Answer: CHARLES HUSBAND VS. ASBESTOS DEFENDANTS (B*P) AS REFLECTED ON EXHIBITS

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

						
                                
Preview
                                ce Tt RD He ke WH Oe

RoR Pm RP YP RP NR OR YP Be Be Be Be eB eB es eB Se
&® DPA mh €& BS fF SF Se AR HAE BD HN SBS

Dean Pollack, State Bar No. 176440
Bina Ghanaat, State Bar No. 264826

Eee atom ce i ELECTRONICALLY
rofessional Law Corporation

P.O. Box 119 FILED.
Oakland, California 94604 Superior Court of California,
ee , County of San Francisco
1901 Harrison Street, 11th Floor NOV 01 2010
Oakland, California 94612 Clerk of the Court
Telephone: (510) 444-6800 BY: VANESSA WU”
Facsimile: (510) 835-6666 Deputy Clerk
Attomeys for Defendant

YORK INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO

UNLIMITED JURISDICTION
CHARLES HUSBAND, : No, CGC-09-275098
Plaintiff, DEFENDANT YORK
INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION’S
v. ANSWER TO COMPLAINT FOR

PERSONAL INJURY—ASBESTOS
ASBESTOS DEFENDANTS (BP),
Complaint Filed: March 2, 2009

Defendants. Trial Date: May 16, 2011

Defendant YORK INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION (“Defendant”) in answer to
Plaintiff's complaint, denies generally and specifically, each and every, all and singular, the
allegations of said complaint, and cach cause of action thereof, and further denies that Plaintiff
CHARLES HUSBAND (“Plaintiff”) has been damaged in any sum or sums or at all.

WHEREFORE, this answering Defendant asserts the following affirmative defenses:

AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES

1. Asa first affirmative defense to each cause of action, the complaint does not state
facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action against this Defendant.
Hf
Hh

1
DEF. YORK INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION'S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF'S No. 275098
COMPLAINT FOR PERSONAL INJURY—ASBESTOSwe ef NBD YH eR HW Ne

RP oR PR RB Ye RP R NR Ree BB eB Be ew Be RB Be oe
oy KA A S&S BW NY KF SS SC CF BP AH BF WH HY KF S

2. As a second affirmative defense, each cause of action is barred by the applicable
statute of limitations, including but not limited to, California Code of Civil Procedure
sections 340.2 and 361. :

3 As a third affirmative defense to each cause of action, Plaintiff failed to mitigate
or make reasonable efforts to mitigate his damages, if any, as required by law.

4. As a fourth affirmative defense to each cause of action, the damages sustained by
Plaintiff, if any, were caused, in whole or in part, by the negligence, strict liability or fault of
others for which this Defendant is not liable or responsible.

5. As a fifth affirmative defense to each cause of action, Plaintiff by his actions,
knew of and appreciated the risks involved, and voluntarily and reasonably assumed the risk of
said injuries, proximately causing or contributing to the damages alleged.

6. As a sixth affirmative defense to each cause of action, if Plaintiff sustained
injuries attributable to the use of any product, which allegations are expressly denied, the injuries
were caused in whole or in part by the unreasonable, unforeseeable and inappropriate purpose
and/or improper use which was made of the product.

7. Asa seventh affirmative defense to each cause of action, Plaintiff was partially, if
not wholly, negligent or otherwise at fault on his own part pursuant to the doctrine of
comparative fault, and Plaintiff is barred from recovery of that portion of the damages directly
attributable to his proportionate share of fault.

8. As an eighth affirmative defense to each cause of action, Defendant alleges that
the products were as safe as could be designed under the state of technology and medical and
scientific knowledge existing at the time the products were manufactured.

9. As aninth affirmative defense to each cause of action, Defendant alleges that any
claim for punitive or exemplary damages is barred by the United States Constitution, including
the First, Fifth, Eighth and Fourteenth Amendments, and by the California Constitution,
including Article I, and that Civil Code section 3294 is invalid on its face or as applied in this
action.

it

2
DEF. YORK INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION'S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF'S No. 275098
COMPLAINT FOR PERSONAL INJURY~-ASBESTOS10. Asa tenth affirmative defense to each cause of action, at the time and place of the
happening of the incident alleged in the complaint, Plaintiff CHARLES HUSBAND was
employed by various employers, and was working within the course and scope of employment
and certain sums have been or will be paid under the applicable provisions of the Labor Code
and any award made must be reduced by the payments.

11. Asan eleventh affirmative defense to each cause of action, Defendant alleges that
the action is barred under the “primary right” doctrine on the basis that causes of action may not
be split by the doctrines of res judicata and collateral estoppel and by virtue of Plaintiff's
prosecution and/or settlement of their claims in prior actions.

‘12. Asa twelfth affirmative defense to each cause of action, Defendant alleges that if
Plaintiff worked for this answering Defendant then Plaintiff's claim is barred by the exclusive
remedy provisions of the appropriate state or federal law.

13. Asa thirteenth affirmative defense to each cause of action, Defendant alleges that
Plaintiff was provided and/or was covered by workers’ compensation insurance by each of his
employers, and Plaintiff, his employer and/or employers were subject to the provisions of the
Workers’ Compensation Act of the State of California. Accordingly, Plaintiffs actions were
barred by the doctrine articulated in Privette v. Superior Court, 5 Cal. 4th 689 (1993).

14. As a fourteenth affirmative defense to each cause of action, this Defendant
alleges that Plaintiff assumed whatever risk or hazard, if any, that existed at the time and place
of the alleged accident set forth in Plaintiff's complaint, and said assumption of risk or hazard is
imputed to said Plaintiff.

