FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 02/20/2018 11:01 PM
`FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 02m2018 11:01 PM
`NYSC 3F DOC. NO. 964
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 964
`
`IND
`EX NO.
`190219/2016
`INDEX NO. 190219/2016
`
` VYSC
`
` flIV flD
` 3F:
`
`02/20/2018
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/20/2018
`
`Exhibit A
`
`

`

`FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 02/20/2018 11:01 PM
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 964
`
`INDEX NO. 190219/2016
`
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/20/2018
`
`FILED:
`NYSCEF
`
`NEW YORK
`DOC.
`NO.
`937
`
`COUNTY
`
`CLERK
`
`01/13/2018
`
`01:36
`
`AM|
`
`I N DE X NO .
`
`1 9 0 2 1 9 / 2 0 1 6
`
`RECEIVED
`
`NYSCEF:
`
`01/13/2018
`
`FILED:FILED:
`
`NYSCEF
`
`COCO
`
`NEWNEW YORKYORK
`
`DOC. NO.
`925
`SUPREME
`
`MON.
`
`iViARYlN
`
`LELE
`
`COURT
`SHULMžEW
`
`OF THE STATE
`YORK
`COUNTY
`
`RECEIVED
`NYSCEF:
`OF NEW YORK
`
`12/15/2017
`
`Index
`
`Number
`
`: 190219/2016
`
`MCGLYNN,
`VS
`AERCO
`
`THOMAS
`
`INTERNATIONAL
`
`INC.
`
`Sequence
`
`Number
`
`: 040
`
`OTHER
`
`RELIEFS
`
`The following
`1 to
`papers, numbered
`Notice of Motion/0miuztecSillBilEGitttEL-
`-
`
`Exhibits
`
`Answering Affidavits
`Affidavits
`
`
`
`Replyingr
`
`~,~,
`
`,
`
`were read on this motion Aplfor O
`- Exhibits
`——
`Affidavits
`
`~ti,
`is ~in~tI
`~p~~ p~ ~ C<
`
`pp
`
`r
`
`~~LSLtn)~
`
`itis
`
`ordered
`
`that
`
`this motion
`
`~ ~C $~~
`q + ( ~ LQ
`
`Upon the foregoing
`
`papers,
`
`~~~4wJ
`
`o D 00I
`
`-I-
`
`>.>. ern
`22
`00
`V)
`ll
`
`~I
`
`o
`
`PART
`
`INDEX NO.
`
`MOTION DATE
`
`MOTION SEQ. NO.
`
`I
`
`(23
`) No(s).
`)
`)( No(s).
`)~( No(s).
`'t r
`
`, J.S.C.
`
`gpt'
`DEC
`
`1420u
`
`Dated:
`
`ui Z
`LL I
`tn 0
`(n»n ~
`
`0~0
`
`1. CHECK ONE:
`
`.....................................................................
`
`2. CHECK AS APPROPRIATE:
`
`APPROPRIATE'APPROPRIATE'
`3. CHECK IF APPROPRIATE:
`
`...........................MOTION
`
`IS:
`
`................................................
`
`0 CASE DISPOSED
`U DENIED
`) GRANTED
`[[
`'I
`
`SETTLE ORDER
`
`HON.
`
`SHULMAN
`MARTIN
`DISPOSITION
`LMON-FINAL
`U OTHER
`
`U.GRANTED.GRANTED IN PART
`
`U SUBMIT ORDER
`G REFERENCE
`APPOINTMENT
`
`U FIDUCIARY
`
`'
`
`DO NOT POST
`
`11 ofof
`
`4040
`
`

`

`FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 02/20/2018 11:01 PM
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 964
`
`INDEX NO. 190219/2016
`
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/20/2018
`
`FILED:
`NYSCEF
`
`NEW YORK
`937
`DOC.
`NO.
`
`FILED:
`NYSCEF
`
`NEW YORK
`DOC. NO.
`925
`
`COUNTY
`
`CLERK
`
`01/13/2018
`
`01:36
`
`AM|
`
`INDEX
`
`NO.
`
`190219/2016
`
`COUNTY
`
`CLERK
`
`12/15/201'/
`
`03:19
`
`PM)
`
`RECEIVED
`™
`RECEIVED
`
`NYSCEF:
`
`01/13/2010
`
`NYSCEF:
`
`12/15/2017
`
`1
`
`r
`
`.
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`77
`
`SUPREME
`COURT
`NEW YORK
`COUNTY
`--------------------------------------
`THOMAS
`
`MCGLYNN,
`
`OF
`
`THE
`: CIVIL
`
`OF NEW YORK
`STATE
`TERM
`:
`PART
`1
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`-against-
`
`AERCO
`
`INTERNATIONAL,
`
`INC.,
`
`et
`
`al.,
`
`Index
`No.
`190219/2016
`
`Defendants.
`
`PROCEEDING
`
`2017
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`242<
`
`25
`
`t
`
`IL
`
`December
`
`4,
`
`60
`New
`
`Centre
`York,
`
`Street
`New
`
`York
`
`B E F 0 R E:
`
`HON.
`
`MARTIN
`
`SHULMAN,
`
`Justice
`
`A P P E A R A N C E S:
`
`t
`I
`
`HANLY
`for
`
`SIMMONS
`Attorneys
`Madison
`112
`New
`York,
`JAMES
`BY:
`LAURENCE
`
`CONROY
`Plaintiff
`the
`Avenue
`York
`New
`KRAMER,
`VALERE
`
`10016
`ESQ.
`NASSIF,
`
`ESQ.
`
`& CO.
`
`CLYDE
`Attorneys
`Chrysler
`The
`Lexington
`405
`New
`York,
`JEFFREY
`BY:
`PETER
`
`US
`
`for
`
`LLP
`the
`Building
`Avenue
`York
`FEGAN,
`DINUNZIO,
`
`New
`
`Defendant
`
`10174
`ESQ.
`ESQ.
`
`Anne
`Senior
`
`Marie
`Court
`
`Scribano
`Reporter
`
`22 ofof
`
`4040
`
`

