In Henderson v. Allied, the trial court grant summary judgment against Henderson in an asbestos case under the Door Closing Statute because the Plaintiff was residents of NC and could not show regular exposure in South Carolina. In determining whether exposure is actionable, the Supreme Court adopted the “frequency, regularity, and proximity test” set forth in Lohrmann v. Pittsburgh Corning Corp., 782 F.2d 1156, 1162 (4th Cir. 1986): “To support a reasonable inference of substantial causation from circumstantial evidence, there must be evidence of exposure to a specific product on a regular basis over some extended period of time in proximity to where the plaintiff actually worked.”
The Supreme Court agreed with the trial court that “presence in the vicinity of static asbestos is not exposure to asbestos." Summary judgment was affirmed.