FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 07/01/ :24 PM INDEX NO /2015 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 48 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/01/2015

Transcription

1 FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 07/01/ :24 PM INDEX NO /2015 NYSCEF DOC. NO. 48 RECEIVED NYSCEF: 07/01/2015 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK x IN RE: NEW YORK CITY ASBESTOS LITIGATION x NYCAL IAS PART 50 Hon. Peter Moulton FRANK GONDAR, Plaintiff, -against- A.O. SMITH WATER PRODUCTS, et al., Defendants x Index No.: GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY S VERIFIED ANSWER TO PLAINTIFFS VERIFIED COMPLAINT, AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES, CROSS-CLAIMS, AND ANSWER TO CROSS-CLAIMS COUNSELORS: PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that Defendant GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY (hereinafter GE ), by its attorneys, Sedgwick, LLP, hereby answers plaintiffs Verified Complaint as follows: FIRST: GE, other than admitting it is a New York Corporation, denies each and every allegation contained in paragraphs 1 through 193 of plaintiffs Verified Complaint to the extent they pertain to GE, denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations to the extent they pertain to Plaintiffs or any other defendant in this action, and refers all questions of law to the Court. AS AND FOR A FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, SECOND: The instant Verified Complaint (hereinafter referred to as the "Complaint") fail to contain any allegations whatsoever against GE, and fail to state a claim upon which relief can be granted against GE. AS AND FOR A SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE,

2 THIRD: That the defendant acted reasonably and with due care toward plaintiff(s). AS AND FOR A THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, FOURTH: That the defendant owed no duty to plaintiff(s). AS AND FOR A FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, FIFTH: That the defendant violated no duty owed to plaintiff(s). AS AND FOR A FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, SIXTH: That at all times relevant hereto, this defendant complied with all applicable laws, regulations and standards. AS AND FOR A SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, SEVENTH: In the event that plaintiff(s) relies on New York Law, L 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, EIGHTH: The claims are barred by the doctrines of res judicata and/or collateral estoppel. AS AND FOR AN EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, NINTH: That the defendant was not served in accordance with the provisions of the New York Civil Practice Law and Rules and therefore the complaint must be dismissed due to insufficient process and insufficient service of process. 2

3 AS AND FOR A NINTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, TENTH: The 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, ELEVENTH: 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 A ELEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, TWELFTH: 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 AN TWELFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, THIRTEENTH: That any injuries and/or damages sustained by the plaintiffs as alleged in the 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 in an amount to be determined by the trier of fact. AS AND FOR A THIRTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, FOURTEENTH: If plaintiffs and/or plaintiffs' decedents 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 3

4 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, FIFTEENTH: If plaintiffs sustained any injuries or damages as alleged in the 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, SIXTEENTH: If plaintiffs and/or plaintiffs' decedents 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' and/or plaintiffs' decedents' 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. AS AND FOR A SIXTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, SEVENTEENTH: Insofar as the 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, 4

5 EIGHTEENTH: 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 A EIGHTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, NINETEENTH: In the event that plaintiff was employed by the defendant, plaintiff s sole and exclusive remedy is under the Workers Compensation Laws. AS AND FOR A NINETEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, TWENTIETH: That the accident and injuries complained of in the plaintiff s complaint were caused or brought about by the negligence of a third person or persons over whom the answering defendant had no control and for whose acts the answering defendant was in no way responsible. AS AND FOR A TWENTIETH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, TWENTY-FIRST: That by entering into the activity in which the plaintiff was engaged at the time of the occurrence set forth in the complaint, said plaintiff 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 plaintiff herein as alleged in the complaint arose from and were caused by the reason of such risks voluntarily undertaken by the plaintiff in his activities and such risks were assumed and accepted by him in performing and engaging in said activities. AS AND FOR A TWENTY-FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, TWENTY-SECOND: 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' and/or plaintiffs' decedents' claims, said plaintiffs and/or plaintiffs' decedents were possessed of or should have 5

