Answer: GODOFREDO PIQUE VS. ASBESTOS DEFENDANTS (B/P)AS REFLECTED ON EXHIBITS et al

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

						
                                
Preview
                                Bury.
‘ATIC

~

Cc Oo 8 Bw RD Hh BF YW WH

28

2. CURDANO LLP
ORNEYS ATLAW
Sul

‘OAKLAND Ga 04607
"510.267.3000

MADELINE L. BUTY [SBN 157186]

bury & EURLIANO LLP

$55 City Center

$55 — 12" Steet, Suite 1280 ELECTRONICALLY
land, California 94607 FILED

Tel: 510.267.3000 Superior Court of California,

Fax: 510.267.0117 County of San Francisco

Attorneys for Defendant OCT 15 2008

PACCAR INC. [sued herein as DOE t] GORDON FARK-LL Clerk

Deputy Clerk

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO ~ UNLIMITED JURISDICTION

GODOFREDO PIQUE, No, 274659
Plaintiff,
ANSWER TO COMPLAINT FOR
v. PERSONAL INJURY - ASBESTOS

)

)

)

)
ASBESTOS DEFENDANTS (B¢4P), ctc. )
)

Defendants. )

)

COMES NOW defendant PACCAR INC, [sued herein as DOE 1} and answering the
Complaint on file herein, admits, denies and alleges as follows:

This answering defendant denies each and every, all and singular, generally and specifically,
the allegations in said Complaint.

Further answering said Complaint, this answering defendant denies that plaintiff has
sustained or will sustain, any injury, damage or loss due to any act or omission on the part of this
answering defendant.

The following affirmative defenses are made on information and belief.

AS A FIRST, SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO THE COMPLAINT. this
answering defendant alleges that plaintiff's Complaint, and each cause of action therein, fails to

state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action against this answering defendant

ANSWER TO COMPLAINT FOR PERSONAL INJURY - ASBESTOS28

‘BUTY & CURLIANOLLP
‘ATTORNEYS ATLAV
955 12ST

AS A SECOND, SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO THE COMPLAINT,
this answering defendant alleges that plaintiff's Complaint, and each cause of action therein, is
barred by the provisions of the Statute of Limitations, including, but not limited to C.C.P, $340.2

AS A THIRD, SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO THE COMPLAINT, this
answering defendant alleges that the acts, omissions and/or products, if any, of this answering
defendant were not the proximate cause of the losses, damages, and/or injuries, if any. alleged in
the Complaint.

AS A FOURTH, SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO THE COMPLAINT.
this answering defendant alleges that the sole and/or partial proximate cause of the incident was
due to the negligence, strict liability, and fraud of other persons and other parties, through whose
conduct this answering defendant is not responsible and this answering defendant requests that the
Court or trier of fact apportion comparative fault among those responsible persons and parties
under the doctrine of comparative negligence or comparative fault and/or based upon the doctrine
of equitable indemnity and contribution.

AS A FIFTH, SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO THE COMPLAINT. this
answering defendant alleges that plaintiff himself was careless and negligent in and about the

matters alleged in the Complaint, and that said carelessness and negligence proximately contributed

to the injuries, loss, and damages complained of, if any.

AS A SIXTH, SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO THE COMPLAINT, this
answering defendant alleges that plaintiff failed subsequent to the occurrence described in the
Complaint to properly mitigate the damages and plaintiff thereby is precluded from recovering
those damages which could have reasonably been avoided by the exercise of due care on the part of
plaintiff.

AS A SEVENTH, SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO THE COMPLAINT,
this answering defendant alleges that plaintiff knowingly and voluntarily assumed the risk and

hazard, if any, incident to the activities in which plaintiff was engaged at the time of the alleged

ANSWER TO COMPLAINT FOR PERSONAL INJURY - ASBESTOSBUTY &CURLIANOLLP
‘ATTORNEYS ATLAW
555~ 12" STREET

‘Suite 1260

94007

‘310.267.3000

0D OW ED Rh FF BY HY

Se oe Se Se
BP WN  S

soe
nA wv

yb Ne NY Ne Ne NY YF HE
A A FB Bw NY =§ SG © w AR

28

incident, and that said voluntary assumption of the risk upon the part of the plaintiff proximately
caused and contributed to the injuries and damages to said plaintiff, if any.

AS AN EIGHTH, SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO THE COMPLAINT,
this answering defendant alleges that plaintiff and/or the plaintiff's employers altered, abused or
misused the subject product,

AS A NINTH, SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO THE COMPLAINT, this
answering defendant alleges that plaintiff was guilty of laches with respect to plaintiffs claim and
is therefore not entitled to invoke the aid of the equity jurisdiction of the Court.

AS A TENTH, SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO THE COMPLAINT.

this answering defendant alleges that plaintiff had accepted the work and in turn the alleged
asbestos-containing products of defendant and, therefore, is estopped from any claims arising from
his performance of the aforementioned work.

