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.