Document 2jBZLLv9YZ8jR2J5q8xGkJ6bL

FILE NAME: Insulators Workers' Comp Claims (IWC) DATE: 1961 DOC#: IWC073 DOCUMENT DESCRIPTION: Claimant - Faciane BACIANE SUMMARY I. Lawsuit filed by widow of an industrial insulator, not a miner or textile worker, claiming that her husband's death was due to asbestosis. II. Suit was filed in 1960 in Baton Pouge, Louisiana. On March 15, 1961, a supplemental and amended petition was filed, adding as defendants nine of the asbestos companies here in this courtroom. III. The certified court records show that the following defendants here received actual notice of the widow's contentions, through receiving legal documents, including the supplemental and amended petition: The Ruberoid Gcmpany, (now OAF, represented here by Mr. John Tucker); Nioolet Industries, Inc., (represented here by Mr. Jack Urouhart); Baldwin-Ehrit-Hill, Inc., now Keene Corporation, (represented here by Mr. 0. J. Weber); Union Asbestos and Rubber Ccmpanv, (now UNARCC); Philip Carey Manufacturing Company, (now Celotex Corporation, represented here by Mr. Lipscomb Norvell): Armstrong Contracting & Supply Corporation, (at the time a wholly-owned subsidiary of Armstrong World Industries, Inc., represented here by Mr. Steven Rice); JohnsManville Products Corporation and Johns-Manville Sales Corporation, (represented here bv Mr. John Bissell)r Eagle-Picher Conpany, Inc., (now Fagle-Picher Industries, represented here by Mr. Frank Bean); ^ittsburg-Coming Corporation, (represented here by Mr. Cordon Pate); and Keasby & Mattison Ccmpanv, (now Nioolet, Ino., again represented here by Mr. Jack Urctuhart) . IV. The supplemental and amended petition, in paragraph 37, alleged that those defendants were negligent in failing to warn of the inherent darners in insulation products; in assuring the deceased insulator that there were no dangers in those products; and in manufacturing those products with the use of dangerous and defective materials. V. In August, 1963, Ruberoid (GAF), Nicolet, and Baldwin-Ehrit-Hill, (Keene), asked the widow sane written questions, called interrogatories. Interrogatory No. 3 asked the widow to "(s)pecify the 'dangers inherent in the products manufactured"' by those three defendants. The widow's answer was as follows: "Insulating materials and asbestos fibers will cause a tissue reaction in the lungs." VI. The lawsuit was eventually dismissed as against all but one of the defendants present here on the ground that, her husband being dead, the widow could not identify specifically which products the dead man had used and been exposed to. One defendant, Armstrong, entered into a settlorient with the widow, along with three other defendants, not here today. KES. GLADYS PACIAU3 vs. TEE TRAVELERS ISSUSASCE CC1EFA3Y n o .__ 7 7 c o * 19th Judicial District Court PARISH OF EAST BATON ROUGE STATE OF LOUISIANA t o The Buberoid Company, a corporation domiciled in Net? York C i t y . York, doing business in the State of Louisiana. GREETING: Original and Supplenental and Amended You are hereby summoned to comply with the demand contained in the^>etitionSof the plaintiff in the above entitled and numbered cause, 9 duly certifie^ ijp y g of w hich^ ^ hereto * attached and to be herew ith-served, or file your answer or other pleading: in the office o f the Clerk of the 19th Judicial D istrict Court, for said Parish, at the City of Baton Rouge, within fifteen (15) days after service hereof. Your failure to comply herewith w ill subject you to the penalty o f entry of default judgm ent against you. W itness the Honorable -Judges of our said Court, at Baton Rouge, Louisiana, this day of & * r c h ________________ f 13=1 . . 2 0 tfc (sgd) Senle L, Pair:eg_____ Deputy Clerk of Said Court TRUE COPY this March 2Gth, 1961 Deputy Clerk of Court S'a . After due and deligent search and inquiry there could not be no. Agent or officer of the Corporation found In the Parish of East Baton Rouge, Louisiana for service of= process therefore, this process is being returned to the Clerk of the 19th Judicial District Court this 23rd day of March, 1961 unserved. Bryan Clemmons, Sheriff East Baton Rouge. Parish, La, tS ct , OV. CLERK OF COUR-: S tA B IS FCXA33 vs. n o . 