Asbestos Lawsuit – Latest News and Updates

June 10, 2026 – Los Angeles Jury Awards $32 Million in Talc Mesothelioma Case

A Los Angeles jury awarded $32 million to the family of a California woman who died from pleural mesothelioma after years of using cosmetic talc. The plaintiffs alleged that the talc was contaminated with asbestos and that the companies responsible for the product failed to warn consumers.

The verdict continues a difficult run for talc defendants in mesothelioma trials. These are even stronger cases than the ovarian cancer claims. Mesothelioma has a much more direct relationship to asbestos, which can make a jury more receptive when the plaintiff establishes that asbestos fibers were present in the talc.

May 26, 2026 – Supreme Court Leaves Bestwall Bankruptcy Ruling in Place

The U.S. Supreme Court declined to review the Fourth Circuit decision allowing Bestwall’s Chapter 11 bankruptcy to continue. The order did not approve the Texas Two-Step strategy or establish a nationwide rule. It left the Fourth Circuit decision intact without explaining the Court’s reasoning.

This is a setback for claimants who wanted a clear ruling that a financially supported company cannot use bankruptcy solely to control asbestos litigation. It is not the sweeping endorsement of the Texas Two-Step that you know defendants will claim.

April 30, 2026 – Washington Supreme Court Revives Refinery Asbestos Claims

The Washington Supreme Court allowed claims to proceed against a contractor connected to asbestos insulation installed at the Cherry Point refinery. The worker encountered the insulation after beginning work at the refinery in 1971 and later died from mesothelioma. The insulation had been selected, supplied, and installed during the refinery’s original construction.

The ruling is good for families whose exposure evidence points to a contractor rather than a product manufacturer or direct employer. In cases involving work performed half a century ago, every viable route to responsibility and compensation counts. Manufacturers have disappeared, records have been lost, and many primary asbestos companies have entered bankruptcy.

April 21, 2026 – Connecticut Court Addresses Recovery From Multiple Asbestos Sources

The Connecticut Supreme Court considered how settlement proceeds should be allocated when a mesothelioma victim had both workplace and nonoccupational asbestos exposure. The estate had resolved product liability claims against manufacturers and suppliers, while also pursuing benefits connected to occupational exposure.

April 15, 2026 – Wisconsin Supreme Court Allows Pabst Brewery Case to Continue

The Wisconsin Supreme Court revived claims arising from a steamfitter’s asbestos exposure at the Pabst brewery in the 1970s. The court found factual disputes concerning the brewery’s control over the work and its responsibility for dangerous conditions on the premises.

The ruling gives the family an opportunity to prove what Pabst knew about asbestos, what work contractors performed, and what precautions should have been taken.

March 4, 2026 – California Court Preserves $51 Million Avon Talc Judgment

A California appellate court largely upheld a judgment against Avon in a case alleging that asbestos in cosmetic talc caused mesothelioma. The court found sufficient evidence supporting the jury’s product identification and causation findings.

February 24, 2026 – Ninth Circuit Orders New Trial in Libby Asbestos Cases

The Ninth Circuit ordered a new trial in two cases involving asbestos-contaminated vermiculite shipped through BNSF Railway’s railyard in Libby, Montana. The court found error in the treatment of BNSF’s defense that federal law required it to transport the vermiculite.

The ruling erased the existing judgments, but it did not decide that BNSF had no responsibility for asbestos dust that escaped and accumulated around the railyard. The families will have another opportunity to prove that the railroad’s handling of the material, rather than the federal shipping requirement itself, caused the dangerous community exposure.

February 13, 2026 – Pennsylvania Jury Awards $250,000 in Talc Ovarian Cancer Case

A Philadelphia jury awarded $250,000 to the family of Gayle Emerson, who used Johnson & Johnson Baby Powder for decades and later died from ovarian cancer. The award included $50,000 in compensatory damages and $200,000 in punitive damages.

December 22, 2025 – Baltimore Jury Returns $1.56 Billion Talc Verdict

A Baltimore jury awarded approximately $1.56 billion to a woman who alleged that asbestos in Johnson & Johnson talc products caused her peritoneal mesothelioma. The award included approximately $59.8 million in compensatory damages and $1.5 billion in punitive damages against Johnson & Johnson and Pecos River Talc. The defendants announced plans to appeal.

December 19, 2025 – Minnesota Jury Awards $65.5 Million to 37-Year-Old Mother

A Minnesota jury awarded $65.5 million to a 37-year-old who developed mesothelioma after using Johnson & Johnson talc products during childhood. Her lawyers argued that the company marketed talc products despite knowing that talc could be contaminated with asbestos. Johnson & Johnson denied that its products contained asbestos and said it would appeal.

Age can have a profound effect on damages. This mother of three is not even 40.  A younger mesothelioma victim will face decades of lost life expectancy, lost income, and lost time with children. That does not make an older victim’s life less valuable, but it changes the economic evidence and the way a jury does and should calculate future loss.

October 2025 – Los Angeles Jury Awards $966 Million in Talc Case

A Los Angeles jury awarded $966 million in a mesothelioma case involving Johnson & Johnson talc products. Most of the award consisted of punitive damages. Large punitive awards are frequently reduced or reversed, so the verdict amount should not be confused with the amount the plaintiff will ultimately collect.

July 8, 2025 – EPA Keeps Chrysotile Asbestos Ban in Place During Review

The Environmental Protection Agency indicated that it would reconsider aspects of its 2024 chrysotile asbestos rule while leaving the existing restrictions in place during that review. The rule addresses the last ongoing uses of chrysotile asbestos in the United States.

May 9, 2025 – Jury Awards $18 Million in Florida Asbestos Brake Dust Trial

A Florida jury awarded $18 million to Denise Cook, a 64-year-old woman who developed peritoneal mesothelioma after years of exposure to asbestos in brake dust. The jury found Hennessy Industries, the maker of the Ammco brake grinder used by Cook’s father, 15% responsible for her illness. The remaining 85% of liability was assigned to non-party entities, including major auto parts manufacturers and Johnson & Johnson. Cook’s legal team argued that chrysotile asbestos in automotive brakes can cause peritoneal mesothelioma, while the defense denied any link. The plaintiff’s attorney said the verdict firmly rejected the asbestos industry’s claims that such exposure could not cause this cancer.

March 31, 2025 – Senators Push for Asbestos Awareness Week

A pair of U.S. senators introduced a resolution supporting the designation of the first week of April as National Asbestos Awareness Week. The resolution would promote education about continuing asbestos hazards and ways to avoid exposure.

February 26, 2025 – LA Wildfires Spread Asbestos

The Los Angeles wildfires destroyed many older homes and buildings containing asbestos roofing, flooring, siding, insulation, and other construction materials. Fire damage and debris removal can disturb those materials and release fibers. Residents, cleanup workers, and contractors should follow government instructions and use trained asbestos professionals rather than handling suspicious debris themselves.

