Preview
FILED: RENSSELAER COUNTY CLERK 10/16/2023 03:22 PM INDEX NO. EF2023-275073
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 14 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/16/2023
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
COUNTY OF RENSSELAER
---------------------------------------------------------------------x
WAYNE VAN AMBURGH and JUDITH VAN Index No.: EF2023-275073
AMBURGH,
GENERAL ELECTRIC
COMPANY'S VERIFIED
Plaintiff(s), ANSWER TO PLAINTIFFS’
-against- COMPLAINT, AFFIRMATIVE
DEFENSES, CROSS-CLAIMS,
AND ANSWER TO CROSS-
AMCHEM PRODUCTS., INC., et. al CLAIMS
Defendants.
----------------------------------------------------------------------x
COUNSELORS:
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that defendant General Electric Company (hereinafter “GE”),
by its attorneys, Tanenbaum Keale LLP, hereby answers Plaintiffs’ Verified Complaint
(hereinafter "Complaint") as follows:
1. GE is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth
of the allegations contained in paragraph 1 of the Complaint and leaves the Plaintiffs to their
proofs.
2. The statements contained in paragraph 2 of Plaintiffs’ Complaint do not require any
admissions or denials as said statements merely define "Defendants" as used within the context of
Plaintiffs’ Verified Complaint.
3. GE, other than admitting it is a New York Corporation, denies the remaining
allegations contained in paragraphs 3 through 17 of Plaintiffs’ Complaint to the extent they pertain
to GE and denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the
allegations to the extent they pertain to any other defendant in this action. GE also refers all
conclusions of law contained in paragraphs 3 through 17 to the Court.
1 of 21
FILED: RENSSELAER COUNTY CLERK 10/16/2023 03:22 PM INDEX NO. EF2023-275073
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 14 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/16/2023
AS AND FOR A FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS,
GE ANSWERS AS FOLLOWS:
4. GE repeats and realleges each and every answer to each and every allegation
contained in paragraphs 1 through 17 of Plaintiffs’ Complaint with the same force and effect as if
fully set forth at length herein answer to paragraph 18 of Plaintiffs’ Complaint.
5. GE denies the allegations contained in paragraphs 19 through 37 of Plaintiffs’
Complaint, to the extent they pertain to GE and denies knowledge or information sufficient to form
a belief as to the truth of the allegations to the extent they pertain to any other party in this action.
GE also refers all conclusions of law contained in paragraphs 19 through 37 to the Court.
AS AND FOR A SECOND CAUSE AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS,
GE ANSWERS AS FOLLOWS:
6. GE repeats and realleges each and every answer to each and every allegation
contained in paragraphs 1 through 37 of Plaintiffs’ Complaint with the same force and effect as if
fully set forth at length herein answer to paragraph 38 of Plaintiffs’ Complaint.
7. GE denies the allegations contained in paragraphs 39 through 43 Plaintiffs’
Complaint to the extent they pertain to GE and denies knowledge or information sufficient to form
a belief as to the truth of the allegations to the extent they pertain to any other party in this action.
GE also refers all conclusions of law contained in paragraphs 39 through 43 to the Court.
AS AND FOR A THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION AGAINST ALL
DEFENDANTS, GE ANSWERS AS FOLLOWS:
8. GE repeats and realleges each and every answer to each and every allegation
contained in paragraphs 1 through 43 of Plaintiffs’ Complaint with the same force and effect as if
fully set forth at length herein answer to paragraph 44 of Plaintiffs’ Complaint.
-2-
2 of 21
FILED: RENSSELAER COUNTY CLERK 10/16/2023 03:22 PM INDEX NO. EF2023-275073
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 14 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/16/2023
9. GE denies the allegations contained in paragraphs 45 through 53 of Plaintiffs’
Complaint, to the extent they pertain to GE and denies knowledge or information sufficient to form
a belief as to the truth of the allegations to the extent they pertain to any other party in this action.
GE also refers all conclusions of law contained in paragraphs 45 through 53 to the Court.
AS AND FOR A FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION AGAINST ALL OTHER
DEFENDANTS, GE ANSWERS AS FOLLOWS:
10. GE repeats and realleges each and every answer to each and every allegation
contained in paragraphs 1 through 53 of Plaintiffs’ Complaint with the same force and effect as if
fully set forth at length herein answer to paragraph 54 of Plaintiffs’ Complaint.
11. GE denies the allegations contained in paragraphs 55 through 64 of Plaintiffs’
Complaint, including all subparts, to the extent they pertain to GE and denies knowledge or
information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations to the extent they pertain to
any other party in this action. GE also refers all conclusions of law contained in paragraphs 55
through 64 to the Court.
AS AND FOR A FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION
AGAINST DEFENDANT ALL DEFENDANTS, GE ANSWERS AS
FOLLOWS:
12. GE repeats and realleges each and every answer to each and every allegation
contained in paragraphs 1 through 64 of Plaintiffs’ Complaint with the same force and effect as if
fully set forth at length herein answer to paragraph 65 of Plaintiffs’ Complaint.
13. GE denies the allegations contained in paragraphs 66 through 83 of Plaintiffs’
Complaint, including all subparts, to the extent they pertain to GE and denies knowledge or
information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations to the extent they pertain to
other party or third party in this action. GE also refers all conclusions of law contained in
paragraphs 66 through 83 to the Court.
-3-
3 of 21
FILED: RENSSELAER COUNTY CLERK 10/16/2023 03:22 PM INDEX NO. EF2023-275073
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 14 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/16/2023
AS AND FOR A SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION
AGAINST DEFENDANT ALL DEFENDANTS, GE ANSWERS AS
FOLLOWS:
14. GE repeats and realleges each and every answer to each and every allegation
contained in paragraphs 1 through 83 of Plaintiffs’ Complaint with the same force and effect as if
fully set forth at length herein answer to paragraph 84 of Plaintiffs’ Complaint.
15. GE denies the allegations contained in paragraphs 85 and 86 of Plaintiffs’
Complaint to the extent they pertain to GE and denies knowledge or information sufficient to form
a belief as to the truth of the allegations to the extent they pertain to other party or third party in
this action. GE also refers all conclusions of law contained in paragraphs 85 and86 to the Court.
AS AND FOR A FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE,
DEFENDANT GE STATES:
16. Plaintiffs’ Complaint fails to contain any allegations whatsoever against GE and
fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted against GE.
AS AND FOR A SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE,
DEFENDANT GE STATES:
17. That GE acted reasonably and with due care toward Plaintiffs.
AS AND FOR A THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE,
DEFENDANT GE STATES:
18. That GE owed no duty to Plaintiffs.
AS AND FOR A FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE,
DEFENDANT GE STATES:
19. That GE violated no duty owed to Plaintiffs.
AS AND FOR A FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE,
DEFENDANT GE STATES:
20. That at all times relevant hereto, GE complied with all applicable laws, regulations
and standards.
AS AND FOR A SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE,
DEFENDANT GE STATES:
-4-
4 of 21
FILED: RENSSELAER COUNTY CLERK 10/16/2023 03:22 PM INDEX NO. EF2023-275073
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 14 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/16/2023
21. In the event that Plaintiffs relies on New York Law, L. 1986 C. 682 Sections 4 and
12 as grounds for maintaining this action, these sections are unconstitutional, and this action is
time barred.
AS AND FOR A SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE,
DEFENDANT GE STATES:
22. The claims are barred by the doctrines of res judicata and/or collateral estoppel.
AS AND FOR AN EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE,
DEFENDANT GE STATES:
23. That GE was not served in accordance with the provisions of the New York Civil
Practice Law and Rules and therefore Plaintiffs’ Complaint must be dismissed due to insufficient
process and insufficient service of process.
