Judge Won't Remove Himself From Asbestos Cases

Newark, NJ, Feb. 3--A federal judge on Monday refused to remove himself from overseeing five bankruptcy cases involving companies sued by people exposed to asbestos. Some of those involved sought to have U.S. District Judge Alfred M. Wolin step aside, claiming some of his advisers had a "blatant conflict," while others, including two of the companies, said he should stay. Wolin had appointed five advisers with expertise in asbestos cases, two of whom are advocates for asbestos victims in a pending bankruptcy before another federal judge in Newark. Wolin, in a 100-page opinion, insisted the right course is to "resolve all the outstanding claims, whatever their nature, and, should the faces and the law so indicate, to return the debtors to that which they do best--the conduct of their business." He also said the effort to remove him came too late in the case to be considered. His writing was directed at the parties, as well as the 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia, which is to decide the issue. A three-judge panel of the appellate court heard arguments Dec. 12 in the case, but Wolin declined to participate. Lawrence Robbins, a lawyer for Kensington International Ltd., a financial institution that is owed money from one of the bankrupt companies and is seeking to have Wolin removed, disagreed with the ruling. "We respectfully disagree both with the factual findings and the legal analysis in Judge Wolin's decision, and intend to call those defects to the attention of the Court of Appeals," he said. "We look forward to that opportunity." The five companies that are in bankruptcy are W.R. Grace, Owens-Corning, Armstrong World, U.S. Gypsum and Federal Mogul. Grace and Owens-Corning opposed recusal, as do lawyers for asbestos victims. They said the judge can filter any information from the advisers that is not objective and that delaying the cases to assign a new judge would harm the bankrupt companies and people suffering from asbestos-related problems. Wolin said he had neither a personal bias toward any party, nor personal knowledge of disputed evidence, reasons a judge must disqualify himself. He was assigned the five cases in late 2001 by the chief judge of the 3rd Circuit in what Wolin said was an "unprecedented concentration of authority over nationwide asbestos litigation" for coordinated management of the complex cases. Wolin appointed his five advisers in December 2001, which the parties knew. Two were advocates for victims in a bankruptcy involving G-I Holdings Inc. The five advisers were "functionally obsolete" since May 2002, Wolin said, conceding that he has failed to formally dismiss them "due to the press of more weighty business." The judge maintained that all parties had access to communications between him and the advisers. The effort to remove him came this fall. Wolin noted that a lawyer for asbestos victims, Elihu Inselbuch, told the appellate panel that an average of 15 claimants die daily. "They, together with other seriously ill asbestos claimants, deserve closure without delay," Wolin wrote. "The debtors who pay the bills for this litigation in the tens of millions of dollars similarly deserve closure as do all other claimants," the judge continued. "To recuse this Court and invalidate the progress to date would represent a consummate waste of untold proportions."

Print the Article