January 3, 2025 – Jury Awards $3.8 for 10 Weeks of Asbestos Exposure

A Pittsburgh jury awarded $3.8 million to a plaintiff who alleged that he developed mesothelioma after working for only ten weeks as a boilermaker at a facility connected to Foster Wheeler. The lawsuit alleged that the defendant failed to follow safety standards and protect workers from asbestos hazards. The short exposure period did not prevent the jury from finding causation.

November 12, 2024 – New Study Confirms Asbestos in Talc Causes Cancer

A study involving more than 50,000 participants reported an association between genital talc use and ovarian cancer. Talc and asbestos litigation overlap, but the claims are not identical. Mesothelioma plaintiffs generally allege that talc was contaminated with asbestos, while ovarian cancer plaintiffs may rely on evidence concerning talc use even without proving asbestos contamination in a particular container.

October 22, 2024 – Travelers Insurance Increases Its Asbestos Reserve

In its 3rd Quarter earnings report last week, Travelers Insurance announced that it was increasing its “asbestos reserves” (the amount of money the company has earmarked for payment of asbestos liabilities). The company explained that the latest increase in its asbestos reserves is the result of significant increases in asbestos settlement and defense costs in recent years. These increases have been attributed to the continued high level of mesothelioma claims, and an increase in asbestos verdicts and settlements overall.

October 16, 2024 – Talc Powder Verdict

A Connecticut jury awarded $15 million in compensatory damages to a real estate developer who alleged that asbestos in talc products caused his mesothelioma. The jury found for the plaintiff on negligence, strict liability, and failure to warn. Johnson & Johnson continues to deny that its talc products contained asbestos, but another plaintiff verdict increases the pressure created by the company’s unresolved talc docket.

October 7, 2024 – National Asbestos Day

Last week was national Mesothelioma Awareness Day. To mark the occasion, the International Association of Firefighters (IAFF) partnered with several other public interest organizations to formally urge Congress to enact an across-the-board ban on all use of asbestos in the U.S. Most people incorrectly assume that the use of asbestos is already banned, but in 2023 over 300 tons of raw asbestos were imported into the U.S. According to the IAFF much of that asbestos ends up in the lungs of firefighters.

September 29, 2024 – $39 Million Mesothelioma Verdict

A Boston jury awarded $39 million to a man who developed mesothelioma after being exposed to asbestos through medical talc powder. The lawsuit claimed that during a 2014 pleurodesis procedure, talcum powder supplied by Cimbar Performance Minerals was injected into the patient’s chest and allegedly contained asbestos fibers. Seven years later, the patient was diagnosed with mesothelioma, a rare and incurable cancer caused by asbestos exposure. The verdict included $21.5 million for anticipated future pain and suffering, making it a landmark case linking medical talc to asbestos-related mesothelioma.

September 26, 2024 – $24.4 Million Verdict

A jury awarded $24.4 million to the family of a Chicago-area man diagnosed with pleural mesothelioma, a cancer linked to asbestos exposure. The plaintiff had worked as a janitor at an Avon Products, Inc. facility in Morton Grove, Illinois, during the early 1980s, where asbestos-contaminated talc was processed. Avon was found at fault for the asbestos exposure, which led to the cancer diagnosis in 2023.

September 20, 2024 – Baby Powder Asbestos Recall

Dynarex Corp. is recalling 62 cases of its Dynacare Baby Powder (Batch Number B 051) due to potential asbestos contamination, as revealed by FDA testing. The product, sold on Amazon and distributed in several states, was found to contain asbestos, a carcinogen. Dynarex has halted distribution and is investigating the source of the contamination.

September 19, 2024 – $4.7 Million Verdict Upheld

A Washington state appeals court upheld a $4.7 million verdict in favor of the estate of a mechanic who died of mesothelioma after exposure to asbestos in Volkswagen’s brake pads. Volkswagen AG sought to overturn the verdict, arguing that the evidence and jury instructions were flawed, but the court rejected these claims.

The three-judge panel found sufficient evidence to support the jury’s decision, including that the man would have followed asbestos warnings had they been provided. The court noted that VW knew about the risks of asbestos but failed to provide warnings on its brake products. Additionally, the court dismissed VW’s arguments regarding jury instructions, including requests to include instructions on “but-for” causation and industry customs. The panel concluded that these instructions were unnecessary, as VW could still make its arguments during the trial.

September 17, 2024 – New Treatment for Mesothelioma

The FDA has approved Merck’s cancer drug Keytruda (pembrolizumab) in combination with chemotherapy for the treatment of unresectable advanced or metastatic malignant pleural mesothelioma.

The approval, based on results from the Keynote-483 trial, showed that the Keytruda regimen improved overall survival and progression-free survival compared to chemotherapy alone, reducing the risk of death by 21%.

While the treatment offers significant benefits, Merck cautions about potential immune-mediated side effects. But another weapon in the fight against mesothelioma is welcome. This approval places Keytruda in competition with Bristol Myers Squibb’s Opdivo and other emerging therapies in the growing mesothelioma treatment market.

September 6, 2024 – Lawsuit Dropped

A lawsuit against BNSF Railway Co. and its insurer, Zurich American Insurance Co., over their handling of asbestos-related personal injury claims was voluntarily dropped by the plaintiffs.

The suit was brought by the estates of two individuals who allegedly died from asbestos exposure at a BNSF-owned rail yard in Libby, Montana. Filed in August, the complaint claimed BNSF assumed insurer duties by “buying back” several policies and, along with Zurich, breached contractual obligations by not covering the claims. The plaintiffs dismissed the case in the US District Court for the District of Montana before the defendants responded or attorneys appeared for them.

The voluntary dismissal does not explain whether the dispute settled or whether the estates chose another route to pursue coverage. The larger lesson is that insurance archaeology can materially affect recovery in an old asbestos case. Lawyers may need to locate policies issued decades ago and determine which carriers assumed or repurchased those obligations.

August 28, 2024 – Claims of Distress

Corporations often restructure to control liabilities and then insist the new entity is in financial distress. Bestwall is a prime example.

We are seeing this with Bestwall, a unit of Georgia-Pacific. The official committee of asbestos claimants argues that Bestwall’s bankruptcy filing should be dismissed, highlighting that the company is not genuinely financially distressed. This contention is backed by an agreement from Georgia-Pacific, Bestwall’s parent company, to fund the asbestos liabilities inherited through a “Texas two-step” corporate merger.

This controversial strategy involved splitting Georgia-Pacific into two entities, one retaining profitable assets and the other, Bestwall, being burdened with substantial asbestos liability claims but supported by financial commitments from the parent company.

