$20 Million and Counting: Missouri Mesothelioma Verdicts

St. Louis has been one of the most consequential jurisdictions in the country for asbestos litigation for more than two decades. The city’s combination of deep industrial history, an experienced plaintiffs’ bar, and juries who understand the human cost of asbestos exposure has produced a steady pattern of significant verdicts for people with mesothelioma.

Three separate mesothelioma verdicts totaling more than $34 million were entered in St. Louis between 2019 and 2022, all arising from exposure to Ford Motor Company brake products. The largest of those, a $20 million award in Trokey v. Ford, survived appellate review in 2023 and stands as Missouri’s highest recent mesothelioma verdict of record.

The Ford Brake Verdicts

Trokey v. Ford Motor Company, $20 Million (2022, upheld on appeal)

On March 10, 2022, a St. Louis jury awarded $20 million to William “Bill” Trokey and his wife Cathy. The jury found Ford Motor Company liable for Bill’s mesothelioma, which he attributed to his work at St. Louis service stations during the 1960s, where he sanded and replaced Ford drum brake pads containing chrysotile asbestos. Bill was diagnosed with mesothelioma in 2020. The case was tried before Judge Christopher McGraugh in the 22nd Judicial Circuit Court for the City of St. Louis (docket 2022-CC10164).

The jury awarded $10 million to Bill Trokey and $10 million to Cathy Trokey. Bill died in April 2022, shortly after the verdict was entered. Ford appealed. The Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District (ED110915), affirmed the verdict in an unpublished opinion in September 2023, rejecting Ford’s abatement argument. The $20 million award remains in place.

Bennett v. Ford Motor Company, $8,433,000 gross (2019)

On August 22, 2019, a St. Louis jury awarded Alfred “Al” Bennett and his wife Pam a gross total of $8,433,000 after finding Ford Motor Company and other defendants liable for Al’s mesothelioma. The award broke down as $5,725,000 in actual damages to Alfred Bennett, $708,000 in actual damages to Pam Bennett, and $2,000,000 in punitive damages against Ford.

Bennett worked as a mechanic at Ford, Mercury, and Lincoln dealerships starting around 1962, over a career of approximately 21 years. He alleged repeated exposure to asbestos in Ford brakes, gaskets, clutches, and OEM replacement parts. The case was filed in the 22nd Judicial Circuit Court under docket 1822-CC10744.

On August 30, 2019, the court entered an order reducing the verdict by $1,497,500 in set-offs, yielding a net judgment of approximately $6,935,500. No appellate opinion has been confirmed in neutral sources. The verdict is reported here as entered.

Behling v. Ford Motor Company et al., $6 Million (2022)

In November 2022, a St. Louis jury awarded $6 million to the surviving heirs of Linda Behling, Howard Behling, Melissa Gray, and Brandon Behling. Linda Behling, a Springfield, Missouri resident, worked as a laborer at a custom-limousine manufacturer in the Springfield, Missouri area during the 1980s. She died of mesothelioma in July 2019 at age 70. Plaintiffs alleged she was repeatedly exposed to asbestos-containing Ford brake products during that work. Ford was among the named defendants.

The case was filed in the 22nd Judicial Circuit Court, City of St. Louis under docket 1922-CC12004. Ford indicated intent to appeal following the verdict. No confirmed appellate disposition has been found in neutral sources. The award is reported here as entered, with appellate status unresolved.

The BMS Jurisdictional Framework and Missouri Talc Cases

Missouri’s asbestos verdict history can’t be understood in isolation from a separate body of talc litigation that moved through St. Louis courts between 2016 and 2020. Three large jury awards involving Johnson & Johnson talc products and ovarian cancer, not mesothelioma, illustrate how the U.S. Supreme Court’s personal jurisdiction ruling in Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Superior Court, 137 S. Ct. 1773 (2017), reshaped what Missouri courts can adjudicate.

The first, Fox v. Johnson & Johnson, produced a $72 million jury verdict in February 2016 ($10 million compensatory, $62 million punitive). Jacqueline Fox, an Alabama resident who died of ovarian cancer in October 2015, had used J&J talc products for 35 years. On October 17, 2017, the Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, vacated the verdict (ED104580) for lack of specific personal jurisdiction under BMS, finding that Fox’s Alabama claims did not arise out of J&J’s Missouri contacts.