`

`FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 02/20/2018 11:01 PM
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 964
`
`INDEX NO. 190219/2016
`
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/20/2018
`
`FILED:
`NYSCEF
`
`NEW YORK
`937
`DOC.
`NO.
`
`|FILED:
`NYSCEF
`
`NEW YORK
`DOC. NO.
`925
`
`COUNTY
`
`CLERK
`
`01/13/2018
`
`01:36
`
`AM|
`
`COUNTY
`
`C
`
`RK
`
`12/15/201V
`
`03:19
`.
`
`PM
`
`INDEX
`
`NO.
`
`190219/2016
`
`RECEIVED
`ex
`RECEIVED
`
`NYSCEF:
`
`01/13/2018
`
`C.
`
`NYSCEF:
`
`sumnute
`12/15/2017
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`Proceedings
`
`2
`
`THE
`
`COURT:
`
`Good
`
`afternoon.
`
`Before
`
`the
`
`Court
`
`are
`
`two
`
`post-verdict
`
`motions.
`
`We
`
`have
`
`both.
`
`On
`
`behalf
`
`of
`
`Jenkins
`
`Brothers,
`
`there
`
`is
`
`a
`
`post-verdict
`
`motion
`
`for
`
`judgment,
`
`notwithstanding
`
`the
`
`number
`
`of
`
`issues.
`
`On
`
`the
`
`other
`
`we
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`verdict,
`
`raising
`
`a
`
`side,
`
`have
`
`the
`
`plaintiff,
`
`with
`
`a motion
`
`for
`
`additur.
`
`On
`
`the
`
`table
`
`are
`
`hard
`
`copies
`
`of
`
`various
`
`papers
`
`presented
`
`on
`
`this
`
`round
`
`of
`
`post-verdict
`
`motion
`
`practice.
`
`Everything
`
`has
`
`been
`
`E-Filed.
`
`I
`
`leave
`
`it
`
`to
`
`respective
`
`counsel
`
`to
`
`make
`
`sure
`
`your
`
`respective
`
`papers
`
`are
`
`in
`
`order
`
`for
`
`purposes
`
`of
`
`appellate
`
`review.
`
`I want
`
`to
`
`emphasize
`
`at
`
`this
`
`time
`
`that
`
`I'm
`
`not
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`going
`
`to
`
`go
`
`through
`
`every
`
`single
`
`argument.
`
`Your
`
`papers,
`
`respectively
`
`and
`
`respectfully,
`
`speak
`
`for
`
`themselves.
`
`I
`
`have
`
`made
`
`it
`
`very
`
`clear
`
`from
`
`the
`
`inception
`
`of
`
`this
`
`trial
`
`--
`
`from
`
`the
`
`inception
`
`of
`
`jury
`
`selection
`
`that
`
`I
`
`have
`
`preserved
`
`each
`
`party's
`
`rights
`
`with.respect
`
`to
`
`objections,
`
`exceptions.
`
`From
`
`my
`
`point
`
`of
`
`view,
`
`there
`
`was
`
`no
`
`waiver
`
`of
`
`any
`
`of
`
`those
`
`to
`
`reiterate
`
`all
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`objections
`
`or
`
`exceptions,
`
`so
`
`we
`
`don't
`
`need
`
`of
`
`them.
`
`To
`
`the
`
`extent
`
`that
`
`I
`
`have
`
`received
`
`a
`
`stipulation
`
`on
`
`a
`
`particular
`
`point,
`
`the
`
`parties
`
`can
`
`debate
`
`the
`
`scope
`
`and
`
`breadth
`
`of
`
`that
`
`stipulation.
`
`But
`
`putting
`
`that
`
`issue
`
`aside,
`
`I
`
`believe
`
`there
`
`were
`
`discussions
`
`in
`
`the
`
`papers
`
`concerning
`
`use
`
`of
`
`interrogatories,
`
`so
`
`we
`
`understand
`
`what
`
`we'
`
`re
`
`talking
`
`3
`
`of
`
`40
`
`

`

`FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 02/20/2018 11:01 PM
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 964
`
`INDEX NO. 190219/2016
`
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/20/2018
`
`FILED:
`NYSCEF
`
`NEW YORK
`937
`DOC.
`NO.
`
`FILED:
`NYSCEF
`
`NEW YORK
`DOC. NO.
`925
`
`COUNTY
`
`CLERK
`
`01/13/2018
`
`01:36
`
`AM|
`
`COUNTY
`
`CLERK
`
`1
`
`15
`
`INDEX
`
`NO.
`
`190219/2016
`
`RECEIVED
`
`NYSCEF:
`
`01/13/2018
`
`RECEIVED
`
`NYSCEF:
`
`12/15/2017
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`Proceedings
`
`3
`
`about,
`
`we'
`we'll
`
`get
`
`there,
`
`but
`
`that's
`
`the
`
`only
`
`area
`
`there
`
`can
`
`be
`
`a
`
`debate
`
`about
`
`waiver.
`
`From
`
`my
`
`point
`
`of
`
`view,
`
`all
`
`rights
`
`are
`
`fully
`
`preserved
`
`for
`
`all
`
`parties.
`
`Fair
`
`enough?
`
`.
`
`Fair
`
`enough.
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`MR.
`
`KRAMER:
`
`MR.
`
`FEGAN:
`
`Yes,
`
`Judge.
`
`.
`
`THE
`
`COURT:
`
`There
`
`are
`
`no
`
`particular
`
`issues
`
`that
`
`are
`
`of
`
`greater
`
`importance,
`
`take
`
`certain
`
`issues
`
`out
`
`of
`
`they
`
`turn,
`
`are
`
`all
`
`important,
`
`but
`
`I may
`
`even
`
`though
`
`they
`
`were
`
`put
`
`10
`
`in
`
`your
`
`respective
`
`briefs
`
`or
`
`memoranda
`
`in
`
`a
`
`certain
`
`order,
`
`just
`
`to
`
`get
`
`rid
`
`of
`
`that
`
`issue
`
`or
`
`address
`
`it
`
`earlier
`
`because
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`I
`
`perceive
`
`it
`
`to
`
`be
`
`an
`
`easier
`
`type
`
`of
`
`issue
`
`that
`
`will
`
`not
`
`necessarily
`
`lend
`
`itself
`
`to
`
`extensive
`
`colloquy.
`
`That
`
`said,
`
`to
`
`quickly
`
`summarize
`
`Jenkins
`
`Brothers'
`
`--
`
`hereinafter
`
`we
`
`will
`
`refer
`
`to
`
`the
`
`defendant
`
`as
`
`and
`
`we
`
`will
`
`refer
`
`to
`
`the
`
`decedent,
`
`Thomas
`
`McGlynn,
`
`position
`
`Jenkins
`
`as
`
`the
`
`plaintiff
`
`on
`
`this
`
`record
`
`--
`
`Jenkins
`
`contends
`
`that
`
`it
`
`because:
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`should
`
`be
`
`awarded
`
`a
`
`JNOV
`
`Dr.
`
`Moline's
`
`causation
`
`opinion
`
`was
`
`invalid
`
`based
`
`on
`
`Dummitt
`
`and
`
`Juni.
`
`Her
`
`opinion
`
`was
`
`based
`
`on
`
`facts
`
`not
`
`in
`
`evidence.
`
`Jenkins
`
`did
`
`not
`
`bear
`
`any
`
`responsibility
`
`for
`
`thermal
`
`insulation
`
`And
`
`ship
`
`applied
`
`owners'
`
`by
`
`and
`
`others.
`
`Brady
`
`Marine's
`
`failure
`
`to
`
`follow
`
`workplace
`
`safety
`
`was
`
`an
`
`intervening
`
`cause
`
`and
`
`broke
`
`4 of
`
`40
`
`

