Motion-Secondary: Dan Albasry as Trustee of the Estate of Newal Al Saad, Firas Mohammad v. Barretts Minerals Inc., Beacon Cmp Corp., Brenntag North America Inc. (Individually And As Successor To Minerals And Pigment Solutions Inc., Successor To Whittaker, Clark & Daniels Inc.);, Brenntag Specialties Llc (Individually And As Successor To Minerals And Pigment Solutions Inc., Successor To Whittaker, Clark & Daniels Inc.);, Charles B. Chrystal Company Inc.;, Colgate Palmolive Co.;, Glaxosmithkline Consumer Healthcare Holdings (Us) Llc (Individually, D/B/A And As Successor To Yardley Of London, Yardley Of London Ltd., Yardley Of London (U.S.) Llc, Smithkline Beecham Plc And Beecham Group Llc);, Glaxosmithkline Llc (Individually, D/B/A And As Successor To Yardley Of London, Yardley Of London Ltd., Yardley Of London (U.S.) Llc, Smithkline Beecham Plc And Beecham Group Llc);, Gsk Consumer Health Inc. (Individually, D/B/A And As Successor To Yardley Of London, Yardley Of London Ltd., Yardley Of London (U.S.) Llc, Smithkline Beecham Plc And Beecham Group Llc);, Lornamead Inc. (Individually And As Successor To Lornamead Acquisitions Ltd. And Lornamead Brands Inc., D/B/A Yardley Of London A/K/A Yardley);, Pfizer Inc., Port Jervis Laboratories Inc. (F/K/A Kolmar Laboratories Inc.);, The Procter & Gamble Co. (Individually, D/B/A, And As Successor To Yardley Of London Ltd., Yardley Of London A/K/A Yardley, Yardley Of London Inc., And Yardley Of London (U.S.) Llc));, Whittaker, Clark & Daniels Inc. (Individually, D/B/A, And Successor To Charles Mathieu Inc. (D/B/A Charles Mathieu & Co. And Chas. Mathieu Inc.), American Talc Company Inc., Metropolitan Talc Company Inc., Imperial Products Co. Inc., And Resource Processo, Yardley Of London Inc. (F/K/A Lentheric Inc. And Lentheric Distributors Inc.);, Yardley Of London Ltd.,, Conopco Inc. (Individually, Doing Business As, And As Successor To Elizabeth Arden Inc. And Evyan Perfumes Inc., Parfums International And Idea Fragrances Co.)

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

						
                                
Preview
                                FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 07/11/2023 12:14 AM                                         INDEX NO. 190002/2023
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 170                                                                RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/11/2023




          SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
          COUNTY OF NEW YORK
          IN RE: NEW YORK CITY
                 ASBESTOS LITIGATION                          NYCAL
          THIS DOCUMENT RELATES TO:
                                                              Index No.: 190002/2023
          DAN ALBASRY, as Trustee of the Estate of NEWAL
           AL SAAD, and FIRAS MOHAMMAD,

                               Plaintiffs,

                 -against-

          BARRETTS MINERALS INC., et al.,

                               Defendants.




            PLAINTIFFS’ MEMORANDUM OF LAW IN OPPOSITION TO PORT JERVIS LABORATORIES INC.’S
                               MOTION TO DISMISS PURSUANT TO CPLR 327




                                                           THE LANIER LAW FIRM PLLC
                                                           Attorneys for Plaintiffs
                                                           Darron E. Berquist, Esq.
                                                           Daniel C. LaTerra, Esq.
                                                           126 E. 56th Street, 6th Floor
                                                           New York, New York 10022
                                                           Tel.: (212) 421-2800
                                                           darron.berquist@lanierlawfirm.com
                                                                                                         Pagei




                                                           daniel.laterra@lanierlawfirm.com



          2725003_5

                                                    1 of 72
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 07/11/2023 12:14 AM                                                                                                                   INDEX NO. 190002/2023
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 170                                                                                                                                  RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/11/2023




          I.         PRELIMINARY STATEMENT ...................................................................................................1

          II.        RELEVANT PROCEDURAL HISTORY ........................................................................................3

