Camplin v. ACandS, Inc., 768 N.E.2d 428 (Ind. 2002). · Go Syfert
Search
Camplin v. ACandS, Inc., 768 N.E.2d 428 (Ind. 2002). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
3 citation events across 2 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Robin B. Quinn, Prsnl. Rep. for Jo Ann Allen v. General Electric Co. (md, 2026-04-27)
Top citers, strongest first. 1 distinct citer. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Robin B. Quinn, Prsnl. Rep. for Jo Ann Allen v. General Electric Co.
Md. · 2026 · confidence medium
The Sixth Circuit concluded, however, that, as stated in its discussion of the plaintiff’s negligence claim, “there [was] no evidence that the danger from secondary exposure was reasonably foreseeable at the time of [the plaintiff’s father’s] exposure[,]” and, as such, the trial court was correct in ruling that the plaintiff “did not present sufficient evidence to survive summary judgment on a bystander liability claim.” Id. at 447 . - 27 - would reasonably be expected to be in the vicinity of the product during its reasonably expected use.” Stegemoller v. ACandS, Inc., 767 N.E…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Cathleen A. and Emmett O. CAMPLIN, Appellants (Plaintiffs Below),
v.
ACandS, INC., Et Al., Appellees (Defendants Below)
49S02-0202-CV-128.
Indiana Supreme Court.
May 17, 2002.
768 N.E.2d 428
2002 Ind. LEXIS 375
2002 WL 1009898
Linda George, W. Russell Sipes, Laudig, George, Rutherford & Sipes, Indianapolis, Indiana, Attorneys for Appellants., See Appendix A, Attorneys for Appel-lees.
Shepard, Dickson, Sullivan, Boehm, Rucker.
Cited by 2 opinions  |  Published
SHEPARD, Chief Justice.

Cathleen Camplin allegedly contracted a disease as a result of contact with asbestos fibers brought home on the person and clothing of her husband Emmett, a union insulator. The trial court dismissed the Camplins' suit on the basis that Mrs. Camplin lacked standing under Indiana's Product Liability Act.

The Indiana Court of Appeals invited us to accept jurisdiction over the Camplins' appeal because it involves the same issue as another case in which we had granted transfer. See Stegemoller v. ACandS, Inc., 749 N.E.2d 1216, 1220 (Ind.Ct.App.2001), transfer granted, 761 N.E.2d 423 (Ind.2001). We accepted jurisdiction, and now hold that Mrs. Camplin has standing as a bystander under the Act. [1]

Analysis

The Act governs actions by users or consumers against manufacturers or sellers for physical harm caused by products. Ind.Code Ann. § 34-20-1-1 (West 1999). For purposes of the Act, "consumer" includes "any bystander injured by the product who would reasonably be expected to be in the vicinity of the product during its reasonably expected use." Id. § 34-6-2-29. Who qualifies under this statutory definition is a legal question, to be decided by the court. Estate of Shebel v. Yaskawa Elec. Am., Inc., 713 N.E.2d 275, 279 (Ind.1999).

We hold today in Stegemollier v. ACandS, Inc., 767 N.E.2d 974 (Ind.2002), that a plaintiff who allegedly contracted a disease as a result of contact with asbestos fibers brought home on the person and clothing of her husband has standing as a bystander under the Act. Our reasoning in that case applies here, and we reach the same result: taking into account the nature of asbestos products, Mrs. Camplin has a cognizable claim as a bystander under the Act.

Conclusion

We reverse the dismissal of this action and direct that it be reinstated.

DICKSON, SULLIVAN, BOEHM, and RUCKER, JJ., concur.

[*430] APPENDIX A:; ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEES

Sonia C. Das, Sue Mehringer, Lisa Dill-man, Lewis & Wagner, Indianapolis, Indiana, for ACandS, Inc.; North American Refractories Co.

Michael Bergin, Daniel Long, Locke Reynolds LLP, Indianapolis, Indiana, for Am-chem Products; C.E. Thurston; Certain Teed Corp.; T & N, PLC; Union Carbide.

John L. Lisher, Osborne, Hiner & Lisher, Indianapolis, Indiana, for Oakfabeo, Inc.

Douglas B. King, Jeffrey McKean, Roger Orlup, Wooden & McLaughlin, LLP, Indianapolis, Indiana, for Rapid American; Flintkote Co.

Christopher Lee, Kahn, Dees, Donovan & Kahn, Evansville, Indiana, for Combustion Engineering; Kaiser Aluminum & Chemical.

Jason L. Kennedy, Segal, McCambridge, Singer & Mahoney, Chicago, Illinois, for Foster Wheeler LLC; AP. Green; Harbi-son-Walker Refractories Co.

James E. Rocap, Jeffrey B. Fetch, Rocap Witchger LLP, Indianapolis, Indiana, for Fargo Insulation.

Stacy Alexander, Reginald Bishop, Roberts & Bishop, Indianapolis, Indiana, for D.B. Riley, Inc.

Edward Harney, Hume, Smith, Geddes, Green & Simmons, LLP, Indianapolis, Indiana, for BMW Constructors, Inc.

Kevin Knight, Ice Miller, Indianapolis, Indiana, for General Electric Co.

Randall Nye, Seott Loitz, Beckman, Kelly & Smith, Hammond, Indiana, for General Refractories; Grefeo.

APPENDIX A: ATTORNEYS FOR

Mary K. Reeder, Charles C. Douglas, Riley, Bennett & Egloff, LLP, Indianapolis, Indiana, for Central Supply Co.

1

. Defendants Kaiser Aluminum and Chemical Corp. and North American Refractories Co. have filed for bankruptcy, and this decision is thus subject to applicable rules of bankruptcy law as to them.