6 been possessed of good and adequate knowledge which negated any need for said warning and/or plaintiffs and/or plaintiffs' decedents 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, TWENTY-THIRD: 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, TWENTY-FOURTH: That after the product(s) left the control of the 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 the complaint. Such change in condition bars the action as against the defendant. AS AND FOR A TWENTY-FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, TWENTY-FIFTH: 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 AN TWENTY-FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, 6

7 TWENTY-SIXTH: 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, TWENTY-SEVENTH: That plaintiff, his coworkers and employers misused, abused, mistreated and misapplied the product(s) designated as asbestos material as alleged in the complaint herein. AS AND FOR A TWENTY-SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, TWENTY-EIGHTH: 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, TWENTY-NINTH: While the 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 the answering defendant had neither control nor right of control and are not recoverable as against GE. AS AND FOR A TWENTY-NINTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, THIRTIETH: In accordance with CPLR 1601 et seq., the liability of the defendant, if any, to the plaintiffs for non-economic loss is limited to the 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. 7

8 AS AND FOR A THIRTIETH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, THIRTY-FIRST: 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, THIRTY-SECOND: 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 set off in the amount of said settlement. AS AND FOR A THIRTY-SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, THIRTY-THIRD: Plaintiff contributed to his illness and/or injuries, in whole or in part, by the use of other substances, product, drugs or medications. AS AND FOR AN THIRTY-THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, THIRTY-FOURTH: The place of trial of this action is stated for an improper venue. AS AND FOR A THIRTY-FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, THIRTY-FIFTH: In the event it should be proven at the time of trial that defendant is subject to market share liability, then the answering defendant s respective share of such liability would be of such a de minimus amount as to make its contribution for damages negligible and the answering 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, 8

9 THIRTY-SIXTH: At all times material to plaintiffs' claims, the state of medical and scientific knowledge did not provide GE with either knowledge, either actual or constructive, and by the application of reasonable developed human skill and foresight 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, THIRTY-SEVENTH: The 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, THIRTY-EIGHTH: The defendant breached no warranties, whether express or implied. AS AND FOR A THIRTY-EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, THIRTY-NINTH: 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, FORTIETH: The doctrine of strict liability in tort is inapplicable to this litigation. 9

10 AS AND FOR A FORTIETH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, FORTY-FIRST: To the extent plaintiffs' Complaint and the causes of action pled 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 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, FORTY-SECOND: 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, FORTY-THIRD: To the extent plaintiffs' Complaint and the causes of action pled 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. 10

11 AS AND FOR A FORTY-THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, FORTY-FOURTH: To the extent plaintiffs' Complaint and the causes of action pled 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, FORTY-FIFTH: Plaintiffs claims are barred as a result of the unconstitutionality of the applicable revival statute. AS AND FOR A FORTY-FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, FORTY-SIXTH: Plaintiffs claims are barred because of plaintiffs failure to join necessary and indispensable parties. AS AND FOR A FORTY-SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, FORTY-SEVENTH: 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, 11

12 FORTY-EIGHTH: The damages allegedly sustained by the plaintiffs were caused, in whole or in part, through the operation of nature. AS AND FOR A FORTY-EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, FORTY-NINTH: At all times relevant to this litigation, the agents, servants and/or employees of this 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, FIFTIETH: Plaintiffs failed to mitigate or otherwise act to lessen or reduce the injuries alleged in the Complaint. AS AND FOR A FIFTIETH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, FIFTY-FIRST: 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, FIFTY-SECOND: 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, FIFTY-THIRD: 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 12

13 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, FIFTY-FOURTH: Plaintiffs' claim for punitive damages is in violation of the due-process-oflaw 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, FIFTY-FIFTH: 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, FIFTY-SIXTH: 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, FIFTY-SEVENTH: The claims asserted herein are barred by the doctrines of Estoppel and Waiver. AS AND FOR A FIFTY-SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, FIFTY-EIGHTH: 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 complaint. In addition, this defendant will rely upon any and all other further defenses which become available or appear during discovery proceedings in this action 13

