Johnson v. United States Steel Corp.

Good Law
192 Cal. Rptr. 3d 158·2015 Cal. App. LEXIS 772·240 Cal. App. 4th 22
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaSeptember 1, 2015A142485California6,811 words

Opinion

Opinion

Pollak, J.

Plaintiffs David and Laura Johnson filed a products liability action against suppliers, manufacturers and retailers of various paints, adhesives, lubricants, solvents, and other products containing benzene. They contend that David’s chronic exposure as an auto mechanic to benzene-containing products led him to develop acute myeloid leukemia (AML). Among the defendants is United States Steel Corporation (U.S. Steel), which supplied a fabricator with a benzene-containing coal residue called “raffinate” that was once the principal ingredient in the fabrication of Liquid Wrench, a solvent for loosening rusted bolts and machine parts.

In somewhat unorthodox proceedings, the trial court granted summary judgment to U.S. Steel, finding insufficient evidence to support causes of action for negligence and strict products liability under a design defect theory. The finding rests on the so-called “component parts doctrine” (or, as in this case, the “bulk supplier defense”), under which “the manufacturer of a component part is not liable for injuries caused by the finished product into which the component has been incorporated unless the component itself was defective and caused…

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.