Despite this support, Bestwall sought bankruptcy protection in 2017, claiming a need to manage its asbestos liabilities. However, the claimants’ committee disputes the legitimacy of Bestwall’s bankruptcy, arguing that the company has sufficient assets and support to meet its obligations without the aid of bankruptcy courts. They point to historical and legal interpretations of bankruptcy that require actual financial distress, asserting that Bestwall’s situation does not meet these criteria.

July 31, 2024 – $24 Million Verdict

A Cook County Circuit Court jury awarded over $24 million to the family of a former janitor who worked at an Avon Products facility in Illinois during the 1980s after finding the company negligently exposed him to asbestos-contaminated talc, leading to his development of mesothelioma. The award included $1 million in punitive damages and $3 million for loss of consortium for his wife. Other damages covered medical expenses, economic loss, shortened life expectancy, disfigurement, emotional distress, loss of normal life, and pain and suffering.

The plaintiff’s mesothelioma lawsuit claimed that Avon required him to handle asbestos-contaminated talc without proper warnings or safety measures. He also argued that Avon had knowledge of the risks associated with asbestos but failed to protect workers.

The jury accepted the family’s evidence and returned a substantial award.

July 24, 2024 – New Lawsuit Alleges Asbestos Exposure at WV Hospital

A new asbestos lawsuit was recently filed in West Virginia in which the plaintiff claims that she was exposed to asbestos at West Virginia University’s Fairmont Medical Center. The lawsuit claims that the asbestos exposure occurred when the plaintiff was a nursing student at the facility between 1998 and 2004. The exposure allegedly occurred as a result of an asbestos abatement project at the facility during the time the plaintiff was there, resulting in the plaintiff being diagnosed with lung cancer. This is a good example of an abatement exposure cases, which we are seeing more of recently.

June 16, 2024 – EPA Issues Final Ban On Asbestos Use

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued a final regulation banning the ongoing use of chrysotile asbestos for any purposes in the U.S. Chrysotile asbestos is the only type of asbestos that is still currently being used for commercial applications, but those uses are now no longer allowed under the new regulation.

June 8, 2024 – Asbestos Talc Trial Yields $260 Million Verdict

A trial in Oregon alleging that asbestos in talcum powder products caused a 48-year-old woman to develop mesothelioma ended this week in a massive $260,000,000 verdict against the defendant, Johnson & Johnson. The verdict included both compensatory and punitive damages against J&J, which continues to claim that its talc products do not contain asbestos.

May 24, 2024 – $2.6 Million California Asbestos Verdict Affirmed

A California appeals panel upheld a $2.6 million verdict against J-M Manufacturing Co. Inc. in a case where a man contracted mesothelioma due to his brother’s work with asbestos-containing products. The company’s argument to apply a duty standard for negligence claims to the man’s strict liability claim was rejected.

In an opinion filed Wednesday, the three-judge panel affirmed the verdict in favor of Nathan K. Williams, who replaced his brother Cornelius as the plaintiff after Cornelius died of mesothelioma during the appeal. The court held that the duty principle applying only to members of a worker’s household does not extend to strict liability claims.

May 10, 2024 – $13.42 Million Wisconsin Asbestos Verdict Affirmed

The Wisconsin Court of Appeals upheld a $26.45 million asbestos verdict against Pabst Brewing Co., with $13.42 million payable by the company, under premises liability and negligence claims.

The lawsuit was brought by a woman after her husband died from mesothelioma allegedly caused by asbestos exposure during his work as a pipefitter at Pabst in the 1970s. The court found sufficient evidence that Pabst knew about asbestos hazards but failed to protect workers at the brewery.

The jury awarded compensatory and punitive damages, although Pabst’s punitive damages were capped at twice the amount of compensatory damages, leading to a final judgment against Pabst of $13.42 million. The case underscored Pabst’s ongoing duty under the Wisconsin Safe Place Act to ensure a safe working environment, irrespective of other concurrent liabilities.

May 8, 2024 – $10 Million Verdict Against Pneumo Abex Co.

A California jury awarded $10 million to a woman whose husband succumbed to mesothelioma, a disease attributed to his exposure to asbestos in brake products from Pneumo Abex Co. The court found that the company’s products were defectively designed and failed to perform safely under foreseeable circumstances, which was a significant factor in causing the disease.

The jury’s decision was based on findings that Pneumo Abex knew about the risks associated with asbestos in their brakes but did not take adequate steps to warn users or mitigate the danger. This negligence in communicating the dangers, coupled with the defective design of the products, led to a substantial verdict.

April 30, 2024 – $4 Million Verdict Against BNSF Railway

Last week, a federal jury determined that BNSF Railway played a role in the asbestos-related deaths of two individuals in Libby, Montana. This town has seen thousands suffer from exposure. The jury awarded $4 million in compensatory damages to each of the deceased’s estates, recognizing the spilled asbestos in the town’s rail yard as a significant contributor to their illnesses and subsequent deaths.

BNSF, acquired by Warren Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway Inc. in 2010, was involved two decades after the closure of the Libby vermiculite mine, which was known for shipping its asbestos-contaminated product by rail.

Despite cleanup efforts, the persistent nature of asbestos-related diseases suggests that those exposed in the past may continue to develop illnesses in the future. The plaintiffs’ asbestos lawsuit alleged that BNSF was aware of the dangers posed by the asbestos-laden vermiculite but failed to take necessary precautions.

April 22, 2024 – $45 Million Talc Asbestos Verdict in Illinois

An Illinois jury ordered Johnson & Johnson and Kenvue to pay $45 million to the family of a woman who died from mesothelioma. The family alleged that her frequent use of talc-based Baby Powder exposed her to asbestos fibers and caused the cancer. An Illinois appellate court upheld the judgment in July 2026.

April 1, 2024 – S.C. Widow Gets $1.75 Million

A jury in South Carolina awarded $1.75 million to a widow after finding a company liable for negligence due to her husband’s death from mesothelioma following asbestos exposure. The exposure stemmed from the company’s gaskets, used by the husband as a maintenance worker at a plant in the 1970s. The lawsuit involved multiple companies accused of contributing to the husband’s asbestos exposure, but the trial specifically addressed the liability of the company that manufactured the asbestos-containing gaskets.

This was a quick trial. It began on March 18, with both sides presenting expert testimony regarding the nature of the asbestos exposure and its potential to cause mesothelioma. The company argued that the asbestos in its gaskets was encapsulated and not capable of causing disease, suggesting that other exposures caused the husband’s mesothelioma.

The jury did not agree. It awarded $ 608,783.26 in survival damages, $ 532,433.48 in wrongful death damages, and $ 608,783.26 for loss of consortium.

We sometimes fail to explain what these damages mean. So let’s take a second and do that:

• Survival Damages: These are damages awarded for the pain and suffering the husband experienced from the time of asbestos exposure until his death. It represents compensation for the decedent’s injuries, not the family’s loss.
• Wrongful Death Damages: This compensation is for the family’s loss due to the husband’s death. It typically covers loss of income, companionship, and emotional support.
• Loss of Consortium: This is awarded to the widow for the loss of her husband’s love, companionship, and support due to his death from mesothelioma.