AS AND FOR A NINTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE,
DEFENDANT GE STATES:
24. Plaintiffs’ Complaint contains no information regarding dates of exposure, injury
or diagnosis, or any other information necessary to determine whether Plaintiffs’ claims were
timely filed. GE asserts the claims may be barred under the terms of any relevant statutes of
limitations or repose from the jurisdiction or jurisdictions whose limitations or repose provisions
govern.
AS AND FOR A TENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE,
DEFENDANT GE STATES:
25. Plaintiffs have failed to plead any basis for claims of misrepresentation, deliberate
concealment, or fraud against GE, much less state such claims with the specificity required by the
New York Civil Practice Law and Rules and Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
AS AND FOR AN ELEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE,
DEFENDANT GE STATES:
26. That one or more of the causes of action have not been maintained in a timely
fashion and Plaintiffs have neglected the same and should be barred by the doctrine of laches.
AS AND FOR A TWELFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE,
DEFENDANT GE STATES:
-5-
5 of 21
FILED: RENSSELAER COUNTY CLERK 10/16/2023 03:22 PM INDEX NO. EF2023-275073
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 14 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/16/2023
27. That any injuries and/or damages sustained by the Plaintiffs, as alleged in Plaintiffs’
Complaint herein, were caused in whole or in part by the contributory negligence and/or culpable
conduct of said Plaintiffs and not as a result of any contributory negligence and/or culpable conduct
on the part of the answering defendant, which either bars or reduces Plaintiffs’ claims herein an
amount to be determined by the trier of fact.
AS AND FOR A THIRTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE,
DEFENDANT GE STATES:
28. If Plaintiffs sustained any injury as alleged, which is denied, the same resulted,
upon information and belief, from their own negligence in failing to care for their own health by
using tobacco products over an extended period of time. The use of said tobacco products is the
sole, direct and proximate cause, or a contributing cause, of the alleged injury or damage, if any,
about which Plaintiffs complain.
AS AND FOR A FOURTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE,
DEFENDANT GE STATES:
29. If Plaintiffs sustained any injuries or damages as alleged in Plaintiffs’ Complaint,
all of which GE specifically denies, then such injuries and damages were caused or contributed to
by reason of the negligence of said Plaintiffs, by reason of, but not limited to, said Plaintiffs’ failure
to wear a respirator, engage in safe work practices or to protect themselves adequately from risk
of harm.
AS AND FOR A FIFTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE,
DEFENDANT GE STATES:
30. If Plaintiffs sustained any injury or damage, which is denied, then such injury or
damage were proximately caused or contributed to by exposure to and inhalation of noxious and
deleterious fumes and residues from industrial products and by-products prevalent on Plaintiffs’
job sites and substances other than those manufactured or sold by GE, if any, and by cumulative
exposure to all types of environmental and industrial pollutants of air and water.
-6-
6 of 21
FILED: RENSSELAER COUNTY CLERK 10/16/2023 03:22 PM INDEX NO. EF2023-275073
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 14 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/16/2023
AS AND FOR A SIXTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE,
DEFENDANT GE STATES:
31. Insofar as Plaintiffs’ Complaint and each cause of action considered separately
allege a cause of action accruing before September 1, 1975, each such cause of action is barred by
reason of the culpable conduct attributable to Plaintiffs, including contributory negligence and
assumption of the risk.
AS AND FOR A SEVENTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE,
DEFENDANT GE STATES:
32. This action may be barred by the applicable state and/or federal industrial insurance
and/or worker's compensation laws which may provide an exclusive remedy for the damages
which Plaintiffs allegedly sustained, if any.
AS AND FOR AN EIGHTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE,
DEFENDANT GE STATES:
33. In the event that Plaintiffs were employed by this answering defendant, Plaintiffs’
sole and exclusive remedy is under the Workers’ Compensation Law of the State of New York.
AS AND FOR A NINETEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE,
DEFENDANT GE STATES:
34. That the accident and injuries complained of in the Plaintiffs’ Complaint were
caused or brought about by the negligence of a third person or persons over whom this answering
defendant had no control and for whose acts the answering defendant was in no way responsible.
AS AND FOR A TWENTIETH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE,
DEFENDANT GE STATES:
35. That by entering into the activity in which the Plaintiffs were engaged at the time
of the occurrence set forth in Plaintiffs’ Complaint, said Plaintiffs knew the hazards thereof and
the inherent risks incident thereto and had full knowledge of the dangers thereof; that whatever
injuries and damages were sustained by the Plaintiffs herein as alleged in Plaintiffs’ Complaint
arose from and were caused by the reason of such risks voluntarily undertaken by the Plaintiffs in
-7-
7 of 21
FILED: RENSSELAER COUNTY CLERK 10/16/2023 03:22 PM INDEX NO. EF2023-275073
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 14 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/16/2023
their activities and such risks were assumed and accepted by them in performing and engaging in
said activities.
AS AND FOR A TWENTY-FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE,
DEFENDANT GE STATES:
36. There should be no recovery against GE because of any failure to warn or
inadequacy of warning because, upon information and belief, at all times pertinent to Plaintiffs’
claims, said Plaintiffs were possessed of or should have been possessed of good and adequate
knowledge which negated any need for said warning and/or Plaintiffs were required to follow
specific written safety procedures as established by their employers which negated the need or
requirement for any such warning.
AS AND FOR A TWENTY-SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE,
DEFENDANT GE STATES:
37. Whatever damages Plaintiffs may have suffered, if any, were solely or proximately
caused by the Plaintiffs when they assumed and voluntarily exposed themselves to specific and
appreciated risks pursuant to the doctrine of volenti non fit injuria and assumption of risk, for
which Plaintiffs are barred from receiving damages, or, in the alternative, for which recovery is
reduced.
AS AND FOR A TWENTY-THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE,
DEFENDANT GE STATES:
38. That after the product(s) left the control of this answering defendant, they were
subject to abuse, alteration, change, improper installation or operation by persons not in the employ
or control of this defendant, which alteration, change, abuse, improper installation or operation
proximately caused the injuries complained of by Plaintiffs in Plaintiffs’ Complaint. Such change
in condition bars the action as against this defendant.
AS AND FOR A TWENTY-FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE,
DEFENDANT GE STATES:
-8-
8 of 21
FILED: RENSSELAER COUNTY CLERK 10/16/2023 03:22 PM INDEX NO. EF2023-275073
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 14 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/16/2023
39. The alleged injuries and damages of which the Plaintiffs complain were caused by
unauthorized, unattended, or improper use of the products complained of, and as a result of failure
to exercise reasonable and ordinary care, caution and vigilance for which GE is not liable or not
responsible.
AS AND FOR A TWENTY-FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE,
DEFENDANT GE STATES:
40. That any oral warranties upon which Plaintiffs allegedly relied are inadmissible and
unavailable because of the provisions of the applicable Statute of Frauds.
AS AND FOR A TWENTY-SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE,
DEFENDANT GE STATES:
41. That Plaintiffs, their coworkers or employers misused, abused, mistreated and
misapplied the product(s) designated as asbestos material as alleged in Plaintiffs’ Complaint
herein.
AS AND FOR A TWENTY-SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE,
DEFENDANT GE STATES:
42. Whatever damages Plaintiffs may have suffered, if any, were due solely or in part
to the failure of Plaintiffs’ employers to take adequate precautions and provide Plaintiffs with a
safe place to work.
AS AND FOR A TWENTY-EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE,
DEFENDANT GE STATES:
43. While this answering defendant denies the allegations of Plaintiffs with respect to
negligence, statutory liability, strict liability, injury and damages, to the extent that Plaintiffs may
be able to prove the same, they were the result of intervening and/or interceding acts of superseding
negligence on the part of third-parties over which this defendant had neither control nor right of
control and are not recoverable as against this defendant.
