In August 2009, plaintiff Charles Aikins, a former boilermaker and ship surveyor, was diagnosed with peritoneal mesothelioma, which is an aggressive, incurable cancer that develops in the mesothelial lining of the abdomen and that often stems from exposure to asbestos. Aikins, now a 75-year-old resident of Napa, contended that he was exposed to asbestos and asbestos-containing products from 1960 through 1995, when he worked for the U.S. Navy/Department of Defense at local shipyards. Aikins previously brought a 2009 state court lawsuit and a 2010 federal court lawsuit related to his alleged asbestos exposure. Both of those actions settled and resolved without trial. In December 2012, Aikins sued RPI Co., formally known as Plant Insulation Co., alleging contractor negligence. Aikins alleged he was exposed to asbestos when he worked in the proximity of RPI employees, who were removing and installing insulation onboard U.S. Navy ships from 1972 through 1977. RPI was the sole defendant in the action. At trial, Aikins claimed that while he was a ship surveyor, from 1972 to 1976, RPI insulators installed and removed chrysotile and amosite asbestos-containing thermal pipe insulation in his presence onboard U.S. Navy ships undergoing repair. He claimed RPI insulators did so without following any of the asbestos safety protocols mandated by the U.S. Navy and Occupational Safety and Health Administration. Thus, plaintiff’s counsel argued that evidence showed that RPI knew that asbestos was deadly in 1960, yet failed to warn, failed to test, and continued to install and remove asbestos insulation without following safety protocols. RPI’s counsel contended that evidence showed that both Aikins and the U.S. Navy knew of the risks and dangers associated with asbestos, and that they knew that they required, among other things, the use of respiratory protection. Thus, counsel argued that because the U.S. Navy and OSHA regulations required asbestos safety protocols for safe removal of asbestos, Aikins should have known of the danger and, as a ship surveyor, had a duty to stop the work that did not comply with those protocols. Defense counsel further argued that there was no evidence that RPI’s work fell below the standard of care and that any alleged exposure to asbestos attributed to RPI was minimal and not a substantial factor in causing Aikins’ mesothelioma., Aikins developed asbestos-related pleural disease and, in August 2009, was diagnosed with peritoneal mesothelioma, which is a debilitating and fatal cancer of the lining of the abdomen. In October 2009, he underwent a radical debulking surgery, which is the surgical removal of part of a tumor that cannot be completely excised so as to enhance the effectiveness of radiation or chemotherapy. Since then, he has been monitored for tumor growth, including undergoing CT scans ever few months and occasional PET scans. Aikins, who is now 75 years old, claimed that he has been battling the disease ever since his diagnosis and that the disease is terminal. He alleged that his prognosis is one year or less. Defense counsel contended that after the surgical removal of the tumor, Aikins has been monitored for tumor growth, for which there has been none. However, counsel noted there was uncontested evidence that mesothelioma is a terminal cancer and that Aikins has but months to live.