Jury Finds Popcorn Good for Movies Not so Good for Your Lungs

In a historic verdict that could reshape how courts view consumer exposure to toxic chemicals, a federal jury this week awarded $7.2 million in damages to a Colorado man who developed a chronic and irreversible lung disease from inhaling the artificial butter aroma of microwave popcorn.

The case marks the first known successful jury verdict in the United States on behalf of a consumer, rather than a factory worker, diagnosed with “popcorn lung”—a condition formally known as bronchiolitis obliterans. Until now, litigation had focused almost exclusively on workers in flavoring and popcorn manufacturing plants.

A Daily Habit Turns Dangerous

Wayne Watson, a 59-year-old from suburban Denver, developed severe respiratory issues after regularly consuming—and inhaling the buttery scent of—microwave popcorn over a period of years. He was diagnosed in 2007 at National Jewish Health, a leading respiratory hospital, where doctors linked his condition to exposure to diacetyl, the chemical compound used to create artificial butter flavor.

Dr. Cecile Rose, a pulmonary specialist and expert witness in the case, testified that Watson’s disease mirrored what she had seen in factory workers exposed to the same chemical. Her critical question—whether he had regular exposure to large quantities of microwave popcorn—led to the diagnosis that became the foundation for the lawsuit.

The Verdict

After a nine-day trial, the jury deliberated for just one day before returning a verdict against both the manufacturer and the retailer of the popcorn. The Chester, Illinois-based Gilster-Mary Lee Corp., which produced the popcorn under private labels, was found 80% liable. The remaining 20% liability was assigned to King Soopers, a supermarket chain owned by Kroger Co., which sold the product.

The jury awarded Watson $7,217,961 in total damages.

Attorneys for the defendants argued that Watson’s health issues stemmed from years of occupational exposure as a carpet cleaner using harsh chemicals. Both King Soopers and Kroger have indicated they plan to appeal the decision. Gilster-Mary Lee has not yet commented.

A Broader Legal Context

Watson’s case is the latest chapter in nearly two decades of litigation surrounding diacetyl. Lawsuits first emerged in the early 2000s when factory workers in popcorn and flavoring plants were diagnosed with bronchiolitis obliterans. Many of those suits resulted in multi-million dollar verdicts and settlements, but this is the first time a jury has sided with a consumer who was harmed by the product simply through routine use at home.

According to Watson’s attorney, Kenneth McClain, similar cases are now pending in federal court in Iowa and in state court in New York.

Why This Matters

This verdict may have significant implications for consumer product safety litigation. It signals that juries are willing to hold both manufacturers and retailers accountable for failing to warn consumers about hidden chemical dangers—even in products used in the home.

It also underscores the growing legal recognition that toxic exposure is not confined to industrial settings. When products sold to the public contain hazardous substances, companies may be required to provide adequate warnings or face liability—even for long-accepted, everyday items like microwave popcorn.