Products Liability Law Reporter

James Jackson worked at a Firestone tire plant in Decatur, Ill., from approximately 1965 to 1996. His son, Thomas Jackson, lived at home for six years during this period and returned home sporadically thereafter. When Thomas was in his 60s, he was diagnosed as having peritoneal mesothelioma. He underwent one round of chemotherapy and died approximately five weeks after his diagnosis. Thomas, 64, had been the founder of a wealth management company and earned a seven-figure salary at the time of his death. He is survived by his wife, to whom he had been married 43 years.

Thomas’s wife sued Bridgestone Americas Tire Operations and various talc suppliers, alleging negligence. The plaintiff asserted that Thomas had been exposed to asbestos dust present on his father’s work clothes, which was transferred to the family’s home and vehicle. The plaintiff claimed James Jackson should have been warned of the dangers of asbestos in the talc used at his workplace to keep tires and rubber components from sticking together. Suit also alleged he should have been advised of the potential for take-home asbestos exposure.

The plaintiff settled confidentially with the talc suppliers before trial. The jury awarded $30 million, including $5.25 million in economic damages.

Citation: Jackson v. A.W. Chesterton Co., No. 19L9793 (Ill. Cir. Ct. Cook Cnty. Dec. 21, 2023).

Plaintiff counsel: AAJ members Robert Cooney Jr. and Michael Cooney, both of Chicago; and AAJ member Benjamin Braly and Sam Iola, both of Dallas.

Plaintiff experts: Arthur Frank, occupational medicine, Philadelphia; and Daniel Condon, economic loss, River Forest, Ill.

Defense experts: Dennis Paustenbach, industrial hygiene, Jackson, Wyo.; and Victor Roggli, pathology, Durham, N.C.

Comment: See also McWilliams v. A.O. Smith Water Prods. Co., 224 A.D.3d 597 (N.Y. App. Div. 2024). In this products liability action, a steamfitter alleged his frequent exposure to asbestos at work led to his mesothelioma diagnosis. A jury awarded $23 million. Affirming, the appellate court held, in part, that the trial court had properly declined to vacate the jury’s findings that gaskets and insulation manufactured by defendant Jenkins Bros. had caused the plaintiff’s mesothelioma and that the plaintiff had met his burden of establishing exposure to a substance that caused the claimed adverse health effect by presenting the testimony of an expert industrial hygienist and epidemiologist. Pierre A. Ratzki, New York City, represented the plaintiff.