`

`FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 02/20/2018 11:01 PM
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 964
`
`INDEX NO. 190219/2016
`
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/20/2018
`
`FILED:
`NYSCEF
`
`NEW YORK
`937
`DOC.
`NO.
`
`FILED:
`NYSCEF
`
`NEW YORK
`DOC. NO.
`925
`
`COUNTY
`
`CLERK
`
`01/13/2018
`
`01:36
`
`AM|
`
`COUNTY
`
`CLERK
`
`12
`
`15
`
`2017
`
`:
`
`PM
`
`INDEX
`
`NO.
`
`190219/2016
`
`RECEIVED
`
`NYSCEF:
`
`01/13/2010
`
`RECEIVED
`
`NYSCEF:
`
`12/15/2017
`
`Proceedings
`
`4
`
`the
`
`chain
`
`to
`
`impose
`
`liability
`
`on
`
`Jenkins.
`
`Against
`
`that
`
`backdrop,
`
`Jenkins
`
`argues
`
`that
`
`it
`
`deserves
`
`a
`
`new
`
`trial
`
`on
`
`liability,
`
`apportionment
`
`and
`
`recklessness
`
`because:
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`It
`
`was
`
`error
`
`to
`
`exclude
`
`evidence
`
`of
`
`the
`
`Scotland
`
`There
`
`were
`
`erroneous
`
`rulings
`
`regarding
`
`the
`
`of
`
`trial
`
`subpoenas
`
`and
`
`preclusion
`
`of
`
`settled
`
`interrogatories
`
`affecting
`
`Jenkins'
`
`apportionment
`
`defense.
`
`quashing
`
`parties'
`
`rights
`
`GOL
`
`15-108
`
`requires
`
`settled
`
`parties
`
`to
`
`be
`
`on
`
`the
`
`verdict
`
`sheet
`
`even
`
`in
`
`the
`
`absence
`
`of
`
`a
`
`jury
`
`finding
`
`of
`
`against
`
`them.
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`.
`
`18
`
`19
`
`apportionment
`.apportionment
`
`liability
`
`.
`
`It
`
`was
`
`error
`
`to
`
`charge
`
`recklessness
`
`and
`
`the'
`the
`
`finding
`
`evidence.
`
`of
`
`recklessness
`
`was
`
`against
`
`the
`
`weight
`
`of
`
`the
`
`.
`
`.
`
`Finally,
`
`assuming
`
`we
`
`get
`
`through
`
`all
`
`these
`
`issues,
`
`Jenkins
`
`argues
`
`that
`
`the
`
`verdict
`
`was
`
`fair
`
`and
`
`reasonable.
`
`In
`
`opposition,
`
`plaintiff
`
`argues
`
`that
`
`Jenkins
`
`burden
`
`with
`
`competent
`
`evidence
`
`that
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`failed
`
`to
`
`meet
`
`plaintiff
`
`was,
`
`its
`
`in
`
`fact,
`
`exposed
`
`to
`
`asbestos
`
`during
`
`the
`
`years
`
`he
`
`worked
`
`in
`
`Scotland's.
`
`navy
`
`yards.
`
`Notably,
`
`to
`
`arguably
`
`support
`
`a
`
`factual
`
`basis
`
`in
`
`the
`
`face
`
`of
`
`plaintiff's
`
`for
`
`'
`
`the
`
`perceived
`
`Scotland
`
`defense,
`
`uncontroverted
`
`denial
`
`of
`
`asbestos
`
`exposure
`
`over
`
`there,
`
`Jenkins
`
`counters
`
`this
`
`testimony
`
`solely
`
`5
`
`of
`
`40
`
`

`

`FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 02/20/2018 11:01 PM
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 964
`
`INDEX NO. 190219/2016
`
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/20/2018
`
`FILED:
`NYSCEF
`
`NEW YORK
`937
`DOC.
`NO.
`
`COUNTY
`
`CLERK
`
`01/13/2018
`
`01:36
`
`AM
`
`FILED:
`NYSCEF
`
`NEW YORK
`DOC. NO.
`925
`
`COUNTY
`
`CLERK
`
`12
`
`INDEX
`
`NO.
`
`190219/2010
`
`RECEIVED
`
`NYSCEF:
`
`01/13/2018
`
`RECEIVED
`
`NYSCEF:
`
`12/15/2017
`
`Proceedings
`
`5
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`with
`
`literature
`
`and
`
`unfounded
`
`assumptions
`
`and
`
`hypotheticals
`
`posed
`
`to
`
`an
`
`industrial
`
`hygienist,
`
`who
`
`testified
`
`during
`
`the
`
`course
`
`of
`
`the
`
`trial;
`
`the
`
`literature,
`
`some
`
`of
`
`which
`
`were
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6'
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`anecdotal
`
`in
`
`nature.
`
`Plaintiff
`
`was
`
`competent
`
`to
`
`identify
`
`asbestos
`
`in
`
`packing,
`
`gaskets
`
`and
`
`thermal
`
`insulation
`
`throughout
`
`his
`
`career
`
`as
`
`a welder/burner
`
`various
`
`employments
`
`(even
`
`in
`
`if
`
`the
`
`United
`
`States
`
`during
`
`his
`
`he
`
`did
`
`not
`
`know
`
`about
`
`the
`
`hazards
`
`of
`
`asbestos).
`
`Plaintiff
`
`argues
`
`that
`
`the
`
`Court
`
`correctly
`
`ruled
`
`in
`
`defendants'
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`the
`
`settled
`
`interrogatories
`
`quashing
`
`allowing
`
`knowledge.
`
`trial
`
`subpoenas
`
`and
`
`in
`
`only
`
`verified
`
`by
`
`witnesses
`
`with
`
`personal
`
`And
`
`because
`
`Jenkins'
`
`experts
`
`definitively
`
`opined
`
`that
`
`plaintiff's
`
`exposure
`
`to:gaskets
`
`and
`
`packing
`
`did
`
`not
`
`contribute
`
`to
`
`mesothelioma,
`
`Jenkins
`
`could
`
`not
`
`use
`
`Dr.
`
`Moline's
`
`causation
`
`testimony
`
`to
`
`support
`
`its
`
`Article
`
`16
`
`burden.
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`Plaintiff
`
`goes
`
`on
`
`to
`
`argue
`
`in
`
`opposition
`
`that
`
`the
`
`jury
`
`verdict
`
`on
`
`liability,
`
`apportionment
`
`and
`
`recklessness
`
`should
`
`be
`
`sustained
`
`because:
`
`Dr.
`
`Moline's
`
`causation
`
`testimony
`
`is
`
`supported
`
`by
`
`record
`
`evidence
`
`and
`
`comports
`
`with
`
`New.
`
`York
`
`law.
`
`Her
`
`testimony
`
`was
`
`supported
`
`by
`
`plaintiff's
`
`testimonial
`
`evidence.
`
`~
`
`6
`
`of
`
`40
`
`

`

`FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 02/20/2018 11:01 PM
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 964
`
`INDEX NO. 190219/2016
`
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/20/2018
`
`FILED
`NYSCEF
`
`: NEW YORK
`937
`DOC.
`NO.
`
`|FILED:
`I NYSCEF
`.
`
`NEW YORK
`DOC. NO.
`925
`
`COUNTY
`
`CLERK
`
`01/13/2018
`
`01:3
`
`6
`
`AM|
`
`COUNTY
`
`CLERK
`
`12 / 15/
`
`2017
`
`03
`
`: 19
`
`PM)
`
`INDEX
`
`NO.
`
`190219/2016
`
`RECEIVED
`
`NYSCEF:
`
`01/13/2010
`
`1Nl»_X NU.
`
`19Uz.19/2.U1b
`
`RECEIVED
`
`NYSCEF:
`
`12/15/2017
`
`Proceedings
`
`6
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`The
`
`evidence
`
`supports
`
`the
`
`jury
`
`verdict
`
`that
`
`Jenkins
`
`failed
`
`to
`
`warn
`
`about
`
`the
`
`hazards
`
`of
`
`thermal
`
`insulation
`
`on
`
`its
`
`valves.
`
`Ancí
`
`that
`
`the
`
`Court
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`correctly
`
`ruled;
`
`denying
`
`Jenkins
`
`a
`
`directed
`
`verdict
`
`vis-a-vis
`
`the
`
`respective
`
`employers'
`
`failure
`
`to
`
`follow
`
`mandated
`
`work
`
`safety
`
`rules
`
`and
`
`which
`
`was
`
`not
`
`an
`
`intervening
`
`cause
`
`breaking
`
`the
`
`chain
`
`as
`
`to
`
`Jenkins'
`Jenkins
`
`liability.
`
`The
`
`Court
`
`properly
`
`allowed
`
`plaintiff's
`
`testimony
`
`as
`
`to
`
`his
`
`personal
`
`knowledge
`
`about
`
`the
`
`asbestos-containing
`
`products
`
`Jenkins'
`
`in
`
`valves,
`
`while
`
`excluding
`
`testimony
`
`between
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`resting
`
`on
`
`hearsay
`
`(otherwise
`
`not
`
`consented
`
`to
`
`counsel)
`
`during
`
`the
`
`course
`
`of
`
`this
`
`trial.
`
`I
`
`think
`
`I
`
`fairly
`
`summarized
`
`the
`
`respective
`
`positions
`
`here.
`
`I'm
`
`saving
`
`additur
`
`for
`
`last.
`
`Let's
`
`take
`
`some
`
`of
`
`the
`
`.easier
`easier
`
`issues.
`
`Against.this
`
`summarized
`
`backdrop:
`
`The
`
`Scotland
`
`defense.
`
`Did
`
`I
`
`fairly
`
`or
`
`inaccurately
`
`summarize
`
`what
`
`you
`
`oppose
`
`Mr.
`
`McGlynn's
`
`uncontroverted
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`had
`
`on
`
`this
`
`record
`
`to
`
`testimony
`
`about
`
`the
`
`nature
`
`and
`
`scope
`
`of
`
`his
`
`work?
`
`MR.
`
`FEGAN:
`
`Well,
`
`what
`
`1 would
`
`add
`
`briefly
`
`to
`
`that,
`
`that
`
`that
`
`Judge,
`
`is
`
`the
`
`issue
`
`of
`
`Mr.
`
`McGlynn's
`
`medical
`
`records
`
`we
`
`had
`
`relied
`
`on,
`
`I
`
`think,
`
`if
`
`you
`
`remember,
`
`statements
`
`indicated
`
`the
`
`length
`
`of
`
`this
`
`time
`
`working
`
`in
`
`shipyards
`
`7 of
`
`40
`
`

