Beginning in 1950, plaintiff Don Lee, 25, a concrete contractor, was allegedly exposed to Riverside Gun Plastic Cement, an exterior stucco product that contained asbestos and was manufactured by Amcord Inc., while he delivered concrete to new housing tracts in southern California. Lee claimed he was continually exposed to Amcord’s asbestos-containing product until 1980. In 2011, Lee was diagnosed with asbestosis, a permanent scarring of the lungs. Lee sued Amcord and other manufacturers of asbestos-containing products. However, several of the defendants either settled or were let out of the case, leaving Amcord as the sole defendant at trial. Thus, Lee alleged that Amcord was negligent, and strictly liable for its product’s defects and for failing to warn of its product’s hazards. Plaintiff’s counsel contended that Lee’s exposure to asbestos from Riverside Gun Plastic Cement and from products of others companies, caused or contributed to the development of his asbestosis. Lee’s state-of-the-art expert testified that there were numerous articles on the danger of asbestos in the early 1900’s. In addition, the plaintiff’s industrial hygiene expert testified about scientific tests for the presence of asbestos in the air and permissible exposure limits under the Occupational Safety and Health Administration. Amcord’s counsel contended that Lee’s bystander exposure was merely of a small amount of airborne chrysotile asbestos fibers. Counsel also contended that Lee was exposed to other asbestos products during his service as a boiler tender aboard a Navy ship and was significantly exposed to various joint compounds in new homes for over 20 years. Counsel argued that exposure to these and other products, some of which contained up to 90 percent asbestos, was more likely to have caused Lee’s condition. The defense’s expert in industrial hygiene described Amcord’s testing for airborne fibers and opined that Lee could not have been exposed to anything greater than background levels from the company’s product. The defense’s expert in naval engineering and Navy ship construction described the significant exposure to asbestos Lee would have had while serving in the Navy as a boiler tender. In addition, the defense’s expert in home construction procedures testified as to the sequencing of building homes, showing that Lee could not have been exposed to gun plastic cement in the air, since the pouring-concrete phase would not have been at the same time as the alleged exposures., In 2011, Lee was diagnosed with asbestosis. His condition was determined to be serious, with an ILO International Classification of Radiographs of Pneumoconioses “B” read of 3 out of 3, the maximum, with calcified pleural plaques. Lee, age 89 at the time of trial, a widower and a retired concrete contractor, uses a portable oxygen system and a walker. The plaintiff’s expert pulmonologist testified about the presence of asbestosis in Lee’s lung, and the plaintiff’s economics expert testified as to Lee’s loss of pension and household services. Thus, Lee sought recovery of past and future medical costs, damages for his loss of pension and household services, and damages for his pain and suffering. Lee also sought recovery of punitive damages against Amcord. The defense’s pulmonary medicine expert opined that Lee’s condition is dose-and-duration-dependent, while the defense’s cardiology expert opined that Lee has a serious cardiac condition that will shorten his life. The defense’s economics expert testified as to Lee’s alleged loss of household services and to the total value of Lee’s economic claim.