Preview
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 07/10/2023 10:29 PM INDEX NO. 190002/2023
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 144 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/10/2023
EXHIBIT 59
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 07/10/2023
06/26/2023 10:29
11:32 PM
AM INDEX NO. 190002/2023
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 144
83 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/10/2023
06/26/2023
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
COUNTY OF NEW YORK
IN RE: NEW YORK CITY
ASBESTOS LITIGATION
Index No.: 190002/2023
THIS DOCUMENT RELATES TO:
EXPERT WITNESS LIST AND CPLR
DAN ALBASRY, as Trustee of the Estate of NEWAL AL 3101(d) DISCLOSURES
SAAD, and FIRAS MOHAMMAD
Plaintiffs,
‐against‐
BARRETT MINERALS INC., et al.,
Defendants.
Plaintiffs, pursuant to the New York City Asbestos Litigation (“NYCAL”) Case Management Order
(“CMO”) and CPLR § 3101(d), submit the following disclosures of expert witnesses who may be
called to testify at the trial of this matter.
Plaintiffs reserve the right to supplement and/or amend these disclosures, including at the time of
trial. Plaintiffs also reserve the right to call or use the testimony of any witnesses designated by any
defendants in this action. If a trial involving more than one plaintiff occurs, any testimonial evidence
introduced for one plaintiff may be introduced on behalf of all plaintiffs at trial against all remaining
defendants. All of plaintiffs’ experts may offer opinions concerning the analysis, opinions and/or
findings of any other expert who is retained, designated, authors a report or otherwise testifies in
this matter on behalf of any party.
Unless indicated otherwise, “asbestos” shall be interpreted, not in a limited regulatory sense, but
broadly and include non‐regulated and non‐commercial forms of asbestos, all forms of elongate
mineral particles, fibrous minerals, fibrous talc, cleavage fragments of amphiboles, individual fibers,
bundles, fibrils and transition/transitional fibers. “Asbestiform” shall also be interpreted broadly
and without particular limitation regarding fiber size, length, dimension, ratio, presence of multiple
fibers, or geologic origin or “habit.” The foregoing notwithstanding, “asbestos” also includes talc,
whether or not known or acknowledged by defendants to contain asbestiform minerals or other
elongate mineral particles. See, e.g., Egilman, et al., Health Effects of Censored Elongated Mineral
Particles: A Critical Review, Detection Limits in Air Quality and Environmental Measurements (STP
1618, 2019; doi: 10.1520/STP161820180080); January 6, 2020, Executive Summary of Preliminary
Recommendations on Testing Methods for Asbestos in Talc and Consumer Products Containing Talc
(available at https://www.fda.gov/media/134005/download) (“The difficulty of identifying and
quantifying individual asbestos or other mineral particles present at low concentrations in talc is
compounded by the presence of non‐asbestiform analogs with the same elemental composition
and crystal structure, but different growth habit. Using TEM, differentiation of chrysotile from non‐
asbestiform serpentine analogs is relatively straightforward; however, each of the non‐asbestiform
amphiboles can disaggregate into particles resembling asbestiform fibers, giving rise to disputes
between laboratories over whether elongate amphibole particles are truly asbestos, or are particles
Page1
resulting from attrition of larger particles of a non‐asbestiform analog. Because both types of
2722407_1
1 of 28
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 07/10/2023
06/26/2023 10:29
11:32 PM
AM INDEX NO. 190002/2023
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 144
83 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/10/2023
06/26/2023
elongate minerals are suspected of having biological activity with similar pathological outcomes, the
distinction is irrelevant…”); White Paper: IWGACP Scientific Opinions on Testing Methods for
Asbestos is Cosmetic Products Containing Talc (December 2021)
(https://www.regulations.gov/document/FDA‐2020‐N‐0025‐0053).
CPLR 3101(d) DISCLOSURES
The opinions of each of the following expert witnesses will be based upon their education,
experience and professional training; their review of relevant medical, epidemiological, scientific,
historical and technical literature, studies, articles, and journals; and their review and analysis of
the facts, discovery and evidence in this case.
1. Dr. Jerrold L. Abraham, M.D.
SUNY Upstate Medical University
2152 Weiskotten Hall
750 East Adams St.
Syracuse, NY 13210
Among other materials typically relied upon by experts in his field, Dr. Abraham may base his
opinions upon his review of medical records, pathology/cytology materials, diagnostic imaging,
medical bills, other experts’ findings and opinions, and, if applicable, the testimony and opinions of
treating physicians or other healthcare providers. He may testify regarding his opinions as to the
asbestos‐caused disease(s) plaintiff developed, as well as which asbestos exposures were significant
and which (including on a defendant‐ or product‐specific basis) constituted a substantial
contributing factor in the causation of said disease(s). He may also testify regarding whether
plaintiff has an increased risk of other diseases or injuries as a result of their exposure to asbestos
and/or diagnosis(es) and how plaintiff’s asbestos‐caused disease(s) affected their life expectancy.
He may testify that plaintiff will likely require future medical treatment and/or medical monitoring
as a result of their asbestos‐caused disease(s). He may testify that plaintiff has incurred and will in
the future likely incur medical expenses as a result of their disease(s), and will opine as to whether
said expenses are reasonable and necessary.
As an expert in the field of medicine and asbestos‐caused diseases, he will testify generally about
what asbestos is and how it has been utilized in various products as to the medical aspects of
asbestos, including how it causes disease; that there is no known or established safe level of
asbestos exposure; that, generally or in the context of a specific case, certain exposures are
significant while others may not be; and which exposures plaintiff experienced were significant and
which‐‐. He will testify that all types of asbestos fibers are carcinogenic and fibrogenic, and he will
offer his medical opinions regarding the prognosis of individuals—including Plaintiff herein—with
asbestos‐related diseases. He may further testify that chrysotile in asbestos‐containing products is
contaminated with amphibole asbestos, particularly tremolite. He may also testify that pure
chrysotile asbestos, in the absence of amphiboles, causes mesothelioma.
He may testify that based on the medical and scientific literature available to Defendants,
Defendants knew or should have known that their asbestos‐containing products could cause
various diseases, including the asbestos‐related disease(s) from which the Plaintiff suffers. He may
also testify as to the state‐of‐the‐art (medical and scientific) concerning asbestos‐related diseases
Page2
at relevant times, including that medical articles and journals in the 1920s indicated that asbestos
2722407_1
2 of 28
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 07/10/2023
06/26/2023 10:29
11:32 PM
AM INDEX NO. 190002/2023
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 144
83 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/10/2023
06/26/2023
could be hazardous and deadly; that medical articles and journals in the 1930s and 1940s indicated
that asbestos could cause cancer; and that it was known or knowable that asbestos was a
hazardous and dangerous substance in those time frames and when plaintiff was exposed to
asbestos. He may testify as to his review of the medical, scientific and/or technical literature and
the opinions and conclusions contained in that literature. He may testify regarding exposure levels
of asbestos, at what levels asbestos may cause disease, and as to when these facts were known in
medical, scientific and/or technical literature. He may also testify as to the hazardous nature of
asbestos and asbestos‐containing products and as a result, that such asbestos and/or asbestos‐
containing products are unreasonably dangerous. Further, he may testify concerning the increased
risk of cancer faced by individuals exposed to asbestos and the epidemiological link between
asbestos and cancer.
Furthermore, he may testify that warnings placed on asbestos‐containing products and/or their
packaging, if any, were inadequate to properly inform end‐users and other persons exposed
thereto of the significant hazards of asbestos inhalation.
This expert may also offer opinions regarding the synergy—or lack thereof—between asbestos and
smoking on lung cancer risks.
His opinions will be based upon, among other things, his knowledge; skills; experience; training;
education; review of relevant medical, technical, scientific and/or historical literature; review of
discovery and other documents obtained in this and other litigation; and/or his review of the facts
and circumstances in this case, including, without limitation, medical records, pathology materials,
radiology studies, depositions, testimony, documents and other discovery.
