Page Updated enero 1, 2026

Jury Awards $25 Million Verdict to Mesothelioma Victim and His Wife

Página revisada y editada por

Abogado de mesotelioma Paul Danziger

A California man afflicted with malignant testicular mesotelioma has won his lawsuit, taking home $25 million for himself and his wife. Houshang and Soraya Sabetian filed suit against several companies, charging them with negligently exposing him to asbestos when he worked at Iranian oil refineries between 1959 and 1979 and leading to his eventual diagnosis with testicular mesothelioma.

Asbestos at Iranian Oil Refineries Blamed for Mesothelioma Diagnosis

Though most mesothelioma lawsuits heard in the United States name American companies as defendants, Mr. Sabetian named both Fluor Enterprises Inc. and Middle East Fluor for his illness, accusing them of having used asbestos-containing products in the construction of their Iranian refinery units despite their knowledge that the material could cause cancer.

According to testimony in the mesothelioma lawsuit, the company had asbestos insulation left over from a previous project. Thought they knew that their leftover material was illegal to use in the United States, they chose to maximize their profit by sending the carcinogenic material to Iran for use in the project that Mr. Sabetian would eventually work on, acting with “conscious disregard for the health and safety of others” and putting him at risk and eventually leading to his diagnosis.

Jury Awards Millions to Mesothelioma Victim and His Wife

Though the Los Angeles jury also attributed 20 percent of the responsibility for Mr. Sabetian’s mesothelioma to the National Iranian Oil Co., they decided that he himself was not negligent and did not contribute to his own illness. Their decision awarded Mr. Sabetian $14 million for past and future pain and suffering and provided his wife $11 million in recognition of her loss of love and companionship.

Speaking of the wrongs done to Mr. Sabetian, a family representative said that Fluor had put profits ahead of people, saying, “This case represents the latest in a long line of Iranian Refinery workers fallen victim to Fluor’s irresponsible conduct overseas.”

This verdict underscores that companies headquartered or operating in the United States may still be held accountable for exposición al amianto that occurs overseas when evidence shows conscious disregard for worker safety. Courts and juries continue to reject the notion that exporting hazardous materials to foreign worksites absolves corporations of responsibility. From a legal standpoint, cases like this reinforce that decisions made at the corporate level, including where and how asbestos-containing materials are used, can form the basis for liability regardless of geography. For workers exposed outside the U.S., this ruling affirms that justice and compensation may still be available through American courts.