Clark Material Handling and Asbestos-Containing Products

Company History

Clark Material Handling Company is an American industrial manufacturer with a long history in the design and production of material handling equipment, most notably forklifts and related warehouse and industrial machinery. Operating under various corporate names and ownership structures over the decades, Clark became one of the most recognized names in the American lift truck industry, with equipment deployed across manufacturing plants, warehouses, shipyards, construction sites, and distribution facilities throughout the country.

During the mid-twentieth century, Clark’s industrial equipment was a fixture on American jobsites at a time when asbestos-containing materials were in widespread commercial use across virtually every sector of heavy industry. Asbestos was considered an ideal industrial material during this era — valued for its heat resistance, durability, and insulating properties — and it appeared in countless components associated with heavy machinery, engine systems, and the infrastructure surrounding industrial equipment.

According to asbestos litigation records, Clark Material Handling has been named in civil asbestos litigation by workers who alleged exposure to asbestos-containing materials in connection with the company’s equipment and associated components. While Clark is primarily known as a manufacturer of material handling machinery rather than a producer of asbestos insulation products, court filings document claims that asbestos-containing materials — including pipe insulation and related thermal products — were present in and around Clark equipment and in the industrial environments where that equipment operated.

Clark’s asbestos-related litigation history places it within a broader pattern seen across American industrial manufacturers who sourced components and materials from third-party suppliers during an era when asbestos content in such materials was standard rather than exceptional.

Asbestos-Containing Products

Plaintiffs alleged in asbestos litigation that Clark Material Handling equipment was associated with asbestos-containing materials, with pipe insulation identified among the product categories at issue. In the industrial settings where Clark forklifts and material handling equipment operated — including steel mills, foundries, chemical plants, paper mills, and shipyards — extensive networks of insulated piping were a constant presence. Workers who operated, maintained, or worked in proximity to Clark equipment in these environments may have encountered asbestos-containing pipe insulation as a routine part of their daily work.

Court filings document claims involving the presence of asbestos-containing thermal insulation in settings where Clark equipment was used, with plaintiffs alleging that disturbing or working near such materials generated respirable asbestos dust. Pipe insulation manufactured and installed during the 1940s through the early 1980s commonly contained chrysotile, amosite, or crocidolite asbestos at concentrations sufficient to release hazardous fibers when cut, removed, or otherwise disturbed during maintenance and repair activities.

According to asbestos litigation records, the specific product formulations and asbestos content percentages associated with Clark Material Handling have been the subject of discovery and testimony in civil proceedings. As is common in Tier 2 litigation involving industrial equipment manufacturers, the precise nature of Clark’s role — whether as a manufacturer of asbestos-containing components, a specifier of such materials, or a company whose equipment was used in environments containing third-party asbestos products — has been a contested issue in litigation.

Clark is understood to have ceased association with asbestos-containing materials in its products and operations by approximately the early 1980s, consistent with the broader industrial transition away from asbestos use that followed regulatory action by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) during that period.

Occupational Exposure

Workers in a range of trades and industrial occupations may have encountered asbestos-containing materials in connection with Clark Material Handling equipment and the environments in which that equipment was used. According to asbestos litigation records, the following worker populations have been identified in claims involving Clark:

Forklift Operators and Equipment Operators: Workers who operated Clark forklifts and related material handling equipment in industrial facilities — including steel mills, foundries, automotive plants, and chemical processing facilities — may have been exposed to asbestos fibers released by insulated pipes and equipment present throughout those environments. Repeated daily passes through areas where asbestos-containing pipe insulation was present, particularly during overhead work or near boiler and steam piping systems, could have resulted in significant cumulative exposure.

Maintenance and Repair Technicians: Court filings document claims from mechanics and maintenance workers who serviced Clark equipment, including brake and clutch systems, which in some industrial machinery of this era incorporated asbestos-containing friction materials. Workers who performed brake jobs, replaced clutch components, or conducted overhauls on Clark lift trucks may have generated asbestos dust as a byproduct of grinding, sanding, or blowing out brake assemblies.