AS AND FOR A TWENTY-NINTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE,
DEFENDANT GE STATES:
-9-
9 of 21
FILED: RENSSELAER COUNTY CLERK 10/16/2023 03:22 PM INDEX NO. EF2023-275073
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 14 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/16/2023
44. In accordance with CPLR 1601 et seq., the liability of this answering defendant, if
any, to the Plaintiffs for non-economic loss is limited to this defendant’s equitable share,
determined in accordance with the relative culpability of all persons or entities contributing to the
total liability for non-economic loss, including named parties and others over whom Plaintiffs
could have obtained personal jurisdiction with due diligence.
AS AND FOR A THIRTIETH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE,
DEFENDANT GE STATES:
45. In the event Plaintiffs recover a verdict or judgment against the defendant, then said
verdict or judgment must be reduced pursuant to CPLR 4545(c) by those amounts which have
been, or will, with reasonable certainty, replace or indemnify Plaintiffs, in whole or in part, for any
past or future claimed economic loss, from any collateral source such as insurance, social security,
workers compensation or employee benefit programs.
AS AND FOR A THIRTY-FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE,
DEFENDANT GE STATES:
46. If Plaintiffs have heretofore settled or should hereafter settle or have any judgment
rendered in their favor for any of their alleged injuries and damages with any entity, then GE is
entitled to a setoff in the amount of said settlement.
AS AND FOR A THIRTY-SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE,
DEFENDANT GE STATES:
47. Plaintiffs contributed to their illness and/or injuries, in whole or in part, by the use
of other substances, product, drugs or medications.
AS AND FOR A THIRTY-THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE,
DEFENDANT GE STATES:
48. The place of trial of this action is stated for an improper venue.
AS AND FOR A THIRTY-FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE,
DEFENDANT GE STATES:
49. In the event it should be proven at the time of trial that this answering defendant is
subject to market share liability, then this defendant’s respective share of such liability would be
- 10 -
10 of 21
FILED: RENSSELAER COUNTY CLERK 10/16/2023 03:22 PM INDEX NO. EF2023-275073
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 14 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/16/2023
of such a de minimus amount as to make its contribution for damages negligible and this defendant
would be entitled to contribution, either in whole or in part, from the co-defendants not represented
by this answer.
AS AND FOR A THIRTY-FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE,
DEFENDANT GE STATES:
50. At all times material to Plaintiffs’ claims, the state of medical and scientific
knowledge did not provide GE with knowledge, either actual or constructive, and by the
application of reasonable developed human skill and foresight GE had no reason to know the
propensities, if any, of “asbestos,” “asbestos dust,” “asbestos fibers” and/or “asbestos products”
to cause or contribute to the creation of medical conditions or circumstances involving alleged
injuries to the lungs, respiratory system, larynx, stomach or other bodily organs, bone and tissue,
and also including asbestosis, respiratory disorders, risk of mesothelioma or any other illness of
any type whatsoever at the times relevant to Plaintiffs’ claims.
AS AND FOR A THIRTY-SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE,
DEFENDANT GE STATES:
51. This answering defendant did not give, make or otherwise extend warranties,
whether express or implied, upon which Plaintiffs could rely.
AS AND FOR A THIRTY-SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE,
DEFENDANT GE STATES:
52. This answering defendant breached no warranties, whether express or implied.
AS AND FOR A THIRTY-EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE,
DEFENDANT GE STATES:
53. Any cause of action against GE based on a breach of warranties is barred because
of failure to give GE timely notice required by the Uniform Commercial Code enacted in New
York.
AS AND FOR A THIRTY-NINTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE,
DEFENDANT GE STATES:
54. The doctrine of strict liability in tort is inapplicable to this litigation.
- 11 -
11 of 21
FILED: RENSSELAER COUNTY CLERK 10/16/2023 03:22 PM INDEX NO. EF2023-275073
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 14 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/16/2023
AS AND FOR A FORTIETH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE,
DEFENDANT GE STATES:
55. To the extent Plaintiffs’ Complaint and the causes of action pled therein fail to
identify GE as the manufacturer in fact of any injury-causing products, or fail to identify any
product manufactured by GE as the cause in fact of any injuries to Plaintiffs, Plaintiffs’ Complaint
fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, inasmuch as such claims, if granted, would
contravene GE's constitutional rights to substantive and procedural due process of law as
guaranteed by the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution of the United States and
the Constitution of the State of New York or any other applicable jurisdiction.
AS AND FOR A FORTY-FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE,
DEFENDANT GE STATES:
56. Plaintiffs’ claim for relief, if granted, would constitute a taking of private property
for public use without just compensation, and would contravene GE's rights as preserved by the
Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of
the State of New York or any other applicable jurisdiction.
AS AND FOR A FORTY-SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE,
DEFENDANT GE STATES:
57. To the extent Plaintiffs’ Complaint and the causes of action pled therein fail to
identify GE as the manufacturer in fact of any injury-causing products, or fail to identify any
product manufactured by GE as the cause in fact of any injuries to Plaintiffs, said Complaint fails
to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, inasmuch as such claims, if granted, would
constitute a denial by this court of this defendant's right to equal protection of the law, as preserved
by the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States as well as the Constitution
of the State of New York or any other applicable jurisdiction.
AS AND FOR A FORTY-THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE,
DEFENDANT GE STATES:
- 12 -
12 of 21
FILED: RENSSELAER COUNTY CLERK 10/16/2023 03:22 PM INDEX NO. EF2023-275073
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 14 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/16/2023
58. To the extent Plaintiffs’ Complaint and the causes of action pled therein fail to
identify GE as the manufacturer in fact of any injury-causing products, or fail to identify any
product manufactured by GE as the cause in fact of any injuries to Plaintiffs, said Complaint fails
to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, inasmuch as such claims, if granted, would
constitute an invalid burden by this court on interstate commerce, and a burden without resort to
less burdensome alternatives, in violation of the Commerce Clause, Article I, Section 8, of the
Constitution of the United States.
AS AND FOR A FORTY-FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE,
DEFENDANT GE STATES:
59. Plaintiffs’ claims are barred as a result of the unconstitutionality of the applicable
revival statute.
AS AND FOR A FORTY-FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE,
DEFENDANT GE STATES:
60. Plaintiffs’ claims are barred because of Plaintiffs’ failure to join necessary and
indispensable parties.
AS AND FOR A FORTY-SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE,
DEFENDANT GE STATES:
61. Insofar as Plaintiffs’ Complaint is premised upon any claims accruing on or after
September 1, 1975, to recover damages for personal injuries, the amount of damages recoverable
thereon must be diminished by reason of the culpable conduct attributable to the Plaintiffs and
defendants other than this answering defendant, including contributory negligence and assumption
of the risk, in the proportion to which the culpable conduct attributable to Plaintiffs and/or others
bears to the culpable conduct which caused the damages.
AS AND FOR A FORTY-SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE,
DEFENDANT GE STATES:
62. The damages allegedly sustained by the Plaintiffs were caused, in whole or in part,
through the operation of nature.
- 13 -
13 of 21
FILED: RENSSELAER COUNTY CLERK 10/16/2023 03:22 PM INDEX NO. EF2023-275073
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 14 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/16/2023
AS AND FOR A FORTY-EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE,
DEFENDANT GE STATES:
63. At all times relevant to this litigation, the agents, servants and/or employees of this
answering defendant utilized proper methods in the conduct of its operations, in conformity with
the available knowledge and research of the scientific and industrial communities.
AS AND FOR A FORTY-NINTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE,
DEFENDANT GE STATES:
64. Plaintiffs failed to mitigate or otherwise act to lessen or reduce the injuries alleged
in Plaintiffs’ Complaint.
AS AND FOR A FIFTIETH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE,
DEFENDANT GE STATES:
65. While denying the allegations of Plaintiffs’ Complaint with respect to liability, to
the extent that they may be able to prove negligence or improper conduct, the acts of this answering
defendant were not a proximate cause of any injuries to Plaintiffs.
