ASB-FBT-CV23-6120092-S
`
`CONRAD JOHNS and
`ELIZABETH JOHNS
`
`v.
`
`ALFA LAVAL INC., et ux., et al.,
`
`
`
`
`
`:
`:
`:
`:
`:
`:
`:
`:
`
`SUPERIOR COURT
`
`J.D. OF FAIRFIELD
`
`AT BRIDGEPORT
`
`MARCH 7, 2023
`
`DEFENDANT NOKIA OF AMERICA CORPORATION’S ANSWER, SPECIAL
`DEFENSES, CROSS-CLAIM, AND ANSWER TO CROSS-CLAIMS TO PLAINTIFFS’
`AMENDED COMPLAINT
`
`Defendant Nokia of America Corporation (f/k/a Alcatel-Lucent USA Inc. and Lucent
`
`Technologies, Inc.), individually and as successor-in-interest to Western Electric Company only
`
`for the purpose of the claims asserted in this action, improperly named as “Nokia of American
`
`Corporation, s/b/m to Alcatel-Lucent USA, Inc., s/b/m to Lucent Technologies., (sued as
`
`successor-in-interest to Western Electric Company)” (hereinafter “Defendant” or “Nokia of
`
`American Corporation”) hereby responds to the allegations of Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint
`
`dated February 8, 2023 as follows:
`
`COUNT I
`
`(Product liability as against all Defendants)
`
`1.
`
`Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to
`
`the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 1 and, as such, leaves Plaintiffs to their proof.
`
`2.
`
`Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to
`
`the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 2 and, as such, leaves Plaintiffs to their proof.
`
`3.
`
`Insofar as the allegations of Paragraph 3 are directed against this Defendant, they
`
`are denied. Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the
`
`truth of the remaining allegations of Paragraph 3 and, as such, leaves Plaintiffs to their proof.
`
`ME1 44263164v.1
`
`

`

`4.
`
`Insofar as the allegations of Paragraph 4 are directed against this Defendant, they
`
`are denied. Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the
`
`truth of the remaining allegations of Paragraph 4 and, as such, leaves Plaintiffs to their proof.
`
`5.
`
`Insofar as the allegations of Paragraph 5 are directed against this Defendant, they
`
`are denied. Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the
`
`truth of the remaining allegations of Paragraph 5 and, as such, leaves Plaintiffs to their proof.
`
`6.
`
`Insofar as the allegations of Paragraph 6 are directed against this Defendant, they
`
`are denied. Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the
`
`truth of the remaining allegations of Paragraph 6 and, as such, leaves Plaintiffs to their proof.
`
`7.
`
`Insofar as the allegations of Paragraph 7 are directed against this Defendant, they
`
`are denied. Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the
`
`truth of the remaining allegations of Paragraph 7 and, as such, leaves Plaintiffs to their proof.
`
`8.
`
`Insofar as the allegations of Paragraph 8 are directed against this Defendant, they
`
`are denied. Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the
`
`truth of the remaining allegations of Paragraph 8 and, as such, leaves Plaintiffs to their proof.
`
`9.
`
`Insofar as the allegations of Paragraph 9 are directed against this Defendant, they
`
`are denied. Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the
`
`truth of the remaining allegations of Paragraph 9 and, as such, leaves Plaintiffs to their proof.
`
`10.
`
`Insofar as the allegations of Paragraph 10 are directed against this Defendant, they
`
`are denied. Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the
`
`truth of the remaining allegations of Paragraph 10 and, as such, leaves Plaintiffs to their proof.
`
`11.
`
`Insofar as the allegations of Paragraph 11 are directed against this Defendant, they
`
`2
`
`ME1 44263164v.1
`
`

