arrow left
arrow right
  • LOUIS CASTAGNA VS. ASBESTOS DEFENDANTS (B/P)AS REFLECTED ON EXHIBITS et al ASBESTOS document preview
  • LOUIS CASTAGNA VS. ASBESTOS DEFENDANTS (B/P)AS REFLECTED ON EXHIBITS et al ASBESTOS document preview
  • LOUIS CASTAGNA VS. ASBESTOS DEFENDANTS (B/P)AS REFLECTED ON EXHIBITS et al ASBESTOS document preview
  • LOUIS CASTAGNA VS. ASBESTOS DEFENDANTS (B/P)AS REFLECTED ON EXHIBITS et al ASBESTOS document preview
  • LOUIS CASTAGNA VS. ASBESTOS DEFENDANTS (B/P)AS REFLECTED ON EXHIBITS et al ASBESTOS document preview
  • LOUIS CASTAGNA VS. ASBESTOS DEFENDANTS (B/P)AS REFLECTED ON EXHIBITS et al ASBESTOS document preview
  • LOUIS CASTAGNA VS. ASBESTOS DEFENDANTS (B/P)AS REFLECTED ON EXHIBITS et al ASBESTOS document preview
  • LOUIS CASTAGNA VS. ASBESTOS DEFENDANTS (B/P)AS REFLECTED ON EXHIBITS et al ASBESTOS document preview 
						
                                
Preview

                                LLP

KNOX RICKSEN

AT LA W

1320 CLAY STREET, SUITE 526
SAKLAND., CALIFORNIA 94612-1427

ATTOGORNiYS5

ho

Kenneth J. McCarthy - SBN 120875

Gregory D. Pike - SBN 124847 ELECTRONICALLY
KNOX RICKSEN LLP

1300 Clay Street, Suite 500 FILED
Oakland, CA 94612-1427
Telephone: (510) 285-2500

Superior Court of California,
County of San Francisco

Facsimile: (510) 285-2505 JUL 26 2007
GORDON PARK-LI, Clerk

Attorneys for Defendant BY: ANNIE PASCUAL

ALLIS-CHALMERS CORPORATION PRODUCT Deputy Clerk

LIABILITY TRUST

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA - COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO

LOUIS CASTAGNA, No. CGC-07-274230
Plaintiff, ANSWER OF ALLIS-CHALMERS
CORPORATION PRODUCT
V. LIABILITY TRUST TO COMPLAINT

FOR PERSONAL INJURY- ASBESTOS
ASBESTOS DEFENDANTS (BP). et al.,

Defendants.

Now comes ALLIS-CHALMERS CORPORATION PRODUCT LIABILITY
TRUST, and files this its answer to the complaint on file in the above-entitled action and answers
and denies as follows:

Denies each and every, all and singular, the allegations contained therein and each
and every part thereof, and specifically denies that plaintiff has been damaged in any sum
whatsoever and/or at all.

AS FOR A FIRST SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO THE
COMPLAINT OF PLAINTIFF ON FILE HEREIN AND TO EACH AND EVERY CAUSE OF
ACTION THEREOF, this answering defendant alleges that the plaintiff was careless and negligent
in and about the matters alleged in the complaint, and that said carelessness and negligence on the
part of plaintiff proximately contributed to the happenings of the incident and to the injuries, loss,
and damages complained of, if any there were.

AS AND FOR A SECOND, SEPARATE, AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO

-|-

ALLIS-CHALMERS CORP. PRODUCT LIABILITY TRUST-ANSWER TO COMPLAINT-ASBESTOSLLP

KNOX RICKSEN

THE COMPLAINT OF PLAINTIFF ON FILE HEREIN AND TO EACH AND EVERY CAUSE
OF ACTION THEREOF, this answering defendant alleges that plaintiff voluntarily and knowingly
assumed all of the risks incident to said operations, acts, and conduct at the time and place
mentioned in said complaint.

AS AND FOR A THIRD, SEPARATE, AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO THE
COMPLAINT OF PLAINTIFF ON FILE HEREIN AND TO EACH AND EVERY CAUSE OF
ACTION THEREOF, this answering defendant alleges that the product in question was properly
designed and manufactured and was fit for the purpose intended; that said product was improperly
maintained and used and was abused, resulting in plaintiff's damages, if any there were.

