Document xa31nMN8nnZoLx8nyzjmo2xy

FILE NAME Allied Signal Bendix ASB DATE 1990 May 1 DOC ASB092 DOCUMENT DESCRIPTION Newspaper Article - Asbestos Victims Win Case fran te,t te Ps} ei e _ ~y 3 eet THE tx en ne oa 83, TIMES UNION ; * E- Tuesday i fev Tuesday - a May 1 1990 5/1/905/1/90 Asbestos Asbestos To J. COXETER K. MACON > 4h T. RANCOUR victims ' DR PAUL . K WAINWRIGHT WAINWRIGHT win case -, K. MILLER Firm must pay | TROY HAS SEVERAL more than 1M By John Caher Staff writer ASBESTOSIS AND ONE Mesoth CASE Pending in WORKERS ALBANY - A federal court jury Monday evening awarded a total of 1,167,159 to two area residents who suffered health problems because to their exposure to asbestos e . In two cases tried jointly before U.S. District Judge Con G. Cholakis the jury found Celotex Corp. one of the two companies on trial liable for damages to the estate of Frank Gambacorta of Albany and to Charles William Hamilton Hanna- croix Greene County COMPENSCOMPAENSATIOTN COIMPEONSATNION THERE MAY BE MEDIA INQUIRIES ETC. AS A RESULT OF THIS ARTICLE WOULD APPRECIATE COMMENTS & SUGGESTIONS The Gambacorta estate was awarded 994,326 and Hamilton and RELATIVE TO MEDIA his wife Elizabeth were awarded 172,833 The jury said the other firm on trial Carey Canada Inc. was not.- liable Suits against several other 31 firms were settled prior to trial for -. undisclosed amounts ; In the Gambacorta case the aa widow Mary Gambacorta had sa sought 4.5 million alleging that Gambacorta suffered from asbesto- sis and mesothelioma because he worked with asbestos between 1947 and 1987 as an insulation installer Gambacorta died in 1987 at 60 : ~ The jury found damages totaling ETC. cc J. BATEMAN J. FOUNTAIN FOUNTAIN J. PATEL G. GUBA V. KEIM va H. Scott 2,840,933 but apportioned percent of the liability Celotex Corp. only 35 on the In the Hamilton case the panel percent computed damages totaling 864,166 2te and set Celotex's responsibility at 20 - - 20 Rey Hamilton worked as an installer e.ats from 1945 to 1981 when he 3 i was disabled with asbestosis at 56 H Pe The jury was charged with deter- BR mining a number of = complicated 3 issues beyond the obvious questions of whether the plaintiffs were in- jured and whether their injuries resulted because the defendants ne- glected to warn them of the hazards of asbestos exposure -s Cholakis also directed the panel to 7 determine which of a total of nine = companies were also negligent and ~ to apportion liability appropriately 3: He also told the jury to determine whether Hamilton was at all respon- # sible for his own injuries and if so to what extent a oe Hamilton although testimony in- =: dicated that he had at some point 7 been warned to stop working with _ asbestos was not found contributori- ly negligent by the four women and two men on the jury On Monday afternoon the panel which began deliberating Friday but were excused over the weekend requested additional information on how damages should be awarded A verdict returned around 5:30 p.m. was based solely on compensatory damages The jury did not assess punitive damages which are designed to punish a wrongdoer and deter simi- lar conduct . In a similar case last summer a federal jury in Albany awarded nearly 3 million in compensatory damages to Raymond and Janet Walters of 155 Lincoln Ave. That 1 judgment against Celotex and Carey Canada is currently under appeal State and federal courts have been bombarded with asbestos claims since the state Legislature in 1986 allowed victims of several hazard- ous substances - including asbestos - to sue for damages even though the statute of limitations had long since expired The rationale for the ~ | Toxic Tort Act of 1986 was that victims of some products such as asbestos frequently don't exhibit symptoms for up to 20 years Cholakis currently has about 550 asbestos cases pending d WCK008480