The Public Justice Trial Lawyer of the Year Award is a prestigious national recognition presented annually to a trial lawyer or team of lawyers who have used exemplary skill and dedication to advance the public interest, protect the environment, or uphold consumer rights through a significant, recent legal victory. The award honors impactful legal work that results in systemic change and holds powerful interests accountable.
A countertop fabricator who developed fatal silicosis from exposure to dust from crystalline silica artificial stone secured $27 million in settlements from artificial stone manufacturers and suppliers, in one of the first civil cases to highlight a growing public health crisis caused by a uniquely toxic product.
In a growing epidemic, thousands of countertop fabricators in the U.S. who worked with crystalline silica artificial stone slabs have been sickened with fatal silicosis lung disease from the nano-sized silica and other toxic particles the slab product releases when fabricated into kitchen and bathroom countertops and installed. Most of the affected workers are low wage, immigrant, and Spanish-speaking-only laborers who are among the most vulnerable and marginalized in our workforce. The vast majority of workers do not learn of the risks of working with artificial stone until after they receive diagnoses of silicosis, which leads to progressive suffocation, oxygen dependence, lung transplantation, and death. The case nominated as a finalist—Doe v. Artificial Stone Defendants—is at the vanguard of hundreds of lawsuits filed by Brayton Purcell LLP to seek redress for these workers and hold the industry accountable.
John Doe, now 51 years old and dependent on supplemental oxygen, spent many years cutting, grinding, and polishing crystalline silica artificial stone slabs—products composed of at least 90% crystalline silica, with the remaining portion made up of highly toxic metals and resins that release volatile organic compounds (VOCs) during fabrication. His job as a fabricator exposed him to extraordinarily fine, nano-sized silica particles that penetrate deep into the lungs. These particles differ dramatically from the much larger silica particles present in natural stone and are far more toxic. Mr. Doe’s dedication to supporting his family through this career came at a steep price: accelerated silicosis with pulmonary massive fibrosis, a terminal disease caused by the nano-sized crystalline silica particles released during routine fabrication. His lawsuit was filed in December 2022. He alleged that artificial stone manufacturers designed, marketed, and distributed a product inherently unsafe to fabricate by human beings, and that they did so despite decades of peer-reviewed scientific studies documenting the unique toxicity of respirable crystalline silica dust produced during the fabrication of artificial stone slabs. He further alleged that warnings accompanying the slabs were inadequate, failing to disclose that even the most rigid adherence to wet cutting, ventilation, and respirators cannot prevent workers from inhaling dangerously high concentrations of respirable crystalline silica.
The case involved contending with 43 defendants, propounding 107 discovery requests, responding to 197 discovery requests, responding to 23 non dispositive motions, taking or defending 76 depositions, defeating 12 motions for summary judgment, filing 23 motions in limine, opposing 56 motions in limine, and serving 152 page lines for deposition and/or discovery designations to be used at trial. As part of the firm’s investigative efforts, the team identified more than 50 former coworkers with relevant knowledge and carried out extensive outreach to locate, contact, and interview the potential witnesses.
During jury selection in April 2025, the defendants agreed to pay more than $27 million to Mr. Doe and his family. This settlement represents one of the most significant recoveries in the United States for artificial stone–induced disease and reflects the
catastrophic harm caused by fabricating crystalline silica artificial stone. It also underscores the reality confronting countless fabrication workers: the very act of showing up to work each day to cut and polish these slabs exposes them to uniquely toxic, nano-sized crystalline silica dust that no respirator, ventilation system, or wet cutting methods can eliminate.
In fact, there is no safe way for human workers to fabricate crystalline silica artificial stone, even when shops follow all OSHA prescribed controls. In California alone, confirmed crystalline silica artificial stone silicosis cases surged from 13 in 2019 to 567 cases by early June 2026, including 31 deaths and 58 lung transplants (with 51 additional victims referred for lung transplantation). Many of those diagnosed are in their 30s and 40s—ages at which they should be supporting families, not fighting for survival. Artificial stone silicosis is a global epidemic, with documented outbreaks in Israel, Spain, China, India, the UK, and Australia. Australia banned crystalline silica artificial stone in 2024 after concluding it cannot be fabricated safely by human beings. Public health agencies in the U.S. are finally beginning to respond, designating the disease as reportable and issuing urgent advisories to clinicians and fabrication communities. In May 2026, the Cal/OSHA Standards Board unanimously voted to implement an Emergency Temporary Standard to prohibit the fabrication of artificial stone containing more than 1% crystalline silica.
It is litigation like this that will ensure corporate accountability and force this dangerous product from the market.
After nearly a decade of litigation, three Sudanese refugees representing more than 23,000 Sudanese survivors of mass atrocities secured a verdict against BNP Paribas of $20.75 million, the first U.S. jury verdict holding a major international bank civilly liable for materially supporting human rights abuses and genocide.
In the early 2000s, Sudan’s regime unleashed a campaign of terror in Darfur marked by systematic killing, village burnings, rape, forced displacement, and the targeted destruction of Black African communities. That campaign depended on hard currency. After the United States imposed an economic embargo aimed at halting the genocide, the regime was on the brink of collapse. To survive, it needed a financier willing to launder billions in illicit petrodollars through New York, falsify records, and deceive regulators.
