Quiroz v. Alcoa Inc.

OPINION

THOMPSON, Judge:

¶ 1 We are asked to decide as a matter of first impression whether an employer owes a duty of care to the child of an employee who contracts mesothelioma from asbestos brought home on the employee’s work clothes. These eases are commonly known as “take-home exposure” eases. See, e.g., Mark A. Behrens, What’s New in Asbestos Litigation?, 28 Rev. Litig. 501, 546 (2009). We find no duty of care arises and, therefore, affirm the trial court’s ruling.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

¶ 2 Because Appellants challenge a grant of summary judgment against them, we recite the…