FILED: NASSAU COUNTY CLERK 06/06/2019 06:45 PM
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 32
`
`INDEX NO. 612033/2018
`
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/06/2019
`
`SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
`COUNTY OF NASSAU
`---------------------------------------------------------------X
`SEBASTIAN L. GRECO and MICHELLI
`
`: Index No. 612033-18
`GRECO,
`
`
`
`
`
`:
`
`
`
`
`Plaintiffs,
`
`:
`-against-
`:
`: EXPERT WITNESS LIST OF
`
`: DEFENDANT PNEUMO ABEX LLC
`AMCHEM PRODUCTS, INC.,
`n/k/a RHONE POULENC AG COMPANY,
`:
`n/k/a BAYER CROPSCIENCE INC., et al.,
`:
`
`:
`:
`
`:
`
`---------------------------------------------------------------X
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Defendants.
`
`
`
`DEFENDANT PNEUMO ABEX LLC’S DESIGNATION AND
`DISCLOSURE OF EXPERT WITNESSES
`
`Defendant, Pneumo Abex LLC, successor in interest to Abex Corporation, (hereinafter
`“Abex”) is not aware of all of the areas of testimony or proof that Plaintiffs intend to produce at
`trial and, therefore, it cannot proffer all expected testimony until it has had the benefit of
`reviewing all of the Plaintiffs’ expert’s reports and opinions. To the extent that a witness
`expresses an opinion at trial or in discovery that has not been divulged prior to the time that this
`statement was served on counsel, and which creates a need for additional areas of rebuttal
`testimony or proof, Abex reserves the right to supplement this statement.
`
`
`Abex hereby reserves the right to supplement this list when and if additional witnesses
`become known to Abex prior to trial. Abex also hereby reserves the right to substitute any expert
`witness in the event that any witness named herein is unable to appear at trial. Abex further
`reserves the right to offer any witness for rebuttal or impeachment.
`
`Abex objects to the use of any deposition testimony against it where it did not have
`proper notice and a motive and opportunity to cross-examine the witness. If, however, the Court
`nevertheless were to permit all or a portion of those depositions to be introduced at trial, Abex
`reserves the right to introduce any other portion of these or any other deposition in rebuttal.
`
`Industrial Hygienists
`
`1.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Jeffery S. Birkner, CIH
`5811 Indian Terrace Dr.
`Simi Valley, CA 93063
`
`Charles L. Blake, CIH
`Clayton Group Services, Inc.
`400 Chastain Center Blvd., N.W.
`
`
`
`1 of 56
`
`

`

`FILED: NASSAU COUNTY CLERK 06/06/2019 06:45 PM
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 32
`
`INDEX NO. 612033/2018
`
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/06/2019
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Suite 490
`Kennesaw, Georgia 30144
`
`Dennis P. Bridge
`Bridge Environmental Mgt Group
`23675 Hedgeworth Court
`Deer Park, Illinois 60010
`
`Michael Connor, CIH, CSP
`AIH Consulting
`1032 Irving Street, Box 922
`San Francisco CA 94122
`
`Gustavo A. Delgado, CIH
`Forensic Analytical Laboratories, Inc.
`3777 Depot Road, Suite 409
`Hayward, CA 94545
`
`William Dyson, Ph.D., CIH
`2100 Dimmocks Mill Rd.
`Hillsborough, NC 27278
`
`Mary A. Finn, Ph.D., MPH, CIH
`Mary A. Finn & Associates
`5772 Gallery Court
`West Des Moines, Iowa 50266
`
`Jerry A. Formisano, Jr., Ph.D., CIH, CSP
`521 Ulumanu Drive
`Kailua, HI 96734
`
`Shannon H. Gaffney, Ph.D., MHS, CIH
`Cardno ChemRisk
`101 2nd Street, Suite 700
`San Francisco, CA 94105
`
`Patricia H. Hall, CIH, MS
`P. H. Hall & Associates, Inc.
`305 Newport Avenue
`Long Beach, California 90814
`
`William H. Krebs, Ph.D., CIH
`Industrial Health Sciences, Inc.
`1014 Bishop Road
`Grosse Pointe Park, Michigan 48230
`
`2
`
`2 of 56
`
`

