the injury occurred to be the place where the product was designed and manufactured”). 7 . Mrs. Pounders does not challenge application of the statute of repose against Enserch. 8 . BW's subsidiary, Byron Jackson Pumps, designed and installed the pumps, which included asbestos-related components. For ease of reference, we refer to BW as the entity that performed these functions. 9 . See Ball, 877 P.2d at 47 n. 3 (collecting cases); Fine v. Huygens, DiMella, Shaffer & Assocs., 57 Mass.App.Ct. 397, 783 N.E.2d 842, 847-48 (2003) (applying activity analysis and concluding statute of repose applies to design professionals who supplied exterior wall panel but does not apply to suppliers who provided stock windows); Abbott v. John E. Green Co., 233 Mich.App. 194, 592 N.W.2d 96, 102 (1998) (<HOLDING>); Pendzsu v. Beazer East, Inc., 219 Mich.App.
holding statements of product superiority and that product was industry approved were puffery holding that opinion work product is entitled to nearly absolute protection with limited exceptions holding under activity analysis contractors who designed and installed asbestos product were entitled to protection of statute of repose holding that the nexus between an asbestos product and plaintiff may be established by direct and circumstantial evidence and that testimony by someone with knowledge relating to the plaintiffs workplace exposure to an asbestoscontaining product is admissible holding that opinion where product is entitled to nearly absolute protection with some limited exceptions