77CC 19th Judicial D istrict Court PARISH OP EAST BATON ROUGE STATE OF LOUISIANA t o Nicolet Industries, lac t a corporation domiciled at Floras- Park New Jersey, doing business in the State of Louisiana* GREETING: You are hereby summoned to comply w ith th plaintiff in the above entitled and numbered cause, attached and to be herew ith-served, or file your answer or other pleading in the office of the Clerk of the 19th Judicial D istrict Court, for said Parish, at the City o f Baton Rouge, within fifteen (15) days after service hereof. Your failure to comply herewith w ill subject you to the penalty of entry of default judgment against you. W itness the Honorable Judges of our said Court, at Baton Rouge, Louisiana, this ^ day of , ll-- (sgd) F e n i 'L* Paftmer Deputy Clerk of Said Court A THJE COPY this Marh.2 0 t h , 1961 Deputy Clerk of Court due and deligent search and Inquiry S*r cou'ld not be no Agent or Officer of the Corporation found in the Parish of If,* iH e S F II-' W ftH 23 ^ 6 t OY, clerk MSS. GLADYS FACIAHE THE TBAVT.TiERS IHSURAITCE COMPANY NO. 77rQQ^ 19th Judicial D istrict Court PARISH OF EAST BATON ROUGE STATE OF LOUISIANA TO__ Baldwin-Ehret-Hill, Inc. T a corporation domig-n gd at , Hew Jersey doing business in the State of Louisian-_________ GREETING: Original and Supplemental and Amended You are hereby summoned to comply with the demand contained in the TietitionSof the COT516S SL27S plaintiff in the above entitled and numbered cause, 9 duly certified eegy ot which s ? hereto A A attached and to be herew ith-served, or file your answer or other pleading in th e office of the ^ Clerk of the 19th Judicial D istrict- Court, for said Parish, at the City o f Baton Rouge, within \ . P , fifteen (15) days after service-hereof. Your failure to comply herewith w ill subject you to the penalty of entry o f default judgment against you. W itness the Honorable'Judges of our said Court, at Baton Rouge, Louisiana, this. 20th day of M a rck _____________ , 19_ L . (sgd) Nenie L Palmer ______ . Deputy Clerk of Said Court A TRUE COPT this Marsh 20th, 1 9 6 1 ^ Deputy Clerk of Court _. After due and deligent search and Inquir there could not he no Agent or officer o. the Corporation found in the Parish of E. Baton Rouge, Louisiana for service of process, theref-ore, this- process is bein returned to the Clerk of the 19th Juaici District Court this 23rd day of March, 1961, unserved. _j Deputy Sheriff MAR 2 3 1961 HRS. GLADYS FACIAHE VS. THS TRAVELERS INSURANCE COMPANY NO___ 7 7 .0 0 4 19th Judicial D istrict Court PARISH OF EAST BATON ROUGE STATE OF LOUISIANA TO-- ghipn, Asbestos and Rubber Company* a corporation existing tinder the laws or the State of Illinois, doing business in the State of Louisiana* aeitieeB ittriw tieeiejfc GREETING: original and supplemental and amended You are hereby summoned to comply w ith the demand contained in the etitionsof the ... / copies of which are plaintiff in the above entitled and numbered cause, ac duly certified hereto attached and to be herewith served, or file your answer or other pleading in the office of the Clerk o f the 19th Judicial D istrict Court, for said Parish, at the City o f Baton Rouge, within fifteen (15) days after service- hereof. Your failure to comply herewith w ill subject you to the penalty o f entry of default judgment against you. W itness the Honorable Judges o f our said Court, at Baton Rouge, Louisiana, this day of M a7_______________ j ig 6 2 0CVCI2 LU 15th (sgd.) Nenie L. Palmer Deputy Clerk of Said Court A TRUE COPY This_May 15th. 1962 Dy. Clerk of Court ^ : r r : : r r aott,nqu"*- -- . U<DPoonn whom * , * ortze to reprPesKenent t- 1 thomfem, return j e Papers fo court not Srvd. p ff MiviAMY '' - 1v0>Qw? / ( KBS GIAPYS F A C I A L VS. ^L- -lEATT-IZEC UTOJEAITCS COMPANY n o . 