`

`FILED: NASSAU COUNTY CLERK 06/06/2019 06:45 PM
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 32
`
`INDEX NO. 612033/2018
`
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/06/2019
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Gayla McCluskey, CIH, CSP, ROH, QEP
`Global Environmental Health Services, Inc.
`Six Harford Lane, Suite 106
`Radnor, Pennsylvania 19087
`
`Steven Mlynarek, Ph.D., CIH
`University of South Florida
`Environmental and Occupational Health
`12901 Bruce B. Downs Blvd.
`Tampa, FL 33612
`
`Donald E. Marano, PE, CIH
`President, IHI Environmental
`640 East Wilmington Avenue
`Salt Lake City, UT 84106
`
`Sheldon H. Rabinovitz, CIH
`Sandler Occupational Medicine Associates, Inc.
`966 Hungerford Drive, Suite 20
`Rockville, Maryland 20852
`
`Charles Redinger, CIH, MPA, Ph.D.
`Redinger & Associates, Inc.
`6 Lancaster County Road, Suite 3
`Harvard, MA 01451
`
`Catherine Simmons, CIH
`Simmons Environmental & Occupational Health Solutions, Inc.
`3546 North Natchez Ave.
`
`Chicago, Illinois 60634
`
`John Spencer, CIH
`Environmental Profiles, Inc.
`813 Frederick Road
`Baltimore, Maryland 21228
`
`Fred Toca, Ph.D., CIH, CSP
`4930 Guilford Forest Drive
`Atlanta, Georgia 30331
`
`Francis W. Weir, Ph.D., CIH, DABT
`8131 Wycombe Drive
`Houston, Texas 77070
`
`Dietrich Weyel, Ph.D., CIH
`660 Edward Drive
`
`3
`
`3 of 56
`
`

`

`FILED: NASSAU COUNTY CLERK 06/06/2019 06:45 PM
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 32
`
`INDEX NO. 612033/2018
`
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/06/2019
`
`Carnegie, Pennsylvania 15106
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`The testimony to be offered at trial by the above referenced industrial hygienists may
`include the following:
`
`A.
`
`Occupational exposures of Plaintiffs or Plaintiffs’ Decedent as described by
`Plaintiffs or Plaintiffs’ Decedent and/or his/her co-workers (including materials
`for which Abex allegedly is legally responsible) and whether such exposures
`could be considered as creating a scientifically significant amount of risk for the
`development of an asbestos-related disease. The manner in which a risk
`assessment properly may be performed for individuals in various trades or
`occupations, and a risk assessment for the Plaintiffs or Plaintiffs’ Decedent in this
`case.
`
`The recognition, evaluation and control of health and safety hazards. The
`accepted standards, industrial hygiene practices and workplace safety practices
`during the years of Plaintiffs or Plaintiffs’ Decedent’s employment.
`
`The principles of industrial hygiene and the factors that are important to industrial
`hygiene studies. The manner in which experts use industrial hygiene data and how
`the data should be interpreted in specific cases. The manner in which industrial
`hygiene data should be properly considered in evaluating exposures.
`
`The testing data (if any) used by Plaintiffs’ expert and testing methods and
`corresponding data. The studies of Plaintiffs’ experts and published studies and
`work performed by others in the past. The available scientific and industrial
`hygiene literature relating to Plaintiffs or Plaintiffs’ Decedent’s alleged exposures.
`These witnesses may rely upon their own test data and/or data that they find
`reliable, including but not limited to, any relevant site inspection(s), to express an
`opinion about Plaintiffs or Plaintiffs’ Decedent’s likely exposure to asbestos, if
`any, from materials for which Abex allegedly is legally responsible.
`
`The state of the art of industrial hygiene during the times relevant to Plaintiffs or
`Plaintiffs’ Decedent’s alleged exposures. State of the art testimony may include
`whether it was recognized that a risk of development of asbestos-related disease
`was recognized for persons such as Plaintiffs or Plaintiffs’ Decedent or for
`materials for which Abex allegedly is legally responsible and the appropriate
`steps to guard against that recognized risk, if any.
`
`The development and utility of methodologies identifying and measuring asbestos
`in air, dust and products/materials, and the process of setting threshold limit
`values ("TLVs"), the OSHA PELS, and other levels for asbestos exposure. This
`testimony will also include the historical standards and recommendations from
`both governmental and nongovernmental agencies concerning workplace levels of
`asbestos exposure.
`
`B.
`
`
`C.
`
`
`D.
`
`E.
`
`F.
`
`
`
`4
`
`4 of 56
`
`

