For purposes of this article, the mesothelioma victim in this case will be referred to as A.F.
In a recent court case, a New York County Supreme Court judge denied Burnham LLC’s request to dismiss a punitive damages claim in a mesothelioma lawsuit. A.F., a former worker, was exposed to asbestos through Burnham boilers and other asbestos-contaminated equipment. A.F. and his wife filed a lawsuit seeking compensation for compensatory and punitive damages from Burnham LLC. The defendants filed a motion to dismiss the claim for punitive damages, but that motion was denied.
After suffering mesothelioma, a victim can file a personal injury lawsuit and seek compensatory damages, which aim to make up for direct losses. Compensatory damages include medical expenses, lost wages, and pain and suffering. Mesothelioma victims’ spouses can also seek compensation for loss of companionship and support. In a mesothelioma claim, victims and their families can also seek punitive damages. Unlike compensatory damages, punitive damages are meant to punish the defendant for particularly reckless or harmful behavior. These damages are intended to send a message to others and warn them against acting in the same manner as the defendant.
Burnham LLC did not take it well when A.F. and his wife included punitive damages in their claim. The defendant filed a motion asking the Supreme Court of New York to dismiss that claim. The company argued that A.F.’s asbestos exposure from their equipment was minimal and likely fell below the threshold limits set by OSHA. The defendant also pointed to the fact that it had never faced any workers’ compensation claims for asbestos-related illnesses.
In response to Burnham LLC’s arguments, A.F. presented evidence that the company knew about the risks of asbestos exposure but failed to warn users of its dangers. To support this argument, the victim pointed out that previous asbestos litigation revealed that, despite knowing about the risks of asbestos in their equipment, Burnham LLC had never warned of these dangers. This evidence showed that Burnham was negligent and prioritized profits over people’s safety.
The judge presiding over this case reviewed the standards required for a claim of punitive damages to be dismissed. The judge thoroughly reviewed the evidence presented by the claimant and defendant. Justice Suzanne Adams rejected Burnham LLC’s request to dismiss the punitive damages claim. She concluded that the defendant had failed to prove the punitive damages claim was unwarranted. According to the judge, a reasonable jury could find that Burnham’s decision to keep using its asbestos-containing equipment despite knowing about the dangers of asbestos amounted to reckless disregard for people’s safety. Justice Adams concluded that the question of whether punitive damages were warranted in this case needed to be answered by a jury.
Nationwide Mesothelioma Lawyers
If you or a loved one were diagnosed with mesothelioma, contact our office to speak to one of our experienced nationwide mesothelioma attorneys about your situation. Our office can help investigate your case and determine if compensation can be sought from negligent parties to help pay for your medical treatment and help you and your family live a more comfortable life.