`

`are denied. Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the
`
`truth of the remaining allegations of Paragraph 11 and, as such, leaves Plaintiffs to their proof.
`
`12.
`
`Insofar as the allegations of Paragraph 12 are directed against this Defendant, they
`
`are denied. Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the
`
`truth of the remaining allegations of Paragraph 12 and, as such, leaves Plaintiffs to their proof.
`
`13.
`
`Insofar as the allegations of Paragraph 13 are directed against this Defendant, they
`
`are denied. Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the
`
`truth of the remaining allegations of Paragraph 13 and, as such, leaves Plaintiffs to their proof.
`
`14.
`
`Insofar as the allegations of Paragraph 14 are directed against this Defendant, they
`
`are denied. Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the
`
`truth of the remaining allegations of Paragraph 14 and, as such, leaves Plaintiffs to their proof.
`
`15.
`
`Insofar as the allegations of Paragraph 15 are directed against this Defendant, they
`
`are denied. Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the
`
`truth of the remaining allegations of Paragraph 15 and, as such, leaves Plaintiffs to their proof.
`
`16.
`
`Insofar as the allegations of Paragraph 16, and its subparts, are directed against
`
`this Defendant, they are denied. Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to
`
`form a belief as to the truth of the remaining allegations of Paragraph 16 and, as such, leaves
`
`Plaintiffs to their proof.
`
`17.
`
`Insofar as the allegations of Paragraph 17 are directed against this Defendant, they
`
`are denied. Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the
`
`truth of the remaining allegations of Paragraph 17 and, as such, leaves Plaintiffs to their proof.
`
`18.
`
`Insofar as the allegations of Paragraph 18 are directed against this Defendant, they
`
`3
`
`ME1 44263164v.1
`
`

`

`are denied. Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the
`
`truth of the remaining allegations of Paragraph 18 and, as such, leaves Plaintiffs to their proof.
`
`19.
`
`Insofar as the allegations of Paragraph 19 are directed against this Defendant, they
`
`are denied. Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the
`
`truth of the remaining allegations of Paragraph 19 and, as such, leaves Plaintiffs to their proof.
`
`20.
`
`Insofar as the allegations of Paragraph 20 are directed against this Defendant, they
`
`are denied. Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the
`
`truth of the remaining allegations of Paragraph 20 and, as such, leaves Plaintiffs to their proof.
`
`21.
`
`Insofar as the allegations of Paragraph 21 are directed against this Defendant, they
`
`are denied. Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the
`
`truth of the remaining allegations of Paragraph 21 and, as such, leaves Plaintiffs to their proof.
`
`22.
`
`Insofar as the allegations of Paragraph 22 are directed against this Defendant, they
`
`are denied. Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the
`
`truth of the remaining allegations of Paragraph 22 and, as such, leaves Plaintiffs to their proof.
`
`23.
`
`Paragraph 23 contains conclusions of law to which no response is required. To
`
`the extent that a response is required, insofar as the allegations of Paragraph 23 are directed
`
`against this Defendant, they are denied.
`
`COUNT II
`
`(Recklessness as to all Defendants)
`
`1-23. Defendant repeats and incorporates by reference its responses to Paragraphs 1-23
`
`of Count I as if fully set forth herein.
`
`24.
`
`Insofar as the allegations of Paragraph 24 are directed against this Defendant, they
`
`4
`
`ME1 44263164v.1
`
`

`

`are denied. Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the
`
`truth of the remaining allegations of Paragraph 24 and, as such, leaves Plaintiffs to their proof.
`
`25.
`
`Insofar as the allegations of Paragraph 25 are directed against this Defendant they
`
`are denied. Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the
`
`truth of the remaining allegations of Paragraph 25 and, as such, leaves Plaintiffs to their proof.
`
`26.
`
`Insofar as the allegations of Paragraph 26 are directed against this Defendant they
`
`are denied. Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the
`
`truth of the remaining allegations of Paragraph 26 and, as such, leaves Plaintiffs to their proof.
`
`27.
`
`Insofar as the allegations of Paragraph 27 are directed against this Defendant they
`
`are denied. Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the
`
`truth of the remaining allegations of Paragraph 27 and, as such, leaves Plaintiffs to their proof.
`
`28.
`
`Insofar as the allegations of Paragraph 28 are directed against this Defendant they
`
`are denied. Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the
`
`truth of the remaining allegations of Paragraph 28 and, as such, leaves Plaintiffs to their proof.
`
`COUNT III
`
`(As to Plaintiff Elizabeth Johns and all Defendants)
`
`1-28 Defendant repeats and incorporates by reference its responses to Paragraphs 1-28
`
`of Count II as if fully set forth herein.
`
`29.
`
`Insofar as the allegations of Paragraph 29 are directed against this Defendant they
`
`are denied. Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the
`
`truth of the remaining allegations of Paragraph 29 and, as such, leaves Plaintiffs to their proof.
`
`Defendant denies that Plaintiffs are entitled to the relief requested in the Wherefore
`
`5
`
`ME1 44263164v.1
`
`