`

`FILED: NASSAU COUNTY CLERK 06/06/2019 06:45 PM
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 32
`
`INDEX NO. 612033/2018
`
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/06/2019
`
`G.
`
`
`H.
`
`
`I.
`
`
`J.
`
`
`K.
`
`
`
`The relationship between scientific knowledge and the development of public
`policy standards relating to asbestos exposure, and all aspects of government
`regulation of asbestos exposure. The development of knowledge regarding the
`dose-response relationship between exposure to asbestos and disease, and other
`related matters.
`
`The expert testimony or opinions offered on behalf of Plaintiffs or Plaintiffs’
`Decedent, including but not limited to testimony, if any, regarding the evolution
`of knowledge of the effects of asbestos exposure, standards and regulations
`applicable to asbestos exposure, and testing done by or on behalf of Plaintiffs or
`Plaintiffs’ Decedent. The asbestos exposures described by Plaintiffs or Plaintiffs’
`Decedent or his/her respective co-workers or other alleged exposure witnesses in
`this case.
`
`The different types of asbestos fiber, their physical and chemical composition,
`characteristics and uses in various products/materials as well as their potential to
`cause disease. The specific exposures in this case, as alleged by Plaintiffs or
`Plaintiffs’ Decedent and/or other witnesses, and whether the alleged exposures
`created a significant risk of asbestos-related disease.
`
`The proper and accepted protocols for analysis of airborne samples for fiber
`release from asbestos-containing products/materials, the potential for various
`products/materials to release asbestos fibers, and the government and industry
`standards regarding same.
`
`Each of the above referenced industrial hygienists, will offer specific opinions,
`which may include the following:
`
`1.
`
`
`2.
`
`The expert’s experience in the testing of asbestos-containing materials,
`some of which are similar in use or in composition to Abex’s friction
`materials, which experience partially forms the basis of his or her opinion
`that these materials have been, and still are, used safely in the workplace
`environment and home, and they are not unreasonably dangerous, and they
`do not pose an occupational or household hazard.
`
`These experts have been or will be provided with any product or materials
`exposure information and other case specific data in this case, including,
`but not limited to, depositions of Plaintiffs or Plaintiffs’ Decedent and
`other witnesses, including its identified witnesses. In addition, in
`formulating their opinions, these witnesses may also review and rely upon
`various case specific documents produced in discovery including, but not
`limited to: Plaintiffs or Plaintiffs’ Decedent’s discovery responses and any
`available asbestos bankruptcy trust documents. These experts will review
`Plaintiffs or Plaintiffs’ Decedent’s exposures, if any, to Abex’s asbestos-
`containing friction materials (including certain aircraft and railroad brake
`linings – only some of which contained asbestos) as well as Plaintiffs or
`
`
`
`5
`
`5 of 56
`
`