Pipefitters, Insulators, and Boilermakers: In the large industrial plants where Clark equipment was commonly used, skilled tradespeople who installed, repaired, or removed pipe insulation worked with and around asbestos-containing thermal products as a matter of course. Plaintiffs alleged that work performed on insulated steam lines, process piping, and boiler systems in proximity to Clark equipment operations created conditions for fiber release and inhalation.

Shipyard Workers: Clark material handling equipment was used extensively in American naval and commercial shipyards, environments documented by federal health agencies as among the highest-exposure worksites for asbestos during the mid-twentieth century. Workers at shipyards who operated or worked near Clark equipment were simultaneously exposed to the pervasive asbestos-containing pipe insulation, boiler lagging, and thermal products present throughout ship construction and repair facilities.

Secondary and Household Exposure: Family members of workers in the above occupations may have faced secondary asbestos exposure through contact with work clothing, tools, and personal protective equipment carried home from jobsites where asbestos-containing materials were present. This pathway of exposure, sometimes called take-home or para-occupational exposure, has been recognized in asbestos disease research and litigation.

The latency period for asbestos-related diseases — including mesothelioma, asbestosis, and asbestos-related lung cancer — typically ranges from 20 to 50 years following initial exposure. Workers exposed to asbestos-containing materials in connection with Clark equipment during the 1940s through the early 1980s may only now be receiving diagnoses of asbestos-related illness.

Trust Fund / Legal Status

Clark Material Handling has not established a dedicated asbestos bankruptcy trust fund. Unlike manufacturers such as Johns-Manville, Armstrong World Industries, or Owens Corning — which resolved their asbestos liabilities through Chapter 11 bankruptcy reorganization and the creation of Section 524(g) trusts — Clark has not undergone a comparable bankruptcy proceeding for asbestos purposes, and no Clark-specific trust exists for the filing of asbestos claims.

According to asbestos litigation records, claims involving Clark Material Handling have been pursued through the traditional civil litigation system. Plaintiffs alleged asbestos exposure in connection with Clark equipment have filed lawsuits in state and federal courts, seeking compensation through the judicial process rather than an administrative trust fund mechanism.

Court filings document that asbestos cases involving industrial equipment manufacturers like Clark frequently involve multiple defendants, reflecting the reality that workers in industrial settings were exposed to asbestos-containing products from many sources simultaneously. In these multi-defendant cases, claims against Clark may proceed alongside claims against the manufacturers of pipe insulation, brake components, gasket materials, and other asbestos-containing products present on the same jobsites.

It is important to note that the absence of a bankruptcy trust does not foreclose legal options for individuals who believe they were exposed to asbestos in connection with Clark Material Handling equipment. Litigation against solvent defendants — companies that remain financially active and have not reorganized under bankruptcy — is a recognized avenue for asbestos claimants.

If you or a family member worked with or around Clark Material Handling equipment between the 1940s and the early 1980s — particularly in industrial settings such as steel mills, shipyards, foundries, chemical plants, or warehouses — and has been diagnosed with mesothelioma, lung cancer, asbestosis, or another asbestos-related disease, the following information is relevant:

  • No Clark trust fund exists. Claims cannot be filed with an administrative trust. Legal options involve civil litigation.
  • Claims may involve multiple defendants. Workers in industrial settings typically encountered asbestos from many manufacturers. An experienced asbestos attorney can identify all potentially responsible parties, including both litigating defendants and companies with established trust funds.
  • Statutes of limitations apply. Asbestos claims are subject to time limits that vary by state and typically begin running from the date of diagnosis or discovery of the disease, not the date of exposure. Prompt consultation with an attorney is important.
  • Medical documentation is essential. A confirmed diagnosis from a qualified physician, along with a documented work history connecting the claimant to Clark equipment or related jobsites, forms the foundation of any claim.

Individuals seeking to understand their legal options should consult with an attorney who specializes in asbestos litigation and has experience identifying exposure histories across industrial workplaces.