`

`Clause that follows Paragraph 29 of Count III of Plaintiffs’ Complaint.
`
`6
`
`ME1 44263164v.1
`
`

`

`SPECIAL DEFENSES AS TO ALL COUNTS
`
`FIRST SPECIAL DEFENSE
`
`Each and every material allegation of the Complaint is denied except as specifically
`
`admitted.
`
`SECOND SPECIAL DEFENSE
`
`Plaintiffs are not entitled to the damages claimed or to the relief requested.
`
`THIRD SPECIAL DEFENSE
`
`The Complaint is barred by the applicable statute of limitations.
`
`FOURTH SPECIAL DEFENSE
`
`The Complaint is barred by the applicable statute of repose.
`
`FIFTH SPECIAL DEFENSE
`
`Plaintiffs’ breach of warranty claims are barred for lack of privity.
`
`SIXTH SPECIAL DEFENSE
`
`Plaintiffs’ warranty claims are barred by reason of the failure of Plaintiffs to give
`
`reasonable notice of the alleged breaches.
`
`SEVENTH SPECIAL DEFENSE
`
`Plaintiffs’ alleged injury or damage was not caused by any act or omission of this
`
`Defendant. Such injury or damage, if any, was caused by the intervening act(s) or omission(s) of
`
`persons or entities other than this Defendant.
`
`EIGHTH SPECIAL DEFENSE
`
`The Court lacks personal jurisdiction over this Defendant.
`
`7
`
`ME1 44263164v.1
`
`

`

`NINTH SPECIAL DEFENSE
`
` Each and every count of Plaintiffs’ Complaint fails to state a cause of action for which
`
`relief can be granted.
`
`TENTH SPECIAL DEFENSE
`
`Plaintiffs have failed to join all necessary parties for the just adjudication of this matter
`
`and has further omitted reason for such failure.
`
`ELEVENTH SPECIAL DEFENSE
`
`Service of process on this Defendant was improper and insufficient.
`
`TWELFTH SPECIAL DEFENSE
`
`The doctrine of strict liability in tort is inapplicable to Plaintiffs’ claims against this
`
`Defendant.
`
`THIRTEENTH SPECIAL DEFENSE
`
`Plaintiffs willingly, knowingly and voluntarily assumed the risk of the alleged injuries for
`
`which relief is now sought.
`
`FOURTEENTH SPECIAL DEFENSE
`
`Plaintiffs were not in the exercise of due care and the negligence of Plaintiffs contributed
`
`to or caused the injury or damage complained of in whole or in part.
`
`FIFTEENTH SPECIAL DEFENSE
`
`If Plaintiffs have settled with and/or released other defendants or entities who are
`
`tortfeasors, this Defendant is entitled to a reduction of any judgment, either in the total of all the
`
`settlement amounts or the pro-rata share of fault of said tortfeasors as determined by the Court or
`
`jury - whichever is greater.
`
`8
`
`ME1 44263164v.1
`
`

`

`SIXTEENTH SPECIAL DEFENSE
`
`The products of this Defendant from which Plaintiffs claim injury or damage were
`
`materially altered after the sale of said product.
`
`SEVENTEENTH SPECIAL DEFENSE
`
`This Defendant is not liable as a matter of law because its product was manufactured in
`
`accordance with contract specifications of a third-party.
`
`EIGHTEENTH SPECIAL DEFENSE
`
`This Defendant is not liable as a matter of law because its product was manufactured in
`
`accordance with contract specification of the United States government.
`
`NINETEENTH SPECIAL DEFENSE
`
`Plaintiffs’ claims against this Defendant are barred by the exclusivity provision of the
`
`Connecticut Workers’ Compensation Act, Conn. Gen. Stat. § 31-284.
`
`TWENTIETH SPECIAL DEFENSE
`
`Plaintiffs’ alleged injuries and damages were cause by the abnormal and unintended use
`
`of this Defendant’s product(s).
`
`TWENTY-FIRST SPECIAL DEFENSE
`
`Plaintiffs’ employer and/or the purchaser of this Defendant’s product(s) possessed a high
`
`degree of knowledge and sophistication and had equal or superior means and ability to appreciate
`
`and warn of any hazards concerning the use of this Defendant’s product(s).
`
`TWENTY-SECOND SPECIAL DEFENSE
`
`At all relevant times the state of medical and scientific knowledge and the state of art and
`
`design and manufacture of Defendant’s products was such that this Defendant neither knew or
`
`9
`
`ME1 44263164v.1
`
`

