Lathrop GPM Partner Catherine Goldhaber recently co-authored an article for Law360 discussing the significant implications of the United States Supreme Court’s ruling in Air and Liquid Systems Corp. et al. v. DeVries. The decision, issued in March 2019, directly impacts maritime asbestos litigation by expanding the duty to warn for equipment manufacturers.
Goldhaber explains that the Supreme Court held that, in the maritime tort context, a product manufacturer has a duty to warn when “its product requires incorporation of a part and the manufacturer knows or has reason to know that the integrated product is likely to be dangerous for its intended uses.” This ruling directly contradicts and will likely lead to the elimination of the “bare-metal” defense, which had been available to manufacturers of maritime equipment in California asbestos litigation since 2012.
The article details how this decision means that manufacturers who did not directly produce or sell asbestos-containing components may still be held liable if their equipment required the incorporation of such parts and they were aware of the danger. Goldhaber notes that the Supreme Court’s new three-part rule for imposing a duty to warn focuses on situations where: (i) the product requires incorporation of a part, (ii) the manufacturer knows or has reason to know the integrated product is dangerous, and (iii) the manufacturer has no reason to believe users will realize the danger.
While the opinion primarily applies to maritime tort cases, Goldhaber highlights that the Court did identify certain non-maritime situations where this rule could apply, such as when a manufacturer directs a part’s incorporation or if a product would be useless without a specific, potentially dangerous part. The immediate impact, she concludes, “could be a resurgence of filings against manufacturers of pumps, valves, steam traps, turbines and other equipment that required the use of asbestos-containing gaskets, packing and insulation in a maritime environment.”
Read the full article here [SUBSCRIPTION REQUIRED]: How The Supreme Court Revived Maritime Asbestos Cases