In August 2011, plaintiff Vincent Monaco, 63, a retired brick mason, was diagnosed with mesothelioma, which is an aggressive, incurable cancer that often stems from exposure to asbestos. Monaco had previously worked as a brick mason at Kaiser Steel in Fontana, as well as at numerous residential sites and commercial buildings throughout Southern California from 1969 throughout the 1990s. He claimed he developed mesothelioma due to his work-related exposure to asbestos-containing joint compounds. Monaco sued one of the manufacturers of the asbestos-containing joint compounds, Kaiser Gypsum Co. Inc., as well as several other industrial/commercial entities. Monaco alleged that Kaiser Gypsum defectively designed the joint compounds and failed to warn of the dangers of exposure to these compounds. All of the other defendants confidentially settled with Monaco prior to trial, with the exception of one other defendant, Kaiser Ventures LLC, which settled during jury selection. Thus, the matter proceeded to trial against Kaiser Gypsum only. Monaco claimed that during his employment at Kaiser Steel, he worked directly with asbestos-containing block and mortar insulation, and near other employees using asbestos-containing pipe insulation. He also claimed that during his employment at several residential homes and commercial shopping malls, he was a bystander to others working with asbestos-containing joint compounds. Plaintiff’s counsel contended that Kaiser Gypsum’s asbestos-containing joint compounds were defectively designed, and that the defendant failed to provide any safety/health warnings. Counsel presented evidence showing that knowledge of hazards from asbestos exposure dated back to 1898. Thus, plaintiff’s counsel argued that Kaiser Gypsum’s own internal documents, which dated back to 1965, acknowledged that inhalation of asbestos dust from any source can cause mesothelioma decades later. Kaiser Gypsum contended that Monaco was not exposed to its joint compounds. It further contended that if Monaco was exposed to asbestos, the exposure was too small to matter and contained a type of asbestos fiber that was safe., Monaco was diagnosed with mesothelioma in August 2011, which he alleged was a result of his exposure to asbestos. He subsequently treated with chemotherapy and pain medication. At trial, Monaco, his medical experts and his brother all testified to the anguish and pain that Monaco lives with. They also testified to the effect of chemotherapy on Monaco, the tremendous amount of pain medication he requires, and the serious limitations it puts on his mobility and his waking hours. In addition, they testified to Monaco’s prognosis of only having a few more months to live. Thus, Monaco claimed $86,000 in damages for his past medical costs. His counsel also asked the jury to award $50,000 for Monaco’s future medical costs, $11,326 for Monaco’s past loss of household services, $218,991 for Monaco’s future loss of household services, $112,911 for Monaco’s loss of social security, and an unspecified amount of damages for Monaco’s past and future pain and suffering. Kaiser Gypsum’s counsel did not dispute Monaco’s medical costs or loss of social security, but asserted that the plaintiff’s future loss of household services should be cut short because he is a single man.