This was not a particularly large verdict but the jury struggled to agree so this was likely a compromise verdict which often brings about a lesser award.

March 21, 2024 – $23 Million Verdict Upheld in NY

A New York appeals court upheld a $23 million significant jury award to an individual who developed mesothelioma, a serious form of cancer often linked to asbestos exposure.

The victim, a steamfitter from 1962 until 1992, sued over 40 defendants in 2018, alleging that his mesothelioma resulted from asbestos exposures during his career. The trial featured testimony from a range of experts, including a historian, an epidemiologist, a surgeon, a pathologist, and an industrial hygienist.
The jury, convinced by the evidence presented, awarded the individual $23 million for past and future pain and suffering, attributing most of the fault to one company, with a smaller portion assigned to another.

March 15, 2024 – New Asbestos Lawsuit

A Massachusetts woman has initiated a mesothelioma lawsuit in the Massachusetts state court. Her case breaks new ground as it sues major cosmetics brands like Clinique, L’Oreal, Esteee Lauder, Unilever, Mary Kay, and Pfizer, along with Johnson & Johnson who is no stranger to asbestos lawsuits. This lawsuit accuses these entities of distributing talcum powder contaminated with asbestos for many years, a factor her suit alleges is directly linked to her mesothelioma.

The complaint suggests that these companies, spanning cosmetics and chemical manufacturing sectors, were aware of the asbestos risk associated with talcum powder. Despite this knowledge, they continued to promote and distribute their products to consumers, who were oblivious to the potential danger.

February 29, 2024 – Asbestos Lawsuit Revived

A Texas appellate court revived on Tuesday a lawsuit against Howmet Aerospace Inc., brought by a man who claims his wife passed away from asbestosis due to her prolonged exposure to asbestos while laundering his work clothes over a span of 25 years. The lower court’s dismissal, based on the purported lack of evidence linking the exposure to the wife’s demise, was overturned. Her death was attributed to “hypoxic respiratory failure” stemming from asbestosis.

The appellate judges highlighted substantial evidence suggesting the wife’s asbestosis resulted solely from asbestos exposure through her husband’s employer, Alcoa Inc. Her husband’s tenure at Alcoa’s facility and her role in cleaning his asbestos-laden work attire were crucial elements of the case. Diagnosed in 2006, she succumbed to the disease in 2015, and the family initiated legal action in 2017.

Contrary to the trial court’s conclusion, the appeals court found the evidence presented-including expert testimony-sufficiently established that the wife’s exposure to asbestos was exclusively through Alcoa, discounting other potential sources. This point was underscored by her limited work history and familial connections to the same Alcoa location.

The appellate court’s decision emphasized the credibility of expert analyses provided by the family, asserting asbestosis as a direct consequence of asbestos exposure, a link not contested by Howmet. Ultimately, it was more probable than not that the wife’s asbestosis and subsequent death were significantly influenced by her exposure to asbestos from handling her husband’s contaminated work garments.

February 19, 2024 – Mesothelioma Dismissal Affirmed

A state appellate panel in Washington determined that a man’s claim against Howmet Aerospace Inc., previously known as Alcoa Inc., lacked sufficient evidence to prove the aerospace company had definitive knowledge of the risk of him developing mesothelioma due to asbestos exposure at its facility.

The ruling upheld the summary judgment dismissal of the lawsuit, concluding that although the plaintiff presented evidence suggesting Alcoa was aware of asbestos-related illnesses among its employees from the mid-20th century to the early 1980s, this did not equate to concrete knowledge of an imminent injury to him specifically.

The decision has prompted plans for a petition for discretionary review by the Washington Supreme Court, challenging the appellate court’s interpretation and its implications for workers’ rights to claim deliberate injury from employers in cases of disease caused by workplace exposure.

February 6, 2024 – Is Now Time for Groundbreaking Asbestos Law?

Could the Alan Reinstein Ban Asbestos Now Act get passed in this election year?

This legislative effort aims to eliminate the use of asbestos in the United States. Named after Alan Reinstein, who passed away from mesothelioma in 2006, the Act seeks to address the significant public health risks posed by asbestos exposure. Its primary goal is to prohibit the mining, importation, use, and distribution of asbestos and asbestos-containing products within a year of its enactment, effectively seeking to close the loopholes that have allowed asbestos use to continue in the U.S. despite its known dangers.

The Act also mandates the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to identify and assess the presence of asbestos in both commercial and residential settings, paving the way for a comprehensive understanding of the asbestos exposure risk to the American public. By doing so, it aims to not only prevent new cases of asbestos-related diseases but also to ensure that individuals and communities already exposed or at risk are adequately protected.

It will be difficult to pass anything in Congress in 2024, and business interests and their lobbyists will object. So I am doubtful, but hopeful.

January 23, 2024 – Push Back on the Texas Two-Step

A bipartisan group of U.S. senators urged the Supreme Court to reject the bankruptcy maneuver used by a Georgia-Pacific affiliate.

Senators Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), and Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) jointly submitted an amicus brief on Monday, expressing their concerns about what they perceive as the manipulation and misuse of the bankruptcy system.

The legal strategy at issue? The infamous “Texas Two-Step” allows a company to transfer its liabilities to a newly formed corporate entity and subsequently place that entity into bankruptcy. It is a strategy that mostly fell flat in 2023. We need to kill it in 2024.

Additionally, a coalition of 25 states, including North Carolina, filed an amicus brief on Monday, echoing the senators’ call for the Supreme Court to review the appeal and reject the Fourth Circuit’s opinion.

Our lawyers believe bankruptcy protection should be reserved for entities facing genuine financial distress, not used as a litigation advantage by companies backed by solvent corporate parents.

January 15, 2024 – Aldrich Pump Bankruptcy

A group of asbestos claimants in North Carolina is seeking permission to appeal a bankruptcy judge’s decision to reject their attempt to dismiss Aldrich Pump’s Chapter 11 bankruptcy case. They argue that the appeal could quickly resolve both the ongoing bankruptcy case and significant legal issues.

Aldrich Pump filed for Chapter 11 protection in June 2020 due to the asbestos liabilities inherited from Trane Technologies, its parent company, following a complex merger. The asbestos claimants, including an official committee and an independent group, moved to dismiss Aldrich’s bankruptcy case in spring 2023. They claimed the filing was in bad faith, as Aldrich was not financially distressed, and argued that granting bankruptcy protection to a non-distressed company exceeded the court’s constitutional powers.

As we discussed in our January 2, 2024, update below, a judge dismissed their motions. He went against the recent grain of requiring financial distress as a requirement for filing bankruptcy. The court leaned into a 1989 Fourth Circuit ruling, a two-pronged test for bankruptcy dismissal involving bad faith and “objective futility.” Judge Whitley noted that Aldrich’s lack of financial distress did not make reorganization futile.