`

`should have known that any of its products presented a health risk.
`
`TWENTY-THIRD SPECIAL DEFENSE
`
`Plaintiffs have released, settled, entered into an accord and satisfaction or otherwise
`
`compromised the claims herein.
`
`TWENTY-FOURTH SPECIAL DEFENSE
`
`Plaintiffs’ claims are barred by the doctrine of laches.
`
`TWENTY-FIFTH SPECIAL DEFENSE
`
`The imposition of punitive damages as to this Defendant would violate public policy and
`
`our United States Constitution as the imposition of punitive damages will serve no deterrent
`
`effect and would be duplicative and excessive in nature.
`
`TWENTY-SIXTH SPECIAL DEFENSE
`
`Plaintiffs failed to mitigate or otherwise act to lessen or reduce the injuries and damages
`
`alleged in Plaintiffs’ Complaint.
`
`TWENTY-SEVENTH SPECIAL DEFENSE
`
`This Defendant gave no warranties, express or implied, to Plaintiffs or to anyone acting
`
`on Plaintiffs’ behalf.
`
`TWENTY-EIGHTH SPECIAL DEFENSE
`
`As a bulk supplier of a product, this Defendant reasonably relied on purchasers and/or
`
`intermediaries to warn of risks or hazards associated with the product.
`
`TWENTY-NINTH SPECIAL DEFENSE
`
`This Defendant cannot be held responsible for products manufactured, sold and
`
`distributed by third-parties over which this Defendant had no responsibility or control.
`
`10
`
`ME1 44263164v.1
`
`

`

`THIRTIETH SPECIAL DEFENSE
`
`Plaintiffs knew or reasonably should have known of the potential dangers associated with
`
`this Defendant’s products and, therefore, this Defendant’s alleged failure to warn Plaintiffs has
`
`no causal connection to Plaintiffs’ injuries.
`
`THIRTY-FIRST SPECIAL DEFENSE
`
`Plaintiffs’ alleged exposure to asbestos as a result of working with or around this
`
`Defendant’s product(s) - which this Defendant vigorously denies - was so minimal as to be
`
`insufficient to establish a reasonable degree of probability that the product(s) caused Plaintiffs’
`
`alleged injuries.
`
`THIRTY-SECOND SPECIAL DEFENSE
`
`This Defendant is entitled to a set-off of any verdict in the amount of compensation
`
`Plaintiffs have received as a result of any claim for workers’ compensation benefits.
`
`THIRTY-THIRD SPECIAL DEFENSE
`
`Plaintiffs’ claims are barred by the doctrines of estoppel and waiver.
`
`THIRTY-FOURTH SPECIAL DEFENSE
`
`This Defendant denies that it manufactured, sold, or distributed any products which
`
`allegedly caused Plaintiffs’ injuries.
`
`THIRTY-FIFTH SPECIAL DEFENSE
`
`Plaintiffs’ employer was in control and possession of Plaintiffs’ worksite and responsible
`
`for maintaining a safe work environment, to the exclusion of this Defendant, and failed to do so,
`
`thereby breaking the chain of causation between this Defendant and Plaintiffs’ alleged injuries.
`
`11
`
`ME1 44263164v.1
`
`