A $55 million verdict in Ristesund v. Johnson & Johnson followed in May 2016 ($5 million compensatory, $50 million punitive split between JJCI and J&J). Gloria Ristesund, a South Dakota resident, alleged ovarian cancer from more than 40 years of J&J talc use. The same appellate court reversed and vacated on June 29, 2018 (ED104887) on the identical BMS grounds, declining to remand.

Largest of the three, Ingham v. Johnson & Johnson, produced a $4.69 billion jury verdict in July 2018 ($550 million compensatory, $4.14 billion punitive) on behalf of 22 plaintiffs, 5 of them Missouri residents, all alleging ovarian cancer from J&J talc. On June 23, 2020, the Eastern District (ED107476) reduced the verdict to approximately $2.12 billion ($500 million actual, $1.62 billion punitive) after dismissing the non-Missouri plaintiffs’ claims for lack of specific personal jurisdiction under BMS. The Missouri Supreme Court declined further review, and the U.S. Supreme Court denied certiorari on June 1, 2021 (No. 20-1223), leaving the $2.12 billion reduction in place.

All three were talc and ovarian cancer cases, not mesothelioma. They matter here because the BMS framework now governs how non-resident asbestos plaintiffs establish jurisdiction in Missouri courts, and it directly shapes litigation strategy for mesothelioma cases brought by out-of-state claimants.

Why St. Louis Is a Major Asbestos Venue

St. Louis’s prominence in asbestos litigation reflects its industrial history. Decades of manufacturing, railroad operations, chemical processing, and construction work created widespread occupational asbestos exposure across the region, and that exposure produced a consistent stream of mesothelioma diagnoses and resulting claims.

Filing volumes confirm the city’s ongoing significance. According to KCIC’s Asbestos Litigation: Year in Review 2023, St. Louis City ranked sixth among top U.S. jurisdictions for asbestos filings in 2023, with 168 filings representing a 20.9% increase over 2022. Mesothelioma and lung cancer claims drove the increase alongside continued litigation over automotive brake products, industrial insulation, and other asbestos-containing materials.

The city’s courts have handled asbestos cases for decades, building established procedures for case management and trial scheduling. Judges and juries in St. Louis are familiar with the disease, the exposure patterns at issue, and the products that caused them.

St. Louis has also drawn sustained attention from tort-reform observers. The American Tort Reform Foundation’s 20-year retrospective on its Judicial Hellholes program records nine years in which St. Louis appeared on the main list. The jurisdiction ranked #1 in the 2016-2017 cycle and #6 in the 2025-2026 cycle.

Missouri’s Five-Year Filing Window

Missouri’s statute of limitations for personal injury mesothelioma claims is five years under Mo. Rev. Stat. § 516.120. The discovery rule, codified at Mo. Rev. Stat. § 516.100, provides that the cause of action does not accrue when the exposure occurred, but when the resulting damage is sustained and capable of ascertainment, typically the date of mesothelioma diagnosis. For wrongful death claims, Mo. Rev. Stat. § 537.100 sets a three-year period running from the date of death.

Mo. Rev. Stat. § 516.097, a 10-year statute of repose, sometimes causes confusion. That provision applies only to architects, engineers, and builders of improvements to real property. It does not govern asbestos products-liability claims, which remain subject to §§ 516.120 and 516.100.

Missouri’s five-year window is one of the longer filing windows available nationally, but the length of that window shouldn’t lead to delay. Investigating exposure history, identifying responsible companies across decades of employment, locating witnesses, and securing records all take time. Starting the process early preserves the best available evidence.

Settlements and the Trust-Fund Track

The Ford brake verdicts are the visible record, but most Missouri mesothelioma cases resolve through settlement rather than trial. Families often recover in parallel from asbestos bankruptcy trust funds, which manufacturers set up as they reorganized out of the tort system. Many of the friction, gasket, and insulation companies whose products reached St. Louis job sites now exist only as those trusts.

Trust fund claims and lawsuits proceed on separate tracks. An attorney experienced in asbestos litigation can identify which trusts apply based on a worker’s employment history and the specific products used at their job sites, and file those claims independently of any lawsuit.