Asbestos Company’s Appeal of $2.9 Million Mesothelioma Verdict Fails

After an Oregon jury awarded mesothelioma victim David Hoff $8.75 million in damages, the defendant, Kaiser Gypsum, was assigned 35% responsibility and ordered to pay $2.9 million. The company filed an appeal of the decision and the award. Nearly six years later, a court of appeals rejected their appeal and Mr. Hoff’s widow will be provided the compensation that she deserves.

Man’s Mesothelioma Blamed on Asbestos in Joint Compound

Kaiser Gypsum manufactured joint compound that contained asbestos, the carcinogenic mineral that cases malignant mesothelioma. As a result the company is frequently named in mesothelioma lawsuits. Mr. Hoff had worked with the product as a carpenter decades before his diagnosis. He had applied it to wallboard and then sanded it when it was dry. He blamed his illness on breathing in the asbestos fibers that became airborne during that process.

The jury in Mr. Hoff’s mesothelioma lawsuit was told about asbestos, and about the fact that the company had been aware of its dangers as early as 1965. After a three-and-a-half-week trial they found the company negligent and awarded Hoff $750,000 in compensation for his medical expenses and $4 million for his pain and suffering. They also awarded his wife Patricia $4 million for her emotional pain and for the loss she would eventually suffer upon his death.

Appeal of Mesothelioma Verdict Rejected by Court

Years after the mesothelioma damages were granted and Mr. Hoff had died, the Court of Appeals of Oregon reviewed Kaiser Gypsum’s motion to overturn the verdict or reduce the damages and rejected them. The company had asserted that the evidence submitted had been insufficient to have warranted the verdict. They also argued that the court had made a mistake by having permitted the compensation calculation and process to have been presented to the jury in the way that it was, but the judges noted that there had been ample opportunity for the issue to be raised at the time, and that the company had failed to do so. They rejected the request to lower the damages that had been awarded and allowed the verdict to stand.