ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLANTS ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEES
LINDA GEORGE SEE APPENDIX A
W. RUSSELL SIPES
Laudig George Rutherford & Sipes
SUPREME COURT OF INDIANA
CATHLEEN A. and EMMETT O. CAMPLIN, )
Appellants (Plaintiffs Below), ) Cause No. 49S02-0202-
) in the Supreme Court
ACandS, INC., et al., ) Cause No. 49A02-0106-
) in the Court of Appeals
Appellees (Defendants Below). )
APPEAL FROM THE MARION SUPERIOR COURT
The Honorable Kenneth H. Johnson, Judge
Cause No. 49D02-9501-MI-0001-375
May 17, 2002
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
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.
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 Stegemoller v. ACandS, Inc., No. 49S02-0111-CV-593,
slip op. (Ind. May 17, 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.
We reverse the dismissal of this action and direct that it be
Dickson, Sullivan, Boehm, and Rucker, JJ., concur.
APPENDIX A: ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEES
For ACandS, Inc.; North American Refractories Co.
SONIA C. DAS
Lewis & Wagner
For Amchem Products; C.E. Thurston; Certain Teed Corp.; Flexitallic; T&N,
PLC; Union Carbide
Locke Reynolds LLP
For Oakfabco, Inc.
JOHN L. LISHER
Osborne Hiner & Lisher
For Rapid American; Flintkote Co.
DOUGLAS B. KING
Wooden & McLaughlin, LLP
For Combustion Engineering; Kaiser Aluminum & Chemical
Kahn Dees Donovan & Kahn
For Foster Wheeler LLC; A.P. Green; Harbison-Walker Refractories Co.
JASON L. KENNEDY
Segal McCambridge Singer & Mahoney
For Fargo Insulation
JAMES E. ROCAP
JEFFREY B. FETCH
Rocap Witchger LLP
For D.B. Riley, Inc.
Roberts & Bishop
For BMW Constructors, Inc.
Hume Smith Geddes Green & Simmons, LLP
For General Electric Co.
For General Refractories; Grefco
Beckman, Kelly & Smith
For Central Supply Co.
MARY K. REEDER
CHARLES C. DOUGLAS
Riley Bennett & Egloff, LLP
 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.