Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

Million Dollar Awards Can Amount to Much Less

By ALM Staff | Law Journal Newsletters |
September 28, 2006

In August, a San Francisco Superior Court jury awarded $10.3 million in economic and non-economic damages in an asbestos case brought by a 60-year-old man allegedly suffering from mesothelioma. Barnes v. Thorpe Insulation Co., 446017. It may be one of California's 10 largest compensatory verdicts for asbestos cases in the last 15 years.

Unfortunately for the plaintiff, George Barnes, even in the best scenario, however, he will not collect anywhere near that amount. The jury only attributed 15% of the harm to Thorpe Insulation Co., the lone named defendant at trial. By the time the judge makes a final ruling on the company's liability, Barnes will probably only be entitled to about $2.3 million from Thorpe. Furthermore, Thorpe may not have the assets to pay; the plaintiff's law firm, San Francisco's Levin Simes Kaiser & Gornick, is now bracing to go to battle against the insulation company's insurers over coverage.

The jury identified $9 million in non-economic damages for physical pain or mental suffering in its special verdict. The rest, all economic damages, included $210,000 for medical bills, $861,083 for past and future income, and $178,974 for the loss of Barnes' services around his family's 2-acre property. It found his wife's loss of consortium worth another $100,000. There were no punitive damages. The jury attributed 15% of Barnes' harm to Thorpe, 5% to the plaintiff himself, 55% to his former employer, the U.S. Navy, and 25% to other manufacturers and distributors. Barnes did settle with several other defendants, but the details were confidential.

This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only

  • Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
  • Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
  • Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts

For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473

Read These Next
The Article 8 Opt In Image

The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.

Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws Image

This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.

Legal Possession: What Does It Mean? Image

Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.

Warehouse Liability: Know Before You Stow! Image

As consumers continue to shift purchasing and consumption habits in the aftermath of the pandemic, manufacturers are increasingly reliant on third-party logistics and warehousing to ensure their products timely reach the market.

Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin Image

With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.