Component Part Supplier Claims and Asbestos Equipment Litigation

Transcription

1 ACI s 18 th National Forum on Asbestos Claims & Litigation January 15-16, 2015 Component Part Supplier Claims and Asbestos Equipment Litigation C. Matt Alva Associate Matushek, Nilles & Sinars Tweeting about this conference?

2 Overview of Discussion Defending a Component Part Defendant Component Part Defense and Controversy Over Replacement Parts

3 Defending a Component Part Defendant Discretion in defending the case is important Don t make the plaintiff s case for them From the outset, work up the case for trial On its surface, case looks like any other And don t do anything to alert opposing counsel otherwise However, make sure you are meeting all obligations and preparing all potential defenses Forum discovery answers, etc. Force opposing counsel to do the work

4 Defending a Component Part Defendant, cont. Handle Depositions with Care Choose questions with case Your questions can tip off opposing counsel to key areas to examine Know your client s history cold Will aid in how you formulate your questions Remember this is a one-step removed case for opposing counsel force them to make the case

5 Defending a Component Part Defendant, cont. Be Aggressive in Answering and Requesting Discovery Answer all forum discovery (or equivalent delay measure) Promulgate appropriate discovery upon plaintiff Fight back in your answers to discovery Discovery questions are often rote, cut-and-paste jobs that are often inappropriate, broad, and unrelated to the current case

6 Defending a Component Part Defendant, cont. Dictate Pace of Case Be aggressive with filings Push your advantages Keep opposing counsel on toes by pushing forum, choice of law, etc Examine Duty Issue for your Jurisdiction

7 Component Part Defense and Replacement Parts Review of the Bare Metal defense Defense where defendants cannot be held liable for the dangers of asbestos-containing parts supplied by third parties. This defense rejects any potential liability for external materials Insulation Gaskets Strong historical support in Tort law for the bare metal defense

8 Breakdown of how the baremetal defense in the courts Defense Friendly Approach Manufacturers have no duty to warn of asbestos-containing replacement parts supplied by a third party Majority approach

9 Breakdown of how the baremetal defense in the courts Plaintiff Friendly Approach Manufacturers have a duty to warn whenever it is foreseeable that asbestos-containing material may be used with their products Minority approach Broad implications concern courts

10 Breakdown of how the baremetal defense in the courts Middle Ground Approach Manufacturers have no duty to warn, unless: The use of asbestos was specified by a Defendant; The use of asbestos was essential to the proper function of a defendant s product; or The use of asbestos was inevitable and by making their product, a defendant was responsible for introducing asbestos into the place in question

11 Breakdown of how the baremetal defense in the courts Disturbing creep towards middle approach Exceptions becoming the rule State-by-state analysis Illinois Pennsylvania New York California