In 2018, plaintiff Ronald Smith, 73, was diagnosed with mesothelioma, which is an aggressive, incurable cancer that often stems from exposure to asbestos. Smith had worked as a plumber from 1963 to 1978. As part of his job, he worked with and around joint compound, asbestos-cement pipe and insulation. He also participated in shade tree automobile repairs. Smith claimed that his previous exposure to asbestos caused his cancer. Smith sued CertainTeed Corp., Elementis Chemical Inc. (formally known as Hacros Chemical Inc.), Union Carbide Corp., and various other companies that were believed to have manufactured, distributed and/or worked with asbestos-containing products to which Smith was allegedly exposed. Smith’s complaint was coordinated with hundreds of other cases that were pending in different counties that shared common questions of fact or law regarding direct and indirect exposure, and involved many of the same defendants. The cases were joined in one court, the Los Angeles County Superior Court. Many of those cases were put on hold while awaiting a decision regarding an appellate case involving indirect exposure. Smith’s complaint ultimately proceeded to trial against CertainTeed, Elementis and Union Carbide, as the other defendants either settled out of the case or were dismissed. Plaintiff’s counsel brought claims of negligence, strict liability and false representation, as well as intentional tort claims against CertainTeed, Elementis and Union Carbide. Counsel contended that the products manufactured, distributed and/or supplied by CertainTeed, Elementis and Union Carbide were defective and that those defendants failed to warn of asbestos in their products. Defense counsel for CertainTeed, Elementis and Union Carbide argued that there was no evidence that any alleged exposure to the subject products was a substantial factor in the development of Smith’s mesothelioma., Smith was diagnosed with mesothelioma in 2018. He underwent palliative treatment. Smith sought recovery of unspecified damages. His wife, Barbara Smith, sought recovery of damages for her loss of consortium.