Horton v. Harwick Chemical Corp.

73 Ohio St. 3d 679 (Ohio 1995) · Supreme Court of Ohio · September 13, 1995

Summary

The Ohio Supreme Court declined to adopt the Lohrmann test for determining causation in asbestos cases at the summary-judgment stage. It held that ordinary summary-judgment standards apply, while rejecting alternative liability because the defendants' asbestos products did not create substantially similar risks of harm.

Holdings

  1. Ohio courts must not apply the Lohrmann frequency, regularity, and proximity test as a formulaic summary-judgment standard in asbestos cases.
  2. For each defendant, the plaintiff must prove exposure to the defendant's product and that the product was a substantial factor in causing the injury, but need not prove regular, extended, close-proximity exposure under the Lohrmann formula.
  3. Alternative liability does not apply where the defendants' products did not create substantially similar risks of harm.

Questions Presented

  1. Whether Ohio courts should adopt the Lohrmann frequency, regularity, and proximity test as the summary-judgment standard for causation in asbestos cases.
  2. Whether a plaintiff in an asbestos case must prove regular, extended exposure to a particular product in close proximity to the plaintiff's workplace to establish that the product was a substantial factor in causing injury.
  3. Whether alternative liability applies when defendants' asbestos-containing products did not create substantially similar risks of harm.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded

Cases Cited (10)

  • Pang v. Minch (1990), 53 Ohio St. 3d 186, 559 N.E.2d 1313(followed)
  • Goldman v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp. (1987), 33 Ohio St. 3d 40, 514 N.E.2d 691(followed)
  • Davis v. Loopco Industries, Inc. (1993), 66 Ohio St. 3d 64, 609 N.E.2d 144(followed)
  • Schultz v. Keene Corp. (N.D. Ill. 1990), 729 F. Supp. 609(followed)
  • Hardy v. Johns-Manville Sales Corp. (E.D. Tex. 1981), 509 F. Supp. 1353, 1355, rev'd on other grounds, 681 F.2d 334 (5th Cir. 1982)(followed)
  • Zurich Ins. Co. v. Raymark Indus., Inc. (1987), 118 Ill. 2d 23, 37, 112 Ill. Dec. 684, 690, 514 N.E.2d 150, 156(followed)
  • Robertson v. Allied Signal, Inc. (3d Cir. 1990), 914 F.2d 360(followed)
  • Lohrmann v. Pittsburgh Corning Corp., 782 F.2d 1156(rejected)
  • Summers v. Tice (1948), 33 Cal. 2d 80, 199 P.2d 1(followed)
  • Minnich v. Ashland Oil Co. (1984), 15 Ohio St. 3d 396, 15 OBR 511, 473 N.E.2d 1199(followed)

Cited In (0)

No citing cases on record yet.

Download CaseDownload Case DataDownload Case and DataDownload AI Instructions

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…

More from Ohio Supreme Court