77,004 19th Judicial District Court PARISH OF EAST BATON ROUGE STATE OF LOUISIANA t o Philip Carey Manufacturing Company, a corporation domiciled at Cincxnnati, d u o * througii C* T Corporation System, agent for service of p r o c e s s * __________________________________ flu tti {f!J* GREETING: Original and Supplemental and Amended You are hereby summoned to comply with the demand contained in the^petitionsof the plaintiff in the above entitled and numbered cause, m duly certified S jfc o :? which S f e r e t o * * attached and to be herewith served, or file your answer or other pleading in the office of the Clerk of the 19th Judicial D istrict Court, for said Parish, at the City of Baton Rouge, within fifteen (15) days after service hereof. Your failure to comply herewith w ill subject you to the penalty of entry of default judgment against you. W itness the Honorable Judges of our said Court, at Baton Rouge, Louisiana, fhi -'Svfr day of _______________, 1 9 _ ^ _ , r. </ Deputy Clerk of Said Court R E C E IV I: / / v ffiC. c-i a d y s f a g i a n e vs. THE TRA7IXEBS EKSUIiAHCE CG. mo 7 7 ,0 0 19th Judicial District Court PARISH OF EAST BATON ROUGE STATE OF LOUISIANA Armstrong Contracting & Supply Corporation, & foreign corporation domiciled at Ailnington, Delaware, through C. . Corporation tystec, agents for service of process* GREETING* Original and Supplemental and Amended You are hereby summoned to comply with the demand contained in the petitioi?of the m copies are plaintiff in the above entitled and numbered cause, a duly certified of which 5? hereto attached and to be herewith served, or file your answer or other pleading in the office of the Clerk of the 19th Judicial D istrict Court, for said Parish, at the City of Baton Rouge, within fifteen (15) days after service hereof. Your failure to comply herewith w ill subject you to the penalty of entry of default judgment against you. W itness the Honorable Judges of our said Court, at Baton Rouge, Louisiana, t h i s _ _ _ _ ISarch 61 day of ___________________________ , 19____ Deputy Clerk of Said Court It REU''. la " i v il HH IW S 01 ! !(;! E E S . GLADYS FAC LAKE VS. THE TRAVELERS IKSUFJUCE COMPART 7 7 fc m NO, 19th Judicial District Court PARISH OF EAST BATON ROUGE STATE OF LOUISIANA Johns-Manville Products Corporation, a corporation domiciled in Hew lork City, Re York, through H* II* Robinson, agent icr servie of process. GREETING: ; Original and Supplemental and Amended You are hereby summoned to comply with the demand contained in th e^ petitioi of the copies are plaintiff in the above entitled and numbered cause, a duly certified jSopy of which 5 hereto attached and to be herewith served, or file your answer or other pleading in the office of the Clerk of the 19th Judicial D istrict Court, for said Parish, at the City of Baton Rouge, within fifteen (15) days after service hereof. Your failure to comply herewith will subject you to the penalty of entry of default judgment against you. W itness the Honorable Judges of our said Court, at Baton Rouge, Louisiana, this. Sardi day of 111 ' 1 61 I 19 2 0 th Deputy Clerk of Said Court ( \s H sNi < ^ % Ob the^LZjIay af 19-ilZserved 3 C'J^jr C On person^ ? J i fy-* Sheriff's Fees Eeturned aaate day ^ a % T $ Shenff of Orleans Parish 4 w <***-yTXt*x1*'*'. .:.v X > 8 8 vs. '-'* * . ir.+-.~+-9`r ,l -> ' I- \+\ ST NO. 7? 00 19th Judicial District Court PARISH OF EAST BATON ROUGE STATE OF LOUISIANA to Johna-Nanville Cales Corporation a corporation domiciled in New York City, New York, through E* M* Robinson, agent for service of process* GREETING: r iiia & 2 i and n sn s You are hereby summoned to comply with the demand contained in the petition-of the ^,es sre plaintiff in the above entitled and numbered cause, 9 duly certified !8pT of which SP hereto attached and to be herewith served, or file your answer or other pleading in the office of the Clerk of the 19th Judicial D istrict Court, for said Parish, at the City of Baton Rouge, within fifteen (15) days after service hereof. Your failure to comply herewith w ill subject you to the penalty of entry of default judgment against you. W itness the Honorable Judges of our said Court, at Baton Rouge, Louisiana, this. M eyeh X day of ___________________________ , 19____ Deputy Clerk of Said Court N J ' ? . , A P Z sZ ^ t'tZ *18 On tht^-Jiay garrea a co?? o! t'-.C' Sheriffs Fee D ew y.Sher o Orleans Parisi ^ ! Y l^ t) ; O ^ o r - c e - <*  S S . GLADYS FACIAHE VS. -...V L IH CU L-lilCE CC2PJO T NO 77 00 19th Judicial District Court PARISH OF EAST BATON ROUGE STATE OF LOUISIANA to Eagle richer Company, lac., a corporation domiciled at Cincinnati, Ohio, "through. Charles E* Dunbar, Jr*, Cumber