AS AND FOR A FIFTY-FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE,
DEFENDANT GE STATES:
66. To the extent that Plaintiffs’ claims have been revived by amendments to New
York’s Civil Practice Law and Rules, said claims can be no greater than what they were at the time
when they originally accrued. Therefore, Plaintiffs cannot rely on the doctrine of strict liability in
tort, and Plaintiffs’ warranty claims are barred for lack of privity.
AS AND FOR A FIFTY-SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE,
DEFENDANT GE STATES:
67. Liability based on the Uniform Commercial Code, pure comparative negligence,
strict liability in tort, or other legal doctrines or statutes, before the dates such legal doctrines were
adopted in this jurisdiction, violate the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the
United States Constitution.
AS AND FOR A FIFTY-THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE,
DEFENDANT GE STATES:
- 14 -
14 of 21
FILED: RENSSELAER COUNTY CLERK 10/16/2023 03:22 PM INDEX NO. EF2023-275073
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 14 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/16/2023
68. Plaintiffs’ claim for punitive damages is in violation of the Due Process clause of
the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution and violates the
Constitution of the State of New York or any other applicable jurisdiction.
AS AND FOR A FIFTY-FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE,
DEFENDANT GE STATES:
69. Plaintiffs’ claim for punitive damages is in violation of the Eighth Amendment
prohibition of ex post facto laws and laws impairing the obligations of contracts contained in
Section 20, Paragraph 1, of Article 1 of the United States Constitution.
AS AND FOR A FIFTY-FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE,
DEFENDANT GE STATES:
70. Plaintiffs’ Complaint fails to allege any allegations about, concerning or directed at
this answering defendant and therefore fails to state a claim against this defendant.
AS AND FOR A FIFTY-SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE,
DEFENDANT GE STATES:
71. The claims asserted herein are barred by the doctrines of Estoppel and Waiver.
AS AND FOR A FIFTY-SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE,
DEFENDANT GE STATES:
72. GE has a defense founded upon documentary evidence.
AS AND FOR A FIFTY-EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE,
DEFENDANT GE STATES:
73. Plaintiffs or any other parties asserting causes of action in this matter have not the
legal capacity to sue.
AS AND FOR A FIFTY-NINTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE,
DEFENDANT GE STATES:
74. There is another action pending between the same parties for the same cause of
action in a court of any state or the United States.
- 15 -
15 of 21
FILED: RENSSELAER COUNTY CLERK 10/16/2023 03:22 PM INDEX NO. EF2023-275073
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 14 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/16/2023
AS AND FOR A SIXTIETH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE,
DEFENDANT GE STATES:
75. The causes of action herein, or any of them, may not be maintained because of
arbitration and award, collateral estoppel, discharge in bankruptcy, infancy or other disability of
the moving party, payment, release, res judicata, statute of limitations, or statute of frauds.
AS AND FOR A SIXTY-FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE,
DEFENDANT GE STATES:
76. With respect to any counterclaim, it may not properly be interposed in this action.
AS AND FOR A SIXTY-SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE,
DEFENDANT GE STATES:
77. All defenses which have been or will be asserted by other defendants and/or third-
party defendants in this action are adopted and incorporated by reference as if fully set forth at
length herein as defenses to Plaintiffs’ Verified Complaint. In addition, this answering defendant
will rely upon any and all other and further defenses which become available or appear during
discovery proceedings in this action and hereby specifically reserves the right to amend its answer
for the purposes of asserting any such additional affirmative defenses.
AS AND FOR A SIXTY-THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE,
DEFENDANT GE STATES:
78. If it is determined that the Plaintiffs were exposed to any GE product, which product
or components of those products were acquired from or sold by or used on behalf of the United
States of America or any State or agency thereof, then GE is entitled to any sovereign or
government immunity or defense available to the United States and/or relevant state and/or
relevant agency thereof including, but not limited to, the federal government contractor defense.
AS AND FOR A SIXTY-FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE,
DEFENDANT GE STATES:
79. Plaintiffs’ purported exposure to asbestos occurred on a federal enclave. All claims
arising from alleged incidents on a federal enclave must be determined in accordance with federal
laws.
- 16 -
16 of 21
FILED: RENSSELAER COUNTY CLERK 10/16/2023 03:22 PM INDEX NO. EF2023-275073
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 14 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/16/2023
AS AND FOR A SIXTY-FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE,
DEFENDANT GE STATES:
80. The design, construction, maintenance, and all safety aspects of the equipment at
issue implicate government contracts that give rise to federal laws, including but not limited to the
War Powers Acts.
AS AND FOR A SIXTY-SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE,
DEFENDANT GE STATES:
81. GE acted under the authority of an officer or agency of the United States, within
the meaning of 28 U.S.C. § 1442(a)(1). GE acted under the direction, control and demand of the
U.S. Government, the Secretary of the Navy or his delegee based on extensive and strict
government design specifications.
AS AND FOR A SIXTY-SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE,
DEFENDANT GE STATES:
82. The government mandated precise specifications regarding the products it needed,
and GE conformed to those specifications. GE cannot be liable to a third party in tort if the
government approved reasonably precise specifications and GE conformed to those specifications.
AS AND FOR A SIXTY-EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE,
DEFENDANT GE STATES:
83. Pursuant to the Defense Production Act, GE cannot be held liable for damages or
penalties for any act or failure to act resulting directly or indirectly from compliance with a rule,
regulation, or order issued pursuant to the Defense Production Act.
AS AND FOR A SIXTY-NINTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE,
DEFENDANT GE STATES:
84. The Court lacks both general and specific personal jurisdiction over the answering
defendant. The answering defendant further objects to and denies an exercise of general
jurisdiction over it, notwithstanding any of Plaintiffs’ allegations in the complaint purporting to
establish a basis for general jurisdiction (see, e.g., Daimler AG v. Bauman, 571 U.S. 117 (2014);
BNSF Ry. Co. v. Tyrrell, 137 S.Ct. 1549 (2017); Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Sup. Ct. of Cal.,
- 17 -
17 of 21
FILED: RENSSELAER COUNTY CLERK 10/16/2023 03:22 PM INDEX NO. EF2023-275073
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 14 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/16/2023
S.F. Cty, 137 S.Ct. 1773 (2017); cf., Gibson v. Air & Liquid Sys. Corp., 173 AD3d 519 [1st Dept.,
2019]).
AS AND FOR A SEVENTIETH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE,
DEFENDANT GE STATES:
85. The answering defendant asserts the claims may be subject to and governed by the
laws of a foreign jurisdiction where any of the parties are domiciled or where Plaintiffs was
allegedly exposed to asbestos or diagnosed. See, e.g., Neumeier v. Kuehner, 31 NY2d 121 [1972];
see also, In re New York City Asbestos Litig. (Tedrick v. Colgate), 32 Misc 3d 161 [Sup Ct 2011,
NY County].
AS AND FOR A CROSS-CLAIM AGAINST OTHER DEFENDANTS
NAMED IN THIS CASE, DEFENDANT GE STATES:
86. If Plaintiffs sustained damages in the manner alleged in Plaintiffs’ Verified
Complaint, all of which is denied by this answering defendant, such damages were caused by
reason of negligence, breach of contract, obligation or warranty, nuisance or trespass or are
otherwise the proper responsibility of other defendants named in this case or Plaintiffs’ culpable
conduct.
87. By reason of the foregoing, the answering defendant is entitled to indemnification
or contribution from, and to have judgment over against, its co-defendants, or some of them, for
all or part of any verdict or judgment that Plaintiffs may recover against the answering defendant.
ANSWER TO ALL CROSS-CLAIMS
88. GE hereby answers the cross-claims of each of the other defendants and any third-
party defendant named in this action, however asserted or alleged, and says:
89. All cross-claims for contribution alleged against GE by any party defendant or
third-party defendant are denied.
