United States v. Amador-Sanchez

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• finding that public policy considerations “weight ] against holding manufacturers liable for harm caused by asbestos products they did not manufacture or distribute because those manufacturers cannot account for the costs of liability created by the third parties’ products”
• explaining the policy rationale for holding only those who make or sell the injurious product liable for the injuries alleged
• discussing Simonetta, Braaten, and O’Neil as decisions which “have [] held that a defendant manufacturer is not liable for a third party’s asbestos products when the defendant is not part of the ‘chain of distribution’ of the asbestos product”
• “[Ujn-der maritime law, a manufacturer is not liable for harm caused by, and owes no duty to warn of the hazards inherent in, asbestos products that the manufacturer did not manufacture or distribute.”
• discussing Lindstrom, and certain California and Washington state court decisions
• “[A] number of state courts ... that have considered this issue have similarly held that a defendant manufacturer is not hable for a third party’s asbestos products when the defendant is not part of the “chain of distribution” of the asbestos product.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).