D. Larks, Jr, Louis B Clavegie and Ashton Phelps, agents for service o process 23S3tt@ 35K S2$2ans GREETING: . Cri-ginnl and Supplemental /ur.ended You are hereby summoned to comply with the demand contained in th e^ etition S jf the plaintiff in the above entitled and numbered cause, 9 duly certified of* which hereto * * attached and to be herewith served, or file your answer or other pleading in the office of the Clerk of the 19th Judicial D istrict Court, for said Parish, at the City of Baton Rouge, within fifteen (15) days after service hereof. Your failure to comply herewith will subject you to the penalty of entry of default judgment against you. W itness the Honorable Judges of 6i$? said Court, at Baton Rouge, Louisiana, this day of _____If o r c h ______ - __ 19 2 0 t? ll Deputy Clerk of Said Court N V On tfa s= L Z .v of 4 /i ervs z. ce * ^ p ic j g s a ^ -- ._ .. *SS1'I0'-2D -r ^ r I* I~ TAllAtTaJiIfjSf!i NOi_ 7 7 2o y L_ _ . vs. 19th Judicial District Court "*- *,- ti - T'V PARISH OF EAST BATON ROUGE STATE OF LOUISIANA t o Pittsburg Corning Corporation, a corporation domiciled at Pittsburg, Pennsylvania, through C. T. Corporation System, agents for service of process__________________________________________ ___ __ __ GREETING: C rim in a l and ..up;--2cr.ent.il nni t e n d e d You are hereby summoned to comply with the demand contained in the^etition^D f the e y r ie s *rs plaintiff in the above entitled and numbered cause, Sr duly certified <55$$* of which hereto attached and to be herewith served, or file your answer or other pleading in the office of the Clerk of the 19th Judicial D istrict Court, for said Parish, at the City of Baton Rouge, within fifteen (15) days after service hereof. Your failure to comply herewith w ill subject you to the penalty of entry of default judgm ent-against you. W itness the Honorable Judges of our said Court, at Baton Rouge, Louisiana, th is. day of S&reh ., 19 6 1 20th (sgd) Renie L Palmer Deputy Clerk of Said Court A THIS COFY this March) 20tfc, 1961 Ti. H I o n V r\*P Deputy Sheriff. V V.---- c\ v y / L. 0 TB' FACIAKE VS. :cr c c :::-a :ty n o . 7 7 ,0 0 __________ 19th Judicial District Court PARISH OF EAST BATON ROUGE STATE OF LOUISIANA Tn ^easbj &. l-attison Conpay/, a corporation dosici] ed at_______ abler, Pennsylvania, doing; business in the L'tate of louislana. y esia a g iff^ g fa ^ P fflfth. GREETING: ori~inal ::nd supple, ental and aa^nded You are hereby summoned to comply with the demand contained in the petitioffi of the copies are plaintiff in the above entitled and numbered cause, ft duly certified Wpy=of A whichS*if hereto attached and to be herewith served, or file your answer or other pleading in the office of the Clerk of the 19th Judicial D istrict Court, for said Parish, at the City of Baton Rouge,"within fifteen (15) days after service hereof. Your failure to comply herewith w ill subject you to the penalty of entry of default judgment against you. W itness the Honorable Judges of our said Court, at Baton Rouge, Louisiana, this- day of larch 19. 61 23rd Deputy Clerk of Said Court ^ 7 'MRS. GLADYS FACIANE I , t 1 THE jj l| TRAVELERS INSURANCE COMPANY MOTION NUMBER 77,004 DIVISION " C" 19TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT PARISH OF EAST BATON ROUGE STATE OF LOUISIANA On motion o f H. A,va Brum field, attorney fo r p l a i n t i f f herein, and on suggesting to the Court that the fo llo w in g named defendants engaged in business a c t iv it ie s in the State of Lo u isia n a , have fa ile d to appoint an agent fo r s e rv ic e of process as required by law: 1. Owens F ib e rg la ss Co. 2 The Ruberoid Company 3. N icolet Industries, Inc. 4. Glass Fib e rs, Inc. 5. Keasby & Mattison Co. 6. B a ld w in -E h re t-H i11, In c. 7. Arrowhead Products, In c. 8. H. I . Thompson F ib e rg la ss Co. And, on fu rth e r suggesting to the Court that the S h e r if f of East Baton Rouge P a rish has been unable to serve said companies with copies of the p e titio n file d herein; NOW, THEREFORE, mover prays that an order issue herein d ire c tin g the S h e r if f of East Baton Rouge P a rish to serve the above named companies through Hon. Wade 0. M artin, J r . , Se cretary of S ta te of the State of