`
`
`DOCKET NO.: FBT-CV23-6120092-S
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`CONRAD JOHNS and ELIZABETH JOHNS
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`VS.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`ALFA LAVAL, INC. et al.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IN RE: ASBESTOS LITIGATION
`
`
`
`:
`:
`:
`:
`:
`:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`SUPERIOR COURT
`
`JUDICIAL DISTRICT
`OF FAIRFIELD
`
`AT BRIDGEPORT
`
`April 6, 2023
`
`DEFENDANT, SCHNEIDER ELECTRIC USA, INC.,
`f/k/a SQUARE D COMPANY’S ANSWER, SPECIAL DEFENSES,
`AND CROSS-CLAIM TO PLAINTIFFS' SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT
`
`Defendant, Schneider Electric USA, Inc., f/k/a Square D Company (hereinafter “Square
`
`
`
`
`D” or “Defendant”) hereby files its Answer, Special Defenses and Cross-Claim to Plaintiffs'
`
`Second Amended Complaint dated March 6, 2023, as follows:
`
`COUNT I
`
`(Product Liability as Against all Defendants)
`
`1.
`
`As to the allegations contained in Paragraph 1, the defendant has insufficient
`
`knowledge upon which to form a belief and, therefore, leaves the plaintiffs to their proof.
`
`2.
`
`As to the allegations contained in Paragraph 2, the defendant has insufficient
`
`knowledge upon which to form a belief and, therefore, leaves the plaintiffs to their proof.
`
`3.
`
`The defendant denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 3 that relate to
`
`Square D. As to the remaining allegations contained in Paragraph 3, the defendant has
`
`insufficient knowledge upon which to form a belief and, therefore, leaves the plaintiffs to their
`
`proof.
`
`4.
`
`As to the allegations contained in Paragraph 4, the defendant has insufficient
`
`knowledge upon which to form a belief and, therefore, leaves the plaintiffs to their proof.
`
`
`
`5.
`
`As to the allegations contained in Paragraph 5, the defendant has insufficient
`
`knowledge upon which to form a belief and, therefore, leaves the plaintiffs to their proof.
`
`6.
`
`The defendant denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 6 that relate to
`
`Square D. As to the remaining allegations contained in Paragraph 6, the defendant has
`
`insufficient knowledge upon which to form a belief and, therefore, leaves the plaintiffs to their
`
`proof.
`
`7.
`
`The defendant denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 7 that relate to
`
`Square D. As to the remaining allegations contained in Paragraph 7, the defendant has
`
`insufficient knowledge upon which to form a belief and, therefore, leaves the plaintiffs to their
`
`proof.
`
`8.
`
`As to the allegations contained in Paragraph 8, the defendant has insufficient
`
`knowledge upon which to form a belief and, therefore, leaves the plaintiffs to their proof.
`
`9.
`
`The defendant denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 9 that relate to
`
`Square D. As to the remaining allegations contained in Paragraph 9, the defendant has
`
`insufficient knowledge upon which to form a belief and, therefore, leaves the plaintiffs to their
`
`proof.
`
`10.
`
`The defendant denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 10 that relate to
`
`Square D. As to the remaining allegations contained in Paragraph 10, the defendant has
`
`insufficient knowledge upon which to form a belief and, therefore, leaves the plaintiffs to his
`
`proof.
`
`11.
`
`The defendant denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 11 that relate to
`
`Square D. As to the remaining allegations contained in Paragraph 11, the defendant has
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`insufficient knowledge upon which to form a belief and, therefore, leaves the plaintiffs to their
`
`proof.
`
`12.
`
`The defendant denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 12 that relate to
`
`Square D. As to the remaining allegations contained in Paragraph 12, the defendant has
`
`insufficient knowledge upon which to form a belief and, therefore, leaves the plaintiffs to their
`
`proof.
`
`13.
`
`The defendant denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 13 that relate to
`
`Square D. As to the remaining allegations contained in Paragraph 13, the defendant has
`
`insufficient knowledge upon which to form a belief and, therefore, leaves the plaintiffs to their
`
`proof.
