In Brady v. Calsol, Inc. 2015 No. B262028, the California Court of Appeal, Second District, reversed summary judgment for a raw materials supplier where there was a triable issue of fact as to whether the benzene levels contained in the supplier’s mineral spirits could have caused plaintiffs’ leukemia.
Plaintiffs were mechanics Ernest Brady and David Gibbs, who used Safety-Kleen solvent to degrease automotive parts. Brady and Gibbs were diagnosed with leukemia allegedly caused by exposure to Safety-Kleen solvent during the course of their employment. In 2008, Plaintiffs sued Calsol, Inc., a distributor of mineral spirits for the ultimate manufacturer, Safety-Kleen Systems, Inc. Plaintiffs asserted negligence and strict products liability claims. Specifically, plaintiffs alleged that benzene, a carcinogen found in mineral spirits, caused their leukemia. Benzene is only carcinogenic to humans at certain levels. The parties dispute the levels of benzene found in the mineral spirits supplied to Safety-Kleen. Calsol contended the benzene levels were present only in low concentrations. Plaintiffs alleged the benzene levels were capable of causing injury.
Calsol filed a motion for summary judgment based on the component parts doctrine. The trial court granted summary judgment for Calsol. The Court of Appeal held that Calsol failed to prove that its mineral spirits were not inherently dangerous, a requirement of the component parts doctrine. The court reversed the summary judgment and remanded for further proceedings.
The component parts doctrine insulates a supplier from liability for a defect contained in the finished product. The component part seller will be subject to liability only if (1) the component itself has a defect which causes injury, or (2) the seller substantially participates in integrating the component into the end product and the integration of the component causes the product to be defective. (O’Neil v. Crane Co. (2012) 53 Cal.4th 335.) The underlying policy is to prevent a component seller from the unreasonable duty to scrutinize another’s product which the component seller has no role in developing. Under the component parts doctrine, “product components” includes raw materials.
Artiglio v. Gen. Elec. Co. (1998) 61 Cal.App.4th 830, set forth all of the factors the raw material supplier must establish to invoke the component parts doctrine: (1) the raw material supplied was not inherently dangerous, (2) the raw material was sold to a sophisticated buyer, (3) the raw material was substantially changed during the manufacturing process, and (4) the raw material supplier had a limited role in developing and designing the end product.
Here, plaintiffs alleged that benzene is inherently dangerous because it is a known carcinogen. Calsol presented no evidence that its mineral spirits were not inherently dangerous. Rather, Calsol argued that Artiglio misinterpreted the meaning of “inherently dangerous” and urged the Court of Appeal to exclude the “inherently dangerous” requirement from the component parts doctrine analysis. Reversing the summary judgment, the Court of Appeal declined to alter the Artiglio factors. These factors are consistent with numerous California asbestos cases, which regard asbestos fiber as a defective raw material because it is inherently dangerous. Although the asbestos fiber is processed before it is sold to consumers, it is the asbestos fiber, not the end product, that causes harm.
California law maintains that suppliers of inherently dangerous raw materials cannot invoke the protections of the component parts doctrine.
This document is intended to provide you with information about product liability related developments. The contents of this document are not intended to provide specific legal advice. This communication may be considered advertising in some jurisdictions.