Legal Opinion

Braaten v. Saberhagen Holdings

Washington Supreme Court

Decided December 11, 2008No. 80251-3PublishedCited by 46 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMadsen, J.

¶1 — The defendants are manufacturers of valves and pumps sold to the navy and used aboard ships. After the valves and pumps were installed on the ships, the navy applied asbestos-containing insulation to them. None of the defendants manufactured, sold, or otherwise supplied the asbestos insulation applied to their products. Vernon Braaten, who worked as a pipefitter on navy ships, developed mesothelioma and brought suit against the defendants, alleging that they failed to warn him of the danger of exposure to asbestos during routine maintenance of their equipment. The trial court granted…

2Cases cited37 opinions

  1. Firestone Steel Products Co. v. BarajasTexas Supreme Court · 1996
  2. Lockwood v. a C & S, Inc.Washington Supreme Court · 1987
  3. Rastelli v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1992
  4. Seattle-First National Bank v. TabertWashington Supreme Court · 1975
  5. Ulmer v. Ford Motor Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1969

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

3Cited by46 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

41 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