A Newport News, VA jury decided last month that two asbestos product suppliers, John Crane, Inc. and Garlock Sealing Technologies, were responsible for the illness and death of Robert Hardick. Robert served in the United States Navy between the 1950′s and the 1970′s, working both on seagoing ships and onshore in shipyard facilities. He was exposed to various forms of asbestos dust while going about his day to day duties, dust which later caused him to develop the malignant tumors that would take his life.
Asbestos has been linked to mesothelioma, the disease that killed Robert Hardick, as well as lung cancer, asbestosis, and other dangerous diseases. Mesothelioma, indicated by a cancer of the soft tissue encasing the lungs called the mesothelium, is an aggressive and invariably terminal disease. While it can take anywhere from years to decades to fully develop, once it’s diagnosable the prognosis is always grim. Most people diagnosed with mesothelioma aren’t expected to live longer than six month to a year.
These days there are strict rules and regulations regarding the safe handling and disposal of asbestos containing products, but that hasn’t always been the case. Throughout much of twentieth century asbestos contamination was a commonplace working condition, in spite of the fact that suppliers were aware of its dangerous properties. The substance’s importance to various industries, wide availability, ease of fabrication and profitability made many asbestos miners and asbestos product manufacturers slow or unwilling to take measures to protect workers and consumers.
Garlock Sealing Technologies agreed to settle out of court for an unknown amount, but John Crane, Inc. chose fight and is now responsible for one half of the total damages determined by the jury, about $2.99 million.
The court’s decision in favor of Diane Hardick, the late Robert Hardick’s widow, in spite of Robert’s exposure to the substance having occurred decades ago and even his death being more than a year in the past demonstrates a rising tendency of success in litigation against big asbestos companies.