2. Dr. Arnold R. Brody, Ph.D.
North Carolina State University
College of Veterinary Medicine
Department of Molecular Biomedical Sciences
1 N. Ocean Blvd.
Boca Raton, FL 33432
Dr. Brody is a specialist in lung biology and pathology. He may testify as to the physiological design
and function of the lungs, peritoneum and other parts of the body; the effects of asbestos on the
lungs, peritoneum and others part of the body; and the effects of asbestos on the body’s defense
mechanisms. He may also testify about asbestos; the diseases it causes; the progressive,
irreversible effects of asbestos disease; and the prognosis for an individual exposed to asbestos
dust or fibers. He may also testify concerning the scientific literature on the biological and
toxicological effects of asbestos written by himself and others. He may also testify about the body’s
biologic responses to brief and/or intermittent exposure to asbestos, the pathogenic effects
produced by various asbestos fiber types, including chrysotile, and mechanisms of asbestos‐induced
diseases including fibrosis and carcinogenesis. He may further testify concerning asbestos
deposition and migration in and through the lungs and body. He will discuss all types of cancer risks
from asbestos exposure. He will define what “an injury” means and that asbestos diseases are
injuries. He may further testify as to the facts and circumstances regarding the nature of the injuries
and damages that are the subject of this action. He may testify that certain exposures are
substantial contributing factors to an individual’s disease. He will testify that products which release
Page3
asbestos fibers are unreasonably dangerous and that some fibers will remain in the human body
2722407_1
3 of 28
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 07/10/2023
06/26/2023 10:29
11:32 PM
AM INDEX NO. 190002/2023
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 144
83 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/10/2023
06/26/2023
until death. He will testify regarding substances, conditions and exposures which are not recognized
causes of mesothelioma. He may testify from hypothetical sets of facts and may give opinions
regarding whether certain types and qualities of asbestos exposures would have contributed to
cause certain asbestos‐related diseases. He may discuss the dangers of low‐level exposure to
asbestos and may testify that there is no safe level of exposure to asbestos. He may also testify
regarding “bystander” and “household exposures” to asbestos and that these types of exposures,
under certain circumstances, are known to contribute to the causation of mesothelioma and other
asbestos‐related diseases. He may testify when it was known that bystander and household
exposures were known to cause disease. He may testify that smoking non‐asbestos cigarettes and
second‐hand cigarette smoke are not causes of mesothelioma. He may also testify that it has been
known for decades that asbestos can cause asbestos‐related diseases, including mesothelioma, and
that all forms of asbestos, including pure chrysotile asbestos in the absence of tremolite, causes
mesothelioma. Dr. Brody may testify that chrysotile in asbestos‐containing products is
contaminated with tremolite asbestos. He may also testify concerning the scientific and medical
literature on the biological and toxicological effects of asbestos written by him and others. He may
testify regarding historical literature relating to asbestos related diseases, and when it was known
and accepted in the medical and scientific community that asbestos could cause various diseases.
Dr. Brody may further testify as to facts and circumstances regarding the nature of the injuries and
damages that are the subject of this action. He may utilize teaching slides and other demonstrative
evidence during his testimony. These slides have been produced to defendants in asbestos cases on
numerous occasions. Copies of same will be provided upon request prior to trial.
This expert may also offer opinions regarding the synergy—or lack thereof—between asbestos and
smoking on lung cancer risks.
His opinions will be based upon, among other things, his knowledge; skills; experience; training;
education; review of relevant medical, technical, scientific and/or historical literature; review of
discovery and other documents obtained in this and other litigation; and/or his review of the facts
and circumstances in this case, including, without limitation, medical records, pathology materials,
radiology studies, depositions, testimony, documents and other discovery.
3. Dr. Barry Castleman, Sc.D.
P. O. Box 188
Garrett Park, MD 20896
Dr. Castleman is an environmental consultant to numerous federal agencies and environmental
groups on public policy related to the control of toxic substances. He holds degrees in
environmental and chemical engineering from Johns Hopkins University, as well as a Doctor of
Science degree from the Johns Hopkins School of Hygiene & Public Health. He has done extensive
research regarding the environmental health aspects of asbestos exposure as well as problems
associated with asbestos disease victims. His research has included (and he may testify about)
thresholds and standards used to determine safe or acceptable levels of asbestos exposure in the
work place and company and trade association knowledge of asbestos hazards. He may testify
regarding the availability of materials as substitutes for asbestos and when information concerning
these substitute materials appeared in the medical, scientific and/or technical literature. He has
authored a treatise on these and related subjects, Asbestos: Medical and Legal Aspects1, which sets
Page4
1
BARRY I. CASTLEMAN, ASBESTOS: MEDICAL AND LEGAL ASPECTS (Aspen Publishers 2011)
2722407_1
4 of 28
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 07/10/2023
06/26/2023 10:29
11:32 PM
AM INDEX NO. 190002/2023
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 144
83 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/10/2023
06/26/2023
forth his opinions and areas of potential testimony.
He may testify regarding availability of materials as substitutes for asbestos and when information
concerning these substitute materials appeared in the medical and scientific literature. He may also
testify regarding his review of the documents entered into evidence in this case or other cases, and
as to the conclusions reached therefrom, that Defendants were negligent, are strictly liable and
acted with wanton and willful disregard for the rights and safety the public at large and the Plaintiff
herein. He may also testify that the Railroad Defendants violated the Federal Employer Liability Act,
Boiler Inspection Act and/or other applicable law by utilizing asbestos‐containing products and
materials. Additionally, he may testify as to the hazardous nature of all types of asbestos and that
all types of asbestos‐containing products and fiber types are unreasonably dangerous.
He may also testify that Defendants engaged in negligent and grossly negligent conduct in failing to
recall their asbestos‐containing products from the market and/or in failing to warn of the dangers
of their products or the use of asbestos‐containing products. Further, he may testify that certain or
all Defendants conspired to suppress information pertaining to the hazards of asbestos, exposure to
asbestos‐containing products and the diseases which result there from. Consequently, he will
testify that Defendants deprived the Plaintiff of the right to make an informed choice concerning
his/her exposure to asbestos‐containing products. Defense counsel are in possession of numerous
transcripts of this expert’s prior testimony within which his opinions concerning these subjects have
been fully explored.
He may testify that medical articles and journals in the 1920s indicated that asbestos could be
hazardous and deadly. He may further testify that and in the 1930s and 1940s medical article and
journals indicated that asbestos could cause cancer. He will testify that it was known or knowable
to Defendants that asbestos was a hazardous and dangerous substance by the foregoing time
frames.
He may also testify that warnings placed on asbestos‐containing products, if any, were or may have
been inadequate to properly inform end‐users and those otherwise exposed of the significant
hazards of asbestos inhalation.
His opinions may be based upon his review of any and all medical records and available chest x‐rays
and/or pathology materials, as well as his expertise in the field, including experience and training,
and his review of historical and more recent medical articles and journals.
Furthermore, he will testify as to the following specific issues: his background; ethical aspects of
corporate responsibility; warnings; and the state‐of‐the‐art of the medical, scientific and/or
technical literature regarding asbestos. He will testify regarding bystander exposure to asbestos;
“fiber drift;” the fact that asbestos products are “toxic” and unreasonably dangerous; the TLV
defense; and the concept that each and every fiber exposure contributes to the causation of
plaintiff’s asbestos‐related disease(s). Further, he may testify as to the level of asbestos exposure
Plaintiff would have endured.
He may testify as to the health aspects of asbestos exposure and to his own personal and
professional writings, publications and editorials; the amount of asbestos exposure it takes to cause
cancer and other asbestos‐related diseases; and the historical aspects of the development of
Page5
OSHA/NIOSH and the history of OSHA/NIOSH regulations and other governmental regulations
2722407_1
5 of 28
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 07/10/2023
06/26/2023 10:29
11:32 PM
AM INDEX NO. 190002/2023
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 144
83 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/10/2023
06/26/2023
regarding asbestos and asbestos exposure. He may also testify that Defendants’ failure to comply
with these regulations constitutes negligence and was a cause of Plaintiff’s injuries. He may testify
that, based on a review of published information and unpublished data concerning the Defendants’
products, these products produce dangerous levels of asbestos dust that contributed to cause the
Plaintiff’s disease(s).
