Colorado Judge Orders Losing Plaintiffs to Pay Terumo $5.2 Million

By Michael Booth | The Colorado Sun

The multinational medical manufacturer, based in Lakewood, uses toxic ethylene oxide as a sterilizer. Jefferson County residents attempted to sue for health damage.

A Jefferson County District Court judge ordered cancer-stricken patients who unsuccessfully sued Lakewood medical manufacturer Terumo BCT for toxic pollution releases to pay just under $5.2 million in the multinational company’s legal fees.

Terumo uses ethylene oxide, or EtO, to sterilize its blood processing equipment before shipping, and neighbors of EtO-using industries around the nation have filed lawsuits claiming the companies are liable for cancer and other major health problems. A Jeffco jury in March found Terumo not negligent, after four women sued the company for damages in their cancer cases.

The company maintains it has always handled EtO and minimized releases according to EPA and Colorado law, and has gone above and beyond in adding filtration systems to prevent the toxic substance venting out of its sterilization areas.

Jeffco District Judge Andrew Poland on Sept. 22 issued an order accepting Terumo’s arguments that it deserved to be repaid $5,180,000 in legal costs by losing plaintiffs that included the named plaintiff Eve Isaacks.

“The plaintiffs, who allege between 15 and 53 years of exposure to ambient EtO from the facility, (were) altogether asking for more than $217 million in damages for their physical impairment, $7.5 million for past and future medical expenses, plus additional punitive damages for Terumo’s allegedly willful conduct,” according to Law360 at the time of the trial.

The judge’s award to reimburse Terumo included just under $4.2 million in expert witness fees in the complex case. Experts spent weeks of testimony debating whether the plaintiffs’ health problems had any relation to the amounts of EtO released over decades by Terumo.

Kurt Zaner, an attorney who has joined lawyers from other firms in bringing some of the EtO cases including the Jeffco suit, said Friday the plaintiffs will appeal the court costs ruling. Plaintiffs’ attorneys had argued during the costs dispute that Terumo’s reimbursement request “is merely an attempt to discourage other plaintiffs from pursuing their cases.”

The plaintiffs’ attorneys in May also filed a motion for a new trial on the original damages claims, saying Terumo “engaged in a systematic pattern of misconduct that prevented the jury from deciding this case on its merits,” according to the motion archived by Lexis-Nexis’ Mealey’s legal publication.

READ THE FULL ARTICLE AT THE COLORADO SUN