Man Awarded $25M in Lawsuit Over Lung Disease Linked to Cooking Spray

Jury finds Conagra Brands liable for failing to warn consumers about inhalation risks of diacetyl and acetyl propionyl in PAM cooking spray.

Published on Feb. 13, 2026

Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›

A Los Angeles County jury awarded $25 million to Roland Esparza, who alleged that years of using Conagra Brands' butter-flavored PAM cooking spray led to a severe lung disease, and that the company failed to adequately warn consumers about inhalation risks of chemicals like diacetyl and acetyl propionyl used in the product's formulation.

Why it matters

This case marks a significant consumer lawsuit over alleged chemical exposure from a common household product, going beyond previous 'popcorn lung' cases linked to industrial manufacturing environments. The verdict could influence future litigation and regulatory oversight around consumer product labeling and safety standards for food flavorings.

The details

Esparza sued Conagra in 2020, claiming negligent design and failure to warn tied to alleged exposure to flavoring chemicals, including diacetyl and acetyl propionyl, which he said resulted in permanent respiratory injury and a diagnosis of bronchiolitis obliterans. Conagra argued it had removed diacetyl from PAM in 2009, but the jury still found the company liable for prior formulations.

  • Esparza began using PAM cooking spray in the 1990s.
  • Esparza filed the lawsuit against Conagra in 2020.
  • The Los Angeles County jury reached its $25 million verdict on February 4, 2026.

The players

Roland Esparza

A 58-year-old Los Angeles resident who is awaiting a double lung transplant and on 24-hour oxygen due to a severe lung disease he alleges was caused by years of using Conagra's PAM cooking spray.

Conagra Brands

The food manufacturing company that produces the PAM brand of cooking sprays, which was found liable by the jury for negligence and inadequate warnings about the health risks of inhaling certain chemical flavorings used in the product.

Got photos? Submit your photos here. ›

What they’re saying

“We must hold companies accountable when they fail to warn consumers about the dangers of their products.”

— Roland Esparza (Newsweek)

“This verdict is disappointing, and we intend to challenge it.”

— Conagra Brands spokesperson (Newsweek)

What’s next

Conagra said it plans to appeal or otherwise challenge the $25 million verdict, signaling additional litigation in post-trial motions and potentially through appellate review.

The takeaway

This case highlights the importance of consumer product safety and the need for clear labeling and warnings about potential health risks, even for commonly used household items. It also underscores the evolving science around the respiratory dangers of certain food flavorings, which could prompt stricter regulations and further litigation.