Products Liability Law Reporter

A federal district court held that the successor in interest to the manufacturer of an arc grinder used by a mechanic to shape asbestos-containing brake pads was not liable for the mechanic’s mesothelioma.

Ronald Thomas worked as a mechanic and manager at auto repair shops for over a decade. While performing brake jobs, he used an arc grinder to shape new brake pads, some of which were made with asbestos and released dust into the air. For some of the jobs, Thomas used a grinder made by Ammco Tools, Inc., to which Hennessy Industries, LLC, is the successor in interest. The Ammco grinder did not contain asbestos.

Thomas was diagnosed as having mesothelioma and died of his disease within a year. His estate sued various defendants for negligence and strict products liability, including Hennessy, alleging that exposure to asbestos in the brake pads led to Thomas’s mesothelioma. Hennessy moved for summary judgment on the basis that its brake grinder did not contain asbestos and thus was not liable under a products liability theory for releasing asbestos fibers into the air.

The district court granted the motion. The court found that the plaintiff has offered no evidence proving a Hennessy product caused Thomas’s injuries. The brake pads were allegedly unsafe—not the defendant’s grinder—the court found, adding that even the combination of the two did not make the grinder unsafe. Moreover, the court concluded, the brake grinder could not have caused Thomas’s mesothelioma.

Consequently, the court dismissed Hennessy from the lawsuit.

Citation: Thomas v. Borg-Warner Morse TEC LLC, 2018 WL 6523200 (E.D. Ark. Dec. 11, 2018).

Comment: In Little v. Budd Co., No. 16-4170-DDC-KGG (D. Kan. Dec. 14, 2018), a jury awarded $139,500 to the estate of Robert Rabe, who, before his death from malignant mesothelioma, was employed by Atchison Topeka and Santa Fe Railroad. As part of his work duties, Rabe replaced asbestos-containing pipe insulation on passenger cars, some of which were manufactured by The Budd Co. Rabe’s estate sued the railway company and The Budd Co., alleging negligence and strict liability design defect and warning defect. The jury apportioned liability at 93 percent to the railway company and 7 percent to The Budd Co. E. Todd Hottman, Olathe, Kansas; and AAJ members John D. Roven and Kevin M. Camp, both of Houston, represented the plaintiff.

In Connor v. Norfolk Southern Ry. Co., 2018 WL 6514842 (M.D.N.C. Dec. 11, 2018), Charles Connor was diagnosed as having mesothelioma and died within a year. His estate sued for products liability and wrongful death, alleging that Connor was exposed to various asbestos-containing products while employed at Fiber Industries, including pipe covering, gaskets, and boilers. The plaintiff named Daniel International, which built the Fiber Industries facility, and Covil, which supplied insulation to Daniel International. The defendants moved for summary judgment on causation grounds. Granting the motions, the district court concluded that the plaintiff failed to establish that Connor was actually exposed to asbestos-containing insulation supplied by Covil on a regular basis over an extended period of time near where he actually worked. Similarly, the court concluded that Daniel International was also entitled to summary judgment, reasoning, in part, that the record lacked evidence showing Connor was present when Daniel International employees were installing, removing, or replacing asbestos insulation.