Over the course of his long career as an oil burner serviceman for Madison Fuel Oil Company, Michael F. Brady was exposed to many asbestos-contaminated parts, and his family blames that exposure for his death from malignant mesothelioma in 2021. Burnham LLC was among the many companies the family named in their personal injury claim. Though the company filed a motion for partial summary judgment to specifically dismiss a claim for punitive damages, the judge sitting in the case denied their petition and will allow the claim to move forward in its entirety.
Family Seeks Punitive Damages in Mesothelioma Death
Whether in a mesothelioma lawsuit or any other type of personal injury claim, punitive damages are sought when the injured party claims that the defendants’ conduct rises to the level of egregious and morally culpable conduct. Those who are found guilty of this type of conduct pay both the plaintiffs’ economic damages and an additional sum that is meant to serve as both punishment and a warning against future similar conduct.
In the case involving Mr. Brady’s mesothelioma death, the family asserts that the company’s failure to warn of the dangers of asbestos in its products rises to the level that warrants punitive damages being assigned. In response, the company argued that because the asbestos exposure they contend he suffered was under the amount specified by the Occupational Safety and Health Act, the punitive damages claim is not warranted.
Judge Denies Motion to Dismiss Punitive Damages Claim in Mesothelioma Lawsuit
In considering arguments from both the mesothelioma victim’s family and the boiler manufacturer, Justice Adam Silvera of the Supreme Court of New York noted that the expert witness testimony submitted by Dr. William Longo on behalf of the defense was insufficient to support their petition, in part because Dr. Longo admitted that he had never conducted any studies on a Burnham boiler and therefore had no certainty as to the amount of exposure he would have experienced.
Combining the insufficiency of that testimony with the direct testimony of Burnham’s corporate representative, who admitted that Burnham had never placed a warning on its burners regarding the dangers of asbestos up until 1982, the judge ruled that the company had failed to demonstrate that punitive damages were not warranted, and therefore the claim will remain part of the family’s suit.
If you or someone you love has been a victim of asbestos exposure, the Patient Advocates at Mesothelioma.net can help you navigate the many challenges that lie ahead. For more information, contact us today at 1-800-692-8608.