          III. STATEMENT OF RELEVANT FACTS .........................................................................................3
                A. MS. AL SAAD PURCHASED AND WAS EXPOSED TO ASBESTOS FROM DEFENDANTS’ PRODUCTS IN NEW YORK AND
                ELSEWHERE IN THE UNITED STATES, AND THERE IS NO EVIDENCE OF OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE ............................... 3
                     1.      Dinan Mohammad’s Testimony ..................................................................................................................4
                                Purchases and Exposure in New York .....................................................................................................5
                                Purchases in Michigan ............................................................................................................................6
                     2.      Dan Albasry’s Testimony .............................................................................................................................6
                     3.      Maytham Ibrahim’s Testimony ...................................................................................................................7
                B.        PJL MANUFACTURED JOHNSON’S BABY POWDER AND SHOWER TO SHOWER IN NEW YORK ........................... 8
                     1.      Johnson’s Baby Powder ...............................................................................................................................8
                     2.      Shower to Shower .....................................................................................................................................10
                C.        OTHER CONNECTIONS TO NEW YORK ................................................................................................ 11
                     1.   PJL’s New York City Sales Office ................................................................................................................11
                     2.   Critical Decisions and Actions From Which Plaintiffs’ Cause of Action Arose were Made and Taken in
                     New York ............................................................................................................................................................12
                              The Cosmetic Industry’s Efforts to Avoid Regulation and Oversight were Born, Fostered and Carried
                        Out in New York .............................................................................................................................................12
                              PJL Was a Founding Member of the CTFA, Including the Talc Subcommittee .....................................14
                              J&J Challenged “Antagonistic Personalities” in New York City Regarding Their Testing Results to Avoid
                        “Adverse Publicity” ........................................................................................................................................18
                D.        NEW YORK COURTS ARE FAMILIAR TO DEFENDANTS ............................................................................. 19
                E.        MS. AL SAAD’S MEDICAL HISTORY & MEDICAL RECORDS...................................................................... 20
                F.        CANADA IS NOT AN ADEQUATE ALTERNATIVE FORUM ........................................................................... 22
                G.        THE DEFENDANTS .......................................................................................................................... 24
                H.        DOCUMENTS AND TANGIBLE THINGS (NON-MEDICAL) .......................................................................... 25
                     1.      Ms. Al Saad’s Talc-Based Products ............................................................................................................26
                     2.      Non-Party Documents ...............................................................................................................................27
                     3.      Defendants’ Documents ............................................................................................................................29
                I.        WITNESSES .................................................................................................................................. 30
                     1.      Plaintiff’s Witnesses ..................................................................................................................................31
                     2.      Defendants’ Witnesses ..............................................................................................................................32

          IV.             ARGUMENTS AND AUTHORITIES ..................................................................................... 34
                A.   PJL HAS NOT MET ITS HEAVY BURDEN OF PROVING THAT DISMISSING THE CASE WOULD BEST SERVE THE ENDS
                OF JUSTICE AND CONVENIENCE OF ALL PARTIES ........................................................................................... 34

                B.        NEW YORK NEXUS ......................................................................................................................... 39
                                                                                                                                                                                               Pageii




                     1.      Parties’ Residence .....................................................................................................................................40



          2725003_5

                                                                                            2 of 72
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 07/11/2023 12:14 AM                                                                                                                  INDEX NO. 190002/2023
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 170                                                                                                                                 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/11/2023




                    2.  The Products at Issue were Designed, Manufactured, Distributed, Tested and/or Supplied in or Through
                    New York ............................................................................................................................................................42
               C.       “HARDSHIP” & CONVENIENCE ......................................................................................................... 43
               D.       AVAILABILITY OF ALTERNATE FORUM ................................................................................................. 52
               E. THIS COURT IS COMPETENT TO ADJUDICATE THIS MATTER AND PJL HAS UTTERLY FAILED TO SUBSTANTIATE ITS
               CLAIM THAT THIS COURT’S ASBESTOS DOCKET IS OVERBURDENED ................................................................... 57
               F.       THIS COURT IS COMPETENT TO APPLY CANADIAN LAW, IF NECESSARY ...................................................... 58
               G.       DISTINGUISHING PJL’S CASES .......................................................................................................... 58

          V.        CONCLUSION...................................................................................................................... 63




                                                                                                                                                                                              Pageiii




          2725003_5

                                                                                           3 of 72
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 07/11/2023 12:14 AM                                                                                                 INDEX NO. 190002/2023
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 170                                                                                                                  RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/11/2023




