Some questions about money and 9/11 truth

Question: Was the claim of 9/11 rescue worker James Zadroga's family denied out of validity or for monetary reasons? Is New York City more intent on avoiding possible law suits from many 9/11 workers who worked at an environmentally toxic site without proper protection than it is with 9/11 truth? Following the City's medical examiner's statement that Zadroga died from injecting pills, contradicting an earlier report from a NJ medical examiner, the shocked family sought out Dr. Michael Braden who stated that there were traces of cellulose, plastic material, and glass fiber in Zadogra's lungs and no evidence of needle track marks. The family says their concern is not about money but about getting his name on the 9/11 memorial. Still, a case surely can be made that the City was negligent in not providing hazmat protection. And wasn't it?