Analysis: Chevron Oil analysis not appropriate

In sum, a Chevron Oil analysis is not appropriate in this case. Robinson is a clear and binding statement of the rule of retroactivity in civil cases.

We conclude that it is still good law. Because the rule of strict product liability adopted in Ulmer and Tabert was applied to the litigants in subsequent asbestos exposure cases, it applies retroactively to all subsequent litigants not barred by procedural requirements. This includes litigants, like Lunsford, exposed to asbestos prior to Washington’s adoption of § 402A of the Restatement of Torts.