Johnson v. ArvinMeritor

Summary judgment was properly granted against truck repairman plaintiff who had sued brake manufacturers and designers for asbestos exposure, since he introduced no evidence linking defendants to any products that he had used in repairing trucks.  Summary judgment was properly granted to truck brake manufacturers and designers in this case brought by a truck repairman…

Chen v. L.A. Truck Centers, LLC

After an Indiana-based bus manufacturer was dismissed from the case, California law governed Chinese bus passengers’ claims against a California-based bus distributor for injuries sustained when the bus overturned in Arizona; only California had a governmental interest in application of its law.  This products liability case arose from a roll over accident of a tour…

Ramos v. Brenntag Specialties, Inc.

The component parts doctrine does not shield a manufacturer from strict products liability for injuries a worker suffers by using the manufacturer’s product for its intended purpose in manufacturing a different, composite product of which the manufacturer’s product is a part.  Disapproving Maxton v. Western States Metals (2012) 203 Cal.App.4th 81, this decision holds that…

McIndoe v. Huntington Ingalls, Inc.

Warships are not “products” for purposes of strict liability in tort since they are not distributed commercially; also, the “any exposure” theory is insufficient proof of causation in an asbestosis case.  While federal maritime law recognizes strict product liability as a tort, it generally follows the Restatement (Third) of Torts formulation of the tort.  Under…