`
`14.
`
`The defendant denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 14 that relate to
`
`Square D. As to the remaining allegations contained in Paragraph 14, the defendant has
`
`insufficient knowledge upon which to form a belief and, therefore, leaves the plaintiffs to their
`
`proof.
`
`15.
`
`The defendant denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 15 that relate to
`
`Square D. As to the remaining allegations contained in Paragraph 15, the defendant has
`
`insufficient knowledge upon which to form a belief and, therefore, leaves the plaintiffs to their
`
`proof.
`
`16.
`
`The defendant denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 16 that relate to
`
`Square D. As to the remaining allegations contained in Paragraph 16, the defendant has
`
`insufficient knowledge upon which to form a belief and, therefore, leaves the plaintiffs to their
`
`proof.
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`17.
`
`The defendant denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 17 that relate to
`
`Square D. As to the remaining allegations contained in Paragraph 17, the defendant has
`
`insufficient knowledge upon which to form a belief and, therefore, leaves the plaintiffs to their
`
`proof.
`
`18.
`
`The defendant denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 18 that relate to
`
`Square D. As to the remaining allegations contained in Paragraph 18, the defendant has
`
`insufficient knowledge upon which to form a belief and, therefore, leaves the plaintiffs to their
`
`proof.
`
`19.
`
`The defendant denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 19 that relate to
`
`Square D. As to the remaining allegations contained in Paragraph 19, the defendant has
`
`insufficient knowledge upon which to form a belief and, therefore, leaves the plaintiffs to their
`
`proof.
`
`20.
`
`The defendant denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 20 that relate to
`
`Square D. As to the remaining allegations contained in Paragraph 20, the defendant has
`
`insufficient knowledge upon which to form a belief and, therefore, leaves the plaintiffs to their
`
`proof.
`
`21.
`
`The defendant denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 21 that relate to
`
`Square D. As to the remaining allegations contained in Paragraph 21, the defendant has
`
`insufficient knowledge upon which to form a belief and, therefore, leaves the plaintiffs to their
`
`proof.
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`22.
`
`The defendant denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 22 that relate to
`
`Square D. As to the remaining allegations contained in Paragraph 22, the defendant has
`
`insufficient knowledge upon which to form a belief and, therefore, leaves the plaintiffs to their
`
`proof.
`
`23.
`The allegations contained in Paragraph 23 call for a legal conclusion and,
`therefore, no response is required.
`
`COUNT II
`(Recklessness as to all Defendants)
`1-23. The defendant incorporates by reference its responses to Paragraphs 1-23 of the
`
`
`
`preceding counts and makes them its responses to Paragraphs 1-23 of Count II, as if set forth in
`
`full.
`
`
`
`24.
`
`The defendant denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 24 that relate to
`
`Square D. As to the remaining allegations contained in Paragraph 24, the defendant has
`
`insufficient knowledge upon which to form a belief and, therefore, leaves the plaintiffs to their
`
`proof.
`
`
`
`25.
`
`The defendant denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 25 that relate to
`
`Square D. As to the remaining allegations contained in Paragraph 25, the defendant has
`
`insufficient knowledge upon which to form a belief and, therefore, leaves the plaintiffs to their
`
`proof.
`
`
`
`26.
`
`The defendant denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 26 that relate to
`
`Square D. As to the remaining allegations contained in Paragraph 26, the defendant has
`
`insufficient knowledge upon which to form a belief and, therefore, leaves the plaintiffs to their
`
`proof.
`
`
`
`5
`
`
`
`
`
`27.
`
`The defendant denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 27 that relate to
`
`Square D. As to the remaining allegations contained in Paragraph 27, the defendant has
`
`insufficient knowledge upon which to form a belief and, therefore, leaves the plaintiffs to their
`
`proof.
`
`
`
`28.
`
`The defendant denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 28 that relate to
`
`Square D. As to the remaining allegations contained in Paragraph 28, the defendant has
`
`insufficient knowledge upon which to form a belief and, therefore, leaves the plaintiffs to their
`
`proof.
