Thursday, October 29, 2009

Third District Reverses $24,170,000.00 Asbestos Judgment Against Honeywell

In Honeywell International, Inc. v. Guilder (3D08-1747), the Third District reversed "judgment awarding Stephen Guilder (“Guilder”) and his children damages in the amount of $24,170,000.00, for injuries sustained from asbestos exposure."  You can read about the decision here.  The court framed the issues as follows:
On appeal, among others errors, Honeywell asserts the trial court erred in: (1) admitting the irrelevant, highly prejudicial letter; (2) excluding Fabre defendants from the verdict form; and (3) awarding Guilder’s children loss of parental consortium. Honeywell further asserts that it is entitled to a setoff reflecting the appropriate percentage of economic damages received from Guilder’s settlement with co-defendants.
On the other hand, Guilder contends that: (1) the letter was relevant, and not unduly prejudicial, or inflammatory; (2) the Fabre defendants were properly excluded from the verdict form; and (3) the loss of parental consortium award was proper. Guilder further contends that Honeywell is not entitled to setoff from any portion of the verdict. We agree with Honeywell.


Post a Comment