L o u is ia n a . By A ttorney: i ORDER ' jl j Premises considered: ;j LET Owens Com ings F ib e rg la ss C o ., The Ruberoid Company, N ico le t || In d u s trie s , In c ., Glass F ib e rs , In c ., Keasby & M attison C o ., Baldw in-Ehret ji || H i l l , In c ., Arrowhead Products, In c . and H. [ . Thompson F ib e rg la ss Co. be served through Hon. Wade 0. M artin, J r . , Se cre tary of State of the State of Louisiana as herein prayed fo r. Baton Rouge, Lou isian a, A p ril , 1961. lI*i If CERTIFIED TP! !C '1RS. 6L7DYS FAC ITHE VERSUS THE TRAVELERS IHSURAtTCE CCMPAEY HUMBER 77,004 DIVISION "C 19TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT PA RISH OP EAST BATCH ROUGE STATE OP LOUIS IMHA SUPPLISISEIAX J^-HD AHBHDED PETITION HOw UlTO COURT comes Mrs. Gladys Faciane, plaintiff in the above entitled and numbered cause and with respect shows that she desires to supplement and amend her original petition filed herein in the following particulars, to-wit: 1. Your petitioner shews that of the marriage existing between petitioner and decedent, the following children were born, namely: Clarence-A. Faciane, born July 30, 11)33 ; Tommy Paul Faciane, born September 1, 1930; Gary Phillip Faciane, born. August 9, 1339; Linda Maria Faciane ebor, b o m January 10, Catherine Joan Faciane, born March C, 1942; Ronald Marital Pcciano, born June 15, 1943. 1941; and and at the time of the death of the said Clarence A. Faciane, the minors, Catherine Jean Faciane and Ronald liarkel Faciane were wholly dependent upon their father for maintenance and support. 2. That petitioner is the duly qualified and acting natural i tutrix of the minors, Catherine Jean Faciane and Ronald Merkel Faciane. . 3. That Gary Phillip Faciane, at the time of the death of the said Clarence A. Faciane, was a minor, who is now a major and comes herein to be made a party plaintiff. Your petitioner now shows that Aber Company, Inc. is a corporation organised and existing under ciao lavs of the State of Louisiana, being domiciled at 5575 dams 1Avenue, Baton Rouge, Louisiana with Charles 3. Dunbar, Jr., Sumter D. Harks, Louis . Cl averio and Sshton Phelps, 420 Hibernia Building, Hew Orleans, Louisiana, as its agents for service of process. 5. That a. . Kellogg^ Company is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the Stats of Delaware, at Dover therein, authorized to do business in the State of Louisiana by having filed the proper credentials with the Secretary of State and having appointed a. Payne Breazeale, Victor Sachse and Maurice J. Tilscn as its agents for service of process. / - 3. That 3 c- B Engineering Supply Company is a corporation organized and. existing under the laws of the State of Texas, domiciled at Houston therein, authorized to do business in the State of Louisiana by having filed the proper credentials with the Secretary of State and having appointed the C. T. Corporation System, 420 Hibernia 3uilding, L7ew Orleans, Louisiana, as its agents for service of process. 7. That Johns-rianville Sales Corporation is a corporation oxrjaaized and existing voider the laws of the State of new York, domiciled in Hew York City therein, authorized to do business in the State of Louisiana by having filed the proper credentials with the Secretary of State and having appointed II. M. Robinson of Hew Orleans, Louisiana, as its agent for service of process. 8. ^ That Johns-iianville Products Corporation is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Hew York, domiciled in ITew York City therein, authorized to do business . in the State of Louisiana by having filed the proper credentials with the fi^cretary of State and having appointed 3. II. Robinson of Hew Orleans, Louisiana, as its agent for service of process. 9. That Gwens Corning Fiberglass Corporation is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Hew York, being domiciled at 717 Fifth Avenue in Hew York City therein, actually doing business in the State of Louisiana but having failed to appoint an agent for service of process. 10. That The Ruberoid Company is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Hew York, being domiciled at 502 Fifth Avenue, Hew York City therein, actually doing business in the State of Louisiana, but having failed to appoint an agent for service of process.. 