`
`COUNT III
`(As to Plaintiff ELIZABETH JOHNS and all Defendants)
`1-28. The defendant incorporates by reference its responses to Paragraphs 1-28 of the
`
`
`
`preceding counts and makes them its responses to Paragraphs 1-28 of Count III, as if set forth in
`
`full.
`
`
`
`29.
`
`The defendant denies the allegations contained in Paragraph 29 that relate to
`
`Square D. As to the remaining allegations contained in Paragraph 29, the defendant has
`
`insufficient knowledge upon which to form a belief and, therefore, leaves the plaintiffs to their
`
`proof.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`SPECIAL DEFENSES
`
`FIRST DEFENSE
`
`Plaintiffs has failed to state a claim upon which relief may be granted.
`
`SECOND DEFENSE
`
`Plaintiffs is not entitled to relief for insufficiency of service of process
`
`THIRD DEFENSE
`
`Plaintiffs has failed to serve process.
`
`6
`
`
`
`
`
`The Court lacks personal jurisdiction over Defendant for the causes of action alleged in
`
`FOURTH DEFENSE
`
`the Complaint, pursuant to applicable statutes.
`
`FIFTH DEFENSE
`
`
`
`Plaintiffs has failed to join a party or parties necessary for a just adjudication of this
`
`matter and has further omitted to state any reasons for such failure.
`
`SIXTH DEFENSE
`
`The Court lacks subject matter jurisdiction over the claims set forth in the Complaint.
`
`SEVENTH DEFENSE
`
`The claims set forth in the Complaint were not brought within the time limited by
`
`statute for commencement of such action.
`
`EIGHTH DEFENSE
`
`Plaintiffs' action is barred by the doctrines of estoppel, laches, and/or waiver.
`
`NINTH DEFENSE
`
`Plaintiffs willingly, knowingly, and voluntarily assumed the risk of their alleged
`
`illnesses and injuries for which relief is sought in this matter, and therefore, recovery by
`
`Plaintiffs is barred.
`
`TENTH DEFENSE
`
`Plaintiffs was negligent in bringing about any injuries allegedly sustained.
`
`ELEVENTH DEFENSE
`
`
`
`The state of the medical and scientific knowledge regarding Defendant’s products and/or
`
`its contents, at all times material hereto, was such that Defendant never knew or could not have
`
`
`
`
`
`7
`
`
`
`known that its product presented any risk or harm to the Plaintiffs if such product were properly
`
`used.
`
`TWELFTH DEFENSE
`
`
`
`Plaintiffs failed to exercise ordinary care for their own safety and well-being, and that
`
`failure to exercise ordinary care, proximately and directly caused and/or contributed to their
`
`alleged illness and injury.
`
`THIRTEENTH DEFENSE
`
`
`
`Plaintiffs’ claims against Defendant are barred because the damages or losses,
`
`experienced, if any, were not due to any act or failure to act of this Defendant but caused solely
`
`by the acts of a third-party or parties for whose acts or failure to act this Defendant is not
`
`responsible and over whom this Defendant had neither control nor the right of control.
`
`FOURTEENTH DEFENSE
`
`
`
`
`
`Defendant denies that it or its agents or servants made any express warranties as alleged.
`
`FIFTEENTH DEFENSE
`
`If Defendant, its servant or agents, made any express and/or implied warranties,
`
`allegations which the Defendant specifically denies, then Defendant denies that it breached any
`
`of the warranties.
`
`SIXTEENTH DEFENSE
`
`
`
`Plaintiffs never, prior to filing of this Complaint, informed this Defendant, by notification
`
`or otherwise, of any breach of express and/or implied warranties. Plaintiffs failed to give notice
`
`of the alleged breach of warranties within a reasonable time as required by applicable statutes.
`
`Consequently, the claims of breach of express or implied warranties against the defendant are
`
`barred.
`
`
`
`8
`
`
`
`SEVENTEENTH DEFENSE
`
`Defendant denies that privity of contract between Plaintiffs and it ever existed.
