Jurisdiction: Superior Court of Connecticut, Judicial District of Bridgeport at Bridgeport
Decedent Nicolas Barone was diagnosed with mesothelioma in May 2022. His surviving spouse, Kathryn Barone (plaintiff)brought suit in September 2023, following her husband’s death in June of that year. Plaintiff’s third amended complaint alleged the cause of plaintiff’s mesothelioma was asbestos exposure from talc supplied by defendant International Talc Company and its successor, Vanderbilt Minerals LLC. After a four-week trial, the jury reached a unanimous verdict and found Vanderbilt liable for a total of $15 million in compensatory damages. The jury also found plaintiff was entitled to punitive damages from Vanderbilt.
After accepting the jury’s verdict, the court directed the parties to file post-trial motions and briefs concerning the amount of punitive damages. Plaintiff sought the maximum amount permissible by Connecticut Gen. Stat. § 52-240b. Plaintiff argued that the jury found Vanderbilt’s conduct reckless, intentional, and or malicious; that it was extremely reprehensible, and concealed and ignored the presence of potent carcinogens in its product. Further, plaintiff contended said products resulted in the decedent’s development of aggressive and incurable cancer. Finally, plaintiff alleged Vanderbilt was motivated by profit and the decedent’s suffering was immense, resulting in an agonizing death. Consequently, plaintiff argued the 2:1 ration of punitive to compensatory damages was consistent with precedent in the state and that a $30 million punitive damage award would not cause Vanderbilt’s financial ruin.
Vanderbilt requested the court deny plaintiff’s request for $30 million and award no punitive damages as an initial matter. Vanderbilt argued that it did not engage in reckless conduct and claimed the applicable factors weighed against any award for punitive damages.
In Connecticut, the trial courts have the exclusive authority to determine damages when the trier-of-fact has determined punitive damages shall be awarded. Conn. Gen. Stat. § 52-240b; Bifolck v. Philip Morris, Inc., 324 Conn. 402, 450, 152 A.3d 1183 (2016). The Connecticut Supreme Court has directed courts to award damages according to the critical factors determined in Exxon v. Baker, 554 U.S 471 (2008). Accordingly, the Exxon factors include:
- The degrees of relative blameworthiness, i.e., whether the defendant’s conduct was reckless or malicious;
- Whether the defendant’s [a]ction was taken or omitted in order to augment profit;
- Whether the wrongdoing was hard to detect;
- Whether the injury and compensatory damages were small, providing a law incentive to bring the action; and
- Whether the award will deter the defendant and others from similar conduct, without financially destroying the defendant.
Exxon, 554 U.S. at 454.
In addition, the courts in Connecticut also consider the Ulbrich factors established by the United States Supreme Court in State Farm Mut. Auto Ins. Co. v. Campbell, which examine:
- The degree of reprehensibility of the defendant’s misconduct;
- The disparity between the actual or potential harm suffered by the plaintiff and the punitive damages award; and
- The difference between the punitive damages awarded…and the civil penalties authorized or imposed in comparable cases.
Ulbrich, 310 Conn. at 455, 538 U.S. 408 (2003).
Taking these factors into account, the court determined punitive damages of $7.5 million was appropriate for this case.
In doing so, it examined evidence such as the fact Vanderbilt continued to mine and produce asbestos-containing materials even after the hazards of asbestos were known. It also found Vanderbilt to be a sophisticated business and “its conduct during all relevant periods was clearly intentional.” Among other factors, the court also found the harm the decedent and the plaintiff endured was and is significant. It stated the defendant was aware of the painful and fatal characteristics of mesothelioma but continued to mine and sell its products “with a reckless disregard to the safety” of its product users. In addition, the court found an award of punitive damages would not financially ruin Vanderbilt.
As such, the court awarded punitive damages in the amount of $7.5 million to plaintiff.
Read the full decision here.