`

`FILED: NASSAU COUNTY CLERK 06/06/2019 06:45 PM
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 32
`
`INDEX NO. 612033/2018
`
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/06/2019
`
`other manufacturer’s
`to
`exposure
`Decedent’s
`Plaintiffs’
`products/materials. The expert may quantify Plaintiffs or Plaintiffs’
`Decedent’s exposure, if any is alleged, to Abex’s asbestos-containing
`friction materials (including certain aircraft and railroad brake linings –
`only some of which contained asbestos) as well as exposure(s) to asbestos-
`containing products/materials manufactured by other companies, and
`provide opinions regarding the significance of each exposure. These
`experts may rely upon any air sampling data and literature regarding
`exposure to other asbestos-containing products/materials. These experts
`will discuss the distinction between friable and non-friable materials. The
`expert’s opinion is that because Abex’s asbestos-containing friction
`materials are resilient and blended with other agents, so that fiber release
`is virtually eliminated. The expert’s opinion is that foreseeable use of
`Abex’s asbestos-containing friction materials (including certain aircraft
`and railroad brake linings – only some of which contained asbestos) does
`not cause any occupational, bystander, or household risk.
`
`These experts may discuss and quantify the amount of asbestos in the
`ambient air. In doing so, these experts may rely upon various ambient air
`testing data – both published and unpublished. These experts may express
`opinions that use of certain materials/products contribute to an asbestos
`exposure comparable to the ambient air and that use of Abex’s asbestos-
`containing friction materials (including certain aircraft and railroad brake
`linings – only some of which contained asbestos), in general, result in
`exposure less than the applicable time weighted average of OSHA’s
`permissible exposure level from its first implementation to the current
`time.
`
`These experts may also discuss levels of exposure to a direct user of
`asbestos materials/products and contrast that exposure to the indirect
`exposure of a nonuser bystander or household member. These experts may
`express the opinion that a nonuser bystander has a substantially reduced
`exposure of at least tenfold as that of a direct user.
`
`These experts may provide opinions that any exposure to Abex’s asbestos-
`containing friction materials (including certain aircraft and railroad brake
`linings – only some of which contained asbestos) to which Plaintiffs or
`Plaintiffs’ Decedent claims exposure, are well below the current, and all
`historical, permissible exposure limits, excursion and short-term limits,
`and fall within the warning label exemption of OSHA.
`
`These experts may provide the opinion, based upon testing data and
`epidemiological reports and studies, that persons exposed to asbestos-
`containing friction materials (including those working around or with
`those materials, or who are present in the vicinity of persons working with
`or around such materials, or who come into contact with apparel of those
`
`
`3.
`
`
`4.
`
`
`5.
`
`
`6.
`
`
`
`6
`
`6 of 56
`
`