`
`EIGHTEENTH DEFENSE
`
`If Defendant was negligent or in breach of warranty, all of which it expressly denies, the
`
`
`
`
`
`Defendant’s liability in any or all of these events has been terminated by the intervening acts,
`
`omissions, or negligence of others over whom this Defendant had neither control, nor the right of
`
`control and for whose conduct the Defendant is not legally responsible.
`
`NINETEENTH DEFENSE
`
`
`
`Defendant denies that there was any defect or negligent mining, processing, manufacture,
`
`design, testing, investigation, fashioning, packaging, distributing, delivery and/or sale in any
`
`asbestos product or material referred to in Plaintiffs’ Complaint, but if there was any defect or
`
`negligence as alleged, then Defendant is not liable as it justifiably relied upon inspection by
`
`others in the regular course of trade or business.
`
`TWENTIETH DEFENSE
`
`
`
`Plaintiffs' employer(s) were negligent with respect to the matters set forth in the
`
`Complaint, and such negligence caused in whole or in part whatever disease, injury or
`
`disability, if any, which Plaintiffs may have sustained, as set forth in the Complaint.
`
`Therefore, even if Plaintiffs are entitled to recover against Defendant, which Defendant
`
`specifically denies, Plaintiffs is not entitled to recover in the amount set forth in the
`
`Complaint because Defendant is entitled to set off any and all Workers Compensation
`
`payments against any judgment which might be rendered in Plaintiffs' favor.
`
`
`
`
`
`9
`
`
`
`
`
`TWENTY-FIRST DEFENSE
`
`
`
`Plaintiffs' employer(s), by their agents, servants, and employees, at all times relevant
`
`hereto, possessed a high degree of knowledge and sophistication in relation to this
`
`Defendant, had superior means and ability to appreciate any alleged hazard regarding the
`
`use of asbestos material, had means and ability superior to that of this Defendant to warn the
`
`Plaintiffs, and failed to warn the Plaintiffs of the alleged hazard.
`
`TWENTY-SECOND DEFENSE
`
`
`
`If the Plaintiffs was exposed to any of the Defendant's asbestos products, then this
`
`Defendant is not liable to the Plaintiffs as a matter of law because of the government contract
`
`and/or government specification defenses.
`
`TWENTY-THIRD DEFENSE
`
`
`
`Any alleged defect or risk or known foreseeable danger attendant to the use of asbestos
`
`containing products was known to Plaintiffs or should have been known to him at the same time
`
`they became known to this Defendant and the Plaintiffs voluntarily and unnecessarily exposed
`
`himself thereto and assumed risk thereof.
`
`TWENTY-FOURTH DEFENSE
`
`
`
`If Plaintiffs has released, settled, entered into an accord and satisfaction, or otherwise
`
`compromised their claims therein, then said claims are barred by operation of law.
`
`TWENTY-FIFTH DEFENSE
`
`
`
`Defendant expressly denied that it manufactured, designed, and/or sold any products
`
`referred to in the Complaint which caused injury to Plaintiffs. Notwithstanding, at all times and
`
`places mentioned in the Complaint, Plaintiffs and/or other persons, without Defendant's
`
`knowledge and approval, redesigned, modified, altered, and used Defendant's products contrary
`
`to instructions and contrary to custom and practice of the industry. This redesign, modification,
`
`
`
`10
`
`
`
`alteration, and use so substantially changed the product's character that if there was a defect in
`
`the product, which Defendant specifically denies, such defect resulted solely from the redesign,
`
`modification, alteration, or other such treatment or change and not from any act or omission by
`
`this Defendant. Therefore, said defect, if any, was created by Plaintiffs and/or other persons, and
`
`was the direct and proximate cause of the injuries and damages, if any, that Plaintiffs allegedly
`
`suffered.