At trial, the plaintiffs—Sudanese refugees who survived the violence and later resettled in the United States—established that French bank
BNP Paribas served as Sudan’s financial lifeline, using a money laundering structure that, in its own words, served no legitimate
business purpose. On cross-examination, bank executives admitted they did so while aware the regime was committing genocide. Internal records show they knew the foreign currency reserves they laundered were being spent on Sudan’s military and even predicted that they would cause Sudan’s “repressive measures” to continue “for a long time.” A senior compliance officer warned executives in Paris that they were “feeding” a regime condemned internationally and helping to keep it in power. The evidence showed that despite those warnings, the bank funneled more than $10 billion in illicit funds and financed the regime’s airbases and state owned armored vehicle manufacturer.
In 2014, BNP Paribas pled guilty in federal court to violating U.S. sanctions on Sudan and other countries, and paid billions in criminal penalties. Filed in 2016, the plaintiffs’ class action was litigated for nearly a decade. Across years of hard-fought litigation, the plaintiffs defeated motions to dismiss, overcame complex jurisdictional, foreign law, and discovery challenges, and secured class certification for more than 23,000 Sudanese survivors residing in the U.S. The case then moved through expert battles and pretrial motion practice before selection for bellwether trial.
In 2025, the case went to trial, fusing a war crimes prosecution with white-collar forensics and macroeconomics. The trial team distilled an international sanctions-evasion conspiracy, the first genocide of the 21st century, and U.S. government efforts to stop that genocide into a coherent narrative for the jury. The plaintiffs presented evidence that BNP Paribas’ money laundering services funded Sudan’s nationwide
campaign of atrocities. The defense maintained that the bank’s conduct was too remote from the violence to justify civil liability.
After weeks of testimony, the jury returned a $20.75 million verdict in favor of the three bellwether plaintiffs—approximately $7 million for each—and found that BNP Paribas had aided and abetted the Sudanese government’s human rights abuses. Judge Hellerstein entered final judgment and certified the case for appeal to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit. That appeal remains pending.
The verdict marks the first time a U.S. jury has held a major international bank civilly liable for materially assisting genocide. Although the trial involved three plaintiffs, it serves as a bellwether for a certified class of more than 23,000 Sudanese survivors, exposing the bank to potentially billions of dollars in liability. The verdict also affirms that a bank’s financial backing of a regime committing mass atrocities can result in civil liability and that knowingly providing economic support can materially contribute to human rights violations. More broadly, the case reaffirms the principle first announced in Nuremberg that corporate actors who write a blank check for genocidal regimes, using illicit and deceptive means, cannot avoid accountability.
This $62 million verdict holding a gun dealer accountable for trafficking and violence arising from its ghost guns is the largest ever jury verdict against a gun dealer, sending a message that the industry is not completely immune from liability.
Because of the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA), the gun industry has long assumed that it cannot be held accountable for conduct that would result in astronomical tort liability for any other industry. But on August 27, 2025, a Baltimore City jury left the industry second-guessing that assumption, delivering a verdict of $62 million against Hanover Armory, LLC in favor of the City of Baltimore.
Hanover Armory is a brick-and-mortar retailer that sold ghost gun kits, a set of parts that could easily be assembled into a functioning firearm, without serial numbers and without conducting background checks. These kits have obvious appeal to individuals who cannot otherwise lawfully obtain a firearm, including teens and gun traffickers. Hanover Armory sold 2,347 kits about 10 miles from the City’s border, close to Baltimore neighborhoods most affected by gun violence, and the kits accounted for 85% of all kits sold by area dealers.
The result was a public health crisis in Baltimore. More gun trafficking operations sprouted up. Ghost guns were recovered from teens as young as 13 years old. A community leader, Dante Barksdale, who dedicated his life to preventing gun violence, was murdered with a ghost gun.
In June 2022, the City filed a complaint with two claims against Hanover Armory: public nuisance and negligence. Discovery proceeded after a motion to dismiss was denied, and the City settled claims against Polymer80, the biggest manufacturer of ghost gun kits, for $1.2 million and substantial injunctive relief. But the case against Hanover Armory proceeded to summary judgment, and then trial.
At trial, the City estimated that it would take $31 million to remedy the ghost gun crisis, by funding evidence-based intervention programs like Safe Streets, the Mayor’s Gun Violence Reduction Strategy, and ROCA. The jury doubled the number.
After trial, the City, Hanover Armory, and Hanover Armory’s insurer settled for meaningful injunctive terms, including a ban on selling ghost gun products, measures to prevent sales to straw purchasers and gun traffickers, and regular reporting to the City, in addition to a $2 million monetary settlement, an amount reached in light of Hanover Armory’s limited assets.
In sum, this case tackled one of the most challenging public health crises in America—gun violence—in a city that has seen far too much of it. The City, the plaintiffs’ bar, and Brady (the oldest gun violence prevention organization in America) teamed up to hold the industry responsible for its conduct. A jury saw through the industry’s smokescreen defenses and delivered a historic verdict.