          Cases
          Adriana Development Corp. N.V. v. Gaspar, 81 A.D.2d 235, 439 N.Y.S.2d 927 (1st Dept 1981) ......... 64
          Aetna Ins. Co. v. Creole Petroleum Corp., 27 A.D.2d 518, 275 N.Y.S.2d 274 (1st Dept 1966) ............. 63
          Alberta & Orient Glycol Co. Ltd. v. Factory Mut. Ins. Co., 2007 WL 6881693 (Sup Ct, NY County, Apr.
             24, 2007) .......................................................................................................................................... 60
          Alston v. Divine Bros. Co., 195 A.D.3d 563, 146 N.Y.S.3d 486 (1st Dept 2021) ................................... 62
          American Bank Note Corp. v. Daniele, 45 A.D.3d 338, 845 N.Y.S.2d 266 (1st Dept 2007) ............ 40, 48
          Anagnostou v. Stifel, 204 A.D.2d 61, 611 N.Y.S.2d 525 (1st Dept 1995) ........................... 35, 36, 47, 57
          Arazosa v. 3M Co., et al. (Index No. 190069/2016) ............................................................................. 34
          Babyn v. Patel [1997] A.J. No. 261 (Alta. Q.B.) .................................................................................... 56
          Bacon v. Nygard, 160 A.D.3d 565, 76 N.Y.S.3d 27 (1st Dept 2018) ..................................................... 37
          Bader & Bader v. Ford, 66 A.D.2d 642, 414 N.Y.S.2d 132 (1st Dept 1979) .................................... 35, 37
          Banco Ambrosiano S.P.A. v. Artoc Bank & Trust Ltd., 62 N.Y.2d 65, 476 N.Y.S.2d 64, 464 N.E.2d 432
             (1984) ......................................................................................................................................... 36, 53
          Bank Hapoalim (Switzerland) Ltd. v. Banca Intesta S.p.A., 26 A.D.3d 286, 810 N.Y.S.2d 172 (1st Dept
             2006) ................................................................................................................................................ 37
          Bankers Trust Co. v. Kline, 52 A.D.2d 775, 382 N.Y.S.2d 795 (1st Dept 1976) ..................................... 38
          Bata v. Bata, 304 N.Y. 51, 105 N.E.2d 623 (1952) ............................................................. 37, 38, 41, 42
          Black v. Brenntag N. Am., 2018 N.Y. Slip Op 31871(U) (Sup Ct, NY County, Aug. 6, 2018) ........... 37, 40
          Bock v. Rockwell Manufacturing Co. Inc., 151 A.D.2d 629, 543 N.Y.S.2d 89 (2d Dept 1989) .............. 38
          Bryan v. Hagemann, 31 A.D.2d 905, 298 N.Y.S.2d 101 (1st Dept 1969) .............................................. 41
          Buechel v. Avon Products, Inc., et al. (Index No. E2022002955) ......................................................... 34
          Chestnut Ridge Air Ltd. v. 1260269 Ontario Inc., 13 Misc. 3d 807, 827 N.Y.S.2d 461 (Sup Ct, NY
             County, July 31, 2006) ...................................................................................................................... 36
          Conway v. Gateway Associates, 166 A.D.2d 388, 561 N.Y.S.2d 190 (1st Dept 1990).......................... 41
          Corrigan v. Bjork Shiley Corp., 182 Cal. App. 3d 166, 227 Cal. Rptr. 247 (Cal. Dist. Ct. App. 1986) ..... 42
          Cortland Street Recovery Corp. v. Bonderman, 215 A.D.3d 446, 187 N.Y.S.3d 602, (1st Dept 2023) . 43
          Cray v. General Motors Corp., 389 Mich. 382, 207 N.W.2d 393, 59 A.L.R.3d 127 (Mich. 1973) ......... 42
          Creditanstalt Inv. Bank AG v. Chadbourne & Parke LLP, 14 A.D.3d 414, 788 N.Y.S.2d 104 (1st Dept
             2005) ................................................................................................................................................ 37
          DeKlerk v. Bloomingdales, Inc., 2020 NY Slip Op 32132(U) (Sup Ct, NY County, July 1, 2020) 47, 48, 58
          DeVita v. Vita, 240 A.D.2d 536, 659 N.Y.S.2d 63 (2d Dept 1997) ........................................................ 35
          Elmaliach v. Bank of China Ltd., 110 A.D.3d 192, 971 N.Y.S.2d 504 (1st Dept 2013) .......................... 43
          Esso Transport Co. Inc. v. Terminales Maracaibo C.A., 352 F. Supp. 1030 (S.D.N.Y. 1972) ........... 53, 54
          Fletcher v. Avon Prods. Inc., 2020 NY Slip Op 30883(U) (Sup Ct, NY County, March 25, 2020) .......... 47
          Foley v. Roche, 68 A.D.2d 558, 418 N.Y.S.2d 588 (1st Dept 1979) ...................................................... 63
          General Precision Inc. v. Ametek Inc., 24 A.D.2d 757, 263 N.Y.S.2d 470 (2d Dept 1965) .................... 41
          Genicom Corp. v. Ekco Group, 160 A.D.2d 551, 554 N.Y.S.2d 202 (1st Dept 1990) ............................. 63
          Globalvest v. Mgmt. Co. L.P. v. Citibank, N.A., 7 Misc.3d 1023(A) (Sup Ct, NY County, May 12, 2005)
             .................................................................................................................................................... 61, 62
          Grizzle v. Hertz Corp., 305 A.D.2d 311, 761 N.Y.S.2d 163 (1st Dept 2003) ........................ 36, 44, 45, 61
          Gulf Oil Corp. v. Gilbert, 330 U.S. 501 (1947) ................................................................................. 36, 60
          Gynes v. Zionist Organization of America, 169 A.D.2d 451, 564 N.Y.S.2d 155 (1st Dept 1991) .... 54, 56
          Hacohen v. Bollinger Ltd., 108 A.D.2d 357, 489 N.Y.S.2d 75 (1st Dept 1985) ..................................... 44
                                                                                                                                                                           Pageiv




          Hamilton v. Corona Ready Mix Inc., 21 A.D.3d 448, 800 N.Y.S.2d 450 (2d Dept 2005)....................... 41
          Heaps v. Simon & Schuster Co., 150 A.D.2d 164, 540 N.Y.S.2d 437 (1st Dept 1989) .......................... 63


          2725003_5

                                                                                 4 of 72
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 07/11/2023 12:14 AM                                                                                                   INDEX NO. 190002/2023
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 170                                                                                                                    RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/11/2023