`

`FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 02/20/2018 11:01 PM
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 964
`
`INDEX NO. 190219/2016
`
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/20/2018
`
`FILED:
`NYSCEF
`
`NEW YORK
`937
`DOC.
`NO.
`
`FILED:
`NYSCEF
`
`NEW YORK
`DOC. NO.
`925
`
`.
`
`COUNTY
`
`CLERK
`
`01/13/2018
`
`01:36
`
`AM|
`
`INDEX
`
`NO.
`
`190219/2010
`
`RECEIVED
`
`NYSCEF:
`
`01/13/2018
`
`COUNTY
`
`CLERK
`
`12
`
`15
`
`2017
`
`03:19
`
`PM
`
`.
`Proceedings
`
`RECEIVED
`
`NYSCEF:
`
`12/15/2017
`
`7
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`and
`
`that
`
`it
`
`was
`
`about
`
`10
`
`years
`
`longer
`
`than,
`
`give
`
`or
`
`take,
`
`longer
`
`than
`
`what
`
`he
`
`described
`
`working
`
`in
`
`shipyards
`
`in
`
`America.
`
`evidence
`
`So
`
`that
`
`was
`
`part,
`
`I
`
`think,
`
`of
`
`our
`
`circumstantial
`
`if
`
`we
`
`had
`
`been
`
`that,
`
`able
`
`to
`
`show
`
`the
`
`jury,
`
`would
`.would
`
`have
`
`gone
`
`towards
`
`that
`
`Scotland
`
`defense,
`
`so
`
`to
`
`speak.
`
`But
`
`other
`
`than
`
`what
`
`your
`
`Honor
`
`recited,
`
`I
`
`think
`
`that's
`
`all
`
`I would
`
`add
`
`to
`
`it.
`
`THE
`
`COURT:
`
`Just
`
`so
`
`that
`
`because
`
`you
`
`know
`
`it
`
`better
`
`we'
`
`than
`
`re
`
`clear
`
`on
`
`this
`
`me
`
`--
`
`when
`
`I
`
`say
`
`record,"
`
`I
`
`am not
`
`necessarily
`
`limiting
`
`the
`
`record
`
`to
`
`record,
`
`"this
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`record
`
`--
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`the
`
`trial
`
`record
`
`and
`
`at
`
`times
`
`mean
`
`the
`
`historic
`
`outside
`
`of
`
`questioning
`
`Mr.
`
`McGlynn
`
`during
`
`his
`
`deposition,
`
`there
`
`were
`
`no
`
`amplification
`
`of
`
`pleadings
`
`to
`
`advance
`
`this
`
`particular
`
`defense;
`
`and
`
`there
`
`were
`
`no motions
`
`for
`
`discovery
`
`or
`
`to
`
`compel
`
`discovery
`
`on
`
`this
`
`issue.
`
`As
`
`I
`
`understand
`
`from
`
`my
`
`perspective,
`
`and
`
`I
`
`use
`
`the
`
`term
`
`colloquially,
`
`Scotland
`
`defense
`
`was
`
`first
`
`raised
`
`during
`
`our
`
`very
`
`first
`
`it,
`
`the
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`pretrial
`
`conference,
`
`as
`
`we
`
`were.selecting
`
`the
`
`jury,
`
`and
`
`you
`
`and
`
`other
`
`co-defendants
`
`at
`
`the
`
`time
`
`were
`
`advancing
`
`it
`
`or
`
`attempting
`
`to
`
`advance
`
`it,
`
`and
`
`I
`
`was
`
`responding
`
`to
`
`a
`
`pretrial
`
`in
`
`limine
`
`motion
`
`precluding
`
`the
`
`Scotland
`
`defense.
`
`Am I
`
`correct
`
`on
`
`that
`
`point?
`
`MR.
`
`FEGAN:
`
`THE
`
`COURT:
`
`Yes.
`
`Okay.
`
`MR.
`
`FEGAN:
`
`The
`
`only
`
`thing
`
`I
`
`would
`
`add
`
`on
`
`that,
`
`8
`
`of
`
`40
`
`

