The California Supreme Court has joined 30 other states with a ruling that manufacturers do not need to put a warning on a product employed by a sophisticated user who should know its dangers.

Defense attorneys for the business community praised the decision, which came in the case of a trained heating and ventilation worker exposed to phosgene gas who suffered pulmonary fibrosis.

"A home run," said M.C. Sungaila, with the firm of Horvitz Levy, which filed a friend-of-the-court brief for the U.S Chamber of Commerce and five manufacturing firms.

Mark Behrens, an attorney with the Shook, Hardy & Bacon law firm, said the ruling is especially significant because "the California Supreme court has been a leader in developing American tort law." He said it is "a court that other courts look to, and California is a large and litigious state. The ruling will apply to many cases."

The case was brought by William Keith Johnson, a trained and certified heating, ventilation and air conditioning (HVAC) technician, against American Standard, which manufactures air conditioning equipment.

Brazing work on such equipment can result in the R-22 refrigerant it contains to decompose and turn into toxic gas.

The high court decision mentioned that HVAC technicians who work on commercial equipment must be certified by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, which advises on the dangers of R-22.

It noted testimony that every time Mr. Johnson purchased the hydro chlorofluorocarbon refrigerant R-22, he "received, and sometimes read, an MSDS [Material Safety Data Sheet]."

According to the court papers, Mr. Johnson testified that he had read the MSDS for R-22, but did not understand that he should avoid heating it. But the California Court of Appeal concluded that there was undisputed evidence from the relevant declarations and depositions of HVAC technicians that the EPA requires those professionals "to understand the decomposition products of refrigerants at high temperatures."

The court noted that "the study guide informed users that refrigerant in contact with high heat can form dangerous substances, and the Material Safety Data Sheet for R-22 informed technicians that the product can decompose when in contact with heat, releasing toxic gases."

The Supreme Court, by its decision, affirmed the summary judgment in the defendant company's favor.

Mr. Behrens said the case would likely not have an impact on long-tail asbestos claims, where the danger to exposure was not known, but it should apply to claims of silicosis injury from silica exposure, where the risks "have been known for many decades" and arise during abrasive sand blasting and foundry operations.

He said it would also impact chemical exposure cases.

Special Reports /

Sophisticated User Ruling In Calif. Heartens Businesses

Related Stories

Recommended For You