Asbestos-Contaminated Wallboard Blamed for Woman’s Mesothelioma Death

Patricia Ann Dumas Jackson was constantly exposed to asbestos as a child, and it is that exposure that her family blames for her death from malignant mesothelioma. After diligent research they identified the companies whose products she was exposed to, and filed suits seeking compensation for the damages that she suffered. Though most agreed to settle before moving to litigation, Hopeman Brothers Inc. refused, arguing that the case against them should be dismissed. A Louisiana court disagreed, allowing the case to move forward.

Mesothelioma Traced to Father’s Shipyard Exposure to Asbestos

According to testimony presented in the mesothelioma lawsuit, Mrs. Jackson’s father O’Neal Dumas had worked at the Avondale Shipyard when she was a child. His work included cleaning up dust left behind after Hopeman’s asbestos-contaminated wallboard was cut up for installation on vessels. That left his clothing, which Patricia was responsible for laundering each night, covered with asbestos dust and fibers.

The family blamed second-hand exposure to asbestos from Hopeman’s product for her malignant mesothelioma, describing her daily process of shaking out her father’s dust-covered clothes, washing them, and then sweeping up the dust left behind on the floor. But the company’s attorneys pushed back against this assertion, claiming that though their wallboard products did contain asbestos, they were not cut or installed until the ship had launched – and Mr. Dumas had never worked onboard the ships.

Evidence Contradicts Asbestos Company’s Arguments

While the asbestos company’s attorneys argued that the family’s claim included details that were “wrong place, wrong time” and that they could not be responsible for Mrs. Jackson’s mesothelioma, witnesses contradicted their arguments. Many people who had worked at Wet Dock No. 2 at the same time that Mr. Dumas had been employed testified that wallboard cut pre-launch, and that the dust that was generated covered everybody who came near.

The judges in the case indicated that because the mesothelioma victim’s family had raised genuine issues of material fact, the case needed to be heard by a jury. The family will continue on their quest for justice.