`

`THIRTY-SIXTH SPECIAL DEFENSE
`
`Plaintiff was a user of tobacco products despite being aware of the dangers of using such
`
`products and such use caused or contributed to any injuries or damages Plaintiffs seek
`
`compensation for in this matter.
`
`THIRTY-SEVENTH SPECIAL DEFENSE
`
`Plaintiffs’ Complaint should be dismissed because it was filed in an improper venue.
`
`THIRTY-EIGHTH SPECIAL DEFENSE
`
`Plaintiffs’ Complaint should be dismissed pursuant to the doctrine of forum non-
`
`conveniens.
`
`THIRTY-NINTH SPECIAL DEFENSE
`
`To the extent that there is a prior pending action between the parties, this case should be
`
`dismissed as a matter of law.
`
`FORTIETH SPECIAL DEFENSE
`
`Pursuant to Connecticut choice of law principles, the law of Connecticut is inapplicable
`
`and the law of an alternate forum should be applied.
`
`FORTY-FIRST SPECIAL DEFENSE
`
`This Defendant reserves the right to assert any and all applicable special defenses that
`
`discovery may reveal as appropriate.
`
`FORTY-SECOND SPECIAL DEFENSE
`
`This Defendant avails itself of and adopts such other defenses as raised by any other
`
`defendant as may be appropriate.
`
`12
`
`ME1 44263164v.1
`
`

`

`CROSS-CLAIM OF DEFENDANT/CROSS-CLAIM PLAINTIFF NOKIA OF
`AMERICAN CORPORATION AGAINST ALL DEFENDANTS AND THIRD-PARTY
`DEFENDANTS
`
`1.
`
`Although Defendant/Cross-Claim Plaintiff Nokia of American Corporation denies
`
`all the claims set forth in Plaintiffs’ Complaint, in the event that Nokia of American Corporation
`
`is found liable to Plaintiffs, then all other Defendants in this matter, whether direct or by third-
`
`party complaints (hereinafter “Cross-Claim Defendants”), are liable for equitable contribution
`
`and/or statutory contribution pursuant to Conn. Gen. Stat §52-572o, and/or allocation of fault.
`
`2.
`
`Nokia of American Corporation adopts, for purposes of this Cross-Claim, all
`
`allegations set forth in Plaintiffs’ Complaint or related third-party complaints against said
`
`Defendants.
`
`3.
`
`Only in the event that Nokia of American Corporation is found liable to Plaintiffs,
`
`in whole or in part, then Cross-Claim Defendants are liable to Nokia of American Corporation
`
`for all or part of Plaintiffs’ claimed damages.
`
`WHEREFORE, Defendant/Cross-Claim Plaintiff Nokia of American Corporation claims:
`
`a)
`
` contribution for Plaintiffs’ alleged damages pursuant to Conn. Gen. Stat. §52-
`
`572o;
`
`b)
`
`equitable contribution from Cross-Claim Defendants for their share of any
`
`judgment rendered in favor of Plaintiffs;
`
`c)
`
`d)
`
`an allocation of responsibility among Defendants; and
`
`such other relief as the Court may deem just and proper.
`
`ANSWER TO ANY AND ALL CROSS-CLAIMS AGAINST
`DEFENDANT/CROSS-CLAIM DEFENDANT NOKIA OF AMERICAN
`CORPORATION
`
`Defendant/Cross-Claim Defendant Nokia of American Corporation denies each and
`13
`
`ME1 44263164v.1
`
`

`

`every allegation of each and every cross-claim that was or hereinafter may be filed against Nokia
`
`of American Corporation by any co-Defendants or Third-Party Defendants.
`
`DEFENDANT,
`NOKIA OF AMERICAN CORPORATION
`
`By:
`
`/s/ Jeffrey M. Thomen
`Jeffrey M. Thomen
`McCarter & English, LLP
`185 Asylum Street, 36th Floor
`Hartford, CT 06103
`Juris #419091
`(860) 275-6700
`(860) 724-3397 facsimile
`
`CERTIFICATION OF SERVICE
`
`I hereby certify that a copy of this document was mailed or delivered electronically or
`non-electronically on March 7, 2023 to all attorneys and self-represented parties of record and to
`all parties who have not appeared in this matter and that written consent for electronic delivery
`was received from all attorneys and self-represented parties receiving electronic delivery.
`
`By:
`
`/s/ Jeffrey M. Thomen
`Jeffery M. Thomen
`
`14
`
`ME1 44263164v.1
`
`