`
`TWENTY-SIXTH DEFENSE
`
`
`
`Defendant expressly denies that it manufactured, designed, and/or sold any products
`
`referred to in the Complaint which caused injury or damages to Plaintiffs. Notwithstanding, at
`
`all times and places mentioned in the Complaint, Plaintiffs and/or other persons used Defendant’s
`
`products, if indeed any were used, in an unreasonable manner, not reasonably foreseeable to
`
`Defendant, and for a purpose for which the products were not intended, manufactured, or
`
`designed. Plaintiffs' injuries and damages, if any, were directly and proximately caused by said
`
`
`
`misuse and abuse, and Plaintiffs' recovery herein, if any, is barred or must be diminished in
`
`proportion to the fault attributable to Plaintiffs and/or such other parties or persons.
`
`TWENTY-SEVENTH DEFENSE
`
`
`
`At all times and places mentioned in the Complaint, Plaintiffs has failed to make a
`
`reasonable effort to mitigate their injuries and damages, if any.
`
`TWENTY-EIGHTH DEFENSE
`
`If it is proven at trial that products of Defendant were furnished, as alleged, to Plaintiffs'
`
`employers and said products were used in the fashion alleged, which is specifically denied, then
`
`any product manufactured, processed or supplied which was or may have been so furnished and
`
`
`
`11
`
`
`
`which was so used, was supplied in accordance with specifications established and promulgated
`
`by that employer, agencies or departments of the United States of America, other persons and/or
`
`entities.
`
`TWENTY-NINTH DEFENSE
`
`
`
`If Plaintiffs has applied for and received Worker's Compensation benefits, then this
`
`Complaint is barred by the Connecticut Workers Compensations Act, Connecticut General
`
`Statute § 31-284.
`
`THIRTIETH DEFENSE
`
`
`
`Defendant denies that Plaintiffs is entitled to the damages claimed or to the relief
`
`demanded.
`
`THIRTY-FIRST DEFENSE
`
`There was no negligence, gross negligence, willful, wanton, or malicious misconduct,
`
`reckless indifference, or reckless disregard of Plaintiffs' rights, or malice (actual, legal, or
`
`otherwise) on the part of the Defendant.
`
`THIRTY-SECOND DEFENSE
`
`Defendant expressly denies that it manufactured, designed, and/or sold any products
`
`referred to in Plaintiffs' Complaint which caused injury to Plaintiffs. Notwithstanding, if
`
`Plaintiffs used or was exposed to Defendant's products as alleged, their exposure was so minimal
`
`as to be insufficient to establish a reasonable degree of probability that Defendant's product or
`
`products caused their alleged injury and illness.
`
`THIRTY-THIRD DEFENSE
`
`
`
`The causes of action asserted by the Plaintiffs, to the extent that Plaintiffs is unable to
`
`identify the manufacturer or manufacturers of the products which allegedly caused injury,
`
`
`
`12
`
`
`
`fail to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, for, if relief is to be granted, the
`
`Defendant's constitutional right to substantive and procedural due process of law would be
`
`contravened.
`
`THIRTY-FOURTH DEFENSE
`
`
`
`The causes of action asserted by Plaintiffs, to the extent that Plaintiffs is unable to
`
`identify the manufacturer or manufacturers of the products which allegedly caused injury, fail
`
`to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, for, if relief is to be granted, such relief
`
`would constitute a taking of the Defendant's property for a public use without just
`
`compensation, a violation of the Defendant's constitutional rights.
`
`THIRTY-FIFTH DEFENSE
`
`The causes of action asserted by Plaintiffs, to the extent that Plaintiffs is unable to
`
`identify the manufacturer or manufacturers of the products which allegedly caused injury,
`
`fail to state a claim upon which relief can be granted because such a relief would constitute a
`
`denial by this Court of Defendant's constitutional right to equal protection under the law.
`
`THIRTY-SIXTH DEFENSE
`
`Punitive damages are unconstitutional for the following reasons:
`
`a.
`
`Subjecting Defendant to multiple trials for the same course of conduct and the
`
`multiple imposition of punitive damages for the same course of conduct is a violation of
`
`both substantive and procedural due process under the United States Constitution and the
`
`Constitution of the State of Connecticut;
`
`b.
`
`c.
`
`The standard award of punitive damages is constitutionally void for vagueness;
`
`There is no principle of limitation on the multiple impositions of punitive damage
`
`awards for the same course of conduct.
