|
0841 A plaintiff who is unable to identify the substances that harmed him cannot establish by the traditional approach that defects in defendant's product caused plaintiff's harm, because it will be impossible to show that exposure to defendant's product was a substantial factor in producing the harm; plaintiff cannot rely on the alternate liability approach (Summers v Tice) to causation unless all possible tortfeasors are joined as defendants; plaintiff cannot rely on the market share approach unless the products involved are fungible.CitationSETLIFF v DU PONT (Unidentified Vapors) 32 CA4 1525 [See: Bromme v Pavitt 5 CA4 1487; Summers v Tice 33 C2 80; Pereira v Dow 129 CA3 865; Sindell v Abbott Labs 26 C3 588]
|
|