Appellate review was needed to clarify when a financially supported company may place mass tort liabilities into Chapter 11.

January 10, 2024 – Nash Engineering Bankruptcy

In a case that underscores the challenges faced by asbestos victims when companies restructure assets before bankruptcy, The Nash Engineering Co., a bankrupt Connecticut manufacturer, and its former shareholders are disputing a trustee’s attempt to recover $59.7 million in cash transfers. These transfers, connected to asbestos liabilities and insurance claims, were executed over a decade ago.

Nash Engineering, embroiled in asbestos litigation, filed for bankruptcy in 2021, listing no significant assets beyond insurance coverage while facing claims from nearly 1,700 creditors, primarily related to asbestos injuries. The trustee’s delayed investigation into the bankruptcy and the subsequent lawsuit seeking to recoup the funds highlight the difficulties asbestos victims face in obtaining compensation.

The trustee’s allegations show why prebankruptcy transfers receive close scrutiny. Money moved beyond the reach of creditors can leave asbestos victims competing over insurance while former owners retain cash. Whether that occurred here depends on the evidence and the defenses to the trustee’s claims.

January 2, 2024 – Aldrich Pump Bankruptcy Upheld

We ended 2023 with a ruling that was very 2022. In 2023, courts were rejecting Texas Two-Step bankruptcies. But Judge J. Craig Whitley in North Carolina ended the year upholding Aldrich Pump’s asbestos liability bankruptcy.

The court found that a bankruptcy case can only be dismissed if it is proven to have been filed in bad faith and is objectively futile. The judge found Aldrich Pump’s effort to settle 90,000 asbestos claims via bankruptcy not to be objectively futile.

Hopefully, the 4th Circuit Court of Appeals will see it differently.

December 22, 2023 – St. Croix Settlement Plan

A bankrupt subsidiary of global oil and gas company Hess Corp, Honx Inc., has formulated a plan to pay approximately $190 million to resolve hundreds of asbestos claims related to a former refinery in St. Croix.

The plan, part of a Chapter 11 bankruptcy proposal, aims to settle 910 current claims from workers and their families who allege asbestos exposure at the refinery and future claims through a trust. The arrangement includes an initial $105 million contribution and full equity in a reorganized company for current claimants, with an additional $45 million allocated for potential future claims. This sum will be paid as $25 million upon the plan’s implementation and $20 million five years later.

Furthermore, Hess has agreed to a potential payout of up to $37 million over 25 years, plus $3 million for trust expenses. Our asbestos lawyers believe this new plan will gain the support of attorneys for future asbestos victims. The plan’s progress hinges on the support of 75% of asbestos claimants and judicial approval.

December 19, 2023

A California judge overturned a $107 million verdict against Union Carbide, Elementis Chemicals, and E.F. Brady in a case involving a man’s death from mesothelioma. The ruling rested on findings of juror and attorney misconduct rather than a determination that the asbestos evidence was legally insufficient.

This decision was based on findings of jury and attorney misconduct, including a prohibited quotient verdict process used by the jury to set damages and the concealment of bias by a juror during voir dire. Additionally, the judge cited misconduct by the plaintiff’s counsel in eliciting blocked testimony and appealing to the jury’s passion and prejudice.

As for the latter point, the defense lawyers argued that the plaintiffs’ counsel improperly suggested punitive damages were a substitute for jail time, insinuating that Union Carbide had committed a crime. They also accused the plaintiffs’ counsel of attempting to sway the jury by evoking negative associations with companies like Monsanto, Exxon, and Philip Morris and suggesting that a substantial award would impact the boardrooms of similar corporations.

Closing arguments are not scripted testimony, and lawyers ordinarily receive some room to argue reasonable inferences from the evidence. There also appears to have been no contemporaneous defense objection to part of the argument. The plaintiffs will have another opportunity to present the case, but a retrial always carries risk and adds delay for a family that already endured a lengthy trial.

• California mesothelioma lawsuits

December 15, 2023

A divided Connecticut appeals court reinstated an asbestos tort action, finding evidence indicating that the defendant was aware of the hazards associated with asbestos at its facility but failed to disclose this knowledge while emphasizing the importance of complying with federal regulations to others.

The plaintiff alleged that Rogers Corp. downplayed the risks of asbestos exposure, referring to it as “nuisance dust” and claiming that exposure levels remained within federal regulatory limits. The court’s ruling shifted the burden of proof to the plaintiff and also addressed the dissolution status of “Special Electric Co.” (SECO), asserting that SECO’s insurers acted as agents of the company despite its dissolution.

December 5, 2023 – Talc Settlement Talks

The asbestos baby powder cases are a real problem for J&J, and it is now finally trying to resolve these claims.

Bloomberg reports that Johnson & Johnson is actively working to settle asbestos lawsuits alleging that its talc-based Baby Powder causes cancer due to asbestos exposure.

December 3, 2023 – $5.4 Million Verdict Against Shipyard in Louisiana

A Louisiana jury awarded $5,474,934.20 in an asbestos lawsuit against Main Iron Works, a shipyard in Houma, Louisiana. This case, filed in the Orleans Parish Civil District Court, involved the late Donald Foret, who succumbed to mesothelioma 18 months after diagnosis. His widow and sons claimed that his mesothelioma was a result of asbestos exposure during his tenure as an insulator at Main Iron Works between 1967 and 1971.

Throughout the six-day trial, the plaintiffs presented testimony from pathology, industrial hygiene, and economic experts. The defense argued that exposures unrelated to Main Iron Works caused the mesothelioma, questioned whether the insulation contained asbestos, and denied that the company knew of the danger at the time.

After several hours of deliberation, the jury found Main Iron Works liable on negligence and strict liability grounds. The damages awarded by the jury included $1,140,611.30 each for physical pain and suffering, mental pain and suffering, physical disability, and loss of enjoyment of life. Additionally, $461,288 was allocated for medical expenses and $451,201 for lost earnings, culminating in a total award of over $5.4 million.

November 1, 2023 – $20 Million Verdict Against Ford Upheld

In a recent Missouri appeals court decision, Ford Motor Co.’s appeal of a $20 million asbestos verdict was denied, with the court finding no error in the nine issues raised by the company.

The case involved William “Bill” Trokey, who filed a lawsuit against Ford and 26 other companies, claiming exposure to asbestos through various sources, including third-party brakes on Ford’s automobiles. The jury ruled in favor of Trokey, awarding him $10 million and his wife, Cathy Trokey, $10 million.

After Bill Trokey’s death, Ford argued that his personal injury tort claims abated upon his death, challenging the substitution of Cathy Trokey as the plaintiff. Ford also contested its liability for third-party products installed on its vehicles, stating that Missouri law does not recognize such liability. Additionally, Ford claimed that jury instructions were improper and prejudicial. The appeals court upheld the verdict without issuing a written opinion, affirming the $20 million award.

