arrow left
arrow right
  • CHARLES HUSBAND VS. ASBESTOS DEFENDANTS (B*P) AS REFLECTED ON EXHIBITS ASBESTOS document preview
  • CHARLES HUSBAND VS. ASBESTOS DEFENDANTS (B*P) AS REFLECTED ON EXHIBITS ASBESTOS document preview
  • CHARLES HUSBAND VS. ASBESTOS DEFENDANTS (B*P) AS REFLECTED ON EXHIBITS ASBESTOS document preview
  • CHARLES HUSBAND VS. ASBESTOS DEFENDANTS (B*P) AS REFLECTED ON EXHIBITS ASBESTOS document preview
  • CHARLES HUSBAND VS. ASBESTOS DEFENDANTS (B*P) AS REFLECTED ON EXHIBITS ASBESTOS document preview
  • CHARLES HUSBAND VS. ASBESTOS DEFENDANTS (B*P) AS REFLECTED ON EXHIBITS ASBESTOS document preview 
						
                                
Preview

                                John R. Brydon [Bar No. 083365]

George A. Otstott [Bar No. 184671]

Thomas J. Moses [Bar No. 116002]

BRYDON HUGO & PARKER ELECTRONICALLY
135 Main Street, 20th Floor FILED
San Francisco, CA 94105 Superior Court of California,
Telephone: (415) 808-0300 County of San Francisco
Facsimile: (415) 808-0333 FEB 21 2012

Email: service@bhplaw.com Clerk of the Court

BY: ALISON AGBAY
Attorneys for Defendant Deputy Clerk

UNION CARBIDE CORPORATION

SUPERIOR COURT - STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO- UNLIMITED JURISDICTION

Ce IN Dh &F BW YD

CHARLES HUSBAND, (ASBESTOS)

il Case No. CGC-09-275098

Plaintiff,

12 DEFENDANT UNION CARBIDE

vs. CORPORATION’S MOTION IN LIMINE
13 NO. 17 FOR ORDER BIFURCATING
ASBESTOS DEFENDANTS (B“P), PUNITIVE DAMAGES CLAIM

i4 PURSUANT TO CIVIL CODE SECTION
Defendants. 3293(d)

TO ALL PARTIES HEREIN AND TO THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD:

Defendant UNION CARBIDE CORPORATION (“Union Carbide”), prior to trial
and selection of a jury, moves this Court for an in limine order excluding the introduction
of all evidence pertaining to Union Carbide’s profits or financial condition unless and until
Plaintiff CHARLES HUSBAND (“Plaintiff”) satisfies the prerequisites for the introduction
of such evidence in accordance with Civil Code section 3295(d).

This motion is made on the grounds that under Civil Code section 3295(d),
bifurcation of Plaintiff's punitive damages claim is mandatory wpon a defendant's request.
As such, no evidence of the profits or financial condition of Union Carbide is admissible
until the trier of fact returns a verdict for Plaintiff awarding them actual damages, and
finding that Union Carbide or the joining defendant is guilty of malice, oppression, or

fraud in accordance with Civil Code section 3294.

BryDON 1

Hicco & PARKER DEFENDANT UNION CARBIDE CORPORATION'S MOTION IN LIMINE NO. 17 FOR ORDER

13S Main SrREET

20" F005 BIFURCATING PUNITIVE DAMAGES CLAIM PURSUANT TO CIVIL CODE SECTION 3295(D)

San Franeisen, CA 941051 This motion is based tpon this notice, the memorandum of points and authorities

2 |/attached hereto, the pleadings and records on file herein, and upon such other documents
3 | and oral argument as may be presented at the hearing on this motion.
4 MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES
Sy. BIFURCATION OF PUNITIVE DAMAGES IS MANDATORY UNDER
6 CALIFORNIA LAW
4 California Civil Code section 3295(d) provides in relevant part:
8 The court shall, on application of any defendant, preclude the admission of
5 evidence of that defendant’s profits or financial condition until after the trier
of fact returns a verdict for plaintiff awarding actual damages and finds that a
10 defendant is guilty of malice oppression, or fraud in accordance with Section
11 3294. Evidence of profit and financial condition shall be admissible only as to
D the defendant or defendants found to be liable to the plaintiff and to be guilty
of malice, oppression, or fraud.
8 (Civ. Code, § 3295(d) [emphasis added].)
i The underlying purpose of Section 3295(d) is to avoid the risk that a defendant's
is financial condition might taint the jury’s determination of the underlying liability case and
16 the issues of oppression, fraud, or malice. (See Medo v. Superior Court (1988) 205
u Cal.App.3d 64, 67-68.)
1s In this asbestos personal injury case, Plaintiff is seeking an award of punitive
19 damages. Pursuant to Section 3295(d), this Court must order the relief sought in this
20 motion — there is no discretion. Accordingly, this Court is respectfully requested to enter an
21 order precluding the introduction by Plaintiff of evidence of the profits or financial
22 condition of Union Carbide unless and until the trier of fact returns a verdict for Plaintiff
23 awarding actual damages, and further finds that Union Carbide or any other joining
a4 defendant is guilty of malice, oppression, or fraud in accordance with Civil Code section
3s 3294.
26
27
28
BryDON 2
Huo & PARKER DEFENDANT UNION CARBIDE CORPORATION'S MOTION IN LIMINE NO. 17 FOR ORDER

13S Main SrREET

20" F005 BIFURCATING PUNITIVE DAMAGES CLAIM PURSUANT TO CIVIL CODE SECTION 3295(D)

San Franeisen, CA 941051] CONCLUSION
2 Based upon the foregoing, Union Carbide respectfully requests that this motion be
3 | granted, and that this Court issue an order bifurcating punitive damages as requested
4 | above.
5 ||Dated: February 21, 2012 BRYDON HUGO & PARKER
6
7 By: /s/ Thomas J. Moses
John R. Brydon
8 George A. Otstott
Thomas }. Moses
9 Attorneys for Defendant
10 UNION CARBIDE CORPORATION
il
12
13
14
is
16
17
18
i9
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
BRYDON 3
Hugo & Parker DEFENDANT UNION CARBIDE CORPORATION'S MOTION IN LIMINE NO. 17 FOR ORDER
ine as BIFURCATING PUNITIVE DAMAGES CLAIM PURSUANT TO CIVIL CODE SECTION 3295(D)