14 and hereby specifically reserves the right to amend its answer for the purposes of asserting any such additional affirmative defenses. AS AND FOR A FIFTY-EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, FIFTY-NINTH: 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 FIFTY-NINTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, SIXTIETH: Plaintiff s 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. AS AND FOR A SIXTIETH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, SIXTY-FIRST: The design, construction, maintenance, and all safety aspects of the equipment at issue implicates government contracts that give rise to federal laws, including but not limited to the War Powers Acts. AS AND FOR A SIXTY-FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, SIXTY-SECOND: 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. 14

15 AS AND FOR A SIXTY-SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, SIXTY-THIRD: 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-THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, SIXTY-FOURTH: 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-FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE, SIXTY-FIFTH: All defenses that have been or will be asserted by other defendants in this action are adopted and incorporated by reference as if fully set forth herein. In addition, GE will rely upon any and all other further defenses which become available or appear during discovery in this action and hereby specifically reserves its right to amend its answer for the purpose of asserting any such additional affirmative defenses. AS AND FOR A CROSS-CLAIM AGAINST OTHER DEFENDANTS NAMED IN THIS CASE, SIXTY-SIXTH: If plaintiffs sustained damages in the manner alleged in the 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. SIXTY-SEVENTH: 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 15

16 them, for all or part of any verdict or judgment that plaintiffs may recover against the answering defendant. ANSWER TO ALL CROSS-CLAIMS 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: SIXTY-EIGHTH: All cross-claims for contribution alleged against GE by any party defendant or third-party defendant are denied. SIXTY-NINTH: All cross-claims for indemnification alleged against GE by any party defendant or third-party defendant are denied. SEVENTIETH: All cross-claims for contractual indemnification alleged against GE by any party defendant or third-party defendant are denied. WHEREFORE, defendant GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY, demands judgment dismissing the complaint of the plaintiffs in its entirety together with the costs and disbursements of this action, or, in the event that a judgment is rendered against it, that it has judgment on cross-claims over and against the other defendants in the amount of any recovery had against them and that the relative responsibilities be apportioned among all parties, including defendants and third-party defendants, together with the costs and disbursements of this action. 16

17 DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY hereby demands a trial by jury in this action. Dated: July 1, 2015 Newark, New Jersey SEDGWICK LLP By: /s/ Michael A. Tanenbaum, Esq. Attorneys for Defendant GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY One Newark Center, 16th Floor Newark, New Jersey (973) To: Joseph W. Belluck, Esq. BELLUCK & FOX, LLP Attorneys for Plaintiffs 546 Fifth Avenue, 4 th Floor New York, New York (212) All Known Defense Counsel of Record 17

18 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK x IN RE: NEW YORK CITY ASBESTOS LITIGATION x FRANK GONDAR, -against- Plaintiff, NYCAL IAS PART 50 Hon. Peter Moulton Index No.: ATTORNEY S VERIFICATION A.O. SMITH WATER PRODUCTS, et al., Defendants x The undersigned affirms the truth of the following statement to be true under penalties of perjury pursuant to Rule 2106 of the Civil Practice Law and Rules. That he is duly admitted to practice law in the State of New York and is a member of the law firm of SEDGWICK LLP, attorneys for defendant, GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY. That he has read the foregoing document and knows the contents thereof, and that the same is true to the knowledge of you except as to the matters therein alleged upon information and belief and that as to those matters he believes them to be true. That the reason why this affirmation is being made by affirmant and not the defendant is that the defendant does not maintain an office in the county where affirmant maintains his offices. That the source of affirmant s information and the grounds of his belief as to all the matters therein alleged upon information and belief are reports from and communications had with said defendants. Dated: Newark, New Jersey July 1, 2015 _/s/ Michael A. Tanenbaum, Esq. 18

19 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I HEREBY CERTIFY that on the 1 st day of June 2015, a copy of the foregoing Answer to Plaintiffs Complaint was filed electronically this day and is available for viewing from the Court s ECF system. Notice of this filing will be sent to all counsel of record via the Court s ECF system. Dates: Newark, New Jersey July1, 2015 /s/ Michael A. Tanenbaum, Esq. 19