11. That U. S. Rubber Company is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Hew York, domiciled at How York City therein, authorized to do business in the State of Louisiana by having filed the, proper credentials with the Secre tary of State and-having appointed H. ii. Robinson of Hew Orleans, t ' Louisiana, as its agent for service of process. 12. That Philip Carey Manufacturing Company is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Ohio, domiciled at Cincinnati therein, authorized to do business in the State of Louisiana by having filed the proper credentials with the Secretary of State and having appointed C. T. Corporation System of Hew Orleans, Louisiana, as its agent for service of process. 13. That i'iundet Cork Corporation is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Hew Jersey, domiciled ( I i/ at Em Bergen therein, authorised to do business in the State of Louisiana by having filed the proper credentials with tlie Secretary of State and having appointed Claries E. Dunbar, Jr., Sumter D. warhs, Louis B. Clavarie and Ashton Phelps as its registered agents for service of process. 14. That Hicolot Industries, Inc. is a corporation organized and existing under the lav/s of the State of Haw Jersey, being domiciled at 1 Nicolet Avenue, Plorhan Pari; therein, actually doing business in the State of Louisiana but having failed to appoint an agent for service of process. 15. That Glass E ihers, Inc. is a corporation organized existing under the laws' of the State of Ohio, domiciled at 1808 Madison /`venue, Toledo therein, actually doing business in the State of Louisiana but having failed to appoint an agent for service of process. . 1G. That Keasby & Mattison Company is a corporation organized and existing under the lav/s of the State of Pennsylvania, domiciled at I960 Butler Avenue, ?Mnbler, Pennsylvania, actually doing business in the State of Louisiana but having failed to appoint an agent for service of process. 17. ihat Baldv/in-Jhret-Jill, Inc. is a corporation organ ized and existing under the lav/s of the State of lev/ Jersey, domiciled at 1133 Ereunig, Trenton, IJev/ Jersey, actually doing business in the State of Louisiana but having failed to appoint an agent for service of process. O , a r ' 18. ',l That Eagle Picher Company, Inc. is a corporation organ-- I at Cincinnati therein, authorized to do business in the State of Louisiana by having filed the proper credentials with the Secretary of State and having appointed Charles 33. Dunbar, Jr., Sumter D. Marks, Jr., Louis B. Claverie and Ashton Phelps as its registered agents for service of process. 19, That Arrowhead Products, Inc. is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of California, being domiciled at 2348 Curry Street, Long Beach, California, actually doing business in the State of Louisiana but having failed to appoint an agent for service of process. 20. That H. 1. Thompson Fiber Glass Company is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of California, being domiciled at Cardova and Budlong, Los Angeles, California, actually doing business in the State of Louisiana but having failed to appoint an agent for service of process. 21. That Pittsburg C o m i n g Corporation is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Pennsylvania, domiciled at Pittsburg- therein, authorized to do business in the State of Louisiana by having filed the proper credentials with the Secretary of State and having appointed C. T. Corporation System as its agent for service of process. 22. That Armstrong Contracting & Supply Corporation is a foreign corporation organized and existing under the laws or the State of Delaware, domiciled at Wilmington therein, authorized to do business in the State of Louisiana by having filed the proper credentials with the Secretary of State and having appointed C. T. Corporation System of New Orleans, Louisiana, as its agent for D service of process. 