Bankruptcy Court Adopts Brattle’s Asbestos Liability Estimate
US Bankruptcy Court Judge Lena M. James of the Western District of North Carolina adopted Brattle’s asbestos claims valuation, presented by Principal David McKnight, in the Aldrich Pump LLC and Murray Boiler LLC claims estimation proceeding. In a September 25, 2026 order, Judge James evaluated the expert testimony presented during a five-day claims estimation trial in August, including both affirmative and rebuttal expert opinions. She ultimately adopted Brattle’s $608 million estimate of the debtors’ mesothelioma liabilities and estimated total asbestos-related liabilities at $742.5 million, crediting Brattle’s analysis and Mr. McKnight’s expert testimony.
Aldrich and Murray are successors to companies that manufactured industrial equipment and climate-control products, some of which incorporated asbestos-containing components manufactured by third parties. Although the predecessor companies largely ended their use of such components by the mid-1980s, they subsequently faced decades of asbestos-related personal injury claims. As part of the Chapter 11 proceedings, the Court held the August 2026 trial to estimate current and future asbestos liabilities based on the companies’ historical experience resolving claims in the tort system.
Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP, representing the Future Claimants’ Representative (FCR), retained Brattle mass torts experts Mr. McKnight and Paul Hinton, who coauthored the expert reports and led the Brattle team that developed the expert analysis. The Brattle team estimated the present and future mesothelioma liabilities at $535 million using a trust-return discount rate and $608 million using a risk-free discount rate. The Court ultimately adopted the claims estimate based on the 4.5% risk-free rate proposed by Brattle and noted that Mr. McKnight’s “familiarity and depth of understanding of the subject matter” were apparent during his testimony.
In its order, the Court highlighted Mr. McKnight’s testimony, finding his critiques “credible and reliable” and describing his conclusions as “persuasive, well-reasoned, and supported by statistical and econometric principles.” The Court also credited Brattle’s analysis on several disputed estimation issues, including the treatment of long-pending and off-complaint claims, claimant age and settlement values, historical verdicts, and the appropriate discount rate.