This expert may also offer opinions regarding the synergy—or lack thereof—between asbestos and
smoking on lung cancer risks.
His opinions will be based upon, among other things, his knowledge; skills; experience; training;
education; review of relevant medical, technical, scientific and/or historical literature; review of
discovery and other documents obtained in this and other litigation; and/or his review of the facts
and circumstances in this case, including, without limitation, medical records, pathology materials,
radiology studies, depositions, testimony, documents and other discovery.
4. Dr. Steven Compton, Ph.D.
3300 Breckinridge Blvd.
Suite 400
Duluth, GA 30096
Dr. Compton is a scientist specializing in the measurement and analysis of materials, determining
the constituent ingredients in materials, and characterizing those materials and ingredients. He
obtained his B.S. in physics from the University of Georgia in 2003, and he thereafter continued his
education and training at the University of Georgia, obtaining his Ph.D. in physics in 2009. He is a
member of various organizations, including, without limitation, American Association for Aerosol,
Research, the American Physical Society, the Microscopy Society of America, and the Georgia
Microscopy Society. He has authored and/or co‐authored numerous publications in the field. He is
presently a Senior Research Scientist at MVA Scientific Consultants.
He may testify regarding material and physical sciences and characteristics of asbestos products
and materials; release of asbestos fibers from products and materials; the process by which
asbestos fibers settle and accumulate into dust; contamination potentials and analysis; industry and
regulatory protocols; constituent analysis of bulk samples and dust samples with respect to the
nature of the materials; and the identity of the manufacturer of the materials, product formulae
and product identification. Additionally, he may testify regarding product physical and analytical
performance and friable asbestos‐containing materials’ characteristics during application; in place
over time; deterioration factors; and fiber release. He may testify regarding re‐entrainment, by
routine maintenance, custodial and general physical activities; comparative fiber‐count analysis; air
streams; vibration; effects of water; and dynamic aspects of preparation of dust and air samples for
analysis by transmission electron microscopy.
He is also expected to testify as to the physical characteristics of asbestos and other minerals and as
to the methods for and all results regarding analyzing asbestos samples. He is also expected to
testify regarding the mineralogic properties and any associated fiber release from asbestos
products and/or other asbestos‐containing materials as well as all analytical techniques, electron
microscopy, product formulas and analysis within his field of materials and related sciences as well
as all foundational subjects and topics related to these stated areas. He has examined the amount
Page6
of dust released by using or otherwise manipulating various asbestos‐containing products and will
2722407_1
6 of 28
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 07/10/2023
06/26/2023 10:29
11:32 PM
AM INDEX NO. 190002/2023
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 144
83 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/10/2023
06/26/2023
offer his results and opinions regarding same. These analyses include current and past techniques
used to measure asbestos content in dust. Many of these investigations have been documented on
videotape, and he will testify regarding his results from the release of asbestos‐containing dust
from said asbestos‐containing products. He may testify about the presence of tremolite asbestos in
chrysotile mines and products made with chrysotile. He may also testify about the presence of
asbestos, including non‐regulated asbestos, in talc and talc mines.
He will testify regarding the general background levels of asbestos release, bystander levels of
exposure of the fiber release, air samples in the personal breathing zone generated from the fiber
release, and fiber release and contamination on clothing and other personal contamination. He will
compare the results of the foregoing dust studies by analysis using both particles per cubic foot,
fibers per cubic centimeter, as well as current and past techniques used to analyze asbestos content
in dust. He will testify that the levels of asbestos dust measured during these tests exceeded TLVs
and PELs in many instances of his product testing. In addition, he has prepared and will utilize
demonstrative aids regarding asbestos dust/fiber release from the various products that he has
studied and defendants’ TLV defense. He will compare and contrast his findings with other scientific
findings, and he will offer opinions concerning testing which was been performed on behalf of
defendants or the lack of testing of defendants’ products. He may also testify about the methods
and equipment available to defendants historically for testing asbestos‐containing products for
dust/fiber release. He may testify that the dust levels measured in testing one defendant’s
asbestos‐containing product would be substantially similar to the results expected from another
defendant’s similar product with similar ingredients. Defense counsel are in possession of
numerous transcripts within which this expert’s opinions have been fully explored.
His opinions will be based upon his review of any and all records and materials, as well as his
expertise in the field, including experience and training, and his review of historical and more
recent scientific articles and journals.
He has previously produced written reports and videotapes of each of the tests he has performed.
Copies may be available upon request.
In addition to the foregoing, his opinions will be based upon, among other things, his knowledge;
skills; experience; training; education; review of relevant medical, technical, scientific and/or
historical literature; review of discovery and other documents obtained in this and other litigation;
and/or his review of the facts and circumstances in this case, including, without limitation, medical
records, pathology materials, radiology studies, depositions, testimony, documents and other
discovery.
5. Ronald E. Gordon, Ph.D.
Mt. Sinai School of Medicine
One Gustave L. Levy Place
New York, NY 10029
Dr. Gordon’s specialty is biological electron microscopy (cell biology). His research for the past
twenty‐five years has involved assessment of asbestos burden in asbestos‐exposed individuals.
He will testify that malignant mesothelioma is a signal tumor for asbestos as its cause and that
Page7
virtually all diffuse malignant mesothelioma in adults in the U.S. are caused by asbestos exposure.
2722407_1
7 of 28
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 07/10/2023
06/26/2023 10:29
11:32 PM
AM INDEX NO. 190002/2023
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 144
83 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/10/2023
06/26/2023
He will testify that malignant mesothelioma is always fatal and that there are no cures for asbestos‐
related diseases. He will testify that asbestos diseases are incurable and progressive by nature. He
will testify that asbestos fibers do not signal ordinary human senses as to their dangers and that
they are more dangerous than ordinary people with ordinary senses and characteristics will
perceive. He will testify that there is no known safe level of asbestos exposure and that the
permissible exposure level(s) described by OSHA will not, cannot and are not intended to prevent
all asbestos‐related mesotheliomas. He will testify that malignant mesothelioma can be caused in
humans by all asbestos fiber‐types, including chrysotile, tremolite, actinolite, anthophyllite, amosite
and crocidolite. He will testify that all of these fiber‐types are potent. He will testify that all of these
asbestos fiber types cause all forms of asbestos‐related disease, including but not limited to, diffuse
malignant mesothelioma, lung cancer, asbestosis, pleural plaques, pleural thickening,
diaphragmatic and pericardial plaques, and pleural effusions. He will testify that the proposition
that chrysotile‐containing products do not cause malignant mesothelioma in humans, or do so only
as a result of asbestos exposures on the order of 25 fiber years, is false and not grounded in any
peer‐reviewed, widely‐accepted medical or scientific literature.
He may utilize visual aids, slides, photographs, drawings, flip charts, power points, film, medical
articles, textbooks and/or other demonstrative aids to assist in explaining any matter about which
he may testify. He has published extensively in peer‐reviewed literature on tissue burden of
asbestos in occupationally exposed individuals who had asbestos diseases, including, but not
limited to, diffuse malignant mesothelioma, and he may testify regarding those publications, as well
as any others that he has reviewed and identifies as reliable and/or authoritative.
