IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
`ALLEGHENY COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
`
`CIVIL DIVISION – ASBESTOS
`Case No.: GD 20-003392
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`MOTION FOR SUMMARY
`JUDGMENT AND BRIEF IN SUPPORT
`
`
`
`Filed on behalf of Defendant,
`Flowserve U.S., Inc., and its Byron Jackson
`Pump Division, (incorrectly named herein;
`correct naming as follows: BW/IP, Inc. and
`its wholly-owned subsidiaries)
`
`Counsel of Record for this Party:
`Segal McCambridge Singer & Mahoney
`1818 Market Street – Suite 1700
`Philadelphia, PA 19103
`(215) 972-8015
`
`Jordan B. Rosenberg, Esquire
`Attorney ID No.: 317253
`
`
`:
`:
`
`::::::::::::::
`
`::::::::::
`
`Gary Tyrone Stevens,
`
`v.
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`Flowserve U.S., Inc., and its Byron Jackson
`Pump Division, (incorrectly named herein;
`correct naming as follows: BW/IP, Inc. and
`its wholly-owned subsidiaries), et al.
`
` Defendants.
`
`

`

`IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF
`ALLLEGHENY COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA
`
`COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
`OF ALLEGHENY COUNTY
`
`CIVIL ACTION – ASBESTOS
`
`Case No.: GD 20-003392
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`::::::::::::
`
`Gary Tyrone Stevens,
`
`v.
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`Flowserve U.S., Inc., and its Byron Jackson
`Pump Division, (incorrectly named herein;
`correct naming as follows: BW/IP, Inc. and its
`wholly-owned subsidiaries), et al.
`
` Defendants.
`
`ORDER
`
`AND NOW, to-wit, this day of , 2021 upon consideration of the Motion
`
`for Summary Judgment and Memorandum of Law submitted on behalf of Flowserve U.S., Inc.,
`
`and its Byron Jackson Pump Division, (incorrectly named herein; correct naming as follows:
`
`BW/IP, Inc. and its wholly-owned subsidiaries), it is hereby, ORDERED ADJUDGED AND
`
`DECREED that said motion is granted and Plaintiffs’ cause of action against this Defendant as
`
`well as any and all crossclaims are dismissed with prejudice.
`
`______________________________________
`
`J.
`
`

`

`SEGAL McCAMBRIDGE SINGER & MAHONEY
`Jordan B. Rosenberg, Esquire
`jrosenberg@smsm.com
`
`Identification No: 317253
`1818 Market Street, Suite 1700
`Philadelphia, PA 19103
`(215) 972-8015
`
`Attorney for Defendant,
`BW/IP, Inc.
`
`COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
`OF ALLEGHENY COUNTY
`
`CIVIL ACTION – ASBESTOS
`
`Case No.: GD 20-003392
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`::::::::::::
`
`Gary Tyrone Stevens,
`
`v.
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`Flowserve U.S., Inc., and its Byron Jackson
`Pump Division, (incorrectly named herein;
`correct naming as follows: BW/IP, Inc. and its
`wholly-owned subsidiaries), et al.
`
` Defendants.
`
`MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND MEMORANDUM OF LAW
`
`AND NOW comes Defendant, Flowserve U.S., Inc., and its Byron Jackson Pump Division,
`
`(incorrectly named herein; correct naming as follows: BW/IP, Inc. and its wholly-owned
`
`subsidiaries), (“BW/IP”), by and through its counsel, Segal McCambridge Singer & Mahoney, and
`
`files the within Motion for Summary Judgment and Memorandum of Law of which the following
`
`is a statement:
`
`1.
`
`Plaintiffs commenced this action by filing a Complaint alleging personal injuries to
`
`husband plaintiff as the result of husband plaintiff’s alleged exposure to asbestos-containing
`
`products manufactured, produced and/or supplied by various defendants.
`
`2.
`
`3.
`
`BW/IP is alleged to be responsible for Byron Jackson pumps.
`
`At his deposition, husband plaintiff failed to identify Byron Jackson as a product
`
`he worked with or around.
`
`4.
`
`No other witness has been produced to show that husband plaintiff worked with or
`
`was present while another person worked with an asbestos-containing product for which
`
`defendant BW/IP is responsible.
`
`

`

`5.
`
`Plaintiffs’ failure to offer evidence establishing husband plaintiff’s exposure to
`
`asbestos fiber from an asbestos-containing product for which BW/IP is responsible entitles it to
`
`judgment as a matter of law.
`
`WHEREFORE, Defendant BW/IP respectfully requests this Honorable Court to grant its
`
`Motion for Summary Judgment as to Plaintiffs’ claims and any cross-claims with prejudice.
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`Segal McCambridge Singer & Mahoney
`
` By: Jordan Rosenberg
` Jordan B. Rosenberg, Esquire
` Attorney for Defendant, BW/IP, Inc.
`
`