`
`
`
`13
`
`
`
`THIRTY-SEVENTH DEFENSE
`
`
`
`Claims for punitive damages against Defendant are groundless in fact and the Complaint
`
`fails to state a claim against it upon which relief can be granted in that the cause of action for
`
`punitive damages allegedly asserted is not a cause of action cognizable under the law of the State
`
`of Connecticut, in the circumstances of the instant action.
`
`THIRTY-EIGHTH DEFENSE
`
`
`
`If Plaintiffs 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 settlements
`
`amounts or the pro rata share of fault of said tortfeasors as determined by the Court or jury,
`
`whichever is greater.
`
`THIRTY-NINTH DEFENSE
`
`This Defendant's first notice of claims set forth in Plaintiffs' Complaint was service of
`
`said Complaint upon it and accordingly, Defendant reserves the right to amend its Answer, if
`
`same becomes appropriate, after full investigation and discovery.
`
`FORTIETH DEFENSE
`
`
`
`Defendant avails itself of, and adopts such other defenses raised by any other Defendant
`
`as may be applicable.
`
`FORTY-FIRST DEFENSE
`
`
`
`If Plaintiffs is barred from recovery, the action of any minor child is also barred because
`
`it is a derivative action.
`
`FORTY-SECOND DEFENSE
`
`Defendant asserts that the Plaintiffs' action has been filed in an improper venue.
`
`
`
`14
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`FORTY-THIRD DEFENSE
`
`
`
`Defendant pleads Comments J and K of the Restatement (Second) of Torts.
`
`FORTY-FOURTH DEFENSE
`
`Plaintiffs' injuries are attributable to causes other than asbestos allegedly released from
`
`Defendant's products and there is reasonable basis to apportion causation pursuant to the
`
`Restatement (Second) of Torts § 433A. Accordingly, recovery must be denied for injuries or
`
`portions of injuries attributable to other causes.
`
`FORTY-FIFTH DEFENSE
`
`
`
`The laws of other states apply to this action.
`
`FORTY-SIXTH DEFENSE
`
`Defendant has no knowledge or means of ascertaining the truth or falsity of the
`
`averments contained in the Complaint respecting the nature and extent of the injuries, damages,
`
`and losses claimed to have been sustained by the Plaintiffs.
`
`FORTY-SEVENTH DEFENSE
`
`To the extent Plaintiffs' Complaint asserts a demand for punitive damages, this
`
`Defendant specifically incorporates by reference any and all standards of limitations regarding
`
`the determination and/or enforceability of punitive damage awards that arose in the decisions of
`
`BMW of North America, Inc. v. Gore, 517 U.S. 559 (1996); Cooper Industries, Inc. v.
`
`Leatherman Tool Group, Inc., 532 U.S. 424 (2001); and State Farm Mutual Automobile
`
`Insurance Co. v. Campbell, 123 S. Ct. 1513 (2003).
`
`FORTY-EIGTH DEFENSE
`
`To the extent that Plaintiffs' Complaint seeks punitive damages against Defendant, this
`
`Defendant affirmatively pleads the following in regard to punitive damages:
`
`
`
`15
`
`
`
`(a)
`
`An award of punitive damages in this civil action would amount to a
`
`deprivation of property without due process of law in violation of the Fifth and Fourteenth
`
`Amendments to the United States Constitution and the corresponding provisions of the
`
`Constitution of the State of Connecticut;
`
`(b)
`
`An award of punitive damages in this civil action would violate the due
`
`process provisions of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution and
`
`the corresponding provisions of the Constitution of the State of Connecticut;
`
`(c)
`
`The criteria used for determining whether and in what amount punitive
`
`damages may be awarded are impermissible, vague, imprecise, and inconsistent and, therefore,
`
`violate the due process provisions of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States
`
`Constitution and the corresponding provisions of the Constitution of the State of Connecticut;
`
`(d)
`
`An award of punitive damages in this civil action would amount to an
`
`excessive fine in violation of the Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution and the
`
`corresponding provisions of the Constitution of the State of Connecticut; and
`
`(e)
`
`Plaintiffs' claim for punitive damages is barred by the "double jeopardy"
`
`clause of the Fifth Amendment to the United States Constitution, as applied to the states through
`
`the Fourteenth Amendment.