- 18 -
18 of 21
FILED: RENSSELAER COUNTY CLERK 10/16/2023 03:22 PM INDEX NO. EF2023-275073
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 14 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/16/2023
90. All cross-claims for indemnification alleged against GE by any party defendant or
third-party defendant are denied.
91. All cross-claims for contractual indemnification alleged against GE by any party
defendant or third-party defendant are denied.
- 19 -
19 of 21
FILED: RENSSELAER COUNTY CLERK 10/16/2023 03:22 PM INDEX NO. EF2023-275073
NYSCEF DOC. NO. 14 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/16/2023
DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
Defendant GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY hereby demands a trial by jury in this
action.
Dated: October 16, 2023
Newark, New Jersey
Yours, etc.
TANENBAUM KEALE LLP
Michael A. Tanenbaum, Esq.
Preview
FILED: RENSSELAER COUNTY CLERK 10/16/2023 03:22 PM INDEX NO. EF2023-275073 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 14 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/16/2023 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF RENSSELAER ---------------------------------------------------------------------x WAYNE VAN AMBURGH and JUDITH VAN Index No.: EF2023-275073 AMBURGH, GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY'S VERIFIED Plaintiff(s), ANSWER TO PLAINTIFFS’ -against- COMPLAINT, AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES, CROSS-CLAIMS, AND ANSWER TO CROSS- AMCHEM PRODUCTS., INC., et. al CLAIMS Defendants. ----------------------------------------------------------------------x COUNSELORS: PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that defendant General Electric Company (hereinafter “GE”), by its attorneys, Tanenbaum Keale LLP, hereby answers Plaintiffs’ Verified Complaint (hereinafter "Complaint") as follows: 1. GE is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations contained in paragraph 1 of the Complaint and leaves the Plaintiffs to their proofs. 2. The statements contained in paragraph 2 of Plaintiffs’ Complaint do not require any admissions or denials as said statements merely define "Defendants" as used within the context of Plaintiffs’ Verified Complaint. 3. GE, other than admitting it is a New York Corporation, denies the remaining allegations contained in paragraphs 3 through 17 of Plaintiffs’ Complaint to the extent they pertain to GE and denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations to the extent they pertain to any other defendant in this action. GE also refers all conclusions of law contained in paragraphs 3 through 17 to the Court. 1 of 21 FILED: RENSSELAER COUNTY CLERK 10/16/2023 03:22 PM INDEX NO. EF2023-275073 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 14 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/16/2023 AS AND FOR A FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS, GE ANSWERS AS FOLLOWS: 4. GE repeats and realleges each and every answer to each and every allegation contained in paragraphs 1 through 17 of Plaintiffs’ Complaint with the same force and effect as if fully set forth at length herein answer to paragraph 18 of Plaintiffs’ Complaint. 5. GE denies the allegations contained in paragraphs 19 through 37 of Plaintiffs’ Complaint, to the extent they pertain to GE and denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations to the extent they pertain to any other party in this action. GE also refers all conclusions of law contained in paragraphs 19 through 37 to the Court. AS AND FOR A SECOND CAUSE AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS, GE ANSWERS AS FOLLOWS: 6. GE repeats and realleges each and every answer to each and every allegation contained in paragraphs 1 through 37 of Plaintiffs’ Complaint with the same force and effect as if fully set forth at length herein answer to paragraph 38 of Plaintiffs’ Complaint. 7. GE denies the allegations contained in paragraphs 39 through 43 Plaintiffs’ Complaint to the extent they pertain to GE and denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations to the extent they pertain to any other party in this action. GE also refers all conclusions of law contained in paragraphs 39 through 43 to the Court. AS AND FOR A THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS, GE ANSWERS AS FOLLOWS: 8. GE repeats and realleges each and every answer to each and every allegation contained in paragraphs 1 through 43 of Plaintiffs’ Complaint with the same force and effect as if fully set forth at length herein answer to paragraph 44 of Plaintiffs’ Complaint. -2- 2 of 21 FILED: RENSSELAER COUNTY CLERK 10/16/2023 03:22 PM INDEX NO. EF2023-275073 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 14 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/16/2023 9. GE denies the allegations contained in paragraphs 45 through 53 of Plaintiffs’ Complaint, to the extent they pertain to GE and denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations to the extent they pertain to any other party in this action. GE also refers all conclusions of law contained in paragraphs 45 through 53 to the Court. AS AND FOR A FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION AGAINST ALL OTHER DEFENDANTS, GE ANSWERS AS FOLLOWS: 10. GE repeats and realleges each and every answer to each and every allegation contained in paragraphs 1 through 53 of Plaintiffs’ Complaint with the same force and effect as if fully set forth at length herein answer to paragraph 54 of Plaintiffs’ Complaint. 11. GE denies the allegations contained in paragraphs 55 through 64 of Plaintiffs’ Complaint, including all subparts, to the extent they pertain to GE and denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations to the extent they pertain to any other party in this action. GE also refers all conclusions of law contained in paragraphs 55 through 64 to the Court. AS AND FOR A FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION AGAINST DEFENDANT ALL DEFENDANTS, GE ANSWERS AS FOLLOWS: 12. GE repeats and realleges each and every answer to each and every allegation contained in paragraphs 1 through 64 of Plaintiffs’ Complaint with the same force and effect as if fully set forth at length herein answer to paragraph 65 of Plaintiffs’ Complaint. 13. GE denies the allegations contained in paragraphs 66 through 83 of Plaintiffs’ Complaint, including all subparts, to the extent they pertain to GE and denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations to the extent they pertain to other party or third party in this action. GE also refers all conclusions of law contained in paragraphs 66 through 83 to the Court. -3- 3 of 21 FILED: RENSSELAER COUNTY CLERK 10/16/2023 03:22 PM INDEX NO. EF2023-275073 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 14 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/16/2023 AS AND FOR A SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION AGAINST DEFENDANT ALL DEFENDANTS, GE ANSWERS AS FOLLOWS: 14. GE repeats and realleges each and every answer to each and every allegation contained in paragraphs 1 through 83 of Plaintiffs’ Complaint with the same force and effect as if fully set forth at length herein answer to paragraph 84 of Plaintiffs’ Complaint. 15. GE denies the allegations contained in paragraphs 85 and 86 of Plaintiffs’ Complaint to the extent they pertain to GE and denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations to the extent they pertain to other party or third party in this action. GE also refers all conclusions of law contained in paragraphs 85 and86 to the Court. AS AND FOR A FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, DEFENDANT GE STATES: 16. Plaintiffs’ Complaint fails to contain any allegations whatsoever against GE and fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted against GE. AS AND FOR A SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, DEFENDANT GE STATES: 17. That GE acted reasonably and with due care toward Plaintiffs. AS AND FOR A THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, DEFENDANT GE STATES: 18. That GE owed no duty to Plaintiffs. AS AND FOR A FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, DEFENDANT GE STATES: 19. That GE violated no duty owed to Plaintiffs. AS AND FOR A FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, DEFENDANT GE STATES: 20. That at all times relevant hereto, GE complied with all applicable laws, regulations and standards. AS AND FOR A SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, DEFENDANT GE STATES: -4- 4 of 21 FILED: RENSSELAER COUNTY CLERK 10/16/2023 03:22 PM INDEX NO. EF2023-275073 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 14 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/16/2023 21. In the event that Plaintiffs relies on New York Law, L. 1986 C. 682 Sections 4 and 12 as grounds for maintaining this action, these sections are unconstitutional, and this action is time barred. AS AND FOR A SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, DEFENDANT GE STATES: 22. The claims are barred by the doctrines of res judicata and/or collateral estoppel. AS AND FOR AN EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, DEFENDANT GE STATES: 23. That GE was not served in accordance with the provisions of the New York Civil Practice Law and Rules and therefore Plaintiffs’ Complaint must be dismissed due to insufficient process and insufficient service of process. AS AND FOR A NINTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, DEFENDANT GE STATES: 24. Plaintiffs’ Complaint contains no information regarding dates of exposure, injury or diagnosis, or