`

`SEGAL McCAMBRIDGE SINGER & MAHONEY
`Jordan B. Rosenberg, Esquire
`Identification No: 317253
`
`1818 Market Street, Suite 1700
`Philadelphia, PA 19103
`(215) 972-8015
`
`Attorney for Defendant,
`BW/IP, Inc.
`
`COURT OF COMMON PLEAS
`OF ALLEGHENY COUNTY
`
`CIVIL ACTION – ASBESTOS
`
`Case No.: GD 20-003392
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`::::::::::::
`
`Gary Tyrone Stevens,
`
`v.
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`Flowserve U.S., Inc., and its Byron Jackson
`Pump Division, (incorrectly named herein;
`correct naming as follows: BW/IP, Inc. and its
`wholly-owned subsidiaries), et al.
`
` Defendants.
`
`MEMORANDUM OF LAW
`
`I.
`
`FACTS
`
`This action was commenced by filing a Complaint alleging personal injuries to husband
`
`plaintiff as the result of husband plaintiff’s alleged exposure to asbestos-containing products
`
`manufactured, produced and/or supplied by various defendants. BW/IP is alleged to be responsible
`
`for Byron Jackson pumps. Husband plaintiff was deposed but failed to identify Byron Jackson as
`
`a product he worked with or around at his deposition. Plaintiffs have produced no witnesses to
`
`show that husband plaintiff worked with or around an asbestos-containing product for which
`
`BW/IP is responsible.
`
`II. LEGAL ARGUMENT
`
`In order for the plaintiffs to sustain their cause of action against BW/IP they must prove
`
`that a BW/IP product was the cause in fact and the proximate cause of plaintiff’s alleged injuries.
`
`Carpenter v. Koehring Co., 391 F. Supp. 206 (E.D. Pa. 1975), aff'd w/o opinion, 527 F.2d 644 (3d
`
`Cir. 1976). It is an essential element of the plaintiffs’ case in chief to show that husband plaintiff’s
`
`alleged injuries were caused by a product of a particular manufacturer or supplier. Eckenrod v.
`
`

`

`GAF Corp., 375 Pa. Super. 187, 544 A.2d 50, 53 (1988).
`
`In Eckenrod, supra, the plaintiff contended that her decedent contracted a fatal malady and
`
`died as a result of exposure to asbestos products at the decedent's workplace. Plaintiff based her
`
`allegations on requisition forms and deposition testimony to establish such "product nexus." The
`
`trial court granted summary judgment in favor of all defendants, based on the plaintiff's inability
`
`to provide specific factual evidence regarding product nexus. The appellate court affirmed the
`
`summary judgment and stated in pertinent part, as follows:
`
`In order for liability to attach in a products liability action, plaintiff
`must establish that the injuries were caused by a product of the
`particular manufacturer or supplier... Accordingly, in order for a
`plaintiff to defeat a motion for summary judgment, a plaintiff must
`present evidence to show that he inhaled asbestos fibers shed by the
`specific manufacturer's product...Summary judgment is proper when
`the plaintiff has failed to establish that the defendants' products were
`the cause of plaintiff's injuries. Id. 544 A. 2d at 52 (emphasis added).
`
`The Eckenrod Court went on to further hold that exposure to a product must be regular and
`
`frequent before the product can be judged to be a cause of a worker's injuries. Id. 544 A.2d at 53.
`
`Also See Samarin v. GAF Corporation, 391 Pa. Super. 340, 571 A.2d 398 (1990).
`
`Summary judgment is appropriate where there is no genuine issue of material fact or when
`
`the party who bears the burden of proof at trial has failed to produce evidence of facts essential to
`
`the cause of action and when the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.
`
`Pennsylvania Rule of Civil Procedure 1035.2. As demonstrated above, there is absolutely no
`
`evidence that husband plaintiff worked with or was present while another person worked with an
`
`asbestos-containing product for which BW/IP is responsible. Thus, as a matter of law, husband
`
`plaintiff’s alleged injuries were not caused by a BW/IP product. Therefore, under Eckenrod,
`
`BW/IP’s Motion for Summary Judgment must be granted.
`
`

`

`III. CONCLUSION
`
`BW/IP’s Motion for Summary Judgment should be granted.
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`Segal McCambridge Singer & Mahoney
`
` By: Jordan Rosenberg
` Jordan B. Rosenberg, Esquire
` Attorney for Defendant, BW/IP, Inc.
`
`

`

`VERIFICATION
`
`I hereby verify that I am authorized to make this verification and that the statements made
`
`in the foregoing Motion for Summary Judgment are true and correct to the best of my knowledge
`
`and belief. The undersigned understands that the statements herein are made subject to the
`
`penalties of 18 Pa. C.S. §4904 relating to unsworn falsification to authorities.
`
`Jordan Rosenberg
` Jordan B. Rosenberg, Esquire
`
`

`

`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`I hereby certify that on this 13th day of September, 2021, I electronically filed this Motion
`
`for Summary Judgment on behalf of BW/IP, Inc. with the Prothonotary using The Allegheny
`
`Courts Electronic Filing System which will send notification of such filing to counsel for plaintiffs.
`
`I have also notified counsel for plaintiffs and all defense counsel of this filing via electronic mail.
`
`Jordan Rosenberg
` Jordan B. Rosenberg, Esquire
`
`