AS AN ELEVENTH, SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO THE
COMPLAINT, this answering defendant alleges that there were no express warranties made by this
answering defendant to plaintiff.

AS A TWELFTH, SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO THE COMPLAINT.
this answering defendant alleges that plaintiff failed to join all necessary and indispensable parties
to this action.

AS A THIRTEENTH, SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO THE :
COMPLAINT, this answering defendant alleges that the plaintiff lacks privity of contract with this
answering defendant and is thereby barred from claiming damages herein.

AS A FOURTEENTH, SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO THE
COMPLAINT, this answering defendant alleges that at all times herein mentioned plaintiff was
employed and was acting within the course and scope of his employment, and as a consequence
thereof, plaintiffs sole recourse for the damages now claimed is governed by Labor Code §§3600

and following which serve to bar the present action.

ANSWER TO COMPLAINT FOR PERSONAL INJURY - ASBESTOSCO 2B SN DHA BF BW RD eS

Noy Pw wR NK _ _
QA QauSR GOS FSF FBX DESH AS

28

BUTY & CURLANO LLP
RNEYS AT LAW

AS A FIFTEENTH, SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO THE
COMPLAINT, this answering defendant alleges that to the extent the Complaint asserts
defendant’s alleged “market share” liability, or “enterprise liability”, the plaintiff's Complamt fails
to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action against this answering defendant.

AS A SIXTEENTH, SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO THE
COMPLAINT, this answering defendant alleges that plaintiff's Complaint, and each cause of
action therein, fails to state facts sufficient to sustain an award of punitive damages against this
answering defendant.

AS A SEVENTEENTH, SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO THE
COMPLAINT, and to each and every cause of action contained therein, this answering defendant
alleges that, pursuant to the terms and provisions of California Civil Code §§1431.1 and 1431.2,
the liability of this answering defendant, if any there be, for any non-economic damages of any
party herein shall be allocated in direct proportion to the percentage of fault, if any, of this
answering defendant.

AS AN EIGHTEENTH, SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO THE

COMPLAINT, and each cause of action contained therein, defendant alleges that the state of the

medical, scientific, and industrial knowledge, practice and procedure was at all relevant times such
that defendant neither breached any alleged duty owed plaintiff, nor knew, nor could have known.
that the products alleged to have caused plaintiff harm presented a foreseeable risk of harm to
plaintiff in the normal and expected use of such products.

AS A NINETEENTH, SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO THE
COMPLAINT, and each cause of action contained therein, defendant alleges that any product
manufactured or any work performed by this defendant was consistent with the state of the art
applicable at the time the product was manufactured or the work performed

AS A TWENTIETH, SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO THE
COMPLAINT, this answering defendant alleges that the products complained of were

manufactured, produced, supplied, sold, and distributed in mandatory conformity with

ANSWER TO COMPLAINT FOR PERSONAL INJURY - ASBESTOS28

BUTY & CURLIANOLLP
"ATTORNEYS AT LAW

| specifications promulgated by the United States Government, and that any recovery by plaintiff on
the Complaint herein is barred in consequence of the exercise of those sovereign powers.

AS A TWENTY-FIRST, SEPARATE AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE TO THE
COMPLAINT, this answering defendant alleges that plaintiff is a sophisticated user who knew or
should have known the products’ hazards, which negates a manufacturer’s duty to warn of a
product’s potential danger.

WHEREFORE, this answering defendant prays that plaintiff take nothing by way of his
Complaint; that this defendant be dismissed with its costs of suit incurred; and for such other and
| further relief as the Court deems just and proper.

DATED: October 14, 2008 BUTY & CURLIANO LLP

By:__/S/MADELINE L. BUTY.

MADELINE L, BUTY
Attorneys for Defendant
PACCAR INC.

ANSWER TO COMPLAINT FOR PERSONAL INJURY - ASBESTOSOo em IN DA A B® BW wD

NR RP Bb YB NY Ne NY NY = Be — _ =
Aaa se BH ££ FSF Ce ABA BHR TS

28

BUTY &. CURLIANO LLP
‘ATTORNEYS AT

510.287.3000

PROOF OF SERVICE
I declare that:
Jam employed in the County of Alameda, Califomia. | am over the age of eightecn years
and not a party to the within entitled cause; my business address is 555 -- 12" Street, Suite 1280,
Oakland, CA 94607.

On October 14, 2008, I served the following document(s) via LexisNexis File & Serve as
described as:

ANSWER TO COMPLAINT FOR PERSONAL INJURY - ASBESTOS

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

I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on
October 14, 2008, in Oakland, California.

ROBIN LOKOLLO /S/ROBIN LOKOLLO
Print Name Signature

ANSWER TO COMPLAINT FOR PERSONAL INJURY - ASBESTOS