          Herman v. Spartinelli, 176 A.D.2d 1238, 576 N.Y.S.2d 734 (4th Dept 1991) ................................. 43, 45
          Highgate Pictures Inc. v. DePaul, 153 A.D.2d 126, 549 N.Y.S.2d 386 (1st Dept 1990) ........................ 53
          Homola v. Longshore Transp. Systems Inc., 204 A.D.2d 1052, 613 N.Y.S.2d 310 (4th Dept 1994) ..... 49
          In re Kolmar Laboratories Inc. v. Smith, EF005492-2022 (Sup Ct, Orange County, Oct. 13, 2022) ..... 30
          Intertec Contr. v. Turner Steiner Int’l, 6 A.D.3d 1, 774 N.Y.S.2d 14 (1st Dept 2004) ........................... 36
          Iragorri v. United Technologies Corp., 274 F.3d 65 (2d Cir. 2001) ....................................................... 37
          Irrigation & Indus. Development Corp. v. Indag S.A., 44 A.D.2d 543, 353 N.Y.S.2d 471 (1st Dept 1974)
             .......................................................................................................................................................... 37
          Islamic Republic of Iran v. Pahlavi, 62 N.Y.2d 474, 478 N.Y.S.2d 597, 467 N.E.2d 245 (1984) 35, 53, 63
          K.T. v. Dash, 37 A.D.3d 107, 827 N.Y.S.2d 112 (1st Dept 2006) ............................................... 45, 49, 61
          Kastendieck v. Kastendieck, 191 A.D.2d 328, 595 N.Y.S.2d 184 (1st Dept 1993) ................................ 54
          Key Bank of Northern New York N.A. v. Lake Placid Co., 103 A.D.2d 19, 479 N.Y.S.2d 862 (3d Dept
             1984) ................................................................................................................................................ 43
          Krieger v. American-Israel Shipping Co., 24 Misc.2d 116, 202 N.Y.S.2d 940 (Sup Ct, Kings County Apr.
             27, 1960) .......................................................................................................................................... 38
          Kuwaiti Eng’g Group v. Consortium of Intl. Consultants, LLC, 50 A.D.3d 599, 856 N.Y.S.2d 101 (1st
             Dept 2008) ....................................................................................................................................... 36
          Macaulay v. Port Jervis Lanoratories, Inc. (190266/2022) .................................................................. 33
          Mancinelli v. RBC, 2018 ONSC 1844 (Div. Ct.) ...................................................................................... 29
          Marshreqbank PSC v. Ahmed Hamad Al Gosaibi & Bros Co., 101 A.D.3d 1, 951 N.Y.S.2d 124 (1st Dept
             2012) ................................................................................................................................................ 52
          Matter of New York City Asbestos Litig., 239 A.D.2d 303, 658 N.Y.S.2d 858 (1st Dept 1997) ............ 35
          McHugh v. Paley, 63 Misc. 2d 1092 (Sup Ct, NY County, Sept. 16, 1970) ......................... 45, 46, 53, 54
          Meyers v. Bridgeport Machines Div. of Textron Inc., 113 Ill.2d 112, 110 Ill. Dec. 567, 497 N.E.2d 745
             (Ill. 1986) .......................................................................................................................................... 42
          Miller v. United Technologies Corp., 40 Conn. Supp. 457, 515 A.2d 390 (Conn. Super. Ct. 1986) ...... 42
          Mionis v. Bank Julius Baer and Co. Ltd., 9 A.D.3d 280, 780 N.Y.S.2d 323 (1st Dept 2004) ...... 36, 37, 47
          Mollendo Equipment Co. Inc. v. Sekisan Trading Co. Ltd., 43 N.Y.2d 916, 403 N.Y.S.2d 729, 374
             N.E.2d 623 (1978) ............................................................................................................................ 63
          Mulford v. Fitzpatrick, 68 A.D.3d 634, 892 N.Y.S.2d 81 (1st Dept 2009) ............................................. 43
          Munoz v. American Pacific Mining New York Inc., 176 A.D.2d 624, 575 N.Y.S.2d 67 (1st Dept 1991) 54
          National Bank & Trust Co. of North America Ltd. v. Banco De Vizcaya S.A., 72 N.Y.2d 1005, 534
             N.Y.S.2d 913, 531 N.E.2d 634 (1988) ............................................................................................... 34
          Neumeier v. Kuehner, 43 A.D.2d 109, 349 N.Y.S.2d 866 (4th Dept 1973) ......................... 48, 49, 54, 57
          Neville v. Anglo American Management Corp., 191 A.D.2d 240, 594 N.Y.S.2d 747 (1st Dept 1993) .. 54
          Obex Trading Corp. v. Maraven S.A., 68 A.D.2d 841, 414 N.Y.S.2d 535 (1st Dept 1979) .................... 63
          OrthoTec, LLC v. Healthpoint Capital, LLC, 84 A.D.3d 702, 924 N.Y.S.2d 78 (1st Dept 2011) .............. 37
          Pacific Alliance Asia Opportunity Fund L.P. v. Kwok Ho Wan, 160 A.D.3d 452, 76 N.Y.S.3d 111 (1st
             Dept 2018) ....................................................................................................................................... 36
          Persaud v. Goriah, 143 Misc.2d 225 (Sup Ct, NY County, Mar. 27, 1989) ........................................... 54
          Phat Tan Nguyen v. Banque Indosuez, 19 A.D.3d 292, 797 N.Y.S.2d 89 (1st Dept 2005).................... 34
          Price v. Brown Group Inc., 206 A.D.2d 195, 619 N.Y.S.2d 414 (4th Dept 1994) .................................. 44
          Pyle v. Pfizer, Index No. 190360/2016 (Sup Ct, NY County, Aug. 15, 2018) ........................................ 40
          Radke v. Lloyd’s of London, 58 A.D.2d 966, 397 N.Y.S.2d 288 (4th Dept 1977) .................................. 38
          Reavis v. Exxon Corp., 90 Misc. 2d 980, 396 N.Y.S.2d 774 (Sup Ct, NY County, June 28, 1977) ... 42, 52,
                                                                                                                                                                             Pagev