`

`FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 02/20/2018 11:01 PM
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 964
`
`INDEX NO. 190219/2016
`
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/20/2018
`
`FILED:
`NYSCEF
`
`NEW YORK
`937
`DOC.
`NO.
`
`FILED:
`NYSCEF
`
`NEW YORK
`DOC. NO.
`925
`
`COUNTY
`
`CLERK
`
`01/13/2018
`
`01:36
`
`AM
`
`INDEX
`
`NO.
`
`190219/2016
`
`RECEIVED
`
`NYSCEF:
`
`01/13/2018
`
`COUNTY
`
`CLERK
`
`12
`
`5/20M19
`
`PM)
`
`INDEX
`
`N
`
`RECEIVED
`
`NYSCEF:
`
`12/15/2017
`
`Proceedings
`
`8
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`just
`
`that
`
`give
`
`in
`
`terms
`
`of
`
`discovery
`
`motions,
`
`et
`
`cetera,
`
`I
`
`don't
`
`know
`
`that
`
`us,
`
`really
`
`would
`
`have
`
`been
`
`in
`
`Mr.
`
`McGlynn's
`
`power
`
`in
`
`terms
`
`of
`
`what
`
`we
`
`didn't
`
`do
`
`to
`
`get
`
`that
`
`kind
`
`to
`
`of
`
`know
`
`--
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`information
`
`from
`
`him.
`
`I.
`
`don't
`
`THE
`
`COURT:
`
`Well
`
`--
`
`MR.
`
`FEGAN:
`
`It
`
`isn't
`
`like
`
`he
`
`was
`
`a Con
`
`Ed
`
`that
`
`we
`
`could
`
`have
`
`pulled
`
`records
`
`from.
`
`The
`
`other
`
`thing
`
`I
`
`was
`
`saying,
`
`you
`
`know,
`
`it's
`
`don't
`
`know
`
`how
`
`much
`
`this
`
`is
`
`actually
`
`worth
`
`at
`
`this
`
`point
`
`--
`
`I
`
`--
`
`10
`
`we
`
`were
`
`in
`
`the
`
`case
`
`for
`
`J
`
`nkins
`
`maybe
`
`six
`
`months
`
`before
`
`the
`
`--
`
`that's
`
`not
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`case
`
`went
`
`to
`
`trial,
`
`so,
`
`I mean,
`
`I'm
`
`not
`
`dispositive,
`
`of
`
`course,
`
`but
`
`I
`
`just
`
`want
`
`to
`
`make
`
`sure
`
`that
`
`we
`
`don't
`
`leave
`
`an
`
`impression
`
`that
`
`we
`
`were
`
`sitting
`
`on
`
`this
`
`for,
`
`you
`
`know,
`
`a
`
`year
`
`and
`
`a
`
`half
`
`or
`
`something.
`
`It
`
`was
`
`a
`
`fast-moving
`
`case.
`
`THE
`
`COURT:
`
`I
`
`understand.
`
`But
`
`there
`
`are
`
`all
`
`kinds
`
`of
`
`discovery
`
`one
`
`could
`
`attempt
`
`co-worker-
`
`or
`
`a
`
`search
`
`of
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`to
`
`seek,
`
`information,
`
`doing
`
`who
`
`may
`
`have
`
`been
`
`working
`
`in
`
`Scotland,
`
`trying
`
`to
`
`trace
`
`people
`
`from
`
`that
`
`time
`
`who
`
`are
`
`in
`
`America.
`
`Again,
`
`I'm
`
`not
`
`faulting
`
`Jenkins.
`
`I'm
`
`putting
`
`it
`
`in
`
`perspective
`
`on
`
`this
`
`record.
`
`With
`
`the
`
`exception
`
`of
`
`certain
`
`references
`
`to
`
`medical
`
`records
`
`that
`
`you
`
`remind
`
`me
`
`of,
`
`there
`
`was
`
`no
`
`other
`
`competent
`
`evidence
`
`that
`
`controverted
`
`Mr.
`
`McGlynn's
`
`testimony
`
`9
`
`of
`
`40
`
`

`

`FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 02/20/2018 11:01 PM
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 964
`
`INDEX NO. 190219/2016
`
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/20/2018
`
`FILED:
`NYSCEF
`
`NEW YORK
`937
`DOC.
`NO.
`
`Î|FILED:
`NYSCEF
`
`NEW YORK
`925
`DOC. NO.
`
`COUNTY
`
`CLERK
`
`01/13/2018
`
`01:36
`
`AM|
`
`COUNTY
`
`CLERK
`
`12/15/2017
`
`'
`
`03:19
`
`PM
`
`INDEX
`
`NO.
`
`190219/2016
`
`RECEIVED
`
`NYSCEF:
`
`01/13/2018
`
`RECEIVED
`
`NYSCEF:
`
`12/15/2017
`
`Proceedings
`
`9
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`as
`
`to
`
`the
`
`description
`
`of
`
`the
`
`nature
`
`of
`
`his
`
`work
`
`in
`
`Scotland,
`
`working
`
`as
`
`a
`
`burner
`
`--
`
`my
`
`word
`
`--
`
`on
`
`the
`
`skeleton
`
`ships
`
`prior
`
`to
`
`their
`
`being
`
`fitted
`
`with
`
`insulation
`
`the
`
`of
`
`as
`
`finished
`
`in
`
`that
`
`ships
`
`context.
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10'
`10
`
`And,
`
`again,
`
`the
`
`literature
`
`is
`
`what
`
`it
`
`is.
`
`Some
`
`of
`
`it,
`
`I
`
`recall,
`
`is
`
`anecdotal,
`
`e.g.,
`
`discussing
`
`interviews
`
`of
`
`workers.
`
`We'
`
`re
`
`not
`
`questioning
`
`that
`
`that
`
`may
`
`have
`
`been
`
`the
`
`asbestos
`
`capital
`
`in
`
`the
`
`UK,
`
`but
`
`I
`
`want
`
`to
`
`make
`
`very
`
`clear,
`
`from
`
`for
`
`my
`
`purposes
`
`of
`
`this
`
`record,
`
`point
`
`of
`
`view,
`
`that
`
`that
`
`the
`
`verdict
`
`as
`
`to
`
`perceived
`
`error
`
`in
`
`not
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`basis
`
`to
`
`set
`
`aside
`
`advancing
`
`that
`
`particular
`
`defense
`
`Another
`
`easier
`
`issue
`
`is
`
`is
`
`--
`
`denied.
`
`It
`
`may
`
`be
`
`something
`
`for
`
`Mr.
`
`Dinunzio
`
`to
`
`respond
`
`to
`
`--
`
`is
`
`my
`
`ruling
`
`on
`
`the
`
`quashing
`
`of
`
`the
`
`subpoenas
`
`and
`
`my
`
`selective
`
`admission
`
`to
`
`various
`
`interrogatories.
`
`And
`
`you
`
`devoted'a
`
`great
`
`deal
`
`of
`
`ink
`
`on
`
`that
`
`subject
`
`in
`
`your
`
`brief.
`
`e
`
`is
`
`your
`
`contention
`
`that
`
`ruling
`
`had
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`Again,
`
`it
`
`my
`
`affected
`
`your
`
`ability
`
`to
`
`be
`
`able
`
`Article
`
`16
`
`apportionment
`
`defense
`
`to
`
`in
`
`advance
`
`a meaningful
`
`that
`
`regard.
`
`So
`
`that
`
`I'm
`
`clear,
`
`Mr.
`
`Dinunzio,
`
`I
`
`believe
`
`that
`
`the
`
`bulk
`
`of
`
`my
`
`rulings
`
`in
`
`quashing
`
`the
`
`trial
`
`subpoenas
`
`focused
`
`on
`
`the
`
`improper
`
`service
`
`these
`
`companies
`
`that
`
`you
`
`sought
`
`of
`
`to
`
`process;
`
`that
`
`most
`
`of
`
`compel
`
`the
`
`production
`
`of
`
`I
`
`10
`
`of
`
`40
`
`

