Legal Opinion
Van Hout v. Celotex Corp.
Washington Supreme Court
Decided June 17, 1993No. 59306-0PublishedCited by 24 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtMadsen, J.
We granted plaintiff's petition for review of a Court of Appeals unpublished decision. The Court of Appeals held there was sufficient evidence to go to the jury, but reversed and ordered a new trial for error in the jury instructions. Defendant cross-petitioned regarding sufficiency of the evidence. We affirm on the cross petition and reverse on plaintiff's petition, thereby reinstating the judgment rendered on the verdict in favor of the plaintiff.
This action arose as a result of William Van Hout's exposure to asbestos dust at the Puget Sound Naval Shipyard between 1946 and 1980. While not…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- John E. Johnson and H/w Ann Marie Johnson v. The Celotex Corporation, Owens-Illinois, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1990
- Bennett v. HardyWashington Supreme Court · 1990
- Lockwood v. a C & S, Inc.Washington Supreme Court · 1987
- Egede-Nissen v. Crystal Mountain, Inc.Washington Supreme Court · 1980
- Levy v. North American Co. for Life & Health InsuranceWashington Supreme Court · 1978
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by24 opinions
- Lunsford v. Saberhagen Holdings, Inc.Washington Supreme Court · 2009
- Lunsford v. Saberhagen Holdings, Inc.Washington Supreme Court · 2009
- Braaten v. Saberhagen HoldingsWashington Supreme Court · 2008
- Braaten v. Saberhagen HoldingsWashington Supreme Court · 2008
- Goehle v. Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research CenterCourt of Appeals of Washington · 2000
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.