Mesothelioma Litigants See Decades of Confusion and Delayed Litigation Ended by Judge’s Decision

There are so many mesothelioma and asbestos lawsuits filed in the city of New York that, years ago, the city established a dedicated court, the New York City Asbestos Litigation Court, or NYCAL. Recently, Justice Adam Silvera of that court ended years of confusion and frustration for victims by lifting a decades-long deferral of punitive damages hearings.

1996 Deferral of Punitive Damages in Mesothelioma Claims

Malignant mesothelioma is a rare form of cancer that is caused by exposure to asbestos. Many of the companies that exposed victims to this toxic material were aware of its dangers, and have been successfully sued for negligence. They have been required to pay victims significant sums in compensation for their economic damages.

But many mesothelioma victims want to go further with their quest for justice. They want to let juries decide whether the companies should also have to pay them as punishment additional sums for their willful disregard for their health and their lives. This type of claim seeks what are known as punitive damages, and requires its own, dedicated hearing of facts. In 1996, victims in New York who had won monetary damages learned that the courts were going to indefinitely defer their right to pursue this type of claim.

Punitive Damages in Mesothelioma Claims Deferred for Multiple Reasons

At the time, the NYCAL court indicated that there were several reasons for putting off mesothelioma victims’ ability to file punitive damages claims. They noted that so much time had elapsed between the wrongdoing by the companies and the damages the victims had suffered that the punishment could be meaningless, and that payment of punitive damages could so deplete the resources of the companies that they might be unable to compensate future victims.

Since that time, multiple mesothelioma victims have attempted to have the deferral lifted, and a variety of rulings have attempted to address or mediate the issue. Each time, the asbestos companies have objected and the deferral has been put back in place. This time, Justice Silvera denied those objections, noting that the victims have been denied their rights and that the asbestos companies had failed to prove why they should not be subject to the same type of punitive damages risk as companies in any other type of case. The victims will now be able to pursue their long-awaited justice.