On March 15, 2017, Romeo Maffei, then 60 years old, underwent an MRI of his brain after he’d noticed an alarming change in his health – he was mumbling, slurring and couldn’t stand up. He was diagnosed with stage four lung cancer.
Mr. Maffei sued Burnham LLC, claiming that it, among other companies, negligently manufactured and sold products such as boilers that contained asbestos, a deadly toxic, failed to adequately warn about the dangers of the asbestos containing products and that his exposure to asbestos from his work as a construction laborer demolishing boilers for many years caused his cancer.
In 2023, a Manhattan jury agreed with plaintiff and awarded him pain and suffering damages in the sum of $26,500,000 ($6,600,000 past – 6.5 years, $19,900,000 future – 17.5 years). Both the liability and damages verdicts were affirmed in Maffei v. A.O. Smith Water Products (1st Dept. 2025).
Here are the injury details:
- numerous invasive and painful procedures including a bronchoscopy, two gamma knife radiosurgeries (in which his skull was drilled into without anesthesia) and a major lung resection
- extensive radiation and chemotherapy
- continuing pain, headaches and abdominal discomfort requiring several medications including narcotics
The jury also awarded and the appellate court sustained loss of consortium damages for plaintiff’s wife in the sum of $5,000,000 ($2,000,000 past, $3,000,00 future) and punitive damages in the sum of $6,500,000.
Plaintiff had been a heavy cigarette smoker for many years and the defense argued that this was the sole cause of his lung cancer, not asbestos. Plaintiff argued that smoking in combination with asbestos exposure increases a person’s risk of developing lung cancer. The jury found that plaintiff’s smoking was a substantial factor in causing his lung cancer and apportioned fault 15% to plaintiff and 85% to the defendant.
The defense also argued, alternatively, that because plaintiff’s lung cancer had been in remission since 2020 any award for future pain and suffering should be minimal. Plaintiff countered that he still suffered from the cancer and treatment that left him always in pain, disabled, extremely anxious and fearful that the cancer will recur and cause his death.