`

`FILED: NASSAU COUNTY CLERK 06/06/2019 06:45 PM
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 32
`
`INDEX NO. 612033/2018
`
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/06/2019
`
`
`L.
`
`
`M.
`
`
`
`working around or with such materials) are not considered to be at risk to
`the development of asbestos-related diseases.
`
`In formulating their opinions, these witnesses may rely upon both unpublished
`and published studies regarding the manufacturing, handling, installation, and
`removal of asbestos-containing friction materials (including aircraft and railroad
`brake linings) and related materials.
`
`These industrial hygienists may also offer the following specific opinions:
`
`the foreseeable use of asbestos-containing friction materials
`That
`(including certain aircraft and railroad brake linings – only some of which
`contained asbestos) does not produce an appreciable risk of any asbestos-
`related disease.
`
`That the Plaintiffs or Plaintiffs’ Decedent’s use, installation, removal or
`contact, if any, with asbestos-containing friction materials, did not
`increase the Plaintiffs or Plaintiffs’ Decedent’s risk of developing an
`asbestos-related disease.
`
`That working with or around asbestos-containing friction materials
`(including certain aircraft and railroad brake linings – only some of which
`contained asbestos) does not increase an individual’s risk of developing
`malignant mesothelioma. The bases for such an opinion are as follows:
`
`Epidemiological studies have shown that automobile repair
`workers have no increase in the risk of developing mesothelioma
`over that of the general population.
`
`(i)
`
`(ii)
`
`
`(iii)
`
`Pathology studies have reviewed lung tissue samples of persons
`with mesothelioma claiming asbestos exposure from brake dust
`and those studies have found that the fiber types present and the
`fiber burden amount of asbestos present do not support an etiology
`from friction materials.
`
`The nature of brake dust itself. Approximately 99% or more of
`brake dust is converted to an inert mineral called forsterite due to
`heat generated during the braking process. Any remaining fibers
`have been shown to be mostly short chrysotile fibers less than one
`micron in length. Additional studies by Dr. Arthur Langer have
`shown that even these remaining chrysotile fibers are converted to
`an innocuous dust.
`
`(iv)
`
`Short fibers less than five micron in length are not causative of
`disease.
`
`1.
`
`2.
`
`3.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`7
`
`7 of 56
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`FILED: NASSAU COUNTY CLERK 06/06/2019 06:45 PM
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 32
`
`INDEX NO. 612033/2018
`
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/06/2019
`
`
`
`N.
`
`(v)
`
`
`(vi)
`
`Occupational industrial hygiene information about exposures to
`dust from asbestos containing friction materials shows that
`installation, repair, and manipulation of these materials have
`traditionally been well below the permissible exposure limit in the
`workplace both at the current time and historically.
`
`That asbestos-containing friction materials are manufactured with
`chrysotile asbestos fibers.
`
`These witnesses may also provide testimony based on a critical review and
`analysis of the epidemiologic data of workers exposed to dust generated from
`working with brakes, brake linings and other friction materials (including certain
`aircraft and railroad brake linings – only some of which contained asbestos).
`These witnesses will testify that epidemiologic studies demonstrate that
`automotive or brake mechanics are not at an increased risk of developing an
`asbestos related diseases as a result of their work on or near brakes or other
`friction materials.
`
`
`
`O.
`
`As applicable, the witness’ case specific report is also incorporated herein.
`
`1A. William Dyson, Ph.D., CIH
`
`2100 Dimmocks Mill Rd
`
`Hillsborough, North Carolina 27278
`
`
`Dr. Dyson may testify as to the various subject matters and opinions set forth in Section 1
`above and that disclosure is incorporated herein. In addition, Dr. Dyson has reviewed documents
`from the medical and industrial hygiene department of Abex. Based on his review of those
`documents, Dr. Dyson will testify concerning the activities of the medical and industrial hygiene
`departments of Abex during the times relevant to this case, which include the following: x-
`raying of workers and pensioners; physical examinations of employees; visits to plants;
`providing health-related information to employees; conferring with employees about health-
`related issues; loaning x-rays to employees for consultation with personal physicians; monitoring
`exposures of workers; monitoring of diseases and claims of diseases; publishing of articles; and
`consulting with others on medical and industrial hygiene issues. Dr. Dyson will express these
`opinions about the medical program and industrial hygiene programs of Abex at the times
`relevant to this case; the programs were comprehensive; the programs were properly conducted
`based on knowledge and information then available the programs of Abex met or exceeded
`accepted standards for industrial safety, industrial hygiene, and workplace safety; and the
`programs were conducted by qualified personnel. Dr. Dyson may also testify based on the above
`information and based medical and scientific literature that manufacturing facilities that produce
`asbestos-containing friction materials can be operated safely and that such facilities operated by
`Abex were operated safely. In addition, Dr. Dyson will discuss the early English experience with
`asbestos, including Dr. Merewether’s publications in England and the United States about
`asbestos exposure and occupational disease in England and will quantify the exposures in
`various departments of the factories that Dr. Merewether inspected and will compare those
`quantified exposures with exposures in U.S. plants.
`
`
`
`8
`
`8 of 56
`
`

`

`FILED: NASSAU COUNTY CLERK 06/06/2019 06:45 PM
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 32
`
`INDEX NO. 612033/2018
`
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/06/2019
`
`
`2.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Pathologists
`
`Frederic B. Askin, M.D.
`Department of Pathology
`The Harry and Jeanette Weinberg Bldg.
`401 N. Broadway / Room 2242
`Baltimore, MD 21231-2410
`
`Mary Beth Beasley, M.D., F.C.A.P.
`1240 Park Avenue – Apt 5B
`New York, NY 10128
`
`Paul W. Biddinger, M.D.
`Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine
`University of Cincinnati College of Medicine
`231 Albert Sabin Way
`Cincinnati, Ohio 45267
`
`Philip T. Cagle, M.D.
`Center for Pulmonary Pathology
`Baylor College
`One Baylor Plaza
`Houston, Texas
`
`Bruce Case, M.D.
`McGill University - Department of Pathology
`Lyman Duff Medical Sciences Building
`3775 University Street
`Montreal, Quebec H3A2B4
`
`Lucian R. Chirieac, M.D.
`Department of Pathology
`Brigham and Women’s Hospital
`75 Francis Street
`Boston, MA 02115
`
`Andrew Churg M.D.
`2221 Westbrook Mall
`Vancouver, British Columbia
`
`John E. Craighead, M.D.
`Department of Pathology
`Medical Alumni Building
`University of Vermont
`Burlington, Vermont 05405
`
`9
`
`9 of 56
`
`

