Confidential
Settlement – $15,000Judge
Court
San Francisco Superior
Attorneys
Plaintiff
Raymond P. Boucher
(Boucher LLP)
Defendant
John R. Brydon
(Demler, Armstrong & Rowland LLP)
Experts
Plaintiff
Samuel P. Hammar
(medical)
Barry R. Horn M.D.
(medical)
Barry Ben-Zion Ph.D.
(technical)
Charles W. Ay
(technical)
Allan H. Smith
(medical)
Defendant
Elliott Hinkes
(medical)
Richard Webb
(medical)
Facts
The plaintiff husband, an 82-year-old retired _____________ (former occupation), claimed asbestos exposure in the shipyard during World War II, at refineries when the insulation was used and while working with asbestos/cement transite pipe. On /19, the plaintiff was diagnosed with lung cancer. A tissue biopsy was found numerous asbestos bodies in tissue, surgical removal of cancer occurred. The plaintiffs husband and wife, brought this action against the defendants, the manufacturer of the _________ (Owens Corning's/role???) and the plaintiff husband's former employer (Kubota??), based on product liability, failure to warn, design defect and loss of consortium theories of recovery.
Settlement Discussions
The plaintiffs made a C.C.P. º998 settlement demand for $32,500, reduced to $25,000 raised to $60,000. The defendants made an initial settlement (combined???) offer of $20,000.
Specials in Evidence
$50,000 $80,000 $50,000
Injuries
The plaintiff husband alleged he suffered lung cancer, requiring surgery. The plaintiff wife alleged she suffered loss of consortium.
Other Information
The settlement was reached approximately ____ years and _____ months after the case was filed. A settlement conference/arbitration/mediation was held on ___/___/1996 before ____________ (name) of ___________ (affiliation or court) resulting in ______________ . The jury was also found that no harm was suffered before June 3, 1986. Defendant pipe manufacturer filed a motion to recover costs. The plaintiff pathologist expert testified that the plaintiff's lung sample contained too many asbestos bodies to count. Per the plaintiff, all doctors confirmed that asbestos causes cancer. The pulmonologist stated smoking history was too remote to be cause and 50/50 chance that cancer would recur. The defendant expert testimony stated that there was not enough exposure to asbestos to be a cause of cancer; that smoking was most likely cause; that the plaintiff has severe emphysema from smoking and that the plaintiff more likely to pass away from some other cause than cancer of lungs. The experts disputed whether the lung cancer was likely to recur and whether it will be terminal. Settlement offsets exceeded $100,000 and exceeded the jury award.
Deliberation
5+ days
Poll
12-0
Length
5 weeks
For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:
Email
jeremy@reprintpros.com
for prices.
Direct dial: 949-702-5390