15. Asa fifteenth affirmative defense to each cause of action, the damages sustained
by Plaintiff or damages that will be sustained by Plaintiff, if any, have been and will be
proximately caused, in whole or in part, by unforeseen superseding and intervening causes over
which Defendant had no control, thereby barring or diminishing recovery on the complaint
against Defendant.

16. As a sixteenth affirmative defense to each cause of action, Plaintiff

acknowledged, ratified, consented to and acquiesced in the alleged acts or omissions, if any, of

3 :
DEF. YORK INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION'S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF'S ™ No. 275098
COMPLAINT FOR PERSONAL INJURY—ASBESTOSe

So

1
2
13
4
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

ec ew UW AH Be BN

this Defendant, thus barring Plaintiff's recovery.

17. Asa seventeenth affirmative defense to each cause of action, Plaintiff CHARLES
HUSBAND and/or his employer(s) were sophisticated users and/or learned intermediaries of the
products and equipment referred to by Plaintiff in the complaint. Accordingly, Defendant owed
no duty to Plaintiff with respect to any warning relating to Defendant’s products.

18. As an eighteenth affirmative defense to each cause of action, the injuries and
damages sustained by Plaintiff, if any, were solely and legally caused by the modification,
alteration or change of the product referred to in the complaint and said modification, alteration
or change was performed by persons or entities other than this answering Defendant and without
its knowledge or consent.

19, As anineteenth affirmative defense to each cause of action, Defendant presently
has insufficient knowledge or information on which to form a belief as to whether it may have
additional, as yet unstated, defenses available. Defendant reserves herein the right to assert
additional defenses in the event discovery indicates that they would be appropriate.

20. As a twentieth affirmative defense to each cause of action, the provisions of the
“Fair Responsibility Act of 1986” (commonly known as Proposition 51, Civil Code
sections 1430, 1431, 1431.1, 1431.2, 1431.3, 1431.4, 1431.5 and 1432) are applicable to this
action to the extent that Plaintiffs injuries and damages, if any, were legally caused or
contributed to by the negligence or fault of persons or entities other than this answering
Defendant.

21. As a twenty-first affirmative defense to each cause of action, the asbestos
products, if any, for which Defendant may have any legal responsibility were manufactured,
packaged, distributed, and/or sold in accordance with contract specifications imposed by
Co-Defendant, by the U.S. Government, by Plaintiff's employers, and/or by third parties yet to
be identified.

22. As a twenty-second affirmative defense to each cause of action, Plaintiff's
complaint, and each cause of action therein, is barred by the doctrine of laches.

ut

act peerage sor
DEF. YORK INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION'S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF'S No. 275098
COMPLAINT FOR PERSONAL INJURY---ASBESTOSCece ty KD Rh & BN

Rm oR RP RP RP RP RR YS SB Be Be Be ee ee
oe nn A & & Be MP SF SC Se Se HT KR ht eR UNE SS

23. As a twenty-third affirmative defense to each cause of action, Plaintiffs
employers were partially, if not wholly, negligent, or otherwise at fault on their own part
pursuant to the doctrine of comparative negligence, and Plaintiff should be barred from recovery
of that portion of the damages directly attributable to Plaintiff's employers’ proportionate share
of the negligence or fault. Witt v. Jackson, 57 Cal. 2d 57 (1961).

24. As a twenty-fourth affirmative defense to each cause of action, Plaintiffs
complaint, and each cause of action therein, is vague, ambiguous, unintelligible and uncertain.

25. As a twenty-fifth affirmative defense to each cause of action, Plaintiff has failed
to join all persons and parties needed for a just adjudication of this action.

26. As a twenty-sixth affirmative defense, with respect to some or all of Plaintiff's

alleged claims and causes of action, this Court lacks jurisdiction.

27. As a twenty-seventh affirmative defense, with respect to some or all of Plaintiff's
alleged claims and causes of action, in the interest of substantial justice, the action should be
heard in a forum outside this state.

WHEREFORE, this answering Defendant prays for judgment as follows:

1. That Plaintiff takes nothing by reason of his complaint on file herein;

2. For costs of suit incurred herein; and
3. For such other and further relief asthe Court deems just and proper.
DATED: Noy. | 2010 BURNHAM BROWN

By. Cie Phoned
BINA GHANAAT

Attorneys for Defendant
YORK INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION

1038539

5
DEE YORK INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION'S ANSWER TO PLAINTIFF'S No. 275098
COMPLAINT FOR PERSONAL INJURY-—-ASBESTOSRe: Charles Husband y. Asbestos Defendants (BP)
Court: San Francisco Superior Court
Action No: CGC-09-275098

PROOF OF SERVICE OF ELECTRONIC SERVICE

I, declare that I am over the age of 18, not a party to the above-entitled action, and
am an employee of Burnham Brown whose business address is 1901 Harrison Street,
11" Floor, Oakland, Alameda County, California 94612 (mailing address: Post Office
Box 119, Oakland, California 94604).

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

DEFENDANT YORK INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION'S ANSWER TO
COMPLAINT FOR PERSONAL INJURY -- ASBESTOS :

on recipients designated on the Transaction Receipt located on the LexisNexis File &
Serve website. 1 declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of
California that the foregoing is true and correct and was executed on November 1, 2010
at Oakland, California.

( } ® Y a
ANNETTE DI GIOV. 1

1040060

PROOF OF SERVICE CGC 09-275098