`
`FORTY-NINTH DEFENSE
`
`
`
`To the extent that any claim for relief in the Complaint seeks to recover damages against
`
`this Defendant for alleged acts or omissions of predecessors or successors-in-interest to this
`
`Defendant of any kind or description, said Defendant asserts that it is not legally responsible and
`
`cannot legally be held liable for any such acts or omissions. This Defendant further asserts that it
`
`cannot be held liable for punitive damages and/or exemplary damages which are or may be
`
`
`
`16
`
`
`
`attributable to the conduct of any predecessor or successor-in-interest. Further, this Defendant
`
`asserts that the conduct of any predecessor or successor-in-interest cannot, as a matter of law,
`
`provide a legal basis for liability or the imposition of damages against this Defendant.
`
`
`CROSS-CLAIM OF DEFENDANT/CROSS-CLAIM PLAINTIFFS
`SCHNEIDER ELECTRIC USA, INC., f/k/a SQUARE D COMPANY
`AGAINST ALL CO-DEFENDANTS
`
`Plaintiffs in this action has filed a complaint against the defendant/cross-claim
`
`1.
`
`plaintiffs alleging that he has sustained certain asbestos-related diseases and other injuries, and
`
`all said allegations have been denied by defendant/cross-claim plaintiffs.
`
`2.
`
`Although the defendant/cross-claim plaintiffs denies all the claims set forth in the
`
`complaint, in the event that the defendant/cross-claim plaintiffs is found liable, then all other
`
`cross-claim defendants are liable for equitable contribution and/or statutory contribution pursuant
`
`to C.G.S. § 52-572o, and/or allocation of fault.
`
`3.
`
`Only in the event that defendant/cross-claim plaintiffs is found liable, for purpose
`
`of this cross-claim, all allegations set forth in the complaint or related third-party complaints are
`
`adopted and incorporated as set forth fully herein.
`
`4.
`
`Only in the event that this defendant/cross-claim plaintiffs is found liable, in
`
`whole or in part, then the cross-claim defendants are liable to this defendant/cross-claim
`
`plaintiffs for all or part of plaintiffs' claimed damages.
`
`WHEREFORE, defendant/cross-claim plaintiffs Schneider Electric USA, Inc., f/k/a
`
`Square D Company, claims:
`
`a.
`
`b.
`
`Contribution for plaintiffs' alleged damages pursuant to C.G.S. § 52-572o;
`
`Equitable contribution from the cross-claim defendants for their share of any
`
`judgment rendered in favor of plaintiffs;
`
`
`
`17
`
`
`
`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, SCHNEIDER ELECTRIC USA, INC.,
`f/k/a SQUARE D COMPANY
`
`Defendant denies each and every allegation of each and every cross-claim that was or
`
`
`
`hereinafter may be filed against defendant by any co-defendants or third-party defendants.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`DATED: April 6, 2023
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`SCHNEIDER ELECTRIC USA, INC.
`f/k/a SQUARE D COMPANY
`By its Attorneys,
`
`
`
`
`/s/ Timothy M. Zabbo
`Timothy M. Zabbo (CT 433686)
`Hinckley Allen & Snyder, LLP
`100 Westminster Street
`Providence, RI 02903
`Tel.: 401/274-2000/Fax: 401/277-9600
`Email: tzabbo@hinckleyallen.com
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`18
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATION
`
`
`I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing was served on April 6, 2023 via electronic
`mail, upon the following counsel of record:
`
`
`Kyle R. Navin, Esq.
`Early, Lucarelli, Sweeney & Meisenkothen, LLC
`One Century Tower, 11th Floor
`265 Church Street, P.O. Box 1866
`New Haven, CT 06508-1866
`
`
`and served to all defense counsel of record.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`/s/ Timothy M. Zabbo
`Timothy M. Zabbo
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`19
`
`
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
