases affecting communities suffering the effects of environmental pollution. In 2004, Baron & Budd was the lead firm representing the City of Santa Monica, California in achieving a landmark settlement with several oil companies to pay for clean-up costs of the city’s drinking water supply, which was contaminated with the gasoline additive MTBE. City of Santa Monica, et al. v. Shell Oil, et al, No. 01-CC-04331, California Superior Court, Orange County. That same year, Baron & Budd took on the representation of over 150 municipalities and water providers in several states who were similarly affected by groundwater contamination of their community water supplies with the gasoline additive MTBE. Read on to learn more about the results of that case in 2008.

2005: Mesothelioma Trial Verdicts

In the spring of 2005, Baron & Budd scored asbestos verdicts confirming our firm’s longtime reputation as a strong, effective trial firm on behalf of mesothelioma victims. These verdicts included a California verdict for a Navy veteran with mesothelioma and a Louisiana verdict for the family of a mesothelioma victim who was exposed to asbestos while working at a Dow Chemical plant.

2006: Baron & Budd Team Named “Trial Lawyer of the Year” for Precedent-Setting Groundwater Contamination Case in Tucson, Arizona

In July 2006, a team of Baron & Budd attorneys was honored with the prestigious “Trial Lawyer of the Year” award presented by Trial Lawyers for Public Justice (TLPJ) for successfully resolving a 21-year-old legal battle over groundwater contamination affecting 1,618 Tucson, Arizona residents injured by exposure to trichlorethylene (TCE). The TLPJ award is given to the trial attorney or attorneys who have made the greatest contribution to the public interest within the past year by trying or settling a precedent-setting case. The litigation reached its conclusion in June 2006 when Associated Aviation Underwriters (AAU) agreed to fund settlements for residents who filed their original claims in the mid-1980s. The case, which involved two trials and three separate appeals to the Arizona Supreme Court, helped define Arizona laws on pollution coverage and is widely considered among the most important litigation in U.S. history involving personal injuries caused by water contamination.

2007: Baron & Budd Appellate Victory for Louisiana Asbestos Victim

In Graves v. Riverwood International Corp., 41,810-CA (La. App. 2 Cir. 1/31/07), 949 So.2d 576, writ denied, 2007-0630 (La. 5/4/07), 956 So.2d 621, Baron & Budd attorneys convinced the Louisiana Second Circuit Court of Appeals that the jury’s verdict was supported by evidence that a worker was exposed to the asbestos that caused his mesothelioma before asbestos-related disease became compensable under the state’s workers’ compensation.

This case was a step along the way toward Rando v. Anco Insulations, 2008-C-1163, 1169 (La. 5/22/09), 16 So.3d 1065, in which Baron & Budd attorneys won an significant appellate victory for mesothelioma victims in Louisiana by convincing the Louisiana Supreme Court that employees with occupational asbestos exposure before 1975 have a right to pursue mesothelioma claims against their employers. The court, by holding that these employee claims are not barred by workers’ compensation law, resolved a longtime split among the Louisiana courts of appeal.

2008: Historic MTBE Groundwater Contamination Settlement

In May 2008, Baron & Budd again achieved justice for communities affected with contaminated groundwater, this time settling the largest grouping of Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether (MTBE) cases in U.S. history with the bulk of the nation’s leading gasoline refiners, which included both a monetary settlement and a 30-year commitment to treat wells contaminated by MTBE in the future that qualify under the terms of the agreement. The settlement was negotiated on behalf of 153 water providers in 17 states–all represented by Baron & Budd. The settlement requires gasoline refiners to pay the water providers’ costs to remove MTBE contamination from public drinking water wells that are contaminated with MTBE and further requires refiners to pay for treatment of qualifying wells that become contaminated in the next 30 years. Approximately 3,385 public drinking wells–which provide drinking water to approximately 7 million people–will receive well protection under the agreement. Plaintiffs’ cases were initially filed in their respective state courts before they were transferred to a Multi-District Litigation (MDL) court in New York. Baron & Budd shareholder Scott Summy, who filed the first-ever MTBE case over 13 years ago, served as national co-lead counsel. In re: Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether, MDL No. 1358, S.D.N.Y.

2009: Precedent-setting On-Line Travel Services Case resolved

While Baron & Budd has historically made our reputation representing individuals and communities damaged by toxic exposure, we have also in recent years represented government entities and consumers in a variety of cases involving corporate misconduct. One such case involves online travel companies that make hotel rooms available to the public through their web sites. The defendants contract with hotels for rooms at discounted or “wholesale” prices, then mark up the prices and sell the rooms to the public at higher “retail” rates; however, instead of paying occupancy taxes based on the retail rates paid by consumers, they are only paying taxes on the lower wholesale prices they negotiate with the hotels. Baron & Budd represents several government entities in suits to recover the tax dollars owed them by these on-line travel companies.

In the first ruling of its kind, the top online travel companies in the U.S. were ordered to pay the City of Anaheim transient occupancy taxes on hotel rooms that the companies have underpaid to Anaheim for years. The ruling was handed down in February 2009 by an Anaheim hearing officer. Baron & Budd also represents a number of other government entities in similar suits. Appeals by Expedia Group, Orbit Group, Priceline Group, Travelocity Group (Online Travel Companies (OTCs)) v. City of Anaheim (City), RE: Audit Numbers 2008160, 2008161, 2008162, 2008163, 2008164, 2008165, 2008166, 2008167.