He will testify that "short" asbestos fibers (those that are less than 5 microns in length) are capable
of causing mesothelioma in humans. He will testify that fiber burden analysis should account for
asbestos fibers that are capable of being seen only in the transmission electron microscope and
these analyses should include fibers shorter than 5 microns since these are the asbestos fibers
which more readily relocate the extrapulmonary sites where asbestos‐induced diseases such as
mesothelioma occur. He may testify that counting asbestos bodies is a poor indicator of the past
presence of chrysotile in human lung and likewise as a marker which can be related asbestos
diseases, including but not limited to, diffuse malignant mesothelioma. He will testify that asbestos
diseases are caused by cumulative asbestos exposure. He will testify that each exposure to asbestos
adds to the total dose that causes malignant mesothelioma and is a substantial contributing factor
in causing fatal asbestos disease. He will testify that asbestos diseases and their causes are well
documented currently and historically. He will testify that a causal relationship between asbestos
and asbestosis was well documented by the 1930's, lung cancer by the 1940's and diffuse malignant
mesothelioma on or before 1960. If called upon to do so, he may perform a fiber burden analysis
and testify to the results and his opinions and interpretation of same.
This expert may also offer opinions regarding the synergy—or lack thereof—between asbestos and
smoking on lung cancer risks.
His opinions will be based upon, among other things, his knowledge; skills; experience; training;
education; review of relevant medical, technical, scientific and/or historical literature; review of
discovery and other documents obtained in this and other litigation; and/or his review of the facts
and circumstances in this case, including, without limitation, medical records, pathology materials,
radiology studies, depositions, testimony, documents and other discovery.
Page8
2722407_1
8 of 28
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 07/10/2023
06/26/2023 10:29
11:32 PM
AM INDEX NO. 190002/2023
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 144
83 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/10/2023
06/26/2023
6. Kristen Kucsma, M.A./Kenneth Betz, MBA, M.A.
Sobel Tinari Economics Group
293 Eisenhower Parkway, Ste. 190
Livingston, NJ 07039
Ms. Kucsma and Mr. Betz are economists. Ms. Kucsma obtained her B.A. in Economics from Seton
Hall University in 1991 and her M.A. in economics from Rutgers University in 1993. Mr. Betz
obtained his B.S. in Economics and Finance from Fairleigh Dickenson University in 1980; his MBA in
Finance from Fairleigh Dickenson University in 1982; and his M.A. in financial economics from
Fairleigh Dickenson University in 1998. Their curriculum vitae will be provided upon request.
Ms. Kucsma and Mr. Betz may testify regarding past and future economic losses sustained by
plaintiffs, including the loss of income, pensions, stock options and other economic losses, as well
as medical expenses. They will also testify generally regarding the concept of present value and its
application to economic losses. They may also testify about the financial conditions and financial
statements of various defendants and their net worth with respect to an award of punitive
damages.
In addition to the foregoing, their opinions will be based upon, among other things, their
knowledge; skills; experience; training; education; review of relevant literature; review of discovery
and other documents obtained in this and other litigation; and/or their review of the facts and
circumstances in this case, including, without limitation, medical records, pathology materials,
radiology studies, depositions, testimony, documents and other discovery.
7. Jerry F. Lauderdale, CIH
3804 Cloudy Ridge Rd.
Austin, TX 78734
Mr. Lauderdale is a Certified Industrial Hygienist who may testify about industrial hygiene principals
as related to the circumstances of, plaintiff’s exposure to defendants’ asbestos‐containing products.
He may testify regarding plaintiff’s exposures to asbestos at different times and may testify
concerning his assessment of the various risks that were associated with such exposures. He may
also testify regarding the material and characteristics of defendants’ asbestos products; release of
asbestos fibers from defendants’ products; industry and regulatory protocols; constituent analysis
with respect to the nature of the materials and the identity of the manufacturer of the materials;
and product formulae and product identification. He may further testify regarding the availability of
materials as substitutes for asbestos and when information concerning these substitute materials
appeared in the medical and scientific literature.
This expert may further testify concerning the conditions at plaintiff’s asbestos exposure sites based
on testimony of plaintiff, co‐workers, documents, discovery responses and/or conversations with
other workers. He may testify concerning asbestos hazards resulting from maintenance, repair and
construction operations taking place at those sites and defendants’ failure to respond adequately
or appropriately to those hazards. He may further testify that defendants’ actions constituted
negligence, gross negligence, conscious indifference to others and/or indicate that defendants were
aware of the substantial certainty that their actions could or would result in significant illnesses
Page9
and/or deaths. He may further testify that defendants were in violation of asbestos‐related
2722407_1
9 of 28
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 07/10/2023
06/26/2023 10:29
11:32 PM
AM INDEX NO. 190002/2023
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 144
83 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/10/2023
06/26/2023
regulations promulgated by state governments, local governments and the United States
government, and that defendants violated their duties under the Occupational Safety and Health
Act and its implementing regulations.
He may testify that Defendants’ failure to comply with these laws, regulations and standards
constitutes negligence and gross negligence, and was a cause of plaintiff’s injuries. He may further
testify that defendants were aware, or should have been aware, as a result of medical, scientific
and industrial hygiene literature available to all defendants, of the hazards of asbestos by the time
of plaintiff’s exposure to their products; the use of asbestos‐containing products on defendants’
equipment or machinery; the use of asbestos‐containing products while working on defendants’
premises; and/or while employed by defendants.
He may also testify, based on his experience, training and education, as to the health risks
associated with exposure to asbestos. He may testify regarding bystander exposure to asbestos,
"fiber drift," and specifically that these are occupational hazards associated with asbestos and that
they were significant contributing factors in the plaintiff’s asbestos exposure. He may also testify
that asbestos products are toxic and unreasonably dangerous, and that they are more dangerous
than would be contemplated by the ordinary user with ordinary skills and characteristics common
to the community. He may also testify that there are no safe levels of exposure to asbestos dust in
that there is no level of exposure to asbestos that has been proven too low to cause the disease
mesothelioma. He may testify further that all types of asbestos represent occupational hazards and
that in the science of industrial hygiene, all types of commercial asbestos and tremolite asbestos
are understood to cause all asbestos diseases, including but not limited to, malignant
mesothelioma. He may testify that "dose reconstruction" or similar efforts to quantify and model in
numeric terms the plaintiff’s total and/or relative asbestos exposure, in the absence of
measurements taken at plaintiff’s exposure sites during the relevant periods of time, are without
adequate foundation or generally accepted methodology to be considered reliable.
This expert may testify regarding the general background levels of asbestos release, bystander
levels of exposure of the fiber release, and fiber release and contamination on clothing and other
personal contamination. He may also testify regarding results of dust studies by analysis of using
both particles per cubic foot and fibers per cubic centimeter, as well as current and past techniques
used to analyze asbestos content in dust. He may testify that the levels of asbestos dust to which
plaintiff was exposed during his working career would have likely exceeded established TLVs and
PELs in many instances.
This expert has examined studies of the amount of asbestos fibers released into the breathing zone
during ordinary and foreseeable operations of asbestos products. He may testify that during
foreseeable uses of defendants’ asbestos‐containing products that those products released
asbestos fibers into the breathing zone of individuals, including the Plaintiff, in levels that are above
background. He may testify that impregnated and/or encapsulated asbestos‐containing products,
when disturbed or abraded, release asbestos fibers into the breathing zone of individuals, such as
the plaintiff, in levels that are above background. He may compare and contrast the findings with
other scientific findings. He may also offer opinions concerning testing which has been performed
on behalf of defendants and/or the lack of testing on defendants’ products. He may also testify
regarding any biases or faults in other tests of defendants’ asbestos‐containing products.
Page10
This expert may testify that dust levels measured in testing one defendant’s asbestos product
2722407_1
10 of 28
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 07/10/2023
06/26/2023 10:29
11:32 PM
AM INDEX NO. 190002/2023
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 144
83 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/10/2023
06/26/2023
would be similar to the results from another defendant’s similar product with similar ingredients.
It is anticipated that this expert will testify that asbestos exposure of plaintiff arising from
defendants’ asbestos‐containing products or activities involving the use of asbestos or asbestos‐
containing products were substantial contributing factors in plaintiff’s overall asbestos exposure
and were the result of defendants’ failure to exercise appropriate industrial hygiene controls for
suppressing or reducing exposures to asbestos, including, but not limited to, adequately warning
plaintiff of the dangers associated with asbestos and means to protect himself/herself. He will
testify that these failures by defendants were knowing and/or unreasonable in the time and place
in which they occurred given the information that was available to defendants, including, without
limitation, medical and scientific literature, statutes, regulations and/or based on the defendants’
actual knowledge. This expert’s opinions may be based upon his review of any and all records and
materials, published and or expressed opinions of other experts in the field, corporate documents,
as well as his expertise in the field, including experience and training, and his review of historical
and more recent scientific articles and journals as well as government regulations.
