Page Updated December 29, 2025

Judge Cites Rules of Evidence in Ruling for Mesothelioma Victim

Page Reviewed and Edited by

Mesothelioma Attorney Paul Danziger

After 81-year-old Anastasios E. Katechis died of malignant mesothelioma, his widow Agathi filed a personal injury claim against Allied Building Products Corporations, as well as several other companies that she blamed for having exposed him to asbestos. Though Allied tried to have the case against them dismissed based on decades-old testimony, the judge hearing the case denied their request, noting that it was inadmissible under the law.

Testimony from Company’s Representative Cited Against Mesothelioma Claim

Though mesothelioma quickly claimed Mr. Katechis’ life, before his death he provided extensive testimony about his exposure to asbestos. He testified that when he’d worked as a painter for Mamais Construction between 1967 and 1970, he’d used asbestos-contaminated joint compound. He recalled seeing the product delivered and provided by Allied and three other companies.

In response to the mesothelioma victim’s testimony, the company’s vice president/corporate vice president George Jones testified that Allied had never used joint compound, and asserted that
Allied had never sold, distributed, manufactured or otherwise offered it at the time that Mr. Katechis worked for Mamais. Much of his testimony was based on testimony provided by a company representative given in another case that had been heard 21 years earlier. Allied asked for the case to be dismissed based on this old testimony.

Judge Rules Testimony Inadmissible in Mesothelioma Claim

In reviewing the testimony of both the mesothelioma victim and that submitted by Allied from their former executive, Justice Adam Silvera of the Supreme Court of New York County noted that Mr. Jones’ assertions were based on testimony provided 21 years earlier by a person who “at the time the testimony was given was an officer, director, member, employee or managing or authorized agent” of the company, and that under New York law was inadmissible as evidence. 

The company’s motion to dismiss the mesothelioma claim against them was denied and Mrs. Katechis’ case will move forward.

This decision highlights a critical evidentiary barrier asbestos defendants often ignore: outdated, secondhand corporate testimony cannot override direct exposure evidence. Courts require admissible, competent proof that addresses the specific time period and products at issue, not generalized denials pulled from decades-old litigation. By rejecting Allied’s attempt to rely on stale testimony, the court reinforced that mesothelioma cases must be decided on reliable, contemporaneous evidence. For victims and their families, this ruling confirms that firsthand work history and product identification remain powerful proof, even when corporate records are incomplete or strategically selective.