`

`FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 02/20/2018 11:01 PM
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 964
`
`INDEX NO. 190219/2016
`
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/20/2018
`
`FILED:
`NYSCEF
`
`NEW YORK
`937
`DOC.
`NO.
`
`|FILED:
`NYSCEF
`
`NEW YORK
`DOC. NO.
`925
`
`COUNTY
`
`CLERK
`
`01/13/2018
`
`01:36
`
`AM|
`
`COUNTY
`
`CLERK
`
`12
`
`15
`
`2017
`
`03:19
`
`PM
`
`INDEX
`
`NO.
`
`190219/2016
`
`RECEIVED
`
`NYSCEF:
`
`01/13/2018
`
`1NUM
`
`NU.
`
`UZ1W zU
`
`RECEIVED
`
`NYSCEF:
`
`12/15/2017
`
`Proceedings
`
`10
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`a
`
`corporate
`
`representative
`
`or
`
`someone
`
`with
`
`personal
`
`knowledge
`
`to
`
`speak
`
`.on
`
`whatever
`
`subject
`
`you
`
`wanted
`
`from
`
`that
`
`company
`
`of
`
`those
`
`settled
`
`defendants
`
`were
`
`outside
`
`of
`
`New
`
`York
`
`I
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`and,
`
`therefore,
`
`believe,
`
`I
`
`ruled
`
`that
`
`the
`
`manner
`
`of
`
`service
`
`of
`
`the
`
`subpoena
`
`was
`
`improper
`
`and,
`
`therefore,
`
`this
`
`Court
`
`didn't
`
`really
`
`have
`
`any
`
`jurisdiction
`
`to
`
`compel
`
`their
`
`production.
`
`Am I
`
`correct
`
`on
`
`that,
`
`sir?
`
`MR.
`
`DINUNZIO:
`
`I
`
`would
`
`add
`
`one
`
`thing
`
`to
`
`that.
`
`That
`
`certainly
`
`was
`
`one
`
`of
`
`the
`
`bases
`
`for
`
`your
`
`ruling.
`
`The
`
`other
`
`one
`
`was
`
`--
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`THE
`
`COURT:
`
`I'll
`
`get
`
`there.
`
`And
`
`the
`
`other
`
`basis,
`
`because
`
`we
`
`were
`
`left
`
`with,
`
`I
`
`think,
`
`don't
`
`nine
`
`companies,
`
`was
`
`whether
`
`--
`
`and
`
`if
`
`I'm
`
`mistaken
`
`hold
`
`me
`
`to
`
`it
`
`--
`
`was
`
`the
`
`manner
`
`of
`
`service.
`
`on
`
`the
`
`registered
`
`agent.
`
`And,.
`
`again,
`
`it
`
`was
`
`the
`
`timing
`
`of
`
`the
`
`manner
`
`of
`
`service
`
`of
`
`the
`
`registered
`
`agent.
`
`procedurally
`
`on
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`Again,
`
`that
`
`supports
`
`my
`
`ruling
`
`that
`
`score.
`
`Am I
`
`correct
`
`on;that,
`
`sir?
`
`MR.
`
`DINUNZIO:
`
`Yeah.
`
`I
`
`thought
`
`the
`
`issue
`
`was
`
`service
`
`upon
`
`the
`
`attorneys.
`
`THE
`
`COURT:
`
`That
`
`was
`
`one
`
`issue.
`
`But
`
`there
`
`was
`
`a
`
`separate
`
`issue,
`
`my
`
`recollection,
`
`not
`
`from
`
`the
`
`papers,
`
`was
`
`that
`
`there
`
`was
`
`an
`
`attempt
`
`to
`
`serve
`
`the
`
`Secretary
`
`of
`
`State.
`
`11
`
`of
`
`40
`
`

`

`FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 02/20/2018 11:01 PM
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 964
`
`INDEX NO. 190219/2016
`
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/20/2018
`
`FILED:
`NYSCEF
`
`NEW YORK
`937
`DOC.
`NO.
`
`|FILED:
`NYSCEF
`
`NEW YORK
`DOC. NO.
`925
`
`COUNTY
`
`CLERK
`
`01/13/2018
`
`01:36
`
`AM|
`
`COUNTY
`
`CLERK
`
`12/15/20t7
`
`03:19
`
`PM
`
`INDEX
`
`NO.
`
`190219/2016
`
`RECEIVED
`
`NYSCEF:
`
`01/13/2010
`
`NDEX NO.
`
`190219/2016
`
`RECEIVED
`
`NYSCEF:
`
`12/15/2017
`
`Proceedings
`
`11
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`Do
`
`you
`
`recall
`
`that,
`
`Mr.
`
`Kramer?
`
`MR.
`
`KRAMER:
`
`Yes.
`
`We mentioned
`
`this
`
`in
`
`our
`
`papers
`
`as
`
`well,
`
`an
`
`issue
`
`. with
`
`the
`
`registered
`
`agent
`
`for
`
`service
`
`of
`
`process
`
`and
`
`whether
`
`or
`
`not
`
`that
`
`was
`
`appropriate.
`
`And
`
`our
`
`argument
`
`was,
`
`as
`
`not.
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`theirs
`
`at
`
`the
`
`time
`
`was,
`
`that
`
`it
`
`was
`
`THE
`
`COURT:
`
`It
`
`was
`
`not
`
`at
`
`the
`
`time.
`
`And
`
`then
`
`you
`
`hang
`
`your
`
`hat,
`
`colloquially,
`
`on
`
`the
`
`notion
`
`that
`
`I
`
`perceived
`
`--
`
`that
`
`I may
`
`have
`
`committed
`
`reversible
`
`error
`
`in
`
`foreclosing
`
`the
`
`--
`
`in
`
`quashing
`
`the
`
`subpoenas
`
`on
`
`public
`
`policy
`
`concerns.
`
`And
`
`Jenkins
`
`quoted
`
`me
`
`in
`
`their
`
`papers
`
`as
`
`doing
`
`that
`
`because,
`
`I
`
`guess,
`
`my
`
`reaction
`
`had
`
`that
`
`issue.
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`was
`
`this
`
`is
`
`the
`
`first
`
`time
`
`I.'ve
`
`ever
`
`it
`
`in
`
`at
`
`the
`
`having
`
`about
`
`NYCAL
`
`the
`
`--
`
`There's
`
`always
`
`a
`
`concern,
`
`at
`
`least
`
`I
`
`thought
`
`about
`
`time,
`
`time
`
`you
`
`know,
`
`that
`
`maybe
`
`I may
`
`be mistaken.
`
`to
`
`reflect,
`
`I
`
`feel
`
`a
`
`little
`
`more
`
`confident
`
`notion
`
`that
`
`--
`
`and
`
`I
`
`speak
`
`for
`
`all
`
`participants
`
`But
`
`in
`
`that,
`
`if
`
`you
`
`were
`
`a
`
`settled
`
`defendant,
`
`would
`
`you
`
`into
`
`court
`
`to
`
`at
`
`later
`
`trials,
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`want
`
`to
`
`be
`
`hauled
`
`which
`
`could
`
`arguably
`
`chill
`
`your
`
`testify
`
`ability
`
`to
`
`make
`
`meaningful
`
`settlements,
`
`discretion
`
`which
`
`is
`
`something
`
`this
`
`Court
`
`has
`
`the
`
`to
`
`think
`
`about.
`
`The
`
`question
`
`in
`
`my mind
`
`at
`
`the
`
`time
`
`was
`
`whether
`
`this
`
`is
`
`a
`
`legally
`
`cognitive
`
`basis
`
`to
`
`quash
`
`a
`
`subpoena,
`
`separate
`
`from
`
`the
`
`procedural
`
`bases
`
`for
`
`quashing
`
`the
`
`subpoena.
`
`And
`
`that'
`
`s,why
`
`I may
`
`have
`
`said
`
`this
`
`was
`
`new
`
`12
`
`of
`
`40
`
`

