GARY, IN — For thirty-one years, Robert Kessler breathed the dust. He worked maintenance at a northwest Indiana steel mill, handling pipe insulation and gaskets that crumbled into the air around him. He retired in 1998 thinking the hard part was over. In January 2025, he was diagnosed with pleural mesothelioma. He died nine months later at age 74. Last month, a Lake County jury awarded his family $8.2 million in damages, finding two industrial manufacturers liable for his exposure to asbestos-containing products they supplied to the mill.
What the Jury Found
The verdict, reached after six days of deliberation in the Lake County Superior Court, assigned liability to a pipe insulation manufacturer and a gasket supplier, both of which had continued selling asbestos-containing products to Indiana industrial facilities well into the 1980s, according to court documents reviewed by litigation analysts at Law360. Jurors found that both companies had known about the health risks of asbestos exposure and failed to adequately warn workers like Kessler.
The $8.2 million award included $3.1 million in compensatory damages for medical expenses and lost income, and $5.1 million for pain, suffering, and loss of consortium on behalf of Kessler's wife of 47 years. The manufacturers' attorneys indicated they intend to appeal, a standard move in high-value asbestos verdicts, according to coverage from Reuters Legal.
Indiana's industrial corridor, stretching from Gary through Hammond and East Chicago, was for decades one of the most asbestos-dense work environments in the Midwest. Steel production, refining, and heavy manufacturing created sustained demand for the insulating and fireproofing products that contained the mineral. Workers in those facilities — most of them union tradesmen who had no idea what they were breathing — are now reaching the age at which mesothelioma typically emerges, often 20 to 50 years after initial exposure.
Why This Verdict Matters Beyond Indiana
In my experience representing mesothelioma families, Indiana cases have historically been harder to litigate than those in Illinois or California, partly because the state's tort reform environment has made large verdicts less common. This outcome signals something shifting in how Midwest juries are weighing corporate knowledge against worker harm.
What the courts have consistently recognized in asbestos litigation is that the central question is not whether a worker was exposed, but whether the companies that profited from selling those products knew the risks and said nothing. The documentary record in cases like Kessler's often includes internal memos, product safety studies, and industry correspondence showing that manufacturers were aware of asbestos dangers decades before they pulled products from the market. That record, presented effectively to a jury, tends to produce verdicts that reflect moral outrage as much as economic calculation.
The legal landscape for asbestos victims in Indiana has also been shaped by statutes of limitations questions that can derail otherwise strong cases. Indiana generally allows two years from the date of diagnosis to file a mesothelioma lawsuit, which means families who delay seeking legal counsel can find themselves time-barred even when the underlying facts are compelling. The Kessler family filed within four months of his diagnosis, which gave their legal team time to build the case while Robert was still alive to provide testimony.
What Indiana Families Should Know Now
If you or someone in your family worked in northwest Indiana's steel, refining, or manufacturing industries before the mid-1990s, the exposure risk was real and the legal window is finite. Mesothelioma's long latency period means that workers who retired 20 or 30 years ago are only now receiving diagnoses, and many don't realize that compensation options remain available.
For veterans who also worked in Indiana's industrial sector, the exposure pathways can be layered — shipyard or military service combined with civilian industrial work can strengthen a claim considerably. Multiple defendants, multiple exposure sources, and multiple compensation channels, including asbestos bankruptcy trust funds, may all apply to a single case.
Families navigating a new diagnosis should understand that legal claims and medical treatment decisions can proceed simultaneously. Waiting for a prognosis to stabilize before contacting an attorney is one of the most common and costly mistakes families make. The Kessler case was strengthened by Robert's own deposition testimony, taken while he was still able to speak clearly about his working conditions.
For Indiana families exploring their options, the compensation estimator at Mesothelioma-Lung-Cancer.org provides a starting point for understanding what a claim might be worth. The path from diagnosis to justice is never simple, but the Kessler verdict is a reminder that Indiana juries are listening.
Attorney Advertising. Past results do not guarantee future outcomes. Every case is unique. The verdicts and settlements described are not a guarantee of similar results. Every case is different.
Comments (6)
My father worked at U.S. Steel's Gary plant from 1974 to 1998 and was diagnosed with mesothelioma in 2019. He passed away last year at 68. Seeing this $8.2 million verdict gives me some hope that manufacturers are finally being held responsible, though honestly no amount of money brings him back. What frustrates me is how long it took — he was exposed for over 20 years before anyone told workers at Gary about the dangers. The company knew. They had to have known. He went through aggressive chemotherapy and died anyway. I'm glad this jury saw through the manufacturers' excuses. If you worked steel mills in the 80s or 90s, get your lungs checked regularly. Don't wait for symptoms like my dad did.
— Paul