Owens-Illinois v. Armstrong

591 A.2d 544 (1991)

Study Aids
Case Briefs Overview
Casebooks
Case Briefs
O
From our private database of 46,200+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Owens-Illinois v. Armstrong

Maryland Court of Special Appeals
591 A.2d 544 (1991)

  • Written by Sharon Feldman, JD

Facts

Frederick Stormer and Dominic Celozzi (plaintiffs) worked with or near asbestos-containing insulation products for many years. Stormer, Celozzi, and two other plaintiffs brought personal-injury claims against various companies that manufactured, installed, or supplied asbestos-containing insulation products, including Owens-Illinois, Inc. (collectively, the asbestos companies) (defendants). The cases were consolidated. At trial, Stormer and Celozzi introduced evidence that they had developed pleural plaques and pleural thickening and suffered from asbestosis as a result of asbestos exposure. The medical experts testified that although pleural plaques and pleural thickening are alterations of healthy pleura, they do not shorten life expectancy or cause pain, disability, or symptoms. The trial judge instructed the jury that damages could not be awarded solely because of pleural plaques or thickening and that the jury had to find in favor of the asbestos companies if the jury found that neither Stormer nor Celozzi suffered from asbestosis. The jury returned a verdict for the asbestos companies. Stormer and Celozzi appealed, arguing that the trial court erred in instructing the jury that damages could not be awarded solely because of pleural plaques or pleural thickening.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Bishop, J.)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 778,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 778,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,200 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 778,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,200 briefs - keyed to 988 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership

Casebooks

Torts

Key Terms