Washington Supreme Court lets equipment manufacturers off the hook

Dec 19, 2008

The Washington Supreme Court has ruled that an equipment manufacturer cannot be held accountable to asbestos victims if the company did not add asbestos directly to its product. The court conceived the question as whether a manufacturer should be required to warn of health risks of another manufacturer’s products.

The plaintiffs alleged that the manufacturers should have warned about the risk of asbestos because, even though their products did not contain asbestos when manufactured, the products required materials be used with them that were normally asbestos containing. As the dissenting judges pointed out, the addition of asbestos-containing products was essential to the use of the defendants’ products.

In many cases, equipment manufacturers included specifications calling for asbestos products to be used with their products. For example, some manufacturers called for their equipment to be insulated with asbestos products. Pumps and valves called for the use of asbestos-containing gaskets and packing.

In some other states, courts have decided that, because the equipment manufacturer knew or should have known about a risk when their product was used as intended—with asbestos products added—the equipment manufacturer had a duty to warn about the asbestos risk. The dissenting opinion from the Washington Supreme Court noted that failing to hold the equipment manufacturers accountable “ignores logic, common sense and justice.”

For the full story, see the AP story in The Seattle Times.

Latest News Stories