September 24, 2023 – Asbestos Award Payouts in 2022

Mealey’s documented a total of 17 asbestos-related verdicts in 2022. Asbestos juries rendered verdicts awarding $215,664,905 in damages.

Asbestos lawsuits are said to be dying out. But the statistics say otherwise. These asbestos payouts closely align with the $208 million awarded by juries in 2021.

We do not have statistics on asbestos settlements in 2022 but, anecdotally, they seem to mirror the settlement payouts in 2021.

September 14, 2023 – $38 million verdict in New York

The plaintiff, a 66-year-old immigrant, worked with commercial boilers in the 1970s and 80s and was diagnosed with lung cancer in 2017. Out of multiple original defendants, only one manufacturer proceeded to trial.

A jury in Manhattan found a commercial boiler manufacturer 85% responsible for a man’s advanced lung cancer due to asbestos exposure. They awarded the man and his wife compensatory damages, adding $6.5 million in punitive damages. The jury considered the plaintiff 15% liable due to his smoking habits. The defense argued that the cancer could not be from their product because the man smoked and lacked diagnoses typically associated with asbestos exposure.

September 12, 2023 – $40 million verdict in Illinois

An Illinois jury awarded $40.75 million to the family of a man who died from mesothelioma after being exposed to asbestos in products made by John Crane Inc. (Case No. 2019-L-012850, Ill. Cir., Cook Co.). The judgment was entered on August 30th. The deceased, who worked as a pump man, was claimed to have contracted the disease due to his job-related asbestos exposure.

After jurisdictional challenges in California and New York, the case was settled in Cook County Circuit Court. The lawsuit was based on negligence-product liability against John Crane Inc.

The company argued that the asbestos exposure from their products was minimal and other sources were more likely the cause. The jury did not buy it. They took just 20 minutes to award compensation of $40.75 million. This included $11.2 million for the loss of normal life, $13.5 million for conscious pain and suffering, and $5.25 million for emotional distress. An additional $4 million was awarded for the widow’s loss of services, $3.6 million for loss of society, and $1 million for grief, sorrow, and mental anguish. Another $800,000 was allocated for loss of services, $800,000 for loss of society, and $550,000 for grief, sorrow, and emotional pain for other family members.

September 5, 2023 – Decline in Mesothelioma Rates

A study reported a decline in mesothelioma cases associated with heavy occupational asbestos exposure. Researchers examined more than 600 cases spanning four decades and found changes in patient demographics, asbestos fiber burdens, and the frequency of accompanying asbestosis. The results are encouraging, but the long latency period means diagnoses will continue for years among people exposed decades ago.

August 4, 2023 – Asbestos Lawsuit Back On

A Florida appeals court has reinstated a lawsuit regarding the mesothelioma death of a woman who was allegedly exposed to asbestos from laundering her mechanic husband’s work clothes. The suit accuses Carlisle Industrial Brake & Friction Inc. of exposing her to asbestos dust through brake linings made for Mack Trucks, which her husband worked on between 1969 and 1993. The First District Court of Appeal reversed a previous summary judgment in favor of Carlisle, with a three-judge panel finding sufficient evidence to establish product identification. The court noted that evidence showed Mack exclusively used Carlisle linings from 1974 to 1979, and deemed it “more likely than not” that the woman was exposed to Carlisle’s products, thus meeting Florida’s legal standard for product identification. The panel further emphasized that the issue of other companies possibly causing the exposure should be left for a jury to determine.

August 2, 2023 – Court Rules Asbestos Case Will Continue

An appellate court in New York recently denied a motion for summary judgment filed by Long Island Power Authority (LIPA) and Long Island Lighting Company (LILCO). The ruling came in Smith v. Advance Auto Parts, et al. 2023 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 3741 (NY App. July 20, 2023). The plaintiff-decedent, in that case, was allegedly exposed to asbestos at the LILCO Shoreham Nuclear Power Station. The motion claimed that the case was not filed in time under New York’s Tort Claims Act, which creates special notice rules and a shorter statute of limitations for filing lawsuits against state and local government entities.

The plaintiff argued that the lawsuit did not fall under New York’s special rules for claims against public entities because LILCO was a private company when the exposure occurred. LIPA acquired it years later.

The issue for the court was whether a private company later acquired by a state authority should be covered by the special SOL and notice requirements for state and local government entities. The court held that LILCO was not entitled to the protection of the New York Tort Claims Act in a lawsuit that is based on alleged conduct that occurred when LILCO was a private company.

July 26, 2023 – Hiding Behind Bankruptcy Law

Paper products maker Georgia Pacific is asking the Fourth Circuit not to proceed with an en banc review of a ruling that supports a bankruptcy stay of asbestos litigation against the parent company. It argues that the earlier decision aligns with court precedent, and the district court was justified in its authority to pause the legal proceedings.

It is frustrating how these companies use bankruptcy to avoid responsibility.

July 13, 2023 – $107 Million Verdict

The family of a 45-year-old janitor, who succumbed to mesothelioma, was awarded $107 million by a California jury yesterday. Union Carbide was found to have acted with malice, while Elementis Chemicals and E. F. Brady Co. Inc. were found negligent.

July 7, 2023 – New FDA Regulation

The EPA has issued a final regulation taking a swing at asbestos that comes into the country. The new rule requires manufacturers, importers, and processors of asbestos or asbestos-containing products to disclose their volume and other relevant information. The regulation is intended to bridge data gaps and identify products containing various types of asbestos. Despite the U.S. halting asbestos mining in 2002, small amounts continue to enter the country through imported products.

June 12, 2023 – $40 Million in Punitive Damages Sought After Verdict

In a Connecticut asbestos case, a plaintiff who was awarded $20 million is requesting the imposition of $40 million in punitive damages.

The plaintiff argues that a successor talc company should be held liable as it continued the same reckless conduct after acquiring its predecessor. The case involves a lawsuit filed by Kathleen Peckham in Bridgeport at Fairfield Judicial District Superior Court, alleging that her husband died from injuries resulting from asbestos exposure when he used DAP Inc.’s DAP 33 window glaze in the 1960s. The jury found the defendants liable and awarded Peckham $20 million, apportioning 50% of the liability to each defendant.

We now turn to punitive damages. The plaintiff alleges that the defendants actively concealed the presence of asbestos in its talc and took precautions to mine talc from areas without asbestos when federal agencies conducted inspections. If true, could there be a better argument for punitive damages?

May 26, 2023 – Hess to Pay Over $100 Million to Asbestos Victims

Hess has agreed to pay $106 million to settle asbestos injury claims related to its bankrupt unit HONX Inc.’s oil refinery. Under the Chapter 11 reorganization plan filed in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of Texas, HONX and the oil and gas company will establish a trust to evaluate and compensate more than 900 outstanding asbestos claims.