             53


          2725003_5

                                                                                  5 of 72
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 07/11/2023 12:14 AM                                                                                                 INDEX NO. 190002/2023
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 170                                                                                                                  RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/11/2023




          Republic of Lebanon v. Sotheby’s, 167 A.D.2d 142, 561 N.Y.S.2d 566 (1st Dept 1990) ....................... 36
          Rodionov v. Redfern, 173 A.D.3d 410, 102 N.Y.S.3d 574 (1st Dept 2019) ..................................... 58, 59
          Rodionov v. Redfern, No. 651976/2016, 2018 WL 2163589 (Sup Ct, NY County May 10, 2018) ........ 58
          Roman v. Sunshine Rachettes Inc., 98 A.D.2d 744, 469 N.Y.S.2d 449 (2d Dept 1983) ........................ 35
          Schneider v. Safety Harbor Spa Inc., 56 A.D.2d 762, 392 N.Y.S.2d 433 (1st Dept 1977) ..................... 38
          Silver v. Great American Ins. Co., 29 N.Y.2d 356, 328 N.Y.S.2d 398, 278 N.E.2d 619 (1972) .. 34, 37, 38
          Slattery v. Colgate-Palmolive Co., No. 190090/16, 2018 WL 3241906 (Sup Ct, NY County, July 7,
             2018) .......................................................................................................................................... 58, 59
          Slaughter v. Waters, 41 A.D.2d 810, 342 N.Y.S.2d 180 (1st Dept 1973).............................................. 44
          State v. Slezak Petroleum Prods. Inc., 78 A.D.3d 1288, 910 N.Y.S.2d 268 (3d Dept 2010) .................. 37
          Sullivan v. McNicholas Transfer Co., 93 A.D.2d 527, 462 N.Y.S.2d 934 (4th Dept 1983)......... 35, 44, 49
          Taguchi v. Stuparyk [1993] A.J. NO. 843 (Alta. Q.B.) ........................................................................... 56
          Taylor v. Interstate Motor Freight Systems, 309 N.Y. 633, 132 N.E.2d 878 (1956) ............................. 38
          Temple by Romano v. Temple, 97 A.D.2d 757, 468 N.Y.S.2d 388 (2d Dept 1983) ............................... 44
          Thor Gallery at South DeKalb v. Reliance Mediaworks (USA) Inc., 131 A.D.3d 431, 15 N.Y.S.3d 766
             (1st Dept 2015) ................................................................................................................................ 37
          Travelers Cas. & Sur. Co. v Vale Canada Ltd., 215 A.D.3d 507, 186 N.Y.S.3d 199 (1st Dept 2023)46, 47
          Travelers Cas. & Sur. Co. v. Honeywell International Inc., 48 A.D.3d 225, 851 N.Y.S.2d 426 (1st Dept
             2008) ................................................................................................................................................ 40
          Travelers Cas. & Sur. Co. v. Vale Canada Ltd., 212 A.D.3d 490, 183 N.Y.S.3d 59 (1st Dept 2023) ...... 46
          Tribax Mgmt. Ltd. v. Lasworth Invest. Ltd., 2006 CanLII 29528 (ONSC Aug. 25, 2006) ....................... 29
          Varkonyi v. S. A. Empresa De Viaco Airea Rio Grandense (Varig), 22 N.Y.S.2d 333, 292 N.Y.S.2d 670,
             239 N.E.2d 542 (1968) ......................................................................................................... 38, 53, 54
          Vath v. Israel, 80 Misc. 2d 759, 364 N.Y.S.2d 97 (Sup Ct, Queens County, Jan. 28, 1975) .................. 64
          Velasquez v. Delaware River Valley Lease Corp., 18 A.D.3d 359, 795 N.Y.S.2d 221 (1st Dept 2005) .. 41
          VictoriaTea.com Inc. v. Cott Beverages, Canada, 239 F. Supp. 2d 377 (S.D.N.Y. 2003) ...................... 60
          Ward v. Colgate-Palmolive Co., No. 190091/16, 2018 WL 3575063 (Sup Ct, NY County, July 25, 2018)
             .................................................................................................................................................... 58, 59
          Waterways Ltd. v. Barclays Bank, 174 A.D.2d 324, 571 N.Y.S.2d 208 (1st Dept 1991) ................. 37, 44
          Yoshida Printing Co. Ltd. v. Aiba, 213 A.D.2d 275, 624 N.Y.S.2d 128 (1st Dept 1995) ........................ 57
          Zirmak Investments LP v. Miller, 290 A.D.2d 552, 736 N.Y.S.2d 421 (2d Dept 2002) .......................... 36

          Statutes
          B.C.L. § 1314......................................................................................................................................... 41
          C.P.L.R. § 3016(b) ................................................................................................................................. 63
          C.P.L.R. § 5304...................................................................................................................................... 55
          CPLR § 5302.......................................................................................................................................... 55
          Ontario R. Civ. P. § 47.01(3) ................................................................................................................. 56
          Ontario R. Civ. P. 30.10 ........................................................................................................................ 29
          Ontario R. Civ. P. 31.10 ........................................................................................................................ 29

          Other Authorities
          Bird, et al., A Review of the Talc Industry’s Influence on Federal Regulation and Scientific Standards
             for Asbestos in Talc, New Solut. 2021 Aug;21(2):152-169............................................................... 18
                                                                                                                                                                           Pagevi




