ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLANT                 ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEES
                                
ROBERT E. PAUL                        See Appendix A
Paul, Reich & Myers, P.C.
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania     

MARK K. DUDLEY                    
Young, Riley, Dudley & Debrota                        
Indianapolis, Indiana                        
        
                        


IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIANA
JAMES A. MARTIN, Administrator of the Estate    )
Of MADELINE MARTIN,  Deceased, and               )                        Widower in his own right,            ) Cause No. 
49S02-0202-CV-117
                                                                                ) in the Supreme Court
    Appellant (Plaintiff Below                   ),            )  
                                                 )  
        v.                                       )  
                                                 )  Cause No. 49A02-0008-CV-534
ACandS, INC., et al.,                            )  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-0001-295


May 17, 2002

SHEPARD, Chief Justice.



    Madeline Martin allegedly died of lung cancer caused by asbestos fibers brought home on the clothing of her husband James, a laborer and bricklayer. The trial court dismissed the ensuing suit, holding that Mrs. Martin’s personal representative could not bring a wrongful death action because Mrs. Martin did not qualify as a “user or consumer” eligible to pursue a claim under Indiana’s Product Liability Act. The Court of Appeals affirmed. Martin v. ACandS, Inc., No. 49A02-0008-CV-534, slip op. (Ind. Ct. App. Aug. 22, 2001).

    We granted transfer, and now reverse, holding that Mrs. Martin had standing as a bystander under the Act. See footnote


Analysis

     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. at § 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. Martin had a cognizable claim as a bystander under the Act.

    Mr. Martin claims that he has an independent cause of action under the Act, as a product user who suffered physical harm in the form of lost services. (Appellant’s Br. at 6.) Because we find that Mrs. Martin had standing under the Act, we need not address this argument. In wrongful death actions based on product liability, See footnote damages may be awarded for the surviving spouse’s loss of services, love, and affection. Durham v. U-Haul Int’l, 745 N.E.2d 755, 765 (Ind. 2001) (loss of consortium “is a proper element of damages in a wrongful death action for the death of a spouse” and includes material services as well as love, care, and affection). Mr. Martin may therefore seek compensation for his loss based upon our holding that Mrs. Martin qualified as a bystander.


Conclusion

    We reverse the dismissal of this action and direct that it be reinstated.

Dickson, Sullivan, Boehm, and Rucker, JJ., concur.

APPENDIX A: ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEES

For Flintkote Co.; J.M. Foster, Inc.; Bondex Int’l., Inc.
DOUGLAS B. KING
JAMES M. BOYERS
Wooden & McLaughlin LLP
Indianapolis, Indiana

For AlliedSignal, Inc.; Dana Corp.; Flexitallic, Inc.; Foseco, Inc.; General Motors Corp.; Quigley Co., Inc.; Union Carbide Corp.
MICHAEL BERGIN
DANIEL M. LONG
Locke Reynolds LLP
Indianapolis, Indiana

For Kaiser Aluminum & Chemical Corp.
CHRISTOPHER D. LEE
LEE F. BAKER
Kahn, Dees, Donovan & Kahn, LLP
Evansville, Indiana

For Riley Stoker Corp.; Congoleum Corp.
REGINALD B. BISHOP
Roberts & Bishop
Indianapolis, Indiana

For Georgia-Pacific Corp.
ANDREW J. DETHERAGE
JONATHON D. MATTINGLY
Barnes & Thornburg
Indianapolis, Indiana

For ACandS, Inc; North American Refractories Co.; A.P. Green Services
LISA M. DILLMAN

For A.P. Green Industries, Inc.; New Harbison-Walker Refractories Co.; Pittsburgh Metals Purifying; Plibrico Co.
JASON L. KENNEDY
Segal McCambridge Singer & Mahoney, LTD
Chicago, Illinois

For Chicago Fire Brick Co.
BRUCE L. KAMPLAIN
Norris, Choplin & Schroeder, LLP
Indianapolis, Indiana

For Beazer East; Universal Refractories
GUS SACOPULOS
Sacopulos Johnson & Sacopulos
Terre Haute, Indiana

For Hoosier Gasket Corp.
BETTE J. DODD
Lewis & Kappes, P.C.
Indianapolis, Indiana




Footnote: 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.

Footnote: See, e.g., FMC Corp. v. Brown, 551 N.E.2d 444 (Ind. 1990).