AS AND FOR A FOURTH, SEPARATE, AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO.
THE COMPLAINT OF PLAINTIFF ON FILE HEREIN AND TO EACH AND EVERY CAUSE)
OF ACTION THEREOF, this answering defendant alleges that said complaint, and each of said
alleged causes of action thereof, is barred by the provisions of the Code of Civil Procedure, Section
335.1, and Section 340.2.

AS AND FOR A FIFTH, SEPARATE, AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO THE
COMPLAINT OF PLAINTIFF ON FILE HEREIN AND TO EACH AND EVERY CAUSE OF
ACTION THEREOF, this answering defendant alleges that the products in question were used
improperly and this improper use proximately caused the incident and injuries, loss, and damages
complained of, if any there were.

AS AND FOR A SIXTH, SEPARATE, AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO THE
COMPLAINT OF PLAINTIFF ON FILE HEREIN AND TO EACH AND EVERY CAUSE OF
ACTION THEREOF, this answering defendant alleges that plaintiff”s complaint does not state facts|
sufficient to constitute a cause of action against this answering defendant.

AS AND FOR A SEVENTH, SEPARATE, AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO.
THE COMPLAINT OF PLAINTIFF ON FILE HEREIN AND TO EACH AND EVERY CAUSE)
OF ACTION THEREOF, this answering defendant alleges that, while at all times denying any

liability or obligation whatsoever to the plaintiff herein, its products were manufactured, produced,

ALLIS-CHALMERS CORP. PRODUCT LIABILITY TRUST-ANSWER TO COMPLAINT-ASBESTOSLLP

KNOX RICKSEN

supplied, sold, and distributed in a manner which conformed with specifications promulgated by the!
United States Government under its war powers as set forth in the United States Constitution, and
that any recovery by plaintiffs herein is thus barred by said sovereign acts and powers

AS AND FOR AN EIGHTH, SEPARATE, AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO.
THE COMPLAINT OF PLAINTIFF ON FILE HEREIN AND TO EACH AND EVERY CAUSE

OF ACTION THEREOF, this answering defendant alleges that the asbestos products, if any, for

which it had any legal responsibility were manufactured, packaged, distributed, or sold in
accordance with contract specifications imposed by its co-defendants, by plaintiff's employers, or
by third parties yet to be identified

AS AND FOR A NINTH, SEPARATE, AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO THE
COMPLAINT OF PLAINTIFF ON FILE HEREIN AND TO EACH AND EVERY CAUSE OF
ACTION THEREOF, this answering defendant alleges that no conduct by or attributable to it was
the cause in fact or the proximate cause of the damages, if any, suffered by plaintiff, nor a
substantial factor in bringing about said damages.

AS AND FOR A TENTH, SEPARATE, AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO THE,
COMPLAINT OF PLAINTIFF ON FILE HEREIN AND TO EACH AND EVERY CAUSE OF
ACTION THEREOF, this answering defendant alleges that at the time of the injuries alleged in the
complaint, plaintiff was employed and was entitled to receive Workers’ Compensation benefits
from plaintift’s employers, that said employers were negligent in and about the matters referred to in

said complaint, and that such negligence on the part of said employers proximately and concurrently

contributed to the happening of the accident and to the loss or damage complained of by plaintif.
any there were; and that by reason thereof defendant is entitled to set off any such benefits to be
received by plaintiff against any judgment which may be rendered in favor of plaintiff.

AS AND FOR AN ELEVENTH, SEPARATE, AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
TO THE COMPLAINT OF PLAINTIFF ON FILE HEREIN AND TO EACH AND EVERY
CAUSE OF ACTION THEREOR, this answering defendant alleges that at the time of the injuries

alleged in the complaint, plaintiff's employers were negligent in and about the matters referred to in

“3

ALLIS-CHALMERS CORP. PRODUCT LIABILITY TRUST-ANSWER TO COMPLAINT-ASBESTOSLLP

KNOX RICKSEN

said complaint, and that such negligence on the part of said employers proximately and concurrently
contributed to any loss or damage, including non-economic damages, complained of by plaintiff, if|
any there were any, and that defendant is not liable for said employers’ proportionate share of non-
economic damages.