23. That R. J. Reynolds Tobacco Company is a foreign corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of New Jersey, domiciled at Jersey City therein, authorized to do business in the State of Louisiana by having filed the proper credentials with the Secretary of State and having appointed Harry McCall and Leonard Sarpy of New Orleans, Louisiana, as its agents for service of pro cess. 24. That P. Lorillard Company is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of New Jersey domiciled at Jersey City therein, authorized to do business in the State of Louisiana by having-filed the proper credentials with the Secre tary of State- and having appointed C. T. Corporation System of New Orleans, Louisiana, as its agent for service of process. 25. Your petitioner now shows that during the years 1954 and 1955, the decedent, Clarence A. Faciane, was employed by defen dant, Aber Insulation Company as an insulator. / ' * 26. That during the said period of time, the Aber Insulation Company contracted for an installed insulation on the American Cynamid Company Project in Orleans Parish, Louisiana, on which job foam glass, fiberglass and unibestos were used, and the said Clarence A. Faciane was required to install said insulation without the benefit of respirators or inhalators or other pro tective devices. 27. That during the year 1956, the decedent was employed by McCarthy & Branton as an insulator on the State Welfare Building Project in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, on which job vegetable corh. Fiberglass and Foam Glass were used and the said Clarence A. Faciane was required to install such insulation without the benefit of respirators or other protective devices. 28. That during the year 1957, the decedent was employed by M. W. Kellogg & Company on a construction project at Esso Standard Oil Company in Baton Rouge, Louisiana, on which project the said Clarence A. Faciane was required to install asbestos, foam ghss and fiberglass without the benefit of respirators or other protective devices. 29. That during the year 1958, the decedent was employed by defendant, Armstrong Contracting & Supply Corporation on the construction of Fidelity National Bank in Baton Rouge> Louisiana, the Library Building in Baton Rouge, Louisiana and during 1959, on the Grace Chemical Company Project in East Baton Rouge Parish, Louisiana, on each of which jobs the said decedent was required to install foam glass, fiberglass, asbestos and asbestos mud, without the benefit of respirators or other protective devices. 30. That on and prior to the year 1931, the decedent smoked Camel Cigarettes, manufactured by defendant, R. J. Reynolds Tobacco Company, and continued1to smoke said Camel Cigarettes continuously until on or about 1955. 31. That from about the year 1955 until the time of his death, on or about March 20, 1960, the decedent smoked Kent Cigarettes manufactured by defendant, P. Lorillard & Company. 32. That the decedent switched to Kent Cigarettes because of advertisements and assurances of safety and warranties that that product was wholesome and was safer, and less harmful than the non-filter tip cigarettes. I t 33. That the decedent became a confirmed tobacco addict and was unable to stop smoking. 34. Your petitioner now shows that the decedent, Clarence A. Faciane, during 1955, became ill because of damage to his lungs and internal organs and that his condition grew progress ively worse until his death on or about March 20, 1960. 35* Your petitioners now show that the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur is applicable to the facts herein. 36. - Yoilt petitioner now shows that the death of the said Clarence A. Faciane was caused by the negligence of the defendants, Aber Company, Inc., M. W. Kellogg & Company, B & B Engineering & Supply Company and Armstrong Contracting & Supply Corporation in failing to warn the said Clarence A. Faciane of the danger inherent in using the insulating material; in failing to supply and furnish safeguards for the use of the decedent; in failing to furnish the decedent with a safe place to work; in giving assurances of "safety to the decedent and in failing to make a full disclosure o f thechngers inherent in such operations. 