          2725003_5

                                                                                 6 of 72
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 07/11/2023 12:14 AM                                                                                                   INDEX NO. 190002/2023
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 170                                                                                                                    RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/11/2023




          Carrie L. Webber, CIVIL PROCEDURE: FORUM NON CONVENIENS—CONVENIENCE OR CONNIVING? PAULOWNIA
             PLANTATIONS DE PANAMA CORP. V. RAJAMANNAN, 38 Wm. Mitchell L. Rev. 433 (2011) .......................... 39
          David W. Robertson, FORUM NON CONVENIENS IN AMERICA AND ENGLAND: A RATHER FANTASTIC FICTION, 103
             Law Q. Rev. 398 (1987) .................................................................................................................... 34
          Duval-Major, One-Way Ticket Home: The Federal Doctrine of Forum Non Conveniens and the
             International Plaintiff, 77 Cornell L. Rev. 650 (1992)....................................................................... 39
          Erin Foley Smith, RIGHT TO REMEDIES AND THE INCONVENIENCE OF FORUM NON CONVENIENS: OPENING U.S.
             COURTS TO VICTIMS OF CORPORATE HUMAN RIGHTS ABUSES, 44 Colum. J. L. & Soc. Probs. 145 (2010) ...... 39
          Finity E. Jernigan, FORUM NON CONVENIENS: WHOSE CONVENIENCE AND JUSTICE?, 86 Tex. L. Rev. 1079 (2008)
             .......................................................................................................................................................... 39
          Friedrich K. Juenger, FORUM SHOPPING, DOMESTIC AND INTERNATIONAL, 63 Tul. L. Rev. 553 (1989) ............ 39
          John R. Wilson, COMING TO AMERICA TO FILE SUIT: FOREIGN PLAINTIFFS AND THE FORUM NON CONVENIENS BARRIER
             IN TRANSNATIONAL LITIGATION, 65 Ohio St. L.J. 659 (2004) .................................................................... 39
          Kathleen Carter-Stein, IN SEARCH OF JUSTICE: FOREIGN VICTIMS OF SILICONE BREAST IMPLANTS AND THE DOCTRINE
             OF FORUM NON CONVENIENS, 18 Suffolk Transnat’l L. Rev. 167 (1995) ................................................. 39




                                                                                                                                                                             Pagevii




          2725003_5

                                                                                  7 of 72
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 07/11/2023 12:14 AM                                                      INDEX NO. 190002/2023
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 170                                                                           RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/11/2023




                     Plaintiffs respectfully submit this Memorandum of Law in in support of their opposition to

          Port Jervis Laboratories Inc.’s Motion to Dismiss based upon the doctrine of forum non conveniens.

                     I.        PRELIMINARY STATEMENT

                     Since the 1940s, Port Jervis Laboratories Inc.’s (“PJL”) principle place of business has been in

          New York1 and its corporate witnesses and relevant documents are in New York. Nevertheless, PJI

          comes to this Court asking it to dismiss the case and send it to a jurisdiction (Canada) hostile to

          plaintiffs that would not and could not maintain personal jurisdiction over it. PJL introduced its

          motion as follows:




                                                                                                                        Page1




          1
              Berquist Exhibit 1:




          2725003_5

                                                            8 of 72
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 07/11/2023 12:14 AM                                                    INDEX NO. 190002/2023
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 170                                                                         RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/11/2023




                    The remainder of PJL’s motion papers consist almost exclusively of conclusory statements and

          unsubstantiated allegations. Plaintiffs do not dispute that (i) Newal Al Saad (and her estate), Firas

          Mohammad and Dan Albasry, are or were residents of Canada, (ii) much of Ms. Al Saad’s exposure to

          asbestos from defendants’ talc-based products occurred outside of New York, or (iii) that Ms. Al Saad

          was treated for her malignant pleural mesothelioma where she resided (Ontario, Canada). However,

          plaintiffs do dispute (i) that Ms. Al Saad’s employment history is relevant to the Court’s analysis, (ii)

          PJL’s unsubstantiated, conclusory arguments that it “appears” that “any and all witnesses…are

          located in Canada,”2 and (iii) the mistaken argument that “all critical evidence in this case is beyond

          the reach of this Court, and defendants will have no ability to obtain same.” Id. PJL argues based upon

          these purported “facts” that this case “presents what appears to be a fairly egregious example of

          forum shopping,” id., and that “it appears fairly obvious that New York County is a palpably improper

          forum for litigating this matter.” Id. at p. 3. PJL would have this Court believe that this matter has no

          substantial nexus with New York, but nothing could be further from the truth. In fact, as detailed

          below, it is PJL’s motion, not plaintiffs’ Complaint, that constitutes egregious forum-shopping.