`

`FILED: NASSAU COUNTY CLERK 06/06/2019 06:45 PM
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 32
`
`INDEX NO. 612033/2018
`
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/06/2019
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Ivan Damjanov, M.D., Ph.D.
`6556 High Drive
`Mission Hills, KS 66208-1936
`
`Allen R. Gibbs, MB Ch B, MRC
`Penarth
`South Glamorgan
`CF6 2XX
`United Kingdom
`
`Michael Graham, M.D.
`Saint Louis University
`1402 South Grand Blvd.; C305
`St. Louis, Missouri 63104
`
`Russell A. Harley, Jr. M.D.
`Department of Pathology & Laboratory Medicine
`171 Ashley Avenue
`Charleston, SC 29425-5836
`
`Alberto Marchevsky, M.D.
`Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine
`Cedars-Sinai Medical Center
`8700 Beverly Boulevard
`Los Angeles, California 90048
`
`Tim D. Oury, M.D., Ph.D.
`University of Pittsburgh
`Department of Pathology
`Room S760, Scaife Hall
`3550 Terrace Street
`Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15261
`
`Elizabeth N. Pavlisko, M.D.
`Duke University Medical Center
`Department of Pathology
`Box 3712
`Durham, North Carolina 27710
`
`Dr. Stephen S. Raab
`University of Colorado
`Department of Pathology
`4200 E. Ninth Avenue
`Denver, CO 80262
`
`
`10
`
`10 of 56
`
`

`

`FILED: NASSAU COUNTY CLERK 06/06/2019 06:45 PM
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 32
`
`INDEX NO. 612033/2018
`
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/06/2019
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Jon Ritter, M.D.
`Washington University School of Medicine
`Department of Pathology
`660 South Euclid Avenue, Box 8118
`St. Louis, Missouri 63110
`
`Victor Louis Roggli, M.D.
`Duke University Medical Center
`Department of Pathology
`Box 3712
`Durham, North Carolina 27710
`
`Thomas A. Sporn, M.D.
`Duke University Medical Center
`Department of Pathology
`Box 3712
`Durham, North Carolina 27710
`
`William D. Travis, M.D.
`Attending Thoracic Pathologist, Department of Pathology
`Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center
`1275 York Avenue
`New York, NY 10021
`
`Mark Wick, M.D.
`Division of Surgical Pathology
`Room 3882 Old Medical School
`University of Virginia Health Sciences Center
`Box 214 Jefferson Park Avenue
`Charlottesville, Virginia 22908
`
`
`The witnesses identified as pathologists will be offered by Abex as expert physicians,
`
`with particular expertise in pathology, in the process of carcinogenesis, as researchers in the field
`of asbestos-related conditions associated with exposure of certain populations to asbestos-
`containing products and/or materials, and in the epidemiological and etiologic aspects of certain
`cancers that are alleged to be causally associated with exposure of certain populations to asbestos
`containing products and/or materials. The pathology testimony to be offered at trial may include
`the following:
`
`
`A.
`
`The anatomic structure and functioning from a pathologic perspective, the defense
`mechanisms and functioning of the lung in health and otherwise, the responses of
`the lung to various stimuli, and the role of various components of the respiratory
`system in the proper functioning of the lung. The witnesses will describe and
`distinguish various types of asbestos fibers; the things which affect the ability of
`asbestos fibers to affect various structures within the respiratory system; and the
`body’s specific responses to fibers of asbestos that are inhaled, whether or not
`
`
`
`11
`
`11 of 56
`
`