any other information necessary to determine whether Plaintiffs’ claims were timely filed. GE asserts the claims may be barred under the terms of any relevant statutes of limitations or repose from the jurisdiction or jurisdictions whose limitations or repose provisions govern. AS AND FOR A TENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, DEFENDANT GE STATES: 25. Plaintiffs have failed to plead any basis for claims of misrepresentation, deliberate concealment, or fraud against GE, much less state such claims with the specificity required by the New York Civil Practice Law and Rules and Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. AS AND FOR AN ELEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, DEFENDANT GE STATES: 26. That one or more of the causes of action have not been maintained in a timely fashion and Plaintiffs have neglected the same and should be barred by the doctrine of laches. AS AND FOR A TWELFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, DEFENDANT GE STATES: -5- 5 of 21 FILED: RENSSELAER COUNTY CLERK 10/16/2023 03:22 PM INDEX NO. EF2023-275073 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 14 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/16/2023 27. That any injuries and/or damages sustained by the Plaintiffs, as alleged in Plaintiffs’ Complaint herein, were caused in whole or in part by the contributory negligence and/or culpable conduct of said Plaintiffs and not as a result of any contributory negligence and/or culpable conduct on the part of the answering defendant, which either bars or reduces Plaintiffs’ claims herein an amount to be determined by the trier of fact. AS AND FOR A THIRTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, DEFENDANT GE STATES: 28. If Plaintiffs sustained any injury as alleged, which is denied, the same resulted, upon information and belief, from their own negligence in failing to care for their own health by using tobacco products over an extended period of time. The use of said tobacco products is the sole, direct and proximate cause, or a contributing cause, of the alleged injury or damage, if any, about which Plaintiffs complain. AS AND FOR A FOURTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, DEFENDANT GE STATES: 29. If Plaintiffs sustained any injuries or damages as alleged in Plaintiffs’ Complaint, all of which GE specifically denies, then such injuries and damages were caused or contributed to by reason of the negligence of said Plaintiffs, by reason of, but not limited to, said Plaintiffs’ failure to wear a respirator, engage in safe work practices or to protect themselves adequately from risk of harm. AS AND FOR A FIFTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, DEFENDANT GE STATES: 30. If Plaintiffs sustained any injury or damage, which is denied, then such injury or damage were proximately caused or contributed to by exposure to and inhalation of noxious and deleterious fumes and residues from industrial products and by-products prevalent on Plaintiffs’ job sites and substances other than those manufactured or sold by GE, if any, and by cumulative exposure to all types of environmental and industrial pollutants of air and water. -6- 6 of 21 FILED: RENSSELAER COUNTY CLERK 10/16/2023 03:22 PM INDEX NO. EF2023-275073 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 14 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/16/2023 AS AND FOR A SIXTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, DEFENDANT GE STATES: 31. Insofar as Plaintiffs’ Complaint and each cause of action considered separately allege a cause of action accruing before September 1, 1975, each such cause of action is barred by reason of the culpable conduct attributable to Plaintiffs, including contributory negligence and assumption of the risk. AS AND FOR A SEVENTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, DEFENDANT GE STATES: 32. This action may be barred by the applicable state and/or federal industrial insurance and/or worker's compensation laws which may provide an exclusive remedy for the damages which Plaintiffs allegedly sustained, if any. AS AND FOR AN EIGHTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, DEFENDANT GE STATES: 33. In the event that Plaintiffs were employed by this answering defendant, Plaintiffs’ sole and exclusive remedy is under the Workers’ Compensation Law of the State of New York. AS AND FOR A NINETEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, DEFENDANT GE STATES: 34. That the accident and injuries complained of in the Plaintiffs’ Complaint were caused or brought about by the negligence of a third person or persons over whom this answering defendant had no control and for whose acts the answering defendant was in no way responsible. AS AND FOR A TWENTIETH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, DEFENDANT GE STATES: 35. That by entering into the activity in which the Plaintiffs were engaged at the time of the occurrence set forth in Plaintiffs’ Complaint, said Plaintiffs knew the hazards thereof and the inherent risks incident thereto and had full knowledge of the dangers thereof; that whatever injuries and damages were sustained by the Plaintiffs herein as alleged in Plaintiffs’ Complaint arose from and were caused by the reason of such risks voluntarily undertaken by the Plaintiffs in -7- 7 of 21 FILED: RENSSELAER COUNTY CLERK 10/16/2023 03:22 PM INDEX NO. EF2023-275073 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 14 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/16/2023 their activities and such risks were assumed and accepted by them in performing and engaging in said activities. AS AND FOR A TWENTY-FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, DEFENDANT GE STATES: 36. There should be no recovery against GE because of any failure to warn or inadequacy of warning because, upon information and belief, at all times pertinent to Plaintiffs’ claims, said Plaintiffs were possessed of or should have been possessed of good and adequate knowledge which negated any need for said warning and/or Plaintiffs were required to follow specific written safety procedures as established by their employers which negated the need or requirement for any such warning. AS AND FOR A TWENTY-SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, DEFENDANT GE STATES: 37. Whatever damages Plaintiffs may have suffered, if any, were solely or proximately caused by the Plaintiffs when they assumed and voluntarily exposed themselves to specific and appreciated risks pursuant to the doctrine of volenti non fit injuria and assumption of risk, for which Plaintiffs are barred from receiving damages, or, in the alternative, for which recovery is reduced. AS AND FOR A TWENTY-THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, DEFENDANT GE STATES: 38. That after the product(s) left the control of this answering defendant, they were subject to abuse, alteration, change, improper installation or operation by persons not in the employ or control of this defendant, which alteration, change, abuse, improper installation or operation proximately caused the injuries complained of by Plaintiffs in Plaintiffs’ Complaint. Such change in condition bars the action as against this defendant. AS AND FOR A TWENTY-FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, DEFENDANT GE STATES: -8- 8 of 21 FILED: RENSSELAER COUNTY CLERK 10/16/2023 03:22 PM INDEX NO. EF2023-275073 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 14 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/16/2023 39. The alleged injuries and damages of which the Plaintiffs complain were caused by unauthorized, unattended, or improper use of the products complained of, and as a result of failure to exercise reasonable and ordinary care, caution and vigilance for which GE is not liable or not responsible. AS AND FOR A TWENTY-FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, DEFENDANT GE STATES: 40. That any oral warranties upon which Plaintiffs allegedly relied are inadmissible and unavailable because of the provisions of the applicable Statute of Frauds. AS AND FOR A TWENTY-SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, DEFENDANT GE STATES: 41. That Plaintiffs, their coworkers or employers misused, abused, mistreated and misapplied the product(s) designated as asbestos material as alleged in Plaintiffs’ Complaint herein. AS AND FOR A TWENTY-SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, DEFENDANT GE STATES: 42. Whatever damages Plaintiffs may have suffered, if any, were due solely or in part to the failure of Plaintiffs’ employers to take adequate precautions and provide Plaintiffs with a safe place to work. AS AND FOR A TWENTY-EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, DEFENDANT GE STATES: 43. While this answering defendant denies the allegations of Plaintiffs with respect to negligence, statutory liability, strict liability, injury and damages, to the extent that Plaintiffs may be able to prove the same, they were the result of intervening and/or interceding acts of superseding negligence on the part of third-parties over which this defendant had neither control nor right of control and are not recoverable as against this defendant. AS AND FOR A TWENTY-NINTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, DEFENDANT GE STATES: -9- 9 of 21 FILED: RENSSELAER COUNTY CLERK 10/16/2023 03:22 PM INDEX NO. EF2023-275073 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 14 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/16/2023 44. In accordance with CPLR 1601 et seq., the liability of this answering defendant, if any, to the Plaintiffs for