He may testify that pure chrysotile asbestos, in the absence of tremolite or other amphibole
Preview
FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 07/10/2023 10:29 PM INDEX NO. 190002/2023 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 144 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/10/2023 EXHIBIT 59 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 07/10/2023 06/26/2023 10:29 11:32 PM AM INDEX NO. 190002/2023 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 144 83 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/10/2023 06/26/2023 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK IN RE: NEW YORK CITY ASBESTOS LITIGATION Index No.: 190002/2023 THIS DOCUMENT RELATES TO: EXPERT WITNESS LIST AND CPLR DAN ALBASRY, as Trustee of the Estate of NEWAL AL 3101(d) DISCLOSURES SAAD, and FIRAS MOHAMMAD Plaintiffs, ‐against‐ BARRETT MINERALS INC., et al., Defendants. Plaintiffs, pursuant to the New York City Asbestos Litigation (“NYCAL”) Case Management Order (“CMO”) and CPLR § 3101(d), submit the following disclosures of expert witnesses who may be called to testify at the trial of this matter. Plaintiffs reserve the right to supplement and/or amend these disclosures, including at the time of trial. Plaintiffs also reserve the right to call or use the testimony of any witnesses designated by any defendants in this action. If a trial involving more than one plaintiff occurs, any testimonial evidence introduced for one plaintiff may be introduced on behalf of all plaintiffs at trial against all remaining defendants. All of plaintiffs’ experts may offer opinions concerning the analysis, opinions and/or findings of any other expert who is retained, designated, authors a report or otherwise testifies in this matter on behalf of any party. Unless indicated otherwise, “asbestos” shall be interpreted, not in a limited regulatory sense, but broadly and include non‐regulated and non‐commercial forms of asbestos, all forms of elongate mineral particles, fibrous minerals, fibrous talc, cleavage fragments of amphiboles, individual fibers, bundles, fibrils and transition/transitional fibers. “Asbestiform” shall also be interpreted broadly and without particular limitation regarding fiber size, length, dimension, ratio, presence of multiple fibers, or geologic origin or “habit.” The foregoing notwithstanding, “asbestos” also includes talc, whether or not known or acknowledged by defendants to contain asbestiform minerals or other elongate mineral particles. See, e.g., Egilman, et al., Health Effects of Censored Elongated Mineral Particles: A Critical Review, Detection Limits in Air Quality and Environmental Measurements (STP 1618, 2019; doi: 10.1520/STP161820180080); January 6, 2020, Executive Summary of Preliminary Recommendations on Testing Methods for Asbestos in Talc and Consumer Products Containing Talc (available at https://www.fda.gov/media/134005/download) (“The difficulty of identifying and quantifying individual asbestos or other mineral particles present at low concentrations in talc is compounded by the presence of non‐asbestiform analogs with the same elemental composition and crystal structure, but different growth habit. Using TEM, differentiation of chrysotile from non‐ asbestiform serpentine analogs is relatively straightforward; however, each of the non‐asbestiform amphiboles can disaggregate into particles resembling asbestiform fibers, giving rise to disputes between laboratories over whether elongate amphibole particles are truly asbestos, or are particles Page1 resulting from attrition of larger particles of a non‐asbestiform analog. Because both types of 2722407_1 1 of 28 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 07/10/2023 06/26/2023 10:29 11:32 PM AM INDEX NO. 190002/2023 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 144 83 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/10/2023 06/26/2023 elongate minerals are suspected of having biological activity with similar pathological outcomes, the distinction is irrelevant…”); White Paper: IWGACP Scientific Opinions on Testing Methods for Asbestos is Cosmetic Products Containing Talc (December 2021) (https://www.regulations.gov/document/FDA‐2020‐N‐0025‐0053). CPLR 3101(d) DISCLOSURES The opinions of each of the following expert witnesses will be based upon their education, experience and professional training; their review of relevant medical, epidemiological, scientific, historical and technical literature, studies, articles, and journals; and their review and analysis of the facts, discovery and evidence in this case. 1. Dr. Jerrold L. Abraham, M.D. SUNY Upstate Medical University 2152 Weiskotten Hall 750 East Adams St. Syracuse, NY 13210 Among other materials typically relied upon by experts in his field, Dr. Abraham may base his opinions upon his review of medical records, pathology/cytology materials, diagnostic imaging, medical bills, other experts’ findings and opinions, and, if applicable, the testimony and opinions of treating physicians or other healthcare providers. He may testify regarding his opinions as to the asbestos‐caused disease(s) plaintiff developed, as well as which asbestos exposures were significant and which (including on a defendant‐ or product‐specific basis) constituted a substantial contributing factor in the causation of said disease(s). He may also testify regarding whether plaintiff has an increased risk of other diseases or injuries as a result of their exposure to asbestos and/or diagnosis(es) and how plaintiff’s asbestos‐caused disease(s) affected their life expectancy. He may testify that plaintiff will likely require future medical treatment and/or medical monitoring as a result of their asbestos‐caused disease(s). He may testify that plaintiff has incurred and will in the future likely incur medical expenses as a result of their disease(s), and will opine as to whether said expenses are reasonable and necessary. As an expert in the field of medicine and asbestos‐caused diseases, he will testify generally about what asbestos is and how it has been utilized in various products as to the medical aspects of asbestos, including how it causes disease; that there is no known or established safe level of asbestos exposure; that, generally or in the context of a specific case, certain exposures are significant while others may not be; and which exposures plaintiff experienced were significant and which‐‐. He will testify that all types of asbestos fibers are carcinogenic and fibrogenic, and he will offer his medical opinions regarding the prognosis of individuals—including Plaintiff herein—with asbestos‐related diseases. He may further testify that chrysotile in asbestos‐containing products is contaminated with amphibole asbestos, particularly tremolite. He may also testify that pure chrysotile asbestos, in the absence of amphiboles, causes mesothelioma. He may testify that based on the medical and scientific literature available to Defendants, Defendants knew or should have known that their asbestos‐containing products could cause various diseases, including the asbestos‐related disease(s) from which the Plaintiff suffers. He may also testify as to the state‐of‐the‐art (medical and scientific) concerning asbestos‐related diseases Page2 at relevant times, including that medical articles and journals in the 1920s indicated that asbestos 2722407_1 2 of 28 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 07/10/2023 06/26/2023 10:29 11:32 PM AM INDEX NO. 190002/2023 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 144 83 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/10/2023 06/26/2023 could be hazardous and deadly; that medical articles and journals in the 1930s and 1940s indicated that asbestos could cause cancer; and that it was known or knowable that asbestos was a hazardous and dangerous substance in those time frames and when plaintiff was exposed to asbestos. He may testify as to his review of the medical, scientific and/or technical literature and the opinions and conclusions contained in that literature. He may testify regarding exposure levels of asbestos, at what levels asbestos may cause disease, and as to when these facts were known in medical, scientific and/or technical literature. He may also testify as to the hazardous nature of asbestos and asbestos‐containing products and as a result, that such asbestos and/or asbestos‐ containing products are unreasonably dangerous. Further, he may testify concerning the increased risk of cancer faced by individuals exposed to asbestos and the epidemiological link between asbestos and cancer. Furthermore, he may testify that warnings placed on asbestos‐containing products and/or their packaging, if any, were inadequate to properly inform end‐users and other persons exposed thereto of the significant hazards of asbestos inhalation. This expert may also offer opinions regarding the synergy—or lack thereof—between asbestos and smoking on lung cancer risks. His opinions will be based upon, among other things, his knowledge; skills; experience; training; education; review of relevant medical, technical, scientific and/or historical literature; review of discovery and other documents obtained in this and other litigation; and/or his review of the facts and circumstances in this case, including, without limitation, medical records, pathology materials, radiology studies, depositions, testimony, documents and other discovery. 