In return, they will be protected from further legal action regarding the alleged toxic material. HONX has faced 911 claims related to asbestos exposure at its former Limetree Bay oil refinery in St. Croix, U.S. Virgin Islands, between 1965 and 1998. The reorganization plan includes a fund of $106 million, with $90 million allocated for existing claimants, $15 million for future claims, and additional funding if necessary.

May 25, 2023 – Asbestos Lawsuit to Continue in Delaware

The Delaware Supreme Court has rejected a motion for an immediate appeal in an asbestos lawsuit case. Hennessy Industries sought summary judgment, arguing that it had no duty to warn the plaintiff because it did not manufacture, supply, or install any asbestos-containing products. The judge ruled that there is a duty on manufacturers in cases where they explicitly specified or recommended the third-party part involved. The company then sought an immediate appeal, contending that the issues addressed in the rulings were of substantial importance. But the Delaware Supreme Court rejected this request.

May 24, 2023 – $33.75 Million Verdict Affirms

The Louisiana Appeals Court upheld a $35.75 million verdict in favor of a man who suffered from asbestos-related mesothelioma, which he attributed to his work as a pipe fitter and welder at various industrial facilities. The court rejected the defendant’s appeal, asserting that there was no abuse of the jury’s discretion in awarding the damages. Additionally, the court noted that the damages align with current economic conditions, particularly the rising inflation.

The defendant, Level 3 Holdings, had been held responsible for over $19 million of the total judgment post-trial. The court also dismissed Level 3’s claim that it should only be assigned a minor share of liability, asserting that all joint tortfeasors are equally accountable for the injury in pre-comparative fault cases in Louisiana. Despite some disputes regarding strict liability and witness testimony, the court found no substantial errors that would affect the jury’s verdict.

May 17, 2023 – St. Louis Asbestos Lawsuit to Remain in Federal Court

The relatives of a man who died from an alleged asbestos-induced lung cancer lost their appeal to shift their case against Raytheon Technologies Corporation back to state court from federal court.

The family of a deceased St. Louis police officer and a Naval officer filed a lawsuit in January against several companies and defense contractors. They alleged that their loved one was exposed to asbestos during his tenure in the Navy and various other jobs from 1956 to 2020. The asbestos lawsuit says that the helicopters the man worked with, specifically the Raytheon products on these helicopters during his time with the St. Louis County Police’s Helicopter Unit, contained asbestos.

In February, Raytheon moved the case to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri. The argument to keep the lawsuit in state court was that Raytheon failed to establish that it was operating under the direction of a federal officer and didn’t possess a defensible case.

Raytheon responded by arguing that the case falls within the purview of federal officer jurisdiction because the only product the deceased could have come into contact with was an engine that they built under military instruction. The judge sided with Raytheon, rejecting the family’s lawyer’s contention that because the man was exposed to asbestos while serving with the St. Louis County Police, Raytheon wasn’t operating under a federal officer.

May 16, 2023 – Asbestos Defendants Seek Reduction of $25 Million Verdict

John Crane’s asbestos lawyers asked a judge earlier this month to reduce a $25 million asbestos verdict, issued against it and other involved companies, arguing that the total amount was overly excessive. This verdict was part of a lawsuit filed by a Navy veteran suffering from asbestosis.

The lawsuit originated in 2019 when the veteran sued several companies, including John Crane Inc. He claimed that his asbestosis was caused by exposure to asbestos-containing products during his tenure in the Navy and his subsequent employment at the Philadelphia Naval Shipyard.

He also alleged that he was exposed to asbestos while undertaking car repairs and home maintenance tasks. The jury reached its verdict against Crane and the other accused companies on December 22, 2022. The plaintiff was awarded $15 million in damages for his asbestosis claim, with the remaining $10 million attributed to his wife’s loss of consortium claim.

Defense lawyers argued that the award was seven times larger than the highest asbestosis verdict identified on the plaintiff firm’s website. That comparison says little about whether this jury’s award was supported by the evidence and the damages suffered by these plaintiffs.

Defense counsel also contested the diagnosis of asbestosis, suggesting that the plaintiff’s breathing difficulties could have been caused by other health complications. They highlighted his smoking history and other ailments, such as emphysema, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, asthma, and diabetes. These are all, of course, arguments that the jury heard and rejected.

May 15, 2023 – New Research Could Advance Asbestos Detoxification Methods

A new study published today demonstrates that certain bacteria from high-temperature marine environments could help reduce the toxicity of asbestos.

The article, published in the American Society for Microbiology, is the first research of its kind. The study focuses on a thermophilic bacterium that can extract iron from asbestos minerals through a process known as anaerobic respiration. As iron is a major factor driving the toxicity of asbestos minerals, its removal could decrease their harmful properties.

Moreover, the research found that the bacterium could mediate the transfer of electrical charge within the iron contained in asbestos without altering its mineral structure. This process could potentially enhance asbestos’s electrical conductivity. Thus, the bacteria could be used to treat the toxicity of asbestos through iron removal, or the increased electrical conductivity of the treated asbestos might enable it to be repurposed.

This innovative research showed that bacteria could be used to extract iron, silicon, and/or magnesium from asbestos, thus offering a superior method of asbestos detoxification compared to other biological methods. However, further research is required to optimize these treatments and to explore the potential for detoxifying and possibly reusing asbestos as secondary raw materials.

April 17, 2023 – Asbestos School Closing in Philadelphia

A sixth school in Philadelphia, Universal Vare Charter, has temporarily closed due to discovered asbestos damage. The extent of the asbestos issue and the school’s reopening date are yet to be determined. The closure has complicated matters as students are in the midst of standardized testing. Consequently, students will be transported to a different school to take their exams, and other classes will be conducted virtually. The closure and asbestos abatement follows a series of similar incidents in other schools across the district, with ongoing investigations into decades-long mischaracterizations of asbestos safety in these institutions.

April 5, 2023 – EPA Proposes Banning All Use of Asbestos

This week, the EPA formally proposed new regulations that would effectively ban nearly all permissible uses of asbestos in the U.S. Virtually all commercial uses and products of asbestos in the U.S. ended decades ago due to the known health risks of asbestos, but asbestos was never outright banned.

In 1989, the EPA attempted to fully ban the use of asbestos in the U.S., but the federal appeals court struck down those regulations 2 years later because they exceeded the agency’s authority under the prior version of the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA). Now, however, the TSCA has been amended to give the EPA more power and the proposed ban on asbestos is one of the agency’s first efforts to flex that regulatory muscle.

March 25, 2023 – $15 Million New York Verdict Upheld

The New York City Asbestos Litigation (NYCAL) court rejected Kaiser Gypsum’s post-trial appeals following a verdict that saw the plaintiffs awarded a sum of $15 million. Kaiser Gypsum sought: 1) a judgment contrary to the verdict; 2) an order for a retrial; or, 3) a reduction of what they deemed an excessively high verdict. They were all rejected.