                    While Ms. Al Saad indeed lived in Canada, 16 of the 17 of the defendants are residents of New

          York or another state; the overwhelming majority of the relevant witnesses are located in the United

          States (including many in New York) or have agreed to travel to New York to testify at the time of

          trial; relevant medical records and pathology materials from facilities in Canada have been obtained

          already and are in New York or may easily be obtained; the overwhelming majority of relevant

          documents—including those pertaining to the design, manufacture, marketing and distribution of

          defendants’ products—are located in New York or elsewhere in the United States; PJL’s proposed

          alternative forum is not adequate or available; many of the products from which the decedent was
                                                                                                                      Page2




          2
              PJL Memorandum of Law at p. 1


          2725003_5

                                                          9 of 72
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 07/11/2023 12:14 AM                                                     INDEX NO. 190002/2023
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 170                                                                          RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/11/2023




          exposed to asbestos were designed, manufactured, marketed and/or distributed in and from New

          York, including by New York defendants; and there is evidence that this Court is exceptionally well-

          equipped to maintain jurisdiction over and resolve this mesothelioma case. The Court should deny

          the motion because PJL plainly failed to meet its heavy burden to demonstrate unequivocally that

          New York is plainly an inconvenient forum and that Canada is not only available (i.e., viable) to the

          parties and that its courts will best serve the ends of justice and convenience of the parties. The

          foregoing notwithstanding, a thorough analysis and balancing of all the forum non conveniens factors

          supports this Court’s retention of jurisdiction and necessitates a denial of the motion.

                    II.      RELEVANT PROCEDURAL HISTORY

                    Plaintiffs filed their initial Complaint on January 5, 2023 (NYSCEF Doc. No. 1). On February 27,

          2023, plaintiffs filed an Amended Complaint naming Conopco Inc. as an additional defendant (NYSCEF

          Doc. No. 35). PJL filed its answer on March 10, 2023 (NYSCEF Doc. No. 41), and its Motion to Dismiss

          on March 13, 2023 (NYSCEF Doc. Nos. 42-50). PJL’s motion has not been joined or otherwise

          supported by any of its co-defendants. This case has not been assigned to a trial cluster and no

          depositions have occurred.

                    III.     STATEMENT OF RELEVANT FACTS

                             A.      MS. AL SAAD PURCHASED AND WAS EXPOSED TO ASBESTOS FROM DEFENDANTS’ PRODUCTS IN
                                     NEW YORK AND ELSEWHERE IN THE UNITED STATES, AND THERE IS NO EVIDENCE OF
                                     OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE

                    As with many of the other defendants3, plaintiffs alleged that Ms. Al Saad was exposed to

          asbestos from PJL’s products while physically present in (alphabetical order) California, Canada,

          Michigan, and New York4:
                                                                                                                       Page3




          3
              Amended Complaint at ¶¶ 8-22 (NYSCEF Doc. No. 35)
          4
              Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint at ¶ 17


          2725003_5

                                                            10 of 72
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 07/11/2023 12:14 AM                                                   INDEX NO. 190002/2023
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 170                                                                         RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/11/2023




          Plaintiffs further allege that some of defendants’ (including PJL’s) talc-based products from which Ms.

          Al Saad was exposed to asbestos were purchased in New York and other locations in the United

          States.

                     PJL has presented no evidence (and plaintiffs do not allege) that Ms. Al Saad experienced any

          occupational exposure to asbestos, whether as a teacher, restaurant worker, or otherwise.5

                                    1.      Dinan Mohammad’s Testimony6

                     Since the late 1990s, Dinan Mohammad regularly observed her mother use Johnson’s Baby

          Powder (“JBP”) as part of her daily routine. During the application process and afterward, Ms.

          Mohammad sensed the JBP in the air. On occasion, Ms. Al Saad applied JBP on a skin rash. Ms.

          Mohammad also observed her mother purchase and use Yardley powders. Since 2010, and for

          approximately four days each week, Ms. Mohammad also observed her mother apply Yardley

          powders. Ms. Al Saad continued to apply JBP during these years too, but used Yardley powder

          products when she left the home for errands or social occasions. Ms. Al Saad also applied JBP on Ms.


                                                                                                                     Page4

          5
              Berquist Exhibit 2:




          6
              Berquist Exhibit 3


          2725003_5

                                                          11 of 72
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 07/11/2023 12:14 AM                                                           INDEX NO. 190002/2023
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 170                                                                               RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/11/2023




          Mohammad as a child after bathing – she sprinkled the powder onto her hand and rubbed it onto her

          daughter. During the application process, Ms. Mohammad sensed the powder fragrance and

          observed visible airborne dust. Ms. Al Saad also sprinkled JBP onto her bedding.

                                            Purchases and Exposure in New York

                  Ms. Al Saad purchased and was exposed to defendants’ talc-based cosmetic products in New

          York on many occasions. One example is when Ms. Mohammad traveled with her mother to Syracuse

          in March 2014 to stay with family friends for a week. They shopped at the Destiny USA mall there,

          where Ms. Al Saad purchased JBP from T.J. Maxx7. She also purchased JBP from a “dollar store” inside

          the mall. Here are Ms. Al Saad (right) and her daughter (left) in the Destiny USA mall with a T.J. Maxx

          bag containing Ms. Al Saad’s purchases:




          Mother and daughter shared a bedroom during their stay in Syracuse, where Ms. Mohammad

          observed her mother apply the recently-purchased JBP as part of her daily morning routine.
                                                                                                                              Page5




          7
           Relevant records relating to these purchases would likely be in Syracuse or Massachusetts, where the retailer is
          based. See https://www.tjx.com/contact (last visited July 8, 2023).


          2725003_5

                                                            12 of 72
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 07/11/2023 12:14 AM                                                             INDEX NO. 190002/2023
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 170                                                                                 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/11/2023




                  Another instance of Ms. Al Saad’s repeated exposure defendants’ products that had been

          purchased in New York occurred in the Spring of 2014, when Ms. Mohammad traveled to New York

          City with her cousin and purchased Yardley talc-based powder for her mother. She returned home to

          Canada, gifted the Yardley powder to her mother, and observed her mother apply it.