AS AND FOR A TWELFTH, SEPARATE, AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO
THE COMPLAINT OF PLAINTIFF ON FILE HEREIN AND TO EACH AND EVERY CAUSE
OF ACTION THEREOF, this answering defendant alleges that at the time of the injuries alleged in
the complaint, parties other than this defendant were negligent in and about the matters referred to|
in said complaint, and that such negligence on the part of said parties proximately and concurrently
contributed to any loss or damage, including non-economic damages, complained of by plaintiff, if'
any there were; and that defendant herein shall not be liable for said parties’ proportionate share of
non-economic damages.

AS AND FOR A THIRTEENTH, SEPARATE, AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
TO THE COMPLAINT OF PLAINTIFF ON FILE HEREIN AND TO EACH AND EVERY
CAUSE OF ACTION THEREOF, this answering defendant alleges that at all times relative to
matters alleged in the complaint, all of plaintiff's employers were sophisticated users of asbestos-
containing products and said employers’ negligence in providing the product to its employees in a
negligent, careless and reckless manner was a superseding intervening cause of plaintiff's injuries, if}
any there were.

AS AND FOR A FOURTEENTH, SEPARATE, AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
TO THE COMPLAINT OF PLAINTIFF ON FILE HEREIN AND TO EACH AND EVERY
CAUSE OF ACTION THEREOF, this answering defendant alleges plaintiff is barred from recovery
in that all products produced by defendant were in conformity with the existing state-of-the-art, and
as a result, these products were not defective in any manner

AS AND FOR A FIFTEENTH, SEPARATE, AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO
THE COMPLAINT OF PLAINTIFF ON FILE HEREIN AND TO EACH AND EVERY CAUSE,
OF ACTION THEREOF, this answering defendant alleges that plaintiff fails to state facts sufficient)

a4.

ALLIS-CHALMERS CORP. PRODUCT LIABILITY TRUST-ANSWER TO COMPLAINT-ASBESTOSLLP

KNOX RICKSEN

to constitute a cause of action upon which punitive damages may be awarded as against this
answering defendant,
AS AND FOR A SIXTEENTH, SEPARATE, AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO.
THE COMPLAINT OF PLAINTIFF ON FILE HEREIN AND TO EACH AND EVERY CAUSE)
OF ACTION THEREOF, this answering defendant alleges that the court lacks subject matter
jurisdiction over the matters alleged in the Complaint because the Complaint and each alleged cause|
of action against defendant is barred by the “Exclusive Remedy” provisions of California Labor
Code Section 3601, et seq
AS AND FOR A SEVENTEENTH, SEPARATE, AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO
THE COMPLAINT OF PLAINTIFF ON FILE HEREIN AND TO EACH AND EVERY CAUSE)
OF ACTION THEREOF, this answering defendant reserves the right to amend its answer, including)

the addition of affirmative defenses after pleading and discovery in preparation for trial

WHEREFORE, said defendant prays for judgment for its costs of suit

DATED: July 25, 2007 KNOX RICKSEN LLP

By;_/s/ Gregory D, Pike
Gregory D. Pike

Attorneys for Defendant
ALLIS-CHALMERS CORPORATION
PRODUCT LIABILITY TRUST

-5-

ALLIS-CHALMERS CORP. PRODUCT LIABILITY TRUST-ANSWER TO COMPLAINT-ASBESTOSLLP

KNOX RICKSEN

Re: — Castagna v. Asbestos Defendants (BP), et al.
San Francisco Superior Court No, CGC-07-274230

PROOF OF SERVICE BY ELECTRONIC TRANSMISSION

1, the undersigned, declare: that I am and was at the time of service of the documents herein referred
0, over the age of 18 years, and not a party to the action; and Tam employed in the County of
‘Alameda, California. My business address is 1300 Clay Street, Suite 500, Oakland, California
94612-1427,

On the date executed below, | electronically served the document(s) via LexisNexis File & Serve
described as:

ALLIS-CHALMERS CORP. PRODUCT LIABILITY TRUST’S ANSWER TO
COMPLAINT FOR PERSONAL INJURY- ASBESTOS.

on the recipients designated on the Transaction Receipt located on the LexisNexis File & Serve

website, T declare under penalty of perjury pursuant to the laws of the State of California that the
foregoing is true and correct and was executed on July 25, 2007, at Oakland, California

/s/ Nicholas J. Bertolino
Nicholas J, Bertolino

<6.

ALLIS-CHALMERS CORP. PRODUCT LIABILITY TRUST-ANSWER TO COMPLAINT-ASBESTOS