2. Dr. Arnold R. Brody, Ph.D. North Carolina State University College of Veterinary Medicine Department of Molecular Biomedical Sciences 1 N. Ocean Blvd. Boca Raton, FL 33432 Dr. Brody is a specialist in lung biology and pathology. He may testify as to the physiological design and function of the lungs, peritoneum and other parts of the body; the effects of asbestos on the lungs, peritoneum and others part of the body; and the effects of asbestos on the body’s defense mechanisms. He may also testify about asbestos; the diseases it causes; the progressive, irreversible effects of asbestos disease; and the prognosis for an individual exposed to asbestos dust or fibers. He may also testify concerning the scientific literature on the biological and toxicological effects of asbestos written by himself and others. He may also testify about the body’s biologic responses to brief and/or intermittent exposure to asbestos, the pathogenic effects produced by various asbestos fiber types, including chrysotile, and mechanisms of asbestos‐induced diseases including fibrosis and carcinogenesis. He may further testify concerning asbestos deposition and migration in and through the lungs and body. He will discuss all types of cancer risks from asbestos exposure. He will define what “an injury” means and that asbestos diseases are injuries. He may further testify as to the facts and circumstances regarding the nature of the injuries and damages that are the subject of this action. He may testify that certain exposures are substantial contributing factors to an individual’s disease. He will testify that products which release Page3 asbestos fibers are unreasonably dangerous and that some fibers will remain in the human body 2722407_1 3 of 28 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 07/10/2023 06/26/2023 10:29 11:32 PM AM INDEX NO. 190002/2023 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 144 83 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/10/2023 06/26/2023 until death. He will testify regarding substances, conditions and exposures which are not recognized causes of mesothelioma. He may testify from hypothetical sets of facts and may give opinions regarding whether certain types and qualities of asbestos exposures would have contributed to cause certain asbestos‐related diseases. He may discuss the dangers of low‐level exposure to asbestos and may testify that there is no safe level of exposure to asbestos. He may also testify regarding “bystander” and “household exposures” to asbestos and that these types of exposures, under certain circumstances, are known to contribute to the causation of mesothelioma and other asbestos‐related diseases. He may testify when it was known that bystander and household exposures were known to cause disease. He may testify that smoking non‐asbestos cigarettes and second‐hand cigarette smoke are not causes of mesothelioma. He may also testify that it has been known for decades that asbestos can cause asbestos‐related diseases, including mesothelioma, and that all forms of asbestos, including pure chrysotile asbestos in the absence of tremolite, causes mesothelioma. Dr. Brody may testify that chrysotile in asbestos‐containing products is contaminated with tremolite asbestos. He may also testify concerning the scientific and medical literature on the biological and toxicological effects of asbestos written by him and others. He may testify regarding historical literature relating to asbestos related diseases, and when it was known and accepted in the medical and scientific community that asbestos could cause various diseases. Dr. Brody may further testify as to facts and circumstances regarding the nature of the injuries and damages that are the subject of this action. He may utilize teaching slides and other demonstrative evidence during his testimony. These slides have been produced to defendants in asbestos cases on numerous occasions. Copies of same will be provided upon request prior to trial. This expert may also offer opinions regarding the synergy—or lack thereof—between asbestos and smoking on lung cancer risks. His opinions will be based upon, among other things, his knowledge; skills; experience; training; education; review of relevant medical, technical, scientific and/or historical literature; review of discovery and other documents obtained in this and other litigation; and/or his review of the facts and circumstances in this case, including, without limitation, medical records, pathology materials, radiology studies, depositions, testimony, documents and other discovery. 3. Dr. Barry Castleman, Sc.D. P. O. Box 188 Garrett Park, MD 20896 Dr. Castleman is an environmental consultant to numerous federal agencies and environmental groups on public policy related to the control of toxic substances. He holds degrees in environmental and chemical engineering from Johns Hopkins University, as well as a Doctor of Science degree from the Johns Hopkins School of Hygiene & Public Health. He has done extensive research regarding the environmental health aspects of asbestos exposure as well as problems associated with asbestos disease victims. His research has included (and he may testify about) thresholds and standards used to determine safe or acceptable levels of asbestos exposure in the work place and company and trade association knowledge of asbestos hazards. He may testify regarding the availability of materials as substitutes for asbestos and when information concerning these substitute materials appeared in the medical, scientific and/or technical literature. He has authored a treatise on these and related subjects, Asbestos: Medical and Legal Aspects1, which sets Page4 1 BARRY I. CASTLEMAN, ASBESTOS: MEDICAL AND LEGAL ASPECTS (Aspen Publishers 2011) 2722407_1 4 of 28 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 07/10/2023 06/26/2023 10:29 11:32 PM AM INDEX NO. 190002/2023 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 144 83 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/10/2023 06/26/2023 forth his opinions and areas of potential testimony. He may testify regarding availability of materials as substitutes for asbestos and when information concerning these substitute materials appeared in the medical and scientific literature. He may also testify regarding his review of the documents entered into evidence in this case or other cases, and as to the conclusions reached therefrom, that Defendants were negligent, are strictly liable and acted with wanton and willful disregard for the rights and safety the public at large and the Plaintiff herein. He may also testify that the Railroad Defendants violated the Federal Employer Liability Act, Boiler Inspection Act and/or other applicable law by utilizing asbestos‐containing products and materials. Additionally, he may testify as to the hazardous nature of all types of asbestos and that all types of asbestos‐containing products and fiber types are unreasonably dangerous. He may also testify that Defendants engaged in negligent and grossly negligent conduct in failing to recall their asbestos‐containing products from the market and/or in failing to warn of the dangers of their products or the use of asbestos‐containing products. Further, he may testify that certain or all Defendants conspired to suppress information pertaining to the hazards of asbestos, exposure to asbestos‐containing products and the diseases which result there from. Consequently, he will testify that Defendants deprived the Plaintiff of the right to make an informed choice concerning his/her exposure to asbestos‐containing products. Defense counsel are in possession of numerous transcripts of this expert’s prior testimony within which his opinions concerning these subjects have been fully explored. He may testify that medical articles and journals in the 1920s indicated that asbestos could be hazardous and deadly. He may further testify that and in the 1930s and 1940s medical article and journals indicated that asbestos could cause cancer. He will testify that it was known or knowable to Defendants that asbestos was a hazardous and dangerous substance by the foregoing time frames. He may also testify that warnings placed on asbestos‐containing products, if any, were or may have been inadequate to properly inform end‐users and those otherwise exposed of the significant hazards of asbestos inhalation. His opinions may be based upon his review of any and all medical records and available chest x‐rays and/or pathology materials, as well as his expertise in the field, including experience and training, and his review of historical and more recent medical articles and journals. Furthermore, he will testify as to the following specific issues: his background; ethical aspects of corporate responsibility; warnings; and the state‐of‐the‐art of the medical, scientific and/or technical literature regarding asbestos. He will testify regarding bystander exposure to asbestos; “fiber drift;” the fact that asbestos products are “toxic” and unreasonably dangerous; the TLV defense; and the concept that each and every fiber exposure contributes to the causation of plaintiff’s asbestos‐related disease(s). Further, he may testify as to the level of asbestos exposure Plaintiff would have endured. He may testify as to the health aspects of asbestos exposure and to his own personal and professional writings, publications and editorials; the amount of asbestos exposure it takes to cause cancer and other asbestos‐related diseases; and the historical aspects of the development of Page5 OSHA/NIOSH and the history of OSHA/NIOSH regulations and other governmental regulations 2722407_1 5 of 28 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 07/10/2023 06/26/2023 10:29 11:32 PM AM INDEX NO. 190002/2023 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 144 83 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/10/2023 06/26/2023 regarding asbestos and asbestos exposure. He may also testify that Defendants’ failure to comply with these regulations constitutes negligence and was a cause of Plaintiff’s injuries. He may testify that, based on a review of published information and unpublished data concerning the Defendants’ products, these products produce dangerous levels of asbestos dust that contributed to cause the Plaintiff’s disease(s). This expert may also offer opinions regarding the synergy—or lack thereof—between asbestos and smoking on lung cancer risks. His opinions will be based upon, among other things, his knowledge; skills; experience; training; education; review of relevant medical, technical, scientific and/or historical literature; review of discovery and other documents obtained in this and other litigation; and/or his review of the facts and circumstances in this case, including, without limitation, medical records, pathology materials, radiology studies, depositions, testimony, documents and other discovery. 