`

`FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 02/20/2018 11:01 PM
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 964
`
`INDEX NO. 190219/2016
`
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/20/2018
`
`FILED:
`NYSCEF
`
`NEW YORK
`937
`DOC.
`NO.
`
`|FILED:
`NYSCEF
`
`NEW YORK
`DOC . NO.
`925
`
`COUNTY
`
`CLERK
`
`01/13/2018
`
`01:36
`
`AM|
`
`COUNTY
`
`CLERK
`
`12/15/2017
`
`03:19
`
`PM)
`
`INDEX
`
`NO.
`
`190219/2016
`
`RECEIVED
`
`NYSCEF:
`
`¹""^
`"°·
`- RECEIVE D NYSCEF:
`
`01/13/2010
`'='"""
`12/15/2017
`
`Proceedings
`
`12
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`ground
`
`for
`
`me.
`
`And
`
`I'rn
`
`not
`
`sure
`
`there
`
`was
`
`any
`
`case
`
`law
`
`to
`
`support
`
`that
`
`particular
`
`notion.
`
`Do
`
`you
`
`want
`
`to
`
`respond
`
`to
`
`that?
`
`Do
`
`you
`
`need
`
`to
`
`respond
`
`to
`
`that?
`
`MR.
`
`DINUNZIO:
`
`I
`
`guess
`
`I
`
`would
`
`add
`
`that
`
`we
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11.
`
`articulated
`
`on
`
`the
`
`record
`
`why
`
`we
`
`thought
`
`the
`
`service
`
`of
`
`the
`
`subpoena
`
`was
`
`proper,
`
`both
`
`through
`
`the
`
`attorneys
`
`of
`
`record,
`
`as
`
`well
`
`as
`
`through
`
`the
`
`registered
`
`agents,
`
`through
`
`CPLR
`
`and
`
`the
`
`relevant
`
`provisions
`
`of
`
`the
`
`Business
`
`Corporation
`
`Law.
`
`THE
`
`COURT:
`
`Do
`
`you
`
`need
`
`to
`
`add
`
`anything
`
`to
`
`that?
`
`MR.
`
`KRAMER:
`
`I
`
`don't
`
`believe
`
`so,
`
`your
`
`Honor.
`
`THE
`
`COURT:
`
`So
`
`another
`
`easier
`
`issue
`
`is
`
`Jenkins'
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`.
`
`contention
`
`that
`
`I
`
`erred
`
`in
`
`not
`
`allowing
`
`it
`
`to
`
`list
`
`all
`
`the
`
`settled
`
`defendants
`
`on
`
`the
`
`verdict
`
`sheet,
`
`even
`
`in
`
`the
`
`absence
`
`of
`
`any
`
`evidence
`
`for
`
`a
`
`jury
`
`to
`
`assign
`
`an
`
`equitable
`
`share
`
`of
`
`fault
`
`to
`
`that
`
`particular
`
`settled
`
`defendant.
`
`And
`
`there
`
`was
`
`a
`
`debate
`
`between
`
`yourself
`
`and
`
`plaintiff's
`
`counsel
`
`on
`
`how
`
`one
`
`interprets
`
`GOL
`
`15-108
`
`and
`
`in
`
`the
`
`context
`
`double
`
`recovery
`
`and
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`Article
`
`16
`
`ofiavoiding
`
`the
`
`various
`
`cases
`
`that
`
`address
`
`the.interplay
`
`of
`
`these
`
`two
`
`statutes.
`
`meeting
`
`settled
`
`And
`
`it
`
`was
`
`your
`
`view
`
`that
`
`even
`
`in
`
`the
`
`absence
`
`of
`
`an
`
`Article
`
`16
`
`burden,
`
`the
`
`mere
`
`fact
`
`that
`
`plaintiff
`
`with
`
`a
`
`defendant
`
`somehow
`
`suggests
`
`implied
`
`liability,
`
`which
`
`puts
`
`the
`
`company
`
`on
`
`the
`
`verdict
`
`sheet
`
`for
`
`purposes
`
`of
`
`the
`
`jury
`
`assigning
`
`a
`
`percentage
`
`of
`
`fault.
`
`13
`
`of
`
`40
`
`

`

`FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 02/20/2018 11:01 PM
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 964
`
`INDEX NO. 190219/2016
`
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/20/2018
`
`FILED:
`NYSCEF
`
`NEW YORK
`937
`DOC.
`NO.
`
`|FILED
`NYSCEF
`
`NEW YORK
`DOC. NO.
`925
`
`COUNTY
`
`CLERK
`
`01/13/2018
`
`01:36
`
`AM|
`
`COUNTY
`
`CLERK
`
`12/15/2017
`
`03:19
`
`P1
`
`INDEX
`
`NO.
`
`190219/2016
`
`RECEIVED
`
`NYSCEF:
`
`01/13/2010
`
`I NDEX NO.
`
`190219TzUlb
`
`RECEIVED
`
`NYSCEF:
`
`12/15/2017
`
`Proceedings
`
`13
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`Am I
`
`correct
`
`in
`
`understanding
`
`your.
`
`argument
`
`on
`
`this?
`
`MR.
`
`DINUNZIO:
`
`Essentially,
`
`yes.
`
`We
`
`think
`
`15-108
`
`and
`
`Article
`
`that
`
`16,
`
`both
`
`the
`
`statutory
`
`framework
`
`of
`
`GOL
`
`as
`
`well
`
`as
`
`the
`
`Bigelow
`
`case,-
`case,
`
`which
`
`we
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`cite
`
`in
`
`our
`
`papers
`
`--
`
`-
`
`THE
`
`COURT:
`
`And
`
`how
`
`do
`
`you
`
`expect
`
`the
`
`jury,
`
`absence
`
`of
`
`any
`
`fault
`
`evidence,
`
`to
`
`assign
`
`a
`
`percentage
`
`the
`
`in
`
`of
`
`fault
`
`in
`
`that
`
`context?
`
`MR.
`
`DINUNZIO:.
`
`So
`
`I
`
`guess
`
`I was
`
`getting
`
`to
`
`that.
`
`In
`
`terms
`
`of
`
`the
`
`Bigelow
`
`case,
`
`it
`
`explains
`
`what
`
`you
`
`need
`
`in
`
`order
`
`to
`
`put
`
`the
`
`issue
`
`before
`
`the
`
`which
`
`is
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`jury,
`
`identification
`
`of
`
`the
`
`settling
`
`tortfeasor's
`
`product
`
`and
`
`some
`
`proof
`
`of
`
`the
`
`plaintiff's
`
`exposure
`
`THE
`
`COURT:
`
`Do
`
`you
`
`need
`
`to
`
`to
`
`that
`
`product.
`
`respond?
`
`MR.
`
`KRAMER:
`
`I'll
`
`respond
`
`insofar
`
`as,
`
`Judge,
`
`in
`
`the
`
`Bigelow
`
`case,
`
`what
`
`the
`
`Court
`
`states
`
`--
`
`what
`
`Justice
`
`Freedman
`
`states
`
`is,
`
`over
`
`and
`
`over
`
`again,
`
`Celotex,
`
`which
`
`is
`
`the
`
`defendant
`
`had
`
`the
`
`burden
`
`of
`
`the
`
`there,
`
`establishing
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`liability
`
`of
`
`the
`
`settled
`
`defendants.
`
`And
`
`part
`
`and
`
`parcel
`
`of
`
`that
`
`is
`
`the
`
`burden
`
`that
`
`the
`
`plaintiffs
`
`themselves
`
`have
`
`to
`
`advance,
`
`which
`
`is
`
`showinga--
`
`ID'ing
`
`a
`
`product,
`
`showing
`
`exposure,
`
`showing
`
`causation,
`
`showing
`
`negligence.
`
`All
`
`the
`
`same
`
`elements
`
`would
`
`have
`
`to
`
`be met.
`
`It's
`
`not
`
`as
`
`simple
`
`as
`
`naming
`
`a
`
`party
`
`and
`
`showing
`
`the
`
`possibi.lity
`
`of
`
`the
`
`exposure.
`
`14
`
`of
`
`40
`
`

