Legal Opinion

Orear v. International Paint Co.

Court of Appeals of Washington

Decided September 17, 1990No. 24604-6-IPublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtWebster, J.

Charles Orear appeals a summary judgment dismissal of his product liability claim against Seaport Chemical/Three M Supply Company. The sole issue is whether a product liability claim can accrue before the plaintiff knows or with reasonable diligence should know who manufactured or supplied the defective product.

Facts

Charles Orear was exposed to epoxy paints and solvents, which he claims were defective, while employed at Todd Pacific Shipyards Corporation between 1980 and 1985. He filed suit against several manufacturers and distributors, including 3M Company, also known as Minnesota Mining…

2Cases cited31 opinions

  1. Jolly v. Eli Lilly & Co.California Supreme Court · 1988
  2. Barrett v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1982
  3. Dianne Mullinax v. E.B. McElhenney Clifford Sticher and Robert E. KellerCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 1987
  4. O'KEEFFE v. SnyderSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1980
  5. Ulmer v. Ford Motor Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1969

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

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Nowotny v. L & B Contract Industries, Inc.Wyoming Supreme Court · 1997
  2. Krasnow v. AllenMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1990
  3. Tarnowsky v. SocciSupreme Court of Connecticut · 2004
  4. Allyn v. BoeCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1997
  5. Aragon v. Clover Club Foods Co.Court of Appeals of Utah · 1993

8 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