4. Dr. Steven Compton, Ph.D. 3300 Breckinridge Blvd. Suite 400 Duluth, GA 30096 Dr. Compton is a scientist specializing in the measurement and analysis of materials, determining the constituent ingredients in materials, and characterizing those materials and ingredients. He obtained his B.S. in physics from the University of Georgia in 2003, and he thereafter continued his education and training at the University of Georgia, obtaining his Ph.D. in physics in 2009. He is a member of various organizations, including, without limitation, American Association for Aerosol, Research, the American Physical Society, the Microscopy Society of America, and the Georgia Microscopy Society. He has authored and/or co‐authored numerous publications in the field. He is presently a Senior Research Scientist at MVA Scientific Consultants. He may testify regarding material and physical sciences and characteristics of asbestos products and materials; release of asbestos fibers from products and materials; the process by which asbestos fibers settle and accumulate into dust; contamination potentials and analysis; industry and regulatory protocols; constituent analysis of bulk samples and dust samples with respect to the nature of the materials; and the identity of the manufacturer of the materials, product formulae and product identification. Additionally, he may testify regarding product physical and analytical performance and friable asbestos‐containing materials’ characteristics during application; in place over time; deterioration factors; and fiber release. He may testify regarding re‐entrainment, by routine maintenance, custodial and general physical activities; comparative fiber‐count analysis; air streams; vibration; effects of water; and dynamic aspects of preparation of dust and air samples for analysis by transmission electron microscopy. He is also expected to testify as to the physical characteristics of asbestos and other minerals and as to the methods for and all results regarding analyzing asbestos samples. He is also expected to testify regarding the mineralogic properties and any associated fiber release from asbestos products and/or other asbestos‐containing materials as well as all analytical techniques, electron microscopy, product formulas and analysis within his field of materials and related sciences as well as all foundational subjects and topics related to these stated areas. He has examined the amount Page6 of dust released by using or otherwise manipulating various asbestos‐containing products and will 2722407_1 6 of 28 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 07/10/2023 06/26/2023 10:29 11:32 PM AM INDEX NO. 190002/2023 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 144 83 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/10/2023 06/26/2023 offer his results and opinions regarding same. These analyses include current and past techniques used to measure asbestos content in dust. Many of these investigations have been documented on videotape, and he will testify regarding his results from the release of asbestos‐containing dust from said asbestos‐containing products. He may testify about the presence of tremolite asbestos in chrysotile mines and products made with chrysotile. He may also testify about the presence of asbestos, including non‐regulated asbestos, in talc and talc mines. He will testify regarding the general background levels of asbestos release, bystander levels of exposure of the fiber release, air samples in the personal breathing zone generated from the fiber release, and fiber release and contamination on clothing and other personal contamination. He will compare the results of the foregoing dust studies by analysis using both particles per cubic foot, fibers per cubic centimeter, as well as current and past techniques used to analyze asbestos content in dust. He will testify that the levels of asbestos dust measured during these tests exceeded TLVs and PELs in many instances of his product testing. In addition, he has prepared and will utilize demonstrative aids regarding asbestos dust/fiber release from the various products that he has studied and defendants’ TLV defense. He will compare and contrast his findings with other scientific findings, and he will offer opinions concerning testing which was been performed on behalf of defendants or the lack of testing of defendants’ products. He may also testify about the methods and equipment available to defendants historically for testing asbestos‐containing products for dust/fiber release. He may testify that the dust levels measured in testing one defendant’s asbestos‐containing product would be substantially similar to the results expected from another defendant’s similar product with similar ingredients. Defense counsel are in possession of numerous transcripts within which this expert’s opinions have been fully explored. His opinions will be based upon his review of any and all records and materials, as well as his expertise in the field, including experience and training, and his review of historical and more recent scientific articles and journals. He has previously produced written reports and videotapes of each of the tests he has performed. Copies may be available upon request. In addition to the foregoing, his opinions will be based upon, among other things, his knowledge; skills; experience; training; education; review of relevant medical, technical, scientific and/or historical literature; review of discovery and other documents obtained in this and other litigation; and/or his review of the facts and circumstances in this case, including, without limitation, medical records, pathology materials, radiology studies, depositions, testimony, documents and other discovery. 5. Ronald E. Gordon, Ph.D. Mt. Sinai School of Medicine One Gustave L. Levy Place New York, NY 10029 Dr. Gordon’s specialty is biological electron microscopy (cell biology). His research for the past twenty‐five years has involved assessment of asbestos burden in asbestos‐exposed individuals. He will testify that malignant mesothelioma is a signal tumor for asbestos as its cause and that Page7 virtually all diffuse malignant mesothelioma in adults in the U.S. are caused by asbestos exposure. 2722407_1 7 of 28 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 07/10/2023 06/26/2023 10:29 11:32 PM AM INDEX NO. 190002/2023 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 144 83 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/10/2023 06/26/2023 He will testify that malignant mesothelioma is always fatal and that there are no cures for asbestos‐ related diseases. He will testify that asbestos diseases are incurable and progressive by nature. He will testify that asbestos fibers do not signal ordinary human senses as to their dangers and that they are more dangerous than ordinary people with ordinary senses and characteristics will perceive. He will testify that there is no known safe level of asbestos exposure and that the permissible exposure level(s) described by OSHA will not, cannot and are not intended to prevent all asbestos‐related mesotheliomas. He will testify that malignant mesothelioma can be caused in humans by all asbestos fiber‐types, including chrysotile, tremolite, actinolite, anthophyllite, amosite and crocidolite. He will testify that all of these fiber‐types are potent. He will testify that all of these asbestos fiber types cause all forms of asbestos‐related disease, including but not limited to, diffuse malignant mesothelioma, lung cancer, asbestosis, pleural plaques, pleural thickening, diaphragmatic and pericardial plaques, and pleural effusions. He will testify that the proposition that chrysotile‐containing products do not cause malignant mesothelioma in humans, or do so only as a result of asbestos exposures on the order of 25 fiber years, is false and not grounded in any peer‐reviewed, widely‐accepted medical or scientific literature. He may utilize visual aids, slides, photographs, drawings, flip charts, power points, film, medical articles, textbooks and/or other demonstrative aids to assist in explaining any matter about which he may testify. He has published extensively in peer‐reviewed literature on tissue burden of asbestos in occupationally exposed individuals who had asbestos diseases, including, but not limited to, diffuse malignant mesothelioma, and he may testify regarding those publications, as well as any others that he has reviewed and identifies as reliable and/or authoritative. He will testify that "short" asbestos fibers (those that are less than 5 microns in length) are capable of causing mesothelioma in humans. He will testify that fiber burden analysis should account for asbestos fibers that are capable of being seen only in the transmission electron microscope and these analyses should include fibers shorter than 5 microns since these are the asbestos fibers which more readily relocate the extrapulmonary sites where asbestos‐induced diseases such as mesothelioma occur. He may testify that counting asbestos bodies is a poor indicator of the past presence of chrysotile in human lung and likewise as a marker which can be related asbestos diseases, including but not limited to, diffuse malignant mesothelioma. He will testify that asbestos diseases are caused by cumulative asbestos exposure. He will testify that each exposure to asbestos adds to the total dose that causes malignant mesothelioma and is a substantial contributing factor in causing fatal asbestos disease. He will testify that asbestos diseases and their causes are well documented currently and historically. He will testify that a causal relationship between asbestos and asbestosis was well documented by the 1930's, lung cancer by the 1940's and diffuse malignant mesothelioma on or before 1960. If called upon to do so, he may perform a fiber burden analysis and testify to the results and his opinions and interpretation of same. This