Whitmire

Whitmire v. Ingersoll-Rand Co.

Good Law
109 Cal. Rptr. 3d 371·184 Cal. App. 4th 1078·2010 Cal. App. LEXIS 708
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 22, 2010B210211California6,096 words

Opinion

Opinion

Willhite, J.

INTRODUCTION

Plaintiff Barbara Whitmire, on her own behalf and as successor in interest to husband Jimmie Whitmire (Whitmire) (collectively plaintiffs), appeals from a summary judgment granted in favor of defendants Bechtel Corporation and Bechtel Construction Company (collectively Bechtel) on plaintiffs’ complaint for, inter alia, negligence and strict liability related to Whitmire’s exposure to asbestos. We affirm the trial court’s judgment because plaintiffs failed to establish a triable issue of fact regarding whether Whitmire was exposed to asbestos for which Bechtel was responsible.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

We summarize the background of the case, and reserve our detailed discussion of the evidence relevant to summary judgment until our Discussion, below.

From 1961 to 1993, Whitmire was employed as an electrician at Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) powerplants. After he contracted mesothelioma, plaintiffs sued Bechtel, among other defendants, alleging that Whitmire had contracted mesothelioma from exposure at the powerplants to asbestos-containing products for which defendants were responsible.

Whitmire worked for PG&E at three locations in Northern…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.