Wisconsin Supreme Court Upholds Mesothelioma Verdict for Steamfitter Exposed to Asbestos at Pabst Brewery

April 20, 2026

The Wisconsin Supreme Court has largely upheld a jury verdict finding Pabst Brewing Company liable under Wisconsin’s Safe Place Statute (Wis. Stat. § 101.11) in an ongoing case involving asbestos exposure at the company’s Milwaukee brewery.

The case, Estate of Lorbiecki v. Pabst Brewing Company, involves Gerald Lorbiecki, a steamfitter who developed mesothelioma after being exposed to asbestos while performing pipe insulation and repair work at the brewery in the mid-1970s through an independent contractor.

Mr. Lorbiecki retained Early, Lucarelli, Sweeney & Meisenkothen (ELSM) after his mesothelioma diagnosis in 2017. ELSM worked with co-counsel Dean Omar Branham Shirley (DOBS) to litigate the case.

Court records showed that Pabst knew asbestos-containing insulation was widely present throughout its facility and understood the health risks years before Mr. Lorbiecki’s exposure. Despite this, the company did not take steps to remove the asbestos or protect workers, including those employed by outside contractors.

Mr. Lorbiecki filed claims under the Wisconsin Safe Place Statute, which requires property owners to maintain safe workplaces. The case proceeded to trial in Milwaukee County, where a jury found Pabst liable and awarded $26.5 million in damages. The final judgment was later reduced to approximately $7 million, including about $4.6 million in punitive damages.

On appeal, the Wisconsin Supreme Court confirmed that Pabst can be held liable for injuries to workers employed by independent contractors. The Court emphasized that companies cannot avoid responsibility for unsafe conditions by outsourcing work.

The Court also upheld the jury’s consideration of punitive damages, finding sufficient evidence that Pabst may have acted with disregard for worker safety. It clarified that Wisconsin law limits punitive damages based on the amount recoverable from the remaining defendant.

The ruling reinforces that companies can be held responsible when they know about asbestos hazards but do not address them, even if the workers exposed are employed by outside contractors.