non-economic loss is limited to this defendant’s equitable share, determined in accordance with the relative culpability of all persons or entities contributing to the total liability for non-economic loss, including named parties and others over whom Plaintiffs could have obtained personal jurisdiction with due diligence. AS AND FOR A THIRTIETH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, DEFENDANT GE STATES: 45. In the event Plaintiffs recover a verdict or judgment against the defendant, then said verdict or judgment must be reduced pursuant to CPLR 4545(c) by those amounts which have been, or will, with reasonable certainty, replace or indemnify Plaintiffs, in whole or in part, for any past or future claimed economic loss, from any collateral source such as insurance, social security, workers compensation or employee benefit programs. AS AND FOR A THIRTY-FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, DEFENDANT GE STATES: 46. If Plaintiffs have heretofore settled or should hereafter settle or have any judgment rendered in their favor for any of their alleged injuries and damages with any entity, then GE is entitled to a setoff in the amount of said settlement. AS AND FOR A THIRTY-SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, DEFENDANT GE STATES: 47. Plaintiffs contributed to their illness and/or injuries, in whole or in part, by the use of other substances, product, drugs or medications. AS AND FOR A THIRTY-THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, DEFENDANT GE STATES: 48. The place of trial of this action is stated for an improper venue. AS AND FOR A THIRTY-FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, DEFENDANT GE STATES: 49. In the event it should be proven at the time of trial that this answering defendant is subject to market share liability, then this defendant’s respective share of such liability would be - 10 - 10 of 21 FILED: RENSSELAER COUNTY CLERK 10/16/2023 03:22 PM INDEX NO. EF2023-275073 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 14 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/16/2023 of such a de minimus amount as to make its contribution for damages negligible and this defendant would be entitled to contribution, either in whole or in part, from the co-defendants not represented by this answer. AS AND FOR A THIRTY-FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, DEFENDANT GE STATES: 50. At all times material to Plaintiffs’ claims, the state of medical and scientific knowledge did not provide GE with knowledge, either actual or constructive, and by the application of reasonable developed human skill and foresight GE had no reason to know the propensities, if any, of “asbestos,” “asbestos dust,” “asbestos fibers” and/or “asbestos products” to cause or contribute to the creation of medical conditions or circumstances involving alleged injuries to the lungs, respiratory system, larynx, stomach or other bodily organs, bone and tissue, and also including asbestosis, respiratory disorders, risk of mesothelioma or any other illness of any type whatsoever at the times relevant to Plaintiffs’ claims. AS AND FOR A THIRTY-SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, DEFENDANT GE STATES: 51. This answering defendant did not give, make or otherwise extend warranties, whether express or implied, upon which Plaintiffs could rely. AS AND FOR A THIRTY-SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, DEFENDANT GE STATES: 52. This answering defendant breached no warranties, whether express or implied. AS AND FOR A THIRTY-EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, DEFENDANT GE STATES: 53. Any cause of action against GE based on a breach of warranties is barred because of failure to give GE timely notice required by the Uniform Commercial Code enacted in New York. AS AND FOR A THIRTY-NINTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, DEFENDANT GE STATES: 54. The doctrine of strict liability in tort is inapplicable to this litigation. - 11 - 11 of 21 FILED: RENSSELAER COUNTY CLERK 10/16/2023 03:22 PM INDEX NO. EF2023-275073 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 14 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/16/2023 AS AND FOR A FORTIETH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, DEFENDANT GE STATES: 55. To the extent Plaintiffs’ Complaint and the causes of action pled therein fail to identify GE as the manufacturer in fact of any injury-causing products, or fail to identify any product manufactured by GE as the cause in fact of any injuries to Plaintiffs, Plaintiffs’ Complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, inasmuch as such claims, if granted, would contravene GE's constitutional rights to substantive and procedural due process of law as guaranteed by the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of New York or any other applicable jurisdiction. AS AND FOR A FORTY-FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, DEFENDANT GE STATES: 56. Plaintiffs’ claim for relief, if granted, would constitute a taking of private property for public use without just compensation, and would contravene GE's rights as preserved by the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of New York or any other applicable jurisdiction. AS AND FOR A FORTY-SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, DEFENDANT GE STATES: 57. To the extent Plaintiffs’ Complaint and the causes of action pled therein fail to identify GE as the manufacturer in fact of any injury-causing products, or fail to identify any product manufactured by GE as the cause in fact of any injuries to Plaintiffs, said Complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, inasmuch as such claims, if granted, would constitute a denial by this court of this defendant's right to equal protection of the law, as preserved by the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States as well as the Constitution of the State of New York or any other applicable jurisdiction. AS AND FOR A FORTY-THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, DEFENDANT GE STATES: - 12 - 12 of 21 FILED: RENSSELAER COUNTY CLERK 10/16/2023 03:22 PM INDEX NO. EF2023-275073 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 14 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/16/2023 58. To the extent Plaintiffs’ Complaint and the causes of action pled therein fail to identify GE as the manufacturer in fact of any injury-causing products, or fail to identify any product manufactured by GE as the cause in fact of any injuries to Plaintiffs, said Complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, inasmuch as such claims, if granted, would constitute an invalid burden by this court on interstate commerce, and a burden without resort to less burdensome alternatives, in violation of the Commerce Clause, Article I, Section 8, of the Constitution of the United States. AS AND FOR A FORTY-FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, DEFENDANT GE STATES: 59. Plaintiffs’ claims are barred as a result of the unconstitutionality of the applicable revival statute. AS AND FOR A FORTY-FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, DEFENDANT GE STATES: 60. Plaintiffs’ claims are barred because of Plaintiffs’ failure to join necessary and indispensable parties. AS AND FOR A FORTY-SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, DEFENDANT GE STATES: 61. Insofar as Plaintiffs’ Complaint is premised upon any claims accruing on or after September 1, 1975, to recover damages for personal injuries, the amount of damages recoverable thereon must be diminished by reason of the culpable conduct attributable to the Plaintiffs and defendants other than this answering defendant, including contributory negligence and assumption of the risk, in the proportion to which the culpable conduct attributable to Plaintiffs and/or others bears to the culpable conduct which caused the damages. AS AND FOR A FORTY-SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, DEFENDANT GE STATES: 62. The damages allegedly sustained by the Plaintiffs were caused, in whole or in part, through the operation of nature. - 13 - 13 of 21 FILED: RENSSELAER COUNTY CLERK 10/16/2023 03:22 PM INDEX NO. EF2023-275073 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 14 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/16/2023 AS AND FOR A FORTY-EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, DEFENDANT GE STATES: 63. At all times relevant to this litigation, the agents, servants and/or employees of this answering defendant utilized proper methods in the conduct of its operations, in conformity with the available knowledge and research of the scientific and industrial communities. AS AND FOR A FORTY-NINTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, DEFENDANT GE STATES: 64. Plaintiffs failed to mitigate or otherwise act to lessen or reduce the injuries alleged in Plaintiffs’ Complaint. AS AND FOR A FIFTIETH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, DEFENDANT GE STATES: 65. While denying the allegations of Plaintiffs’ Complaint with respect to liability, to the extent that they may be able to prove negligence or improper conduct, the acts of this answering defendant were not a proximate cause of any injuries to Plaintiffs. AS AND FOR A FIFTY-FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, DEFENDANT GE STATES: 66. To the extent that Plaintiffs’ claims have been revived by amendments to New York’s Civil Practice Law and Rules, said claims can be no greater than what they were at the time when they originally accrued. Therefore, Plaintiffs cannot rely on the doctrine of strict