California Court of Appeal Holds Intermediary’s Sophistication Not Sufficient, as a Matter of Law, to Avoid Supplier’s Liability for Injury to Product User

by Wilson Elser

On October 29, 2013, the California Court of Appeal affirmed as proper a trial court’s refusal to give defendant John Crane, Inc.’s (Crane’s) requested jury instruction on the “sophisticated user” defense. In Anne Pfeifer, et al. v. John Crane, Inc., California Court of Appeal, Second District, Div. Four, 2013 S.O.S. B232315 (Los Angeles County Super. Ct., No. BC416536), the Court held that when a manufacturer provides hazardous products to a “sophisticated” intermediary, that “intermediary’s sophistication” is not sufficient, as a matter of law, to excuse the manufacturer’s liability for injury to the employee user of the product.

Factual and Procedural Background
Defendant Crane was a manufacturer of packing and gasket products, among other products. It sold asbestos-containing packing and gaskets to the U.S. Navy and to the U.S. government.

From 1963 to 1971, William Pfeifer (Pfeifer) served in the Navy as an apprentice fireman and boiler tender. After leaving the Navy, Pfeifer worked for the U.S. government as a boiler technician until 1982. In 2009, he was diagnosed with pleural mesothelioma. Pfeifer claimed exposure to asbestos from Crane products throughout his career.

Plaintiffs brought an action for negligence, strict liability and loss of consortium. After a  jury award in favor of plaintiffs, Crane appealed the judgment on several grounds, including the jury’s allocations with respect to comparative fault, the award of punitive damages and the trial court’s rejection of Crane’s proffered instruction on its “sophisticated user” defense. According to the opinion, Crane requested a jury instruction that stated, “employees of a sophisticated user are deemed to be sophisticated users.”

The Court of Appeal found that sufficient evidence supported the jury's findings of comparative fault and punitive damages against Crane. With respect to the “sophisticated user” issue, the Court held that when a manufacturer provides hazardous products to a “sophisticated” intermediary for use by the intermediary’s employees, the manufacturer-supplier is subject to liability for failure to warn the employees of the hazards, “absent some basis for the manufacturer to believe the ultimate users know or should know of the hazards.”

“Sophisticated User” Defense
On appeal, Crane argued that it was not liable for its failure to warn Pfeifer regarding the hazards of asbestos while he served in the Navy because the Navy had greater knowledge of those hazards than Crane had. In response, the Court reviewed the history of the “sophisticated user” defense and noted that the term has been applied to at least two potentially overlapping defenses, both based on section 388 of the Restatement Second of Torts:

  • The basis for the first defense can be found in comment k to section 388, which states that the supplier’s duty to warn arises only when the supplier “has no reason to expect that [the item’s user] will … realize the danger involved” (Rest.2d Torts, § 388, com. k., pp. 306-307).
  • The basis for the second defense is reflected in comment n to section 388, which states that when the supplier provides items to a third party that will pass them to the user, the supplier may in some circumstances discharge its duty to warn the user by informing the third party of the item’s dangers (Rest.2d Torts, § 388, com. n., pp. 307-310).

The Court went on to analyze the California Supreme Court case of Johnson v. American Standard, Inc. (2008) 43 Cal. 4th 56, 66. It noted that although the Johnson case held that the sophisticated user defense, as reflected in comment k to section 338, was applicable in California, the Johnson court focused the inquiry on whether the plaintiff knew or should have known of the particular risk of harm from the product that caused the injury. The Johnson case specifically did not address the question of “sophisticated intermediary.”
Another case the Court analyzed, Stewart v. Union Carbide Corp. (2010) 190 Cal.App.4th 23, 33, addressed the “sophisticated intermediary” defense, which is reflected in comment n to section 388. In Stewart, a plumber asserted claims against a supplier of raw asbestos. At trial, the court refused the supplier’s request for instructions on a “sophisticated user” defense on the theory that the manufacturers of the products that used the supplier’s raw asbestos were aware of the hazards. In affirming the ruling, the appellate court concluded there was no evidence to support any type of “sophisticated user” instruction. The Stewart court said that Johnson “did not impute an intermediary’s knowledge to the plaintiff, or charge him with any knowledge except that which had been made available to him through his training and which, by reason of his profession and certification, he should have had.” The Court further determined that the “sophisticated intermediary” defense was inapplicable because the defendant had provided no warnings to the intermediary manufacturers.

Because it was undisputed in the Pfeifer case that Crane did not provide any warnings to the Navy (or presumably to the U.S. government), the Court held that the trial court properly declined to give Crane’s proposed instruction, which erroneously stated that employees of a sophisticated user are by virtue of their employment deemed to be sophisticated users.

The Court further held that there was insufficient evidence to support any legally correct version of the sophisticated user defense. The evidence at trial established only that:

  • By the 1960s, medical researchers agreed that asbestos caused cancer
  • Crane issued no warnings regarding its products while Pfeifer served in the Navy from 1963 to 1971
  • Pfeifer had no training or knowledge regarding the dangers of asbestos
  • The Navy had a medical staff with access to research on asbestos
  • Studies of Navy workers in the 1940s, 1960s and 1970s disclosed some hazards from asbestos dust
  • In the early 1970s, the Navy began an asbestos abatement program aimed at containing dust from asbestos insulation.