`

`FILED: NASSAU COUNTY CLERK 06/06/2019 06:45 PM
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 32
`
`INDEX NO. 612033/2018
`
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/06/2019
`
`
`D. Whether it can be said, to a reasonable degree of medical probability, that any
`hypothetical person’s alleged “exposure” to asbestos containing product(s) or
`material(s) was of importance to that individual, without reference to that person’s
`individual work history, medical history, findings on physical examination and
`pathological examination of tissue, if any, information concerning that person’s
`use of protective equipment, specific types of asbestos containing product(s) or
`material(s) used and/or handled, resolution of questions regarding exposures to
`substances other than asbestos-containing products or materials, and other known
`etiologies for whatever conditions are found to exist.
`
`
`B.
`
`
`C.
`
`
`E.
`
`
`F.
`
`
`G.
`
`
`H.
`
`they are retained.
`
`The various conditions, such as asbestosis, pleural changes and other non-
`malignant changes that may be attributable in some persons to the results of long-
`term inhalation and retention of some forms of asbestos fibers. The circumstances
`under which exposure to certain forms and types of asbestos may be associated
`with the incidence of some forms of mesothelioma in some persons, the results of
`their own experiences, the medical and scientific literature, and existing
`epidemiological studies concerning associations that are alleged to exist
`epidemiologically between exposure to asbestos in some populations and the
`mortality and/or incidence of other forms of cancer.
`
`The effects of inhaled tobacco smoke and other factors on the occurrence of
`disease in populations also alleged to be exposed to asbestos containing
`products/materials, and the effects of inhaled tobacco smoke and other factors on
`the apparent results of certain epidemiological studies.
`
`The epidemiological evidence does not support a conclusion that cancers of the
`gastrointestinal tract, oral cavity, larynx, pharynx, liver, bladder, kidney, prostate
`are causally associated with exposure to asbestos containing products or
`materials. Nor does the epidemiological evidence support a conclusion that
`leukemia and/or lymphoma are causally associated with exposure to asbestos
`containing products or materials.
`
`The diagnosis of diseases in this case, whether the diagnosis is correct, and
`whether the diseases can be causally related to exposure to asbestos.
`
`These witnesses may testify about the carcinogenicity of radiation and
`development of a second malignant neoplasm after radiation therapy. They may
`also testify about the risk of developing mesothelioma after radiation therapy for
`Hodgkin disease, and other cancers, as may be applicable in any specific case
`based on their review of case specific materials.
`
`The alleged occupational exposure—as described by Plaintiffs’ witnesses—and
`whether such exposure could be considered a substantial contributing factor to
`Plaintiffs or Plaintiffs’ Decedent’s alleged disease. The risks associated with
`
`
`
`12
`
`12 of 56
`
`

