Legal Opinion

Simonetta v. Viad Corp.

Washington Supreme Court

Decided December 11, 2008No. 80076-6PublishedCited by 52 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtC. Johnson, J.

¶1 — This case presents the issue of whether under the common law a manufacturer can be held liable for failure to warn of the hazards of another manufacturer’s product. Joseph Simonetta claims his lung cancer was the result of exposure to asbestos while employed by the United States Navy. Simonetta performed maintenance on an evaporator, a device that desalinates seawater, manufactured by Griscom Russell, a company of which Viad Corporation is the purported successor. After the evaporator was shipped from the Griscom Russell plant in 1941 or 1942, it was insulated with asbestos products…

2Cases cited39 opinions

  1. Lockwood v. a C & S, Inc.Washington Supreme Court · 1987
  2. Rastelli v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1992
  3. Seattle-First National Bank v. TabertWashington Supreme Court · 1975
  4. Terhune v. A. H. Robins Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1978
  5. Reichelt v. Johns-Manville Corp.Washington Supreme Court · 1987

34 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by52 opinions

  1. O'NEIL v. Crane Co.California Supreme Court · 2012
  2. Macias v. Saberhagen Holdings, Inc.Washington Supreme Court · 2012
  3. Lunsford v. Saberhagen Holdings, Inc.Washington Supreme Court · 2009
  4. Lunsford v. Saberhagen Holdings, Inc.Washington Supreme Court · 2009
  5. Taylor v. Elliott Turbomachinery Co. Inc.California Court of Appeal · 2009

47 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API