• More on this verdict

March 14, 2023 – Washington Mesothelioma Verdict Upheld on Appeal

The Washington Court of Appeals upheld yesterday a significant $16.67 million asbestos verdict. This case is associated with the widow of a former employee of a Camas paper mill. The employee succumbed to mesothelioma in 2021 due to asbestos exposure from “dryer felts” sold by a specific company.

Dryer felts, which resemble absorbent conveyor belts, transport large wet paper sheets through heated rollers for drying, marking the last step in paper manufacturing. The deceased worked on the mill’s paper machine cleanup crew, which frequently involved cleaning these dryer felts using compressed air.

Following his death in 2021, the widow hired an attorney who filed an asbestos lawsuit. The family’s asbestos lawsuit alleged that the defendant company did not test its products for asbestos release, issue warnings, or label its products concerning asbestos content. After a four-week trial, the jury issued its award. The appellate court’s decision noted that the family’s lawyers presented more than sufficient evidence for a jury to decide that there was asbestos exposure, both from direct contact and “bystander exposure.”

Expert testimony also supported the conclusion that the worker encountered asbestos from the company’s products even when he was not personally handling them. The three-judge panel found sufficient evidence for the jury to conclude that exposure to asbestos from Scapa’s dryer felts was a substantial factor in causing his mesothelioma.

March 12, 2023 – $20 Million Verdict for Mesothelioma from 4-Month Exposure

A Connecticut jury has ordered a minerals company based in Norwalk and a national sealant manufacturer to pay $20 million to the widow of a man who succumbed to asbestos contamination in 2020. The six-week asbestos trial culminated in the jury’s verdict after less than two hours of deliberation.

The decedent, a 76-year-old man, had been working for a former company in Woodstock, Connecticut, in the early 1960s when he was tasked with replacing the factory building’s window. Over a four-month span, he was required to replace numerous individual window panes, chiseling out the asbestos-contaminated sealant and glaze between each pane. These materials, sold by the sealant manufacturer and made up of materials manufactured by the minerals company, were the subject of the lawsuit. The man was diagnosed with mesothelioma and passed away 11 months later. His widow hired an asbestos lawyer to bring a lawsuit against the companies.

February 22, 2023 – New Study Links Gene Mutation to Mesothelioma Risk

A research team from Nagoya University reported animal-model evidence suggesting that a BRCA1 mutation may increase susceptibility to mesothelioma following asbestos exposure. The study does not establish the same risk in humans, but it may help researchers understand why people with comparable exposures do not face identical disease risks.

January 10, 2023 – Employer Has an Obligation

The Superior Court of Pennsylvania ruled that an employer’s duty can extend to hazards it should reasonably have discovered. The case involved an employee exposed to asbestos during the 1970s and 1980s who was diagnosed with malignant mesothelioma in 2017 and died in 2019.

The employee’s estate sued the employer, Kreider Farms, for negligence in failing to warn and protect him from asbestos hazards. The employer argued that they were unaware of asbestos dangers at the time and were only obligated to protect employees from known risks. Initially, the trial court sided with the employer.

However, on appeal, the Superior Court ruled in favor of the employee’s estate. The Court held that employers must take into account general scientific discoveries, make efforts to uncover facts indicating danger to employees, and act accordingly when such hazards are discovered.

The Court found that the trial court had made a mistake by only considering whether the employer had actual knowledge of asbestos risks. Instead, the court determined that a jury could have concluded that the employer should have known about the dangers based on expert reports, medical journals, and state department publications presented by the appellant.

November 22, 2022 – $5.75 Million Verdict Against Volkswagen for Asbestos Wrongful Death

After a 2-week trial, a jury in Spokane, Washington, awarded $5,750,000 in damages in an asbestos lawsuit against Volkswagen Group of America for the wrongful death of a former automatic mechanic, Thomas Sorrentino. Mr. Sorrentino contracted mesothelioma in November 2020, arising from his exposure to asbestos as an automotive mechanic at United Volkswagen in Spokane, Washington. He was exposed to asbestos when he ground brakes on an arc grinder, blew out brake drums, and cleaned up the shop from 1972-1975. The lawsuit alleged that Volkswagen of America and Volkswagen AG failed to warn Mr. Sorrentino of the hazards of asbestos.

November 14, 2022 – Honeywell Will Pay $1.3 Billion to Asbestos Claims Trust Fund

Honeywell International has been a major defendant in asbestos lawsuits recently. From 1979 to 1986, Honeywell owned a subsidiary called North American Refractories Company (NARCO). At one point, NARCO was the biggest manufacturer of heat-resistant products. As a result, NARCO was overwhelmed with asbestos liabilities, and in 2002, the company was forced into bankruptcy.

As a result of the NARCO bankruptcy, Honeywell was tagged with liability for future asbestos liabilities related to those asbestos products that NARCO manufactured for use in Honeywell products. To address these liabilities, a settlement trust fund called the North American Refractories Asbestos Personal Injury Settlement Trust (NARCO Trust) was created in 2013. The trust is funded by Honeywell, and it is tasked with paying settlement compensation to claimants.

Recently, however, bitter legal disputes have arisen between Honeywell and the NARCO Trust over how much the trust was paying out on claims. Since the trust was established, Honeywell has periodically paid money into the trust to keep it funded. Those periodic funding obligations were supposed to continue for a long time under court supervision.

Earlier this month, however, Honeywell announced that it had reached an agreement with the NARCO Trust by which Honeywell would make a final one-time payment of $1.3 billion to finally resolve its obligations to fund the trust. The $1.3 billion would effectively buy Honeywell out of its future obligations to the trust. The agreement must first be approved by the U.S. Bankruptcy Court.

July 21, 2022 – $15 Million Verdict to Drywall Installer

A New York jury awarded $15 million to the family of a drywall installer. Throughout his career as a construction worker in New York and New Jersey from the 1960s to the 1980s, the man consistently encountered asbestos. His work involved mixing a powdery joint compound with water and applying it to drywall. In compliance with the manufacturer’s guidelines, he sanded the product to attain a smooth finish, which unfortunately led to the creation of substantial dust laden with asbestos.

Among the 11 entities his family blamed for his mesothelioma, Kaiser Gypsum was the final defendant in the trial. Everyone else offered reasonable settlement amounts or were dismissed from the case. The jury concluded that Kaiser Gypsum was 70% responsible for his suffering and awarded his family $15 million.

May 25, 2022 – $7.2 Million Mesothelioma Verdict Against U.S. Steel

In this wrongful death case, the decedent, 62-year-old male James O’Reilly, died due to pleural mesothelioma, allegedly from asbestos exposure while working for decades as a union pipefitter at various industrial facilities for over twenty years,