A jury in New York has ruled that a company had to pay $6.4 million to a plaintiff who alleged that his mesothelioma had been caused by his exposure to asbestos while he was working. The case is Meissner v. Air & Liquid Systems Corp., No. 7953/18 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. Monroe Co. Nov. 15, 2019).
Wayne Meissner alleged that, in March 2018, he began to experience impairment of his respiration and also developed a persistent cough. Several months later, he said, he learned that his symptoms were a product of pleural mesothelioma – an aggressive, incurable cancer that can result from ingestion or inhalation of fibers of asbestos.
Meissner said that, from 1964 and 1966, he was a laborer working at residential sites that were being renovated. He claimed that his work required use of an asbestos-containing joint compound that was manufactured by a now-defunct company: Chicago-based United States Gypsum Corp.
Meissner also said that, in 1967, he worked for a company that manufactured asbestos-containing insulating blankets. The blankets' asbestos was provided by another now-defunct company: Denver-based Johns Manville.
In April 1970, according to Meissner, he began working at Kodak Park, an industrial complex that was located in Rochester. Meissner said that a contractor, North Brunswick, New Jersey-based Ridge Construction Corp., was overseeing fireproofing of an eight-story building and that the work involved use of an asbestos-containing fireproofing material that was applied via spray. Meissner said that he was supervising the work, and he claimed that his duties included measuring the thickness of the fireproofing material, which was manufactured by Columbia, Maryland-based W. R. Grace & Co.
Meissner claimed that his mesothelioma stemmed from his inhalation of fibers of asbestos that was contained in the fireproofing material and other asbestos-containing products that were used at sites at which he worked.
Meissner sued Ridge Construction; two companies that were believed to have provided asbestos-containing insulation that Mr. Meissner handled, Buffalo-based Niagara Insulations Inc. and Rochester-based Rochester Industrial Insulation Inc.; and other companies that were believed to have distributed, manufactured, or sold asbestos-containing products that Meissner handled.
His lawsuit alleged that Ridge Construction negligently failed to provide a safe workplace, that Ridge Construction's failure contributed to Meissner's development of mesothelioma, that the remaining defendants' products were defectively designed, that those defendants were strictly liable for their products' defects, that they negligently failed to provide warnings that disclosed their products' defects, and that their negligence contributed to Meissner's development of mesothelioma.
The matter proceeded to a trial against Ridge Construction, Niagara Insulations, and Rochester Industrial Insulation.
Meissner's counsel contended that Ridge Construction knew that asbestos-containing fireproofing material was being used at the Kodak Park site, that the site was being polluted by asbestos, and that asbestos was dangerous, but that the company did not provide warnings that disclosed the danger.
The jury found that Ridge Construction was liable for Meissner's mesothelioma, and it found that Niagara Insulations and Rochester Industrial Insulation were not liable. The jury assigned 80 percent of the liability to Ridge Construction and the remaining liability to nonparties: W. R. Grace was assigned 10 percent of the liability; Johns Manville was assigned five percent of the liability; and U.S. Gypsum was assigned five percent of the liability.
The jury found that damages to Mr. Meissner and his wife totaled $8 million and that Ridge Construction was responsible for 80 percent, or $6.4 million, of that amount.
Editors Note: In March of 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court issued an opinion on asbestos and mesothelioma, deciding in a 6-3 decision that manufacturers can be held liable, and have a duty to warn if:
- the manufacturer requires the asbestos-containing part to be added,
- the manufacturer knows that the part is dangerous,
- the manufacturer has no reason to believe that users would be aware of the risk.
That case is Air & Liquid Sys. Corp. v. Devries, 139 S. Ct. 986.
See the full detailed report from our ALM partner, VerdictSearch.com.
Click here for free trial access to more than 200,000 cases.