Beginning in the mid-1950s, plaintiff’s decedent Donald Felton, started working at Ace Brake Supply, an automobile brake and clutch remanufacturing plant in Los Angeles. Felton worked on the assembly line that affixed brake linings that Ace exclusively purchased in bulk from Maremont Corp. He also stood at the grinding station on the assembly line, grinding up to 500 brakes per day — eight hours per day, 5.5 days per week — for nearly two years. Felton was ultimately diagnosed with pleural mesothelioma, an aggressive, incurable cancer that develops on the lining of the lungs and that often stems from exposure to asbestos. He subsequently passed away on April 19, 2013. Hiroko Felton, acting as the successor in interest to the estate of Donald Felton, sued Maremont Corp., Beach City Chevrolet Co. Inc., and several other believed suppliers and manufacturers of asbestos-containing automobile products. Beach City Chevrolet and several of the other defendants were let out of the case, and the trial continued against Maremont only. Plaintiff’s counsel contended that the decedent was exposed to asbestos from Maremont’s brake linings while working on the assembly line at Ace Brake Supply. Thus, counsel argued that the decedent developed pleural mesothelioma as a result of his exposure to Maremont’s products. Maremont’s counsel argued that the decedent had no markers of asbestos exposure and, further, that epidemiological studies show that exposure to asbestos in brakes does not cause mesothelioma. Counsel also argued that Maremont’s products were not defective and that any exposure the decedent incurred was a result of Ace Brake Supply’s failure to provide proper ventilation protection at the remanufacturing plant., Donald Felton developed pleural mesothelioma and ultimately died on April 19, 2013. The decedent’s estate sought recovery of $7.5 million in general damages for loss of the decedent’s love, companionship, comfort, care, moral support, and affection. The parties stipulated to $150,000 in economic damages for the decedent’s medical expenses prior to his death. Maremont’s counsel disputed the nature and extent of the non-economic damages allegedly suffered by the decedent’s estate.