`

`FILED: NASSAU COUNTY CLERK 06/06/2019 06:45 PM
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 32
`
`INDEX NO. 612033/2018
`
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/06/2019
`
`
`I.
`
`
`J.
`
`
`
`K.
`
`L.
`
`
`M.
`
`
`N.
`
`
`O.
`
`exposures to different types of asbestos fibers and whether such exposures were a
`substantial contributing factor to Plaintiffs or Plaintiffs’ Decedent’s alleged
`disease. The fiber burden results in this case, if any.
`
`The medical state of the art including risks generally appreciated and understood
`by the medical community as a result of exposure to asbestos-containing products
`or materials, and whether it was understood that such exposures presented a risk
`of harm to individuals such as Plaintiffs or Plaintiffs’ Decedent.
`
`The pathologic, scientific and epidemiological testimony which may be offered
`by Plaintiffs’ experts.
`
`The different types of asbestos fiber, their physical and chemical composition, as
`well as their potential to cause disease. The specific exposures in this case, as
`alleged by Plaintiffs or Plaintiffs’ Decedent and/or other witnesses (including any
`friction materials for which Abex allegedly is legally responsible), and to
`determine whether the alleged exposures created a significant risk of asbestos-
`related disease.
`
`In expressing their opinions, these pathology experts will rely on their training,
`education, experience, research and publications, as well as the published medical
`and scientific literature available and a review of the pathological materials
`available in this case.
`
`In expressing their opinions, these pathology experts may have reviewed the
`medical records, x-rays, CT scans, and pathology specimens of Plaintiffs or
`Plaintiffs’ Decedent. They may also provide micro photographs of pathology
`specimens and other pathology data including the results of any tissue digestion
`studies to further explain their opinions regarding the Plaintiffs or Plaintiffs’
`Decedent.
`
`These witnesses may also provide testimony based on a critical review and
`analysis of the epidemiologic data of workers exposed to dust generated from
`working with brakes, brake linings and other friction materials (including certain
`aircraft and railroad brake linings – only some of which contained asbestos).
`These witnesses will testify that epidemiologic studies demonstrate that
`automotive or brake mechanics are not at an increased risk of asbestos related
`diseases as a result of their work on or near brakes or other friction materials.
`These witnesses will further testify that there is no scientific data to support a
`causal relationship between exposure to friction materials and asbestos-related
`diseases.
`
`These pathologists may also offer the following specific opinions:
`
`1.
`
`the foreseeable use of asbestos-containing friction materials
`That
`(including certain aircraft and railroad brake linings – only some of which
`
`13
`
`13 of 56
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`FILED: NASSAU COUNTY CLERK 06/06/2019 06:45 PM
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 32
`
`INDEX NO. 612033/2018
`
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 06/06/2019
`
`
`
`
`
`2.
`
`3.
`
`
`4.
`
`5.
`
`6.
`
`
`
`contained asbestos), and the presence in the vicinity of such use or contact
`with apparel worn by someone engaged in such use, does not produce an
`appreciable risk of any asbestos-related disease and cannot be a producing
`cause of an asbestos-related disease.
`
`That in order to have an asbestos-related lung cancer, there must be pre-
`existing asbestosis. In the alternative, there must be an elevated level of
`asbestos fibers, determined by fiber burden studies, in the lung in excess
`of the general population standards.
`
`Plaintiffs or Plaintiffs’ Decedent’s alleged exposure as a bystander or from
`household contact to asbestos-containing friction materials (including
`certain aircraft and railroad brake linings – only some of which contained
`asbestos), or the alleged use, installation, removal, or contact, if any with
`Abex’s materials did not cause or contribute to and were not a substantial
`factor or producing cause of Plaintiffs or Plaintiffs’ Decedent’s alleged
`asbestos-related disease.
`
`That exposure to asbestos-containing friction materials (including certain
`aircraft and railroad brake linings – only some of which contained
`asbestos) which contained chrysotile asbestos does not cause nor
`contribute to any type of malignant mesothelioma.
`
`That the non-occupationally exposed general public is not at risk for the
`development of an asbestos-related condition or disease, even though there
`is asbestos in the ambient air. Thus, because of the large dose needed to
`cause an asbestos-related disease, exposure to a single asbestos fiber does
`not substantially contribute to the development of an asbestos-related
`disease.
`
`That working with or around asbestos-containing friction materials
`(including certain aircraft and railroad brake linings – only some of which
`contained asbestos) does not cause nor contribute to the development of
`malignant mesothelioma. The bases for such an opinion are as follows:
`
`Epidemiological studies have shown that automobile repair
`workers have no increase in the risk of developing mesothelioma
`over that of the general population.
`
`(i)
`
`(ii)
`
`
`(iii)
`
`Pathology studies have reviewed lung tissue samples of persons
`with mesothelioma claiming asbestos exposure from brake dust
`and those studies have found that the fiber types present and the
`fiber burden amount of asbestos present do not support an etiology
`from friction materials.
`
`The nature of brake dust itself. Approximately 99% or more of
`
`
`
`14
`
`14 of 56
`
`

`

`FILED: NASSAU COUNTY CLERK 06/06/2019 06:45 PM
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 32
`
`INDEX NO. 612033/20