Although the evidence might show that the Navy was a negligent sophisticated intermediary, it did not support a reasonable inference by Crane that the Navy would warn or otherwise protect Pfeifer from the hazards of the Crane product. The Court was especially swayed in plaintiffs’ favor by this absence of any evidence that Crane had reason to believe the Navy would issue warnings to Pfeifer regarding Crane’s products, or that it was at the time “readily known and apparent” to the Navy that the Crane products were hazardous.

While the decision may be discouraging to defendants who sell products to sophisticated users, it does not completely close the door to the viability of the “sophisticated intermediary” defense. The Pfeifer court says it is not enough for a supplier defendant to simply show the plaintiff was an employee of a sophisticated intermediary to avoid liability. The supplier must also show it had sufficient reason for believing the ultimate user knew or should have known of the hazards.

However, the Court acknowledged the appropriateness of this defense even in the absence of a showing that warnings were issued to the intermediary. The Court stated that “suppliers may provide the additional required showing in many ways,” e.g., by offering evidence that it reasonably believed that the intermediary would warn the users, that the employees knew or should have known of the dangers in view of their experience and training, or that the specific dangers were so “readily known and apparent” to the intermediary that it would be expected to protect its employees.


DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Wilson Elser | Attorney Advertising

Written by:

Wilson Elser

Wilson Elser on:

Readers' Choice 2017
Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
Sign up using*

Already signed up? Log in here

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
Custom Email Digest
Privacy Policy (Updated: October 8, 2015):

JD Supra provides users with access to its legal industry publishing services (the "Service") through its website (the "Website") as well as through other sources. Our policies with regard to data collection and use of personal information of users of the Service, regardless of the manner in which users access the Service, and visitors to the Website are set forth in this statement ("Policy"). By using the Service, you signify your acceptance of this Policy.

Information Collection and Use by JD Supra

JD Supra collects users' names, companies, titles, e-mail address and industry. JD Supra also tracks the pages that users visit, logs IP addresses and aggregates non-personally identifiable user data and browser type. This data is gathered using cookies and other technologies.

The information and data collected is used to authenticate users and to send notifications relating to the Service, including email alerts to which users have subscribed; to manage the Service and Website, to improve the Service and to customize the user's experience. This information is also provided to the authors of the content to give them insight into their readership and help them to improve their content, so that it is most useful for our users.

JD Supra does not sell, rent or otherwise provide your details to third parties, other than to the authors of the content on JD Supra.

If you prefer not to enable cookies, you may change your browser settings to disable cookies; however, please note that rejecting cookies while visiting the Website may result in certain parts of the Website not operating correctly or as efficiently as if cookies were allowed.

Email Choice/Opt-out

Users who opt in to receive emails may choose to no longer receive e-mail updates and newsletters by selecting the "opt-out of future email" option in the email they receive from JD Supra or in their JD Supra account management screen.


JD Supra takes reasonable precautions to insure that user information is kept private. We restrict access to user information to those individuals who reasonably need access to perform their job functions, such as our third party email service, customer service personnel and technical staff. However, please note that no method of transmitting or storing data is completely secure and we cannot guarantee the security of user information. Unauthorized entry or use, hardware or software failure, and other factors may compromise the security of user information at any time.

If you have reason to believe that your interaction with us is no longer secure, you must immediately notify us of the problem by contacting us at In the unlikely event that we believe that the security of your user information in our possession or control may have been compromised, we may seek to notify you of that development and, if so, will endeavor to do so as promptly as practicable under the circumstances.

Sharing and Disclosure of Information JD Supra Collects

Except as otherwise described in this privacy statement, JD Supra will not disclose personal information to any third party unless we believe that disclosure is necessary to: (1) comply with applicable laws; (2) respond to governmental inquiries or requests; (3) comply with valid legal process; (4) protect the rights, privacy, safety or property of JD Supra, users of the Service, Website visitors or the public; (5) permit us to pursue available remedies or limit the damages that we may sustain; and (6) enforce our Terms & Conditions of Use.

In the event there is a change in the corporate structure of JD Supra such as, but not limited to, merger, consolidation, sale, liquidation or transfer of substantial assets, JD Supra may, in its sole discretion, transfer, sell or assign information collected on and through the Service to one or more affiliated or unaffiliated third parties.

Links to Other Websites

This Website and the Service may contain links to other websites. The operator of such other websites may collect information about you, including through cookies or other technologies. If you are using the Service through the Website and link to another site, you will leave the Website and this Policy will not apply to your use of and activity on those other sites. We encourage you to read the legal notices posted on those sites, including their privacy policies. We shall have no responsibility or liability for your visitation to, and the data collection and use practices of, such other sites. This Policy applies solely to the information collected in connection with your use of this Website and does not apply to any practices conducted offline or in connection with any other websites.

Changes in Our Privacy Policy

We reserve the right to change this Policy at any time. Please refer to the date at the top of this page to determine when this Policy was last revised. Any changes to our privacy policy will become effective upon posting of the revised policy on the Website. By continuing to use the Service or Website following such changes, you will be deemed to have agreed to such changes. If you do not agree with the terms of this Policy, as it may be amended from time to time, in whole or part, please do not continue using the Service or the Website.

Contacting JD Supra

If you have any questions about this privacy statement, the practices of this site, your dealings with this Web site, or if you would like to change any of the information you have provided to us, please contact us at:

- hide
*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.