liability in tort, and Plaintiffs’ warranty claims are barred for lack of privity. AS AND FOR A FIFTY-SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, DEFENDANT GE STATES: 67. Liability based on the Uniform Commercial Code, pure comparative negligence, strict liability in tort, or other legal doctrines or statutes, before the dates such legal doctrines were adopted in this jurisdiction, violate the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution. AS AND FOR A FIFTY-THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, DEFENDANT GE STATES: - 14 - 14 of 21 FILED: RENSSELAER COUNTY CLERK 10/16/2023 03:22 PM INDEX NO. EF2023-275073 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 14 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/16/2023 68. Plaintiffs’ claim for punitive damages is in violation of the Due Process clause of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution and violates the Constitution of the State of New York or any other applicable jurisdiction. AS AND FOR A FIFTY-FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, DEFENDANT GE STATES: 69. Plaintiffs’ claim for punitive damages is in violation of the Eighth Amendment prohibition of ex post facto laws and laws impairing the obligations of contracts contained in Section 20, Paragraph 1, of Article 1 of the United States Constitution. AS AND FOR A FIFTY-FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, DEFENDANT GE STATES: 70. Plaintiffs’ Complaint fails to allege any allegations about, concerning or directed at this answering defendant and therefore fails to state a claim against this defendant. AS AND FOR A FIFTY-SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, DEFENDANT GE STATES: 71. The claims asserted herein are barred by the doctrines of Estoppel and Waiver. AS AND FOR A FIFTY-SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, DEFENDANT GE STATES: 72. GE has a defense founded upon documentary evidence. AS AND FOR A FIFTY-EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, DEFENDANT GE STATES: 73. Plaintiffs or any other parties asserting causes of action in this matter have not the legal capacity to sue. AS AND FOR A FIFTY-NINTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, DEFENDANT GE STATES: 74. There is another action pending between the same parties for the same cause of action in a court of any state or the United States. - 15 - 15 of 21 FILED: RENSSELAER COUNTY CLERK 10/16/2023 03:22 PM INDEX NO. EF2023-275073 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 14 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/16/2023 AS AND FOR A SIXTIETH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, DEFENDANT GE STATES: 75. The causes of action herein, or any of them, may not be maintained because of arbitration and award, collateral estoppel, discharge in bankruptcy, infancy or other disability of the moving party, payment, release, res judicata, statute of limitations, or statute of frauds. AS AND FOR A SIXTY-FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, DEFENDANT GE STATES: 76. With respect to any counterclaim, it may not properly be interposed in this action. AS AND FOR A SIXTY-SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, DEFENDANT GE STATES: 77. All defenses which have been or will be asserted by other defendants and/or third- party defendants in this action are adopted and incorporated by reference as if fully set forth at length herein as defenses to Plaintiffs’ Verified Complaint. In addition, this answering defendant will rely upon any and all other and further defenses which become available or appear during discovery proceedings in this action and hereby specifically reserves the right to amend its answer for the purposes of asserting any such additional affirmative defenses. AS AND FOR A SIXTY-THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, DEFENDANT GE STATES: 78. If it is determined that the Plaintiffs were exposed to any GE product, which product or components of those products were acquired from or sold by or used on behalf of the United States of America or any State or agency thereof, then GE is entitled to any sovereign or government immunity or defense available to the United States and/or relevant state and/or relevant agency thereof including, but not limited to, the federal government contractor defense. AS AND FOR A SIXTY-FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, DEFENDANT GE STATES: 79. Plaintiffs’ purported exposure to asbestos occurred on a federal enclave. All claims arising from alleged incidents on a federal enclave must be determined in accordance with federal laws. - 16 - 16 of 21 FILED: RENSSELAER COUNTY CLERK 10/16/2023 03:22 PM INDEX NO. EF2023-275073 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 14 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/16/2023 AS AND FOR A SIXTY-FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, DEFENDANT GE STATES: 80. The design, construction, maintenance, and all safety aspects of the equipment at issue implicate government contracts that give rise to federal laws, including but not limited to the War Powers Acts. AS AND FOR A SIXTY-SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, DEFENDANT GE STATES: 81. GE acted under the authority of an officer or agency of the United States, within the meaning of 28 U.S.C. § 1442(a)(1). GE acted under the direction, control and demand of the U.S. Government, the Secretary of the Navy or his delegee based on extensive and strict government design specifications. AS AND FOR A SIXTY-SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, DEFENDANT GE STATES: 82. The government mandated precise specifications regarding the products it needed, and GE conformed to those specifications. GE cannot be liable to a third party in tort if the government approved reasonably precise specifications and GE conformed to those specifications. AS AND FOR A SIXTY-EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, DEFENDANT GE STATES: 83. Pursuant to the Defense Production Act, GE cannot be held liable for damages or penalties for any act or failure to act resulting directly or indirectly from compliance with a rule, regulation, or order issued pursuant to the Defense Production Act. AS AND FOR A SIXTY-NINTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, DEFENDANT GE STATES: 84. The Court lacks both general and specific personal jurisdiction over the answering defendant. The answering defendant further objects to and denies an exercise of general jurisdiction over it, notwithstanding any of Plaintiffs’ allegations in the complaint purporting to establish a basis for general jurisdiction (see, e.g., Daimler AG v. Bauman, 571 U.S. 117 (2014); BNSF Ry. Co. v. Tyrrell, 137 S.Ct. 1549 (2017); Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Sup. Ct. of Cal., - 17 - 17 of 21 FILED: RENSSELAER COUNTY CLERK 10/16/2023 03:22 PM INDEX NO. EF2023-275073 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 14 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/16/2023 S.F. Cty, 137 S.Ct. 1773 (2017); cf., Gibson v. Air & Liquid Sys. Corp., 173 AD3d 519 [1st Dept., 2019]). AS AND FOR A SEVENTIETH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, DEFENDANT GE STATES: 85. The answering defendant asserts the claims may be subject to and governed by the laws of a foreign jurisdiction where any of the parties are domiciled or where Plaintiffs was allegedly exposed to asbestos or diagnosed. See, e.g., Neumeier v. Kuehner, 31 NY2d 121 [1972]; see also, In re New York City Asbestos Litig. (Tedrick v. Colgate), 32 Misc 3d 161 [Sup Ct 2011, NY County]. AS AND FOR A CROSS-CLAIM AGAINST OTHER DEFENDANTS NAMED IN THIS CASE, DEFENDANT GE STATES: 86. If Plaintiffs sustained damages in the manner alleged in Plaintiffs’ Verified Complaint, all of which is denied by this answering defendant, such damages were caused by reason of negligence, breach of contract, obligation or warranty, nuisance or trespass or are otherwise the proper responsibility of other defendants named in this case or Plaintiffs’ culpable conduct. 87. By reason of the foregoing, the answering defendant is entitled to indemnification or contribution from, and to have judgment over against, its co-defendants, or some of them, for all or part of any verdict or judgment that Plaintiffs may recover against the answering defendant. ANSWER TO ALL CROSS-CLAIMS 88. GE hereby answers the cross-claims of each of the other defendants and any third- party defendant named in this action, however asserted or alleged, and says: 89. All cross-claims for contribution alleged against GE by any party defendant or third-party defendant are denied. - 18 - 18 of 21 FILED: RENSSELAER COUNTY CLERK 10/16/2023 03:22 PM INDEX NO. EF2023-275073 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 14 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/16/2023 90. All cross-claims for indemnification alleged against GE by any party defendant or third-party defendant are denied. 91. All cross-claims for contractual indemnification alleged against GE by any party defendant or third-party defendant are denied. - 19 - 19 of 21 FILED: RENSSELAER COUNTY CLERK 10/16/2023 03:22 PM INDEX NO. EF2023-275073 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 14 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 10/16/2023 DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL Defendant GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY hereby demands a trial by jury in this action. Dated: October 16, 2023 Newark, New Jersey Yours, etc. TANENBAUM KEALE LLP Michael A. Tanenbaum, Esq.