Document 2RjYmxk7pKzgENreQDy9By196

COPY CAUSE NO. 2000-05-1962-C FILEDJZL t.Ns____ O'CLOCK___ LL M AURORA DE LA GARZA DIST. CLERK jan i e im KT COHKT J W&fto:0j ROBERT HENRY VILLARREAL, Individually and as Personal Representative of the Heirs and Estate of JOHN HENRY VILLARREAL Plaintiffs. vs. GAF CORPORATION HOLDINGS. INC.). ET AL. Defendants. IN T corqro CAMERON C 197TM JUDICIAL DISTRICT DEFENDANTS' MOTION TO BIFURCATE COME NOW. Dana Corporation. Quigley Company. Inc.. T&N LTD (f/k/a T&N pic and t. Turner & Newell pic). Union Carbide Corporation f/k/a Union Carbide Chemicals and Plastics. Inc., and United States Gypsum Company, (hereinafter "Defendants"). Defendants in the above-referenced cause, hereby request the court to bifurcate the determination of the amount of punitive damages, if anv. from the trial of all other issues, and in support thereof show: I. This is an action by Plaintiffs for damages based upon alleged exposure to asbestos products. In addition to actual damages. Plaintiffs seek an award of punitive damages against the Defendants. II. Defendants, in good faith, believe it would be unfairly prejudicial to allow evidence relevant only to the amount of punitive damages to be considered by the jury along with other issues in this matter. According to the Texas Supreme Court in Transportation Ins. Co. v. Moriel, S79 S.W.2d 10 (Tex. 1994). "evidence of a defendant's net worth, which is generally relevant only to the amount of punitive damages, by highlighting the relative wealth of a defendant, has a verv real potential for n mi i tr ikw prejudicing the |ur\'s determination of other disputed issues in a tort case." Id. at 30. Thus, if presented with a timely motion, the tnal court should bifurcate the determination of the amount of punitive damages from the remaining issues. Id. Ill In Moricl. the Texas Supreme Court provided that the jury should first hear evidence relevant to liability for actual damages and liability for punitive damages, and then return findings on those issues. The same jury should then be presented with evidence of a defendant's net worth, and any other evidence relevant to the amount of punitive damages, only if it answered the punitive damage liability question in the plaintiffs favor. Id. ? '.CCPoCumcron \ iliam-jl. JonnvDetendanLs Motion to Biluraatd JcX WHEREFORE. Defendants respectful!) request that the court order a bifurcation of the determination of the amount of punitive damages from the remaining issues in this matter, and make such other orders as the court deems fair and just. Respectfully submitted, POWERS & FROST, L.L.P. Cj (IU,k______ James H. Powers Texas State Bar No. 16217400 Sharia J. Frost Texas State Bar No. 07491100 Gwendolyn S. Frost Texas State Bar No. 07488750 2600 Two Houston Center 909 Fannin Houston. Texas 77010 Telephone: (713) 767-1555 Facsimile: (713) 767-1799 ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANTS CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 1 hereby certify that a true and correct of Defendants' Motion to Bifurcate has been forwarded to Plaintiffs' counsel of record either by first class mail, return receipt requested, delivery or facsimile on this the f?1- day of _____________. 2001. y,vW/\' /Ck _^. F CCR-Cameron'A illjnea!, Johrr.DefenaanLs Motion to Bn'urcaic doc