                  Additionally, in the spring of 2019, Ms. Al Saad, Dan Albasry (her son), and Ms. Mohammad

          were in Syracuse attending a wedding. They shared a hotel room at there the Microtel Inn & Suites

          by Wyndham. Ms. Mohammad observed her mother’s containers of JBP and White Shoulders on the

          bathroom counter, and she observed her mother apply JBP each day. She sensed the powder

          fragrance in the hotel room long after the application process ended. On the wedding day, Ms.

          Mohammad helped Ms. Al Saad with her wedding gown after she had applied JBP.

                                             Purchases in Michigan

                  From approximately 2014 to 2015, Ms. Mohammad resided in Windsor, Ontario. Ms. Al Saad

          lived with her daughter in Windsor for several weeks at a time during this two-year period. While

          there, Ms. Al Saad frequently shopped in Detroit, Michigan. On at least two separate occasions, Ms.

          Al Saad purchased JBP at a Target8 in Detroit. Ms. Mohammad observed her mother’s application of

          powder from the U.S.-purchased JBP containers while they lived together in Windsor.

                                    2.       Dan Albasry’s Testimony9

                  Dan Albasry regularly observed his mother use JBP, including on her body as part of her daily

          routine. On occasion, he also observed his mother sprinkle JBP onto her bedding. Similar to the

          observation of his sister, Mr. Albasry observed talc-based powders, including, but not limited to, JBP,
                                                                                                                                 Page6




          8
            Relevant records relating to these purchases would likely be in Detroit or Minnesota, where the retailer is based.
          See https://corporate.target.com/about (last visited July 8, 2023).
          9
            Berquist Exhibit 4


          2725003_5

                                                              13 of 72
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 07/11/2023 12:14 AM                                                                 INDEX NO. 190002/2023
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 170                                                                                     RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/11/2023




          Shower to Shower and White Shoulders, on a dresser counter or on a bedside nightstand. He also

          observed these products on a shelf in the bathroom.

                     On February 14, 2021, the family gathered around Ms. Al Saad—who was bedridden and

          weak from her illness—in her bedroom, where she kept some of her JBP:




                     As referenced by Ms. Mohammad, Mr. Albasry also traveled with his family to attend the

          wedding in Syracuse in April 2019. During the hotel stay, Mr. Albasry observed his mother’s JBP and

          White Shoulder containers in the bathroom. He observed his mother apply JBP each day. On the

          wedding day, he also observed Ms. Al Saad apply White Shoulders powder to her neck and upper

          chest10, and advised her there was white powder residue on the neckline of her dress.

                                       3.       Maytham Ibrahim’s Testimony11

                     Maytham Ibrahim, Ms. Al Saad’s brother, has personal knowledge of various visits Ms. Al Saad

          made to the United States, including to Massachusetts, Michigan and New York. For example, in

          approximately 1996, they visited New York together for approximately 10 days, during which Ms. Al
                                                                                                                                 Page7




          10
               This application was after she had applied JBP before putting on her dress. Berquist Exhibit 3.
          11
               Berquist Exhibit 5


          2725003_5

                                                                 14 of 72
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 07/11/2023 12:14 AM                                                                   INDEX NO. 190002/2023
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 170                                                                                       RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/11/2023




          Saad purchased from retailers in New York City and Long Island talc-based cosmetic products for her

          personal use.

                            B.        PJL MANUFACTURED JOHNSON’S BABY POWDER AND SHOWER TO SHOWER IN NEW YORK

                                      1.       Johnson’s Baby Powder

                   Ms. Al Saad used JBP in the 1990s and 2000s12 during which time PJL manufactured JBP at its

          plant in Port Jervis, New York. PJL began manufacturing JBP in 1980.13 It continued to manufacture

          JBP in Port Jervis through the 1990s, as evidenced by a J&J Material for Windsor Grade 66 Talc dated

          September 23, 1997, which identified “Kolmar” as a location where the Windsor 66 talc would be

          received and sampled using the (sham14) J4-1 testing method15:




                                                                                                                                        Page8




          12
             Ms. Al Saad used JBP after the 2000s and may have it prior to when she moved to Canada in 1991.
          13
             Berquist Exhibit 6; Berquist Exhibit 7; Berquist Exhibit 8; Berquist Exhibit 9; Berquist Exhibit 10; Berquist Exhibit 11
          at 189:12-190:4
          14
             See Plaintiff’s Complaint at ¶¶ 101-162.
          15
             Berquist Exhibit 12 at 147:13-22; Berquist Exhibit 13


          2725003_5

                                                                 15 of 72
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 07/11/2023 12:14 AM                                                     INDEX NO. 190002/2023
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 170                                                                          RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/11/2023




                                                              ***




                     In the early 2000s, J&J revised the material specification for Windsor Grade 66 and 96 talc

          and noted “Kolmar” as a location where this revision was to be implemented; talc continued to be

          received and analyzed by PJL using the (sham) J4-1 method16:




                                                              ***




                     These specifications demonstrate that J&J facilitated the shipment of talc to PJL, where it was

          received, stored and analyzed for asbestos content by the (sham) J4-1 method throughout the 1990s

          and 2000s. Importantly, the Shower to Shower Morning Fresh and the JBP containers in Ms.