Gustavo Reyes-Gonzalez v. Aaroha Radiant Marble & Granite Slabs, et al.
Case Background
Plaintiff Gustavo Reyes-Gonzalez filed the Silicosis lawsuit on September 29, 2022, in the California State, Superior Court of Los Angeles County (Case number: 22STCV31907). Judges William F. Fahey, Ruth Ann Kwan, Michelle Williams Court, David S. Cunningham III, and David J. Cowan presided over the case.
Cause
Gustavo Reyes-Gonzalez worked as a countertop fabricator and installer in Southern California from 2007 to 2022. Throughout this 15-year period, he was regularly exposed to stone products containing silica and toxic metals that were manufactured and distributed by the defendants. These products included granite, marble, quartz, onyx, porcelain, natural stone, and artificial stone. Reyes-Gonzalez’s job duties involved cutting, grinding, fabricating, installing, and finishing these stone products, primarily for residential countertops.
This work generated significant amounts of toxic airborne dust and particulates, which Reyes-Gonzalez inhaled daily. The defendants failed to adequately warn Reyes-Gonzalez of the toxic and fibrogenic hazards of their products. They also did not provide proper safety instructions for handling and use. The complaint alleged that the defendants were aware of these dangers. The health risks of occupational silica exposure have been known to the stone industry for centuries. Despite this knowledge, the defendants concealed the hazards from workers like Reyes-Gonzalez.
Injuries
As a direct result of his occupational exposure to the defendants’ silica-containing stone products, Reyes-Gonzalez developed silicosis, a serious and progressive lung disease caused by inhaling crystalline silica dust. He was first diagnosed with silicosis in September 2021 after years of unknowingly breathing in harmful particulates. The silica dust caused severe and irreversible damage to Reyes-Gonzalez’s lungs, leading to breathing difficulties, chest pain, and other respiratory symptoms.
His condition deteriorated to the point that he required extensive medical treatments and hospitalizations. The silicosis became so advanced and debilitating that Reyes-Gonzalez needed a lung transplant to save his life. In addition to silicosis, he suffered from other related and consequential medical conditions stemming from the toxic exposure.
Damages
Reyes-Gonzalez incurred substantial medical expenses for the diagnosis and treatment of his silicosis. These costs included doctor visits, hospitalizations, medications, and the potential lung transplant. These medical costs were alleged to be well in excess of the court’s jurisdictional minimum. Due to his illness, Reyes-Gonzalez was unable to continue working in his profession. He suffered lost income and wages from the time of his diagnosis and claimed he would continue to experience a loss of future earning capacity. The complaint sought compensation for both past and future economic losses.
Reyes-Gonzalez sought compensatory damages for his economic and non-economic losses. He also demanded punitive damages, alleging that the defendants’ conduct was malicious, oppressive, and in conscious disregard of worker safety.
Key Arguments and Proceedings
Legal representation
- Plaintiff(s):Gustavo Reyes-Gonzalez
- Counsel for Plaintiff: Alan Richard Brayton| Scott Philip Brust | Andrew Chew | Jessica Lafaurie | Raphael Metzger | James Patrick Nevin | Gilbert Lynn Purcell
- Experts for Plaintiff(s): Stephen Petty | Dr. Kenneth Rosenman
- Defendant(s):Aaroha Radiant Marble & Granite Slabs | Antolini Luigi & CSPA | Antolini Luigi & CSPA an Italian Corporation | Architectural Surfaces Inc. a Texas Corporation | Architectural Surfaces Inc. | Arizona Tile L.L.C. | Arizona Tile L.L.C. an Arizona Limited Liability Company | Azzari Appliances Plumbing Flooring Cabinets LLC | Azzari Appliances Plumbing Flooring Cabinets LLC a California Limited Liability Company | Basix Surfaces West Inc. a California Corporation as Successor of Polarstone US a California Corporation| Best Cheer Stone Inc. | Best Cheer Stone Inc. a California Corporation | C&C North America Inc. a Delaware Corporation | Caesarstone Ltd. aka Caesarstone Sdot-Yam Ltd. | Caesarstone USA Inc. | Caesarstone USA Inc. a California Corporation | Cambria Company LLC | Cambria Company LLC a Minnesota Corporation | Color Marble Stone Inc. | Color Marble Stone Inc. a California Corporation| Compac Atlanta LLC | Compac Quartz Inc. | Compac Quartz Inc. a Corporation | Cosentino Global Sociedad Limitada | Cosentino Group a Spanish Corporatio | Cosentino Group S.A. fka Cosentino S.A. | Cosentino Industrial SA | Dal-Tile Distribution Inc. | Dal-Tile Distribution Inc. a Delaware Corporation | Dal-Tile International Inc. | E. I. DuPont de Nemours and Company | E. I. DuPont de Nemours and Company a Delaware Corporation | Elite Stone & Cabinet Inc. | Elite Stone & Cabinet Inc. a California Corporation | FA International Stone Company | FA International Stone Company a Business Entity | Gramar Stone Center Inc. | Gramar Stone Center Inc. a California Corporation | Home Depot U.S.A. Inc. | International Marble & Granite Supply Company | International Marble & Granite Supply Company an Illinois Corporation | Jacobe Enterprises Inc. | Jacobe Enterprises Inc. a California Corporation | Lowe’s Companies Inc. Doe 8 | Lowe’s Companies Inc. | Lowe’s Home Centers LLC | M S International Inc. | M S International Inc. a California Corporation| Marble Systems Inc. | Marble Systems Inc. a Virginia Corporation | Marbolis Inc.| Marbolis Inc. a California Corporation | Marmol Export Corporation | Marmol Export Corporation a California Corporation | Mohawk Industries Inc. | NGY Group Orange County Inc. | NGY Group Orange County Inc. a California Corporation | Ollin International Inc. | Ollin International Inc. a California Corporation | Pacific Shore Stones LLC | Pacific Shore Stones LLC a California Limited Liability Company | Pacific Stone Design Center Inc. | Pacific Stone Design Center Inc. a California Corporation | Pacific Stone Design Inc. | Pacific Stone Design Inc. a California Corporation | Pacifica Tile & Stone Inc. | Pacifica Tile & Stone Inc. a California Corporation | Paragon Industries Inc. | Paragon Industries Inc. a California Corporation | Parsoda U.S.A. Inc. | Parsoda U.S.A. Inc. a California Corporation | Pental Granite and Marble LLC | Pental Granite and Marble LLC a Washington Corporation | Polar Stone US | Qortstone a Business Entity | Qortstone Inc. | Qortstone Inc. a California Corporation | SMA Surfaces Inc. formerly known as Polarstone US | Stone Studio Inc. | Stone Studio Inc. a California Corporation | Stoneware Enterprises | Stoneware Enterprises a California Corporation | Strictly Stones | Strictly Stones a Business Entity | Stylenquaza LLC dba Vicostone US | Surface Concepts & Slabs Inc. a California Corporation | Surface Concepts & Slabs Inc. | Surface Concepts & Slabs Inc. a California Corporation | Surface Warehouse L.P. a Texas Limited Partnership Doe 4 | T&L Granite Countertop Warehouse | T&L Granite Countertop Warehouse a Business Entity | Terrazzo & Marble Supply Co. of Illinois | Terrazzo & Marble Supply Co. of Illinois an Illinois Corporation | The Slab Studio | The Slab Studio a Business Entity | US Surface Warehouse LP | US Surface Warehouse LP a Texas Limited Partnership | Vadara Quartz Surfaces a California Business | Vadara Quartz Surfaces | Venetian Tile & Stone Gallery | Venetian Tile & Stone Gallery a Nevada Corporation | Walker Zanger Inc. | Walker Zanger Inc. a New York Corporation
- Counsel for Defendants: Marla T. Lamazan| Mary E. Bacon | Melissa Rose Badgett | Dennis M. Baier | Christine D. Calareso | Christine D. Calareso, Esq. | Kathryn Canale | Maria Chaves | Andrew Cho, Esq. | John V. Coghlan | Jennifer Cormier | Michael A. D’Andrea | Matthew P. Dickson | Richard Paul Dieffenbach | Angela Rae Fidger | Patrick Foley | Amanda Jean Fornwalt | Nadine Hughes | Paul Richard Johnson | Deidre Cohen Katz | Gregory Kim | Bryan Lawrence King | Todd Konold | Christian F. Lamond | Roger Mohan Mansukhani | Angela N. Markwith | Evan Martin | Ravi R. Mehta | Deanne Lynne Miller | Sean O’Leary Morris | Sadaf Anahita Nejat | Holly J. Pailet | Angela Parayno | James C. Parker | Karen Jeannine Porter | Katie M. Pritchar | Paul D. Rasmussen | Gabriel Zuniga Reynoso | Daniel Stewart Rodman | Michael George Romey | Pavan Linardos Rosati | Mark D. Sayre | David R. Scheidemantle | John Hubert Shaffery | Lisa Noel Shyer | Chariese R. Solorio | James Timothy Spratt | Peter A. Strotz | Michael John Studenka | Lisa G. Taylor | Lisa Michelle Tracy | Jon Alan Turigliatto | Thomas F. Vandenburg | Lindsay Weiss | Rey S. Yang, Esq.
- Experts for Defendant(s): Brian Daley
Key Arguments or Remarks by Counsel
Gilbert Purcell, Plaintiff’s Attorney, told the jury that engineered stone has “nasty, nasty risks” that had not been properly disclosed.
“A company should never needlessly cause risk to others,” Purcell said, “and that’s what they did.”
For instance, Purcell argued, Cambria had failed for a decade and a half to warn that silica dust could be an invisible hazard. How can workers avoid breathing dust, he argued, “when you can’t even know you’re breathing it because it’s invisible?”
