SACRAMENTO - California’s usually mild-mannered geologist community and rock hounds have risen up against a plaintiffs’ lawyer ploy to use California’s state rock to prop open courthouse doors for a new brand of asbestos lawsuits.
“What a gross misuse of politics,” wrote a disgusted Justin Zzyzx, a mineral expert who hosts a website called Fakeminerals.com to alert mineral collectors to fakes and scams.
Senate Bill 624, authored by Senator Gloria Romero (D-East Los Angeles), started out as a bill dealing with solid waste management issues. But in May, it was rewritten to formally drop serpentine as California’s state rock, arguing that the state shouldn’t be promoting a rock that can contain a naturally occurring form of asbestos, a substance that can cause serious health hazards, including cancer.
In fact, the Legislature’s official bill analysis reveals that the supporters of the newly rewritten bill include the trial lawyers’ lobbying organization and two personal injury law firms that specialize in suits dealing with exposure to asbestos.
And the bill contains such “findings” as: “Serpentine contains the deadly mineral chrysotile asbestos, a known carcinogen, exposure to which increases the risk of the cancer mesothelioma.” And this: “California should not designate a rock known to be toxic to the health of its residents as the state’s official rock.”
Once those who know their minerals got wind of the lawyers’ spin on serpentine, the Internet began to rock with protests. Garry Hayes, a Modesto Community College geology teacher, posted the following on his “Geotripper” blog.
“The more I read about this, the more disturbed I become…about the very strange goings-on in the California legislature while they avoid working out the state budget. Senate Bill 624 would remove serpentine as the California State Rock, and declare in effect that serpentine is a dangerous mineral. The declaration could very well be legally binding, possibly leading to lawsuits for anyone who uses serpentine as a building stone or a classroom sample. For a short bill, it is full of inaccuracies and misstatements of fact…. as I have learned more, I am concerned that we are being conned in the name of a tragic disease. Somebody may be making an underhanded political move with the intention of making a lot of money. If this isn’t true, the parties are welcome to respond.”
The posting on Zzyzx’s fakeminerals.com site leads with the observation that “Senator Gloria Romero is working for lawyers, not YOU”.
“What the bill is actually doing is making the non-fact, ‘Serpentine contains the deadly mineral chrysotile asbestos,…’ a term that can be actionable in court. That means that they could start tort on crushed stone quarries that mined chrysotile free serpentine, on cities that had crushed serpentine stone used as road foundation, or used in break walls in the ocean.
“That means that they could start tort on anyone who has SERPENTINE around! How about the main library in downtown Los Angeles? We have a HUGE serpentine boulder in a fountain with a cool lizard sculpture.
“Should we have that removed? Are lawyers going to sue THE LIBRARY How about some favorite hiking and fishing locations? Look forward to more land closures all over our once free state! State agencies can then close down anything that has to do with serpentine, all because of the crap science used by the ‘asbestos awareness’ groups, which are nothing but fronts for asbestos litigation…”
Political columnist Dan Walters mined the issue in Friday’s Sacramento Bee, explaining that there is more than symbolism in SB 624.
“Its declarations, geologists say, are scientifically incorrect. And if it’s enacted, it could open new avenues for litigation, which explains why lawyers who pursue asbestos suits are pushing it… Were SB 624 to become law, declaring serpentine as carcinogenic, it could widen the opportunities for lawsuits against owners of property with naturally occurring outcroppings of serpentine.”
Walters concluded his column with a quote from Civil Justice Association of California President John H. Sullivan:
“We’ve long observed that personal injury lawyers will leave no stone unturned in their hunt for new cases, but this is ridiculous.”
Sullivan later noted that CJAC has been monitoring the surge of out-of-state law firms moving into California to file ‘traditional’ asbestos cases against companies that years ago may have used asbestos in products. “One can conclude from geologists’ observations that SB 624 is an attempt to twist good science in order to develop new business for the lawsuit industry,” he said.
The National Cancer Institute has provided an objective comment on naturally occurring asbestos:
“Everyone is exposed to asbestos at some time during their life. Low levels of asbestos are present in the air, water, and soil. However, most people do not become ill from their exposure. People who become ill from asbestos are usually those who are exposed to it on a regular basis, most often in a job where they work directly with the material or through substantial environmental contact.”