expert may also offer opinions regarding the synergy—or lack thereof—between asbestos and smoking on lung cancer risks. His opinions will be based upon, among other things, his knowledge; skills; experience; training; education; review of relevant medical, technical, scientific and/or historical literature; review of discovery and other documents obtained in this and other litigation; and/or his review of the facts and circumstances in this case, including, without limitation, medical records, pathology materials, radiology studies, depositions, testimony, documents and other discovery. Page8 2722407_1 8 of 28 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 07/10/2023 06/26/2023 10:29 11:32 PM AM INDEX NO. 190002/2023 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 144 83 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/10/2023 06/26/2023 6. Kristen Kucsma, M.A./Kenneth Betz, MBA, M.A. Sobel Tinari Economics Group 293 Eisenhower Parkway, Ste. 190 Livingston, NJ 07039 Ms. Kucsma and Mr. Betz are economists. Ms. Kucsma obtained her B.A. in Economics from Seton Hall University in 1991 and her M.A. in economics from Rutgers University in 1993. Mr. Betz obtained his B.S. in Economics and Finance from Fairleigh Dickenson University in 1980; his MBA in Finance from Fairleigh Dickenson University in 1982; and his M.A. in financial economics from Fairleigh Dickenson University in 1998. Their curriculum vitae will be provided upon request. Ms. Kucsma and Mr. Betz may testify regarding past and future economic losses sustained by plaintiffs, including the loss of income, pensions, stock options and other economic losses, as well as medical expenses. They will also testify generally regarding the concept of present value and its application to economic losses. They may also testify about the financial conditions and financial statements of various defendants and their net worth with respect to an award of punitive damages. In addition to the foregoing, their opinions will be based upon, among other things, their knowledge; skills; experience; training; education; review of relevant literature; review of discovery and other documents obtained in this and other litigation; and/or their review of the facts and circumstances in this case, including, without limitation, medical records, pathology materials, radiology studies, depositions, testimony, documents and other discovery. 7. Jerry F. Lauderdale, CIH 3804 Cloudy Ridge Rd. Austin, TX 78734 Mr. Lauderdale is a Certified Industrial Hygienist who may testify about industrial hygiene principals as related to the circumstances of, plaintiff’s exposure to defendants’ asbestos‐containing products. He may testify regarding plaintiff’s exposures to asbestos at different times and may testify concerning his assessment of the various risks that were associated with such exposures. He may also testify regarding the material and characteristics of defendants’ asbestos products; release of asbestos fibers from defendants’ products; industry and regulatory protocols; constituent analysis with respect to the nature of the materials and the identity of the manufacturer of the materials; and product formulae and product identification. He may further testify regarding the availability of materials as substitutes for asbestos and when information concerning these substitute materials appeared in the medical and scientific literature. This expert may further testify concerning the conditions at plaintiff’s asbestos exposure sites based on testimony of plaintiff, co‐workers, documents, discovery responses and/or conversations with other workers. He may testify concerning asbestos hazards resulting from maintenance, repair and construction operations taking place at those sites and defendants’ failure to respond adequately or appropriately to those hazards. He may further testify that defendants’ actions constituted negligence, gross negligence, conscious indifference to others and/or indicate that defendants were aware of the substantial certainty that their actions could or would result in significant illnesses Page9 and/or deaths. He may further testify that defendants were in violation of asbestos‐related 2722407_1 9 of 28 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 07/10/2023 06/26/2023 10:29 11:32 PM AM INDEX NO. 190002/2023 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 144 83 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/10/2023 06/26/2023 regulations promulgated by state governments, local governments and the United States government, and that defendants violated their duties under the Occupational Safety and Health Act and its implementing regulations. He may testify that Defendants’ failure to comply with these laws, regulations and standards constitutes negligence and gross negligence, and was a cause of plaintiff’s injuries. He may further testify that defendants were aware, or should have been aware, as a result of medical, scientific and industrial hygiene literature available to all defendants, of the hazards of asbestos by the time of plaintiff’s exposure to their products; the use of asbestos‐containing products on defendants’ equipment or machinery; the use of asbestos‐containing products while working on defendants’ premises; and/or while employed by defendants. He may also testify, based on his experience, training and education, as to the health risks associated with exposure to asbestos. He may testify regarding bystander exposure to asbestos, "fiber drift," and specifically that these are occupational hazards associated with asbestos and that they were significant contributing factors in the plaintiff’s asbestos exposure. He may also testify that asbestos products are toxic and unreasonably dangerous, and that they are more dangerous than would be contemplated by the ordinary user with ordinary skills and characteristics common to the community. He may also testify that there are no safe levels of exposure to asbestos dust in that there is no level of exposure to asbestos that has been proven too low to cause the disease mesothelioma. He may testify further that all types of asbestos represent occupational hazards and that in the science of industrial hygiene, all types of commercial asbestos and tremolite asbestos are understood to cause all asbestos diseases, including but not limited to, malignant mesothelioma. He may testify that "dose reconstruction" or similar efforts to quantify and model in numeric terms the plaintiff’s total and/or relative asbestos exposure, in the absence of measurements taken at plaintiff’s exposure sites during the relevant periods of time, are without adequate foundation or generally accepted methodology to be considered reliable. This expert may testify regarding the general background levels of asbestos release, bystander levels of exposure of the fiber release, and fiber release and contamination on clothing and other personal contamination. He may also testify regarding results of dust studies by analysis of using both particles per cubic foot and fibers per cubic centimeter, as well as current and past techniques used to analyze asbestos content in dust. He may testify that the levels of asbestos dust to which plaintiff was exposed during his working career would have likely exceeded established TLVs and PELs in many instances. This expert has examined studies of the amount of asbestos fibers released into the breathing zone during ordinary and foreseeable operations of asbestos products. He may testify that during foreseeable uses of defendants’ asbestos‐containing products that those products released asbestos fibers into the breathing zone of individuals, including the Plaintiff, in levels that are above background. He may testify that impregnated and/or encapsulated asbestos‐containing products, when disturbed or abraded, release asbestos fibers into the breathing zone of individuals, such as the plaintiff, in levels that are above background. He may compare and contrast the findings with other scientific findings. He may also offer opinions concerning testing which has been performed on behalf of defendants and/or the lack of testing on defendants’ products. He may also testify regarding any biases or faults in other tests of defendants’ asbestos‐containing products. Page10 This expert may testify that dust levels measured in testing one defendant’s asbestos product 2722407_1 10 of 28 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 07/10/2023 06/26/2023 10:29 11:32 PM AM INDEX NO. 190002/2023 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 144 83 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/10/2023 06/26/2023 would be similar to the results from another defendant’s similar product with similar ingredients. It is anticipated that this expert will testify that asbestos exposure of plaintiff arising from defendants’ asbestos‐containing products or activities involving the use of asbestos or asbestos‐ containing products were substantial contributing factors in plaintiff’s overall asbestos exposure and were the result of defendants’ failure to exercise appropriate industrial hygiene controls for suppressing or reducing exposures to asbestos, including, but not limited to, adequately warning plaintiff of the dangers associated with asbestos and means to protect himself/herself. He will testify that these failures by defendants were knowing and/or unreasonable in the time and place in which they occurred given the information that was available to defendants, including, without limitation, medical and scientific literature, statutes, regulations and/or based on the defendants’ actual knowledge. This expert’s opinions may be based upon his review of any and all records and materials, published and or expressed opinions of other experts in the field, corporate documents, as well as his expertise in the field, including experience and training, and his review of historical and more recent scientific articles and journals as well as government regulations. He may testify that pure chrysotile asbestos, in the absence of tremolite or other amphibole