Glaser v. Sears Roebuck, Co.
N15C-08-207 ASB
| Del. Super. Ct. | Jul 12, 2017Background
- Plaintiffs Scott Glaser and Sandra Hurst sued Sears Roebuck alleging Mr. Glaser was exposed to Sears‑sold asbestos floor tile at the Penobscot Building in Detroit in 1977–1978.
- Glaser worked as a carpenter and testified he swept and cleaned tile scraps/dust at the site.
- The parties agreed the summary‑judgment motion was limited to Sears’s liability for those floor tiles.
- Sears admitted it was a retailer (not a manufacturer) but acknowledged certain floor tiles it sold during the period contained asbestos.
- Michigan law limits a non‑manufacturing seller’s product‑liability exposure to negligence (including implied‑warranty) or express‑warranty claims where the seller failed to exercise reasonable care or made an express warranty.
- The court found Plaintiffs failed to show Sears sold a product in a defective condition, that Sears breached reasonable care, or that Sears had a duty to warn of another manufacturer’s product — and granted Sears summary judgment.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Sears, as a retailer, can be liable for asbestos exposure from floor tile | Sears knew in the 1970s that asbestos was dangerous and sold asbestos‑containing tile, so it should be liable | Sears was only a retailer, not a manufacturer, and did not manufacture/process the tiles; Michigan law limits seller liability | Summary judgment for Sears — plaintiffs failed to meet Michigan standard for non‑manufacturer seller liability |
| Whether Plaintiffs proved a product was sold in a defective condition | The presence of asbestos in tiles makes them defective and caused Glaser’s injury | Plaintiffs produced no evidence Sears sold a defective product or breached reasonable care in selling tiles | Held for Sears — plaintiffs did not prove defect, causation, or lack of reasonable care |
| Whether Sears had a duty to warn about dangers of another manufacturer’s product | Plaintiffs implied Sears should have warned about asbestos hazards | Sears had no duty to warn about hazards created by another manufacturer’s product | Held for Sears — under Michigan law a seller/manufacturer does not owe a duty to warn of another’s product dangers |
| Whether an express or implied warranty claim survives against Sears | Plaintiffs assert breach of warranty theories based on sale of asbestos tile | Sears denies liability as a non‑manufacturing seller and there is no proof of warranty breach or causation | Held for Sears — warranty claims fail for lack of proof of defective product and causation |
Key Cases Cited
- Moore v. Sizemore, 405 A.2d 679 (Del. 1979) (Delaware authority on summary‑judgment standards cited by the court)
- Nutt v. A.C. & S., Inc., 517 A.2d 690 (Del. Super. Ct. 1986) (Delaware asbestos litigation precedent referenced regarding summary judgment principles)