New Jersey Appellate Court Finds That Manufacturer Has Duty To Warn That Component Parts of Products Contain Asbestos Even Though Parts Will Be Replaced

The Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division found that a pump manufacturer had a duty to warn workers that component parts of its pumps contained asbestos even though those parts would later be replaced.  Analyzing the question of duty under a strict liability theory, the court held that the plaintiffs were entitled to the inference that the manufacturer knew that its pumps and their asbestos-containing component parts posed a danger that was reasonably foreseeable because the manufacturer knew at the time it introduced the pumps into the market that the parts would have to be replaced as part of regular maintenance.  The manufacturer was also unaware of any substitute parts that did not contain asbestos, which increased the likelihood that the workers would be exposed to asbestos even after the parts were replaced.  The court further explained that it was fair to impose a duty to warn because the manufacturer could have issued a warning at virtually no cost and the warning would have made conditions considerably safer.  In particular, imposing the duty at the manufacturing stage was appropriate because the warning would have affected the entire class of foreseeable users more so than at any other time in the life of the pump, further enhancing the safety of the product.

Despite the existence of a duty, the court concluded that the plaintiffs failed to prove causation and, therefore, dismissal was appropriate.  The court explained that the plaintiffs failed to present any evidence of actual exposed to the asbestos contained in the component parts specifically manufactured by the defendant and that a showing of “mere proximity” to the defendant’s product was not sufficient.