`

`FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 02/20/2018 11:01 PM
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 964
`
`INDEX NO. 190219/2016
`
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/20/2018
`
`FILED:
`NYSCEF
`
`NEW YORK
`937
`DOC.
`NO.
`
`FILED:
`NYSCEF
`
`NEW YORK
`DOC. NO.
`925
`
`COUNTY
`
`CLERK
`
`01/13/2018
`
`01:36
`
`AM|
`
`COUNTY
`
`CLERK
`
`12/15/2017
`
`03:19
`
`PM)
`
`Proceedings
`
`INDEX
`
`NO.
`
`190219/2016
`
`RECEIVED
`
`NYSCEF:
`
`RECEIVED
`
`NYSCEF:
`
`01/13/2018
`™"*°¹°
`12/15/2017
`
`14
`
`j
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`This
`
`legal
`
`concept
`
`is
`
`echoed
`
`throughout
`
`the
`
`case
`
`law
`
`on
`
`the
`
`subject,
`
`most
`
`notably
`
`in
`
`the
`
`Whalen
`
`case,
`
`which
`
`defendant
`
`cites
`
`to
`
`advance
`
`their
`
`own
`
`argument.
`
`The
`
`Court
`
`in
`
`Whalen
`
`acknowledges
`
`the
`
`fact
`
`that,
`
`in
`
`order
`
`to
`
`meet
`
`one
`
`of
`
`the
`
`prongs
`
`of
`
`the
`
`GOL,
`
`you
`
`either
`
`have
`
`to
`
`prove
`
`a
`
`party's
`
`share
`
`of
`
`the
`
`fault,
`
`and
`
`if
`
`that's
`
`not
`
`done,
`
`there's
`
`other.
`
`but
`
`there
`
`is
`
`an
`
`offset;
`
`based
`
`on
`
`settlements,
`
`then
`
`an
`
`offset
`
`based
`
`there.
`
`But
`
`it
`
`has
`
`to
`
`be
`
`one
`
`or
`
`the
`
`There
`
`has
`
`to
`
`be
`
`a.
`
`showing
`
`of
`
`fault.
`
`It's
`
`inherent
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`in
`
`the
`
`statute.
`
`.
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`THE
`
`COURT:
`
`Okay.
`
`.Well,.
`
`I
`
`put
`
`the
`
`issue
`
`out
`
`there.
`
`A basis
`
`to
`
`set
`
`aside
`
`the
`
`verdict
`
`grounded
`
`on
`
`your
`
`interpretation
`
`of
`
`GOL
`
`15-108sis
`
`denied.
`
`.
`
`I
`
`need
`
`to
`
`go
`
`back
`
`to
`
`the
`
`interrogatories.
`
`There
`
`was
`
`a
`
`great
`
`deal
`
`of
`
`back
`
`and
`
`forth
`
`on
`
`this
`
`record
`
`concerning
`
`what
`
`may
`
`have
`
`been
`
`a
`
`stipulation
`
`between
`
`parties
`
`to
`
`allow
`
`certain
`
`interrogatory
`
`answers
`
`to
`
`be
`
`the
`
`read
`
`to
`
`the
`
`jury
`
`on
`
`behalf
`
`of
`
`various
`
`entities
`
`or
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`tortfeasors
`
`sheet.
`
`addressing
`
`apparently
`
`so
`
`as
`
`to
`
`get'
`get
`
`those
`
`entities
`
`on
`
`the
`
`verdict
`
`Evidently,
`
`plaintiff
`
`was
`
`concerned
`
`that
`
`they
`
`were
`
`a
`
`limited
`
`number
`
`of
`
`interrogatories
`
`that
`
`expanded
`
`in
`
`the
`
`wee
`
`hours
`
`of
`
`that
`
`morning
`
`and
`
`ruled
`
`they
`
`took
`
`issue
`
`with
`
`that.
`
`And
`
`I
`
`think
`
`I
`
`basically
`
`15
`
`of
`
`40
`
`

`

`FILED: NEW YORK COUNTY CLERK 02/20/2018 11:01 PM
`NYSCEF DOC. NO. 964
`
`INDEX NO. 190219/2016
`
`RECEIVED NYSCEF: 02/20/2018
`
`FILED:
`NYSCEF
`
`NEW YORK
`937
`DOC.
`NO.
`
`|FILED:
`NYSCEF
`
`NEW YORK
`DOC. NO.
`925
`
`COUNTY
`
`CLERK
`
`01/13/2018
`
`01:36
`
`AM
`
`COUNTY
`
`CLERK
`
`12/.15/2017
`.15
`
`03:19
`
`PM
`
`INDEX
`
`NO.
`
`190219/2016
`
`RECEIVED
`
`NYSCEF:
`
`01/13/2010
`
`1NIEx
`
`NO.
`
`19U219/
`
`U1b
`
`RECEIVED
`
`NYSCEF:
`
`12/15/2017
`
`.
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`Proceedings
`
`15
`
`against
`
`the
`
`plaintiffs
`
`in.
`
`saying
`
`"No.
`
`No
`
`foul.
`
`No
`
`real
`
`surprise
`
`there.
`
`You
`
`have
`
`the
`
`ability
`
`to
`
`present
`
`to
`
`this
`
`jury
`
`any
`
`and
`
`all
`
`interrogatories
`
`that
`
`meet
`
`certain
`
`criteria."
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`evidentiary
`
`.
`
`I
`
`know
`
`there
`
`was
`
`a
`
`discussion
`
`of
`
`certain
`
`core
`
`answers
`
`to
`
`certain
`
`questions,
`
`identification
`
`of
`
`the
`
`product,
`
`that
`
`point.
`
`it
`
`.
`
`.
`
`contained
`
`asbestos.
`
`I
`
`don't
`
`want
`
`to
`
`belabor
`
`that
`
`And
`
`I
`
`believe
`
`we
`
`also
`
`discussed
`
`how
`
`the
`
`use
`
`of
`
`10
`
`interrogatories
`
`made
`
`sense
`
`in
`
`light
`
`of
`
`the
`
`current
`
`CMO and
`
`I
`
`been
`
`lifted
`
`or
`
`vacated
`
`at
`
`the
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`believe
`
`that
`
`the
`
`stay.
`
`had
`
`time
`
`--
`
`was
`
`it
`
`vacated
`
`at
`
`the
`
`time?
`
`MR.
`
`DINUNZIO:
`
`It
`
`was
`
`not
`
`--
`
`MR.
`
`KRAMER:
`
`The
`
`Appellate
`
`Division,
`
`I
`
`believe,
`
`ruled
`
`during
`
`the
`
`course
`
`of
`
`trial
`
`that
`
`the
`
`new
`
`CMO could
`
`go
`
`forward,
`
`but
`
`we
`
`were
`
`bound
`
`by
`
`the
`
`prior
`
`CMO at
`
`the
`
`time.
`
`MR.
`
`DINUNZIO:
`
`It
`
`was
`
`actually
`
`about
`
`a month
`
`after
`
`the
`
`First
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`the
`
`trial.
`
`I
`
`believe
`
`the
`
`stay
`
`was
`
`vacated
`
`by
`
`Department
`
`on
`
`or
`
`about
`
`September
`
`19th.
`
`MR.
`
`KRAMER:
`
`That
`
`might
`
`be
`
`true.
`
`THE
`
`COURT:
`
`Then
`
`I
`
`wasn't
`
`sure.
`
`MR.
`
`KRAMER:
`
`My main
`
`point
`
`being
`
`we
`
`were
`
`bound
`
`by
`
`the
`
`first
`
`CMO.
`
`THE
`
`COURT:
`
`Fair
`
`enough.
`
`MR.
`
`DINUNZIO:
`
`I
`
`think
`
`you
`
`did
`
`allude
`
`to
`
`it,
`
`your
`
`16
`
`of
`
`40
`
`