37. Your petitioners now show that the death of the said Clarence A. Faciane was further caused by the negligence of the defendants, Johns-Manville Sales Corporation, Johns-Manville Products Corporation, Owens Corning Fiberglass Corporation, Ruberoid Company, U. S. Rubber Company, Philip Carey Manufact uring Company, Mundet cork Corporation, Nicolet Industries, Inc., Glass Fibers, Inc., Keasby & Mattison Company, Baldwin-Ehret- Hill, Inc., Eagle Picher Company, Inc., Arrowhead Products, Inc., H. I. Thompson Fiber Glass Company and Pittsburg C o m i n g Corporation in failing to warn the decedent of the dangers inherent in the products manufactured by them and used on the jobs by the decedent; in assuring the said Clarence A. Faciane that there were no dangers inherent in said products; in manu facturing the said products with the use of dangerous and defective materials and in warranting the said products were without defects or vices. 38. That the death of the said Clarence A. Faciane was further caused by the negligence of the defendants, R. J. Reynolds Tobacco Company and P. Lorillard & Company in adver tising, distributing and selling its tobacco and cigarettes without warnings? in giving assurances of safety in the sell ing, advertising and distributing its tobacco and cigarettes; and in manufacturing, processing, mixing and using the in gredients and tobaccos which decedent smoked and in warranting that its products were wholesome, harmless and without defects or vices. 39. That as a result of the negligence of the defendants, their agents and employees, acting in the course and scope of their employment, said Clarence A. Faciane received severe and fatal injuries consisting of damage to his lungs, which caused abrasions thereto, resulting in his death. 40. Your petitioner, Mrs. Gladys Faciane, now itemizes her damages as follows, to-wit: 'y . __ ' c' y Medical expenses incurred; Our Lady of Lake Hospital-------$ Dr. Richard Selser-------------Dr. Charles A. Beskin----------Dr. Albert McQuown--------- ----- 2#007.41 410.00 265.00 150.00 Funeral Expenses $ 2,000.00 Mental pain and anguish of deceased---------------------------- 50,000.00 Mental pain and anguish of petitioner-------------------------- 50,000.00 Loss of support---------- 50,000.00 Loss of love, affection and companionship---------------------- 50,000.00 or a total of $204,832.41. . .. 41. Petitioner, Mrs. Gladys Faciane, on behalf of the minor, Catherine Jean Faciane, itemizes her damages as follows: Mental pain and anguish of deceased-------------- ;------------ $15,000.00 Mental pain and anguish of the minor--------------------------- 15,000.00 Loss of support (3 years)--------- 6,000.00 Loss of love,- -companionship and guidance------------------------ 15,000.00 or a total of $51,000.00. - 42. * Petitioner, Mrs. Gladys Faciane, on behalf of the minor, Ronald Markel Faciane, itemizes his damages as follows: . Mental pain and anguish of deceased $15,000-00 Mental pain and anguish of petitioner-------------------------- 15, 000.00 Loss of love, companionship and guidance----------------------- 15,000.00 or a total of $45,000.00. 44. In the alternative and in the event that petitioners are not entitled to damages for the wrongful death of the said Clarence A. Faciane, then and in that event, they are entitled to workmen's Compensation Benefits under the laws of the State of Louisiana. 45. That defendants, Armstrong Contracting & Supply cor poration, Aber Company, M. W. Kellogg & Company and B & B Engineering & Supply Company were each engaged in the con struction business, a hazardous business within the meaning and intent of the Workmen's Compensation Laws of the State of Louisiana. 46. i That the decedent was employed by each of the sard defendants as an insulator, a hazardous occupation at an average weekly wage in excess of $100.00. 47. Petitioners now show that they reiterate each and every allegation of the original petition filed herein except as herein amended. WHEREFORE, petitioners pray that this supplemental and amended petition be filed and allowed and that there be service and citation according to law and after all legal delays and due proceedings had, that there be judgment herein i in favor of petitioner, Mrs. Gladys Faciane and against the defendants, Aber Company, Inc., M. w Kellogg & Company, B 5e B Engineering & Supply Company, Armstrong Contracting & Supply Corporation, Travelers Insurance Company, Jolinc-Manvi 1 1 ^ Sