New York Asbestos Litigation Judge Permits Mesothelioma Lawsuit to Move Forward
A mesothelioma lawsuit that saw a longtime employee of an air conditioner contractor sue the manufacturer of commercial cooling towers he worked on will be heard by a jury, despite the efforts of the defendant to stop the case in its tracks. When the case was originally filed by Charles Vincent against Baltimore Aircoil Company (BAC), accusing the company of negligence in having exposed him to asbestos in their products, the company denied his claim and filed a motion for summary judgment base on a lack of product identification. The company argued that the parts named in Mr. Vincent’s claims did not contain asbestos. The judge in the case denied their motion, indicating that the “facts and conditions from which BAC’s liability may be reasonably inferred’ was a question of credibility to be considered by a jury.
Lifetime of Working on Air Conditioning Equipment Blamed for Malignant Mesothelioma
Mr. Vincent provided testimony about his career exposure to asbestos shortly after being diagnosed with malignant pleural mesothelioma in late 2018. In testimony provided in both March and again in October of 2019, he spoke of having been hired by an air conditioning contractor when he was in seventh or eighth grade and continuing to work for that company’s for decades.
Though he first worked in the office, as he got older and graduated from high school he began working as a mechanic and then eventually as a supervisor in the field through the 1980s. He specifically pointed to work on BAC cooling towers at the Squibb Building in New York City, at the World Trade Center and at a residence at Rockefeller University.
Despite Detailed Testimony, Asbestos Company Argues Against Liability
Mr. Vincent’s testimony provided significant details about the equipment he worked on and the asbestos that contaminated it, but despite this BAC argued small points to attempt to call his testimony into question. Though the company asked that his claims be dismissed, the judge denied their motion, pointing out that summary judgment could not be granted simply on the basis of gaps in a plaintiff’s proof. The case will proceed to trial to be heard by a jury.
There are so many challenges that make life more difficult for those diagnosed with malignant mesothelioma, but the Patient Advocates at Mesothelioma.net have information that can make your life easier. Contact us today at 1-800-692-8608.FREE Mesothelioma Packet