One of the most interesting cases that I tried to verdict and to defense verdict was Nunez v. Special Electric. The plaintiff Mr. Nunez worked in the Jontz Manville transite plant in southern California, actually making asbestos containing products. My client Special Electric distributed raw chrysotile asbestos. The defense in that case was not that the asbestos was safe rather the defense was that the asbestos was inherently dangerous. So in California we have the consumer expectation test which asks whether an ordinary consumer would believe a product was safe or not. Our defense was that an ordinary consumer would not believe that raw chrysotile asbestos was safe. In other words, they would know it’s dangerous. And the jury believed, in fact, that Mr. Nunez knew or should have known that the asbestos that he was working with was in fact dangerous.

A second case that I tried to verdict was a case called Moran v. Foster Wheeler. Mr. Moran was a career refractory salesman. Refractories are products like bricks and block that at some point in time continued asbestos. They’re used as heat insulators in or outside of heat exchange vessels like for example, boilers. In this particular case, Mr. Moran alleged that my client should have warned him about the asbestos in the products that he was selling and using. We took the position that Mr. Moran was a sophisticated user under California law. That is based on his knowledge, training, education, and experience he should have known the hazards of the products that he was working with and around.

And the jury sided with us in fact and found Mr. Moran should have known about the hazards of asbestos in the products that he was selling.