Reed v. Asbestos Corporation Limited

Summary

The Delaware Supreme Court affirmed summary judgment for five defendants in a take-home asbestos exposure action. The Court held that the plaintiffs failed to provide non-speculative evidence placing the decedent’s relatives in sufficient proximity to the defendants’ asbestos products, and, as to Bayer Cropscience, failed to establish that the products were friable when used.

Holdings

1. Summary judgment was proper because plaintiffs produced no evidence from which a jury could reasonably infer, without speculation, that Barbara Reed's father or former husband was in specific proximity to the defendants' products when those products were being used.
2. Summary judgment was proper because plaintiffs produced no evidence from which a jury could reasonably infer, without speculation, that Barbara Reed's father was in specific proximity to Bayer's products at a time when those products were friable.

Questions Presented

1. Whether summary judgment was proper where plaintiffs lacked evidence placing the decedent's alleged exposure sources in specific proximity to the defendants' asbestos products at the time of use.
2. Whether summary judgment was proper against Bayer Cropscience where plaintiffs also lacked evidence that Bayer's products were friable at the relevant time.

Disposition

affirmed