Partner James Nevin of Brayton Purcell LLP stated: “Since this is the first of hundreds of trials, it was important for the artificial stone slab manufacturer and supplier defendants to hear the message loud and clear from the jury – stop selling your deadly fashion products. The health and lives of these young fabrication workers are far more important than your profits. The jury heard the evidence that the defendants’ warnings, when actually conveyed at all, are entirely inadequate, and that the defendants’ products are inherently defective in that they cannot be fabricated safely. The jury rightly rejected the defendants’ efforts to place the blame for accelerated silicosis on plaintiff’s unsophisticated hirers who never received any warnings at all from the defendants. The defendants have known for decades that their artificial stone products are deadly to fabrication workers, and yet they continue to sell it, in relentless pursuit of profits over worker safety. We hope that upon hearing about this verdict, more fabrication workers will come forward, having learned that they too have a right to justice. And, we hope that consumers, will hear about this verdict, and stop buying these deadly products.”
Claims
The complaint alleged four causes of action against the defendants in Silicosis lawsuit:
- Negligence – Reyes-Gonzalez claimed that the defendants breached their duty of care by failing to exercise due caution in the production and distribution of their stone products. They negligently failed to warn of the known hazards or provide adequate safety instructions.
- Strict Liability – Failure to Warn: The complaint alleged that the defendants’ products were defective due to inadequate warnings about their toxic and fibrogenic properties. The lack of sufficient warnings about silica dust exposure rendered the products unreasonably dangerous.
- Strict Liability – Design Defect: Reyes-Gonzalez claimed that the stone products were defectively designed because they failed to perform as safely as an ordinary consumer would expect and the risks outweighed the benefits.
- Fraudulent Concealment: The complaint accused the defendants of intentionally concealing material facts about the dangers of their products from Reyes-Gonzalez and other workers. They allegedly had a duty to disclose these hazards but deliberately withheld the information.
Defense
The defendants in Gustavo Reyes-Gonzalez’s case responded to his complaint with comprehensive answers and numerous affirmative defenses. Costco Wholesale Corporation, Jacobe Enterprises, Inc., Caesarstone USA, Inc., and Marbolis, Inc. all vehemently denied the plaintiff’s allegations and any liability for damages. They uniformly asserted that Reyes-Gonzalez failed to state a valid claim and argued that his own negligence, assumption of risk, and failure to mitigate damages barred recovery.
Each defendant claimed compliance with industry standards and applicable laws. They argued that their products came with adequate warnings and invoked the sophisticated user doctrine, suggesting that the plaintiff or his employers should have been aware of any potential risks. The companies also argued that third parties or the plaintiff’s own actions were the true cause of any injuries or damages, not their products or conduct.
The defendants raised various legal doctrines to challenge the plaintiff’s claims. They asserted that statutes of limitations had expired, potentially barring the lawsuit. They also invoked principles such as laches (unreasonable delay in bringing the claim) and estoppel (preventing the plaintiff from making certain legal claims due to prior conduct or statements).
Specific defenses varied slightly among the defendants. Costco, for instance, argued that they did not participate in designing, manufacturing, or labeling the products alleged to have caused harm. Caesarstone USA provided an especially vigorous defense. They presented 65 affirmative defenses, including challenges to the basis for punitive damages and attempts to limit liability for non-economic damages.
All defendants sought dismissal of the complaint with prejudice. Where applicable, they demanded jury trials to adjudicate the claims. Additionally, each company requested that the court award them costs and attorney’s fees incurred in defending against the lawsuit.
Expert Testimony
Plaintiff’s experts, Stephen Petty, an industrial hygienist, and Dr. Kenneth Rosenman, an environmental and occupational health specialist, provided expert testimony for the plaintiff’s case. In their declarations, Petty opined on whether artificial stone products were defective in design according to the risk-benefit test and a modified consumer expectation test he called the “workers’ expectation test.” Dr. Rosenman discussed the substantial factor standard for asbestos-related cancer claims as outlined in the Judicial Council of California Civil Jury Instructions (CACI 435).
Conversely, the defense’s expert, Mr. Brian Daley, provided an opinion on California employment law.
Jury Verdict
In a Silicosis lawsuit, on August 7, 2024, the jury determined that the plaintiff’s total damages amounted to $52,437,366, comprising $8,257,366 in economic loss, $21,565,000 in past non-economic loss, and $22,615,000 in future non-economic loss. The jury also assigned percentages of fault to various parties. They found the plaintiff, Gustavo Reyes-Gonzalez, 2.5% responsible for his injuries. Among the defendants, Caesarstone USA, Inc. was assigned 15% fault, Cambria Company LLC 10% fault, and Color Marble Inc. 2.5% fault. The remaining 70% of responsibility was attributed to “ALL OTHERS” not specifically named in this verdict form. This allocation totaled 100% of the fault for the plaintiff’s injuries.
Court Documents:
Available Upon Request
Press Release:
Leave A Comment