Wheeler

Wheeler v. Raybestos-Manhattan

Bad Law
11 Cal. Rptr. 2d 109·1992 Cal. App. LEXIS 1037·8 Cal. App. 4th 1152·92 Daily Journal DAR 11833·92 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 7318
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJuly 28, 1992A054969California2,347 words

Opinion

Opinion

Poche, J.

Plaintiffs Richard Wheeler, Earnest Hayes, Herman Kirktendoll, Juliga Woods and Preston Bartice appeal from a judgment entered after the trial court granted defendants’ motion for nonsuit as to each of their complaints. The five complaints which were consolidated for the purpose of trial all allege personal injuries suffered from exposure to asbestos. Each of the defendants, Morton International, Lear Siegler Diversified Holdings, and Firestone Tire and Rubber, manufactures, or is arguably a successor in interest to a manufacturer of, brake products. These cases, like all asbestos cases in San Francisco Superior Court, are subject to a series of general orders. General order 21 provides that the theory of market share liability articulated in Sindell v. Abbott Laboratories (1980) 26 Cal.3d 588 [ 163 Cal.Rptr. 132 , 607 P.2d 924 ] is inapplicable to the asbestos cases. When the trial court here indicated that it was bound to comply with the general order, plaintiffs were permitted to make an offer of proof. At the conclusion of the offer of proof the court granted defendants’ motion for nonsuit.

Thus, the matter before us is purely a question of law: Did plaintiffs state…

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.