Citing Cringe-Invoking Testimony, Louisiana Judge Orders New Mesothelioma Trial
Vita Chenet’s family was close to getting justice following her 2019 mesothelioma death when something unexpected occurred: An expert witness providing testimony for the defendant, Colgate-Palmolive, introduced new information that confused the jury and led to them deciding in favor of the talc company. Calling what the witness had done “entirely improper,” the judge ordered a new trial.
Expert Witness Improperly Offers Alternative Theory for Mesothelioma Death
The mesothelioma trial, which was heard in Louisiana’s Orleans Parish Civil District, saw Colgate-Palmolive accused of negligence in failing to warn of asbestos in its Cashmere Bouquet talcum powder product. The jury had heard significant testimony about the victim’s lifelong use of the product and the connection between it and her asbestos-related disease when experienced expert witness Dr. Richard Attanoos was called to the stand.
Dr. Attanoos is a pathologist who has been called on for expert witness testimony by mesothelioma defendants for years. For this trial, he answered a question from Ms. Chenet’s family’s attorney by introducing entirely new information that the judge agreed had confused the jury and was inappropriate: He spoke of his certainty that the woman’s father had died of an asbestos-related disease following having worked in contaminated shipyards during World War II, suggesting that it was secondary childhood exposure to asbestos that was responsible for her death.
Unexpected Testimony Leads to Order for Retrial
Though Colgate-Palmolive had countered the family’s claim by suggesting that the mesothelioma diagnosis was a result of having grown up in the shipyard’s asbestos-contaminated shipyard, no mention had been made of her father’s death before the pathologist volunteered the information. Following this, the jury decided in favor of the talc company, and the victim’s family argued that a new trial was needed because the witness had sabotaged the trial by introducing information that had confused the jury. Judge Kern Reese agreed.
In handing down his decision, the judge said that the unsolicited testimony in the mesothelioma trial had shocked him enough to make him cringe and had left him “unequivocally floored.” He described it as having been “unsolicited, it was a new opinion, it was never previously disclosed in any expert report or deposition.” He ordered that a new trial be held.
Paquete de compensación financiera GRATUITO
- Información sobre despachos de abogados que recuperarán su INDEMNIZACIÓN MÁS ALTA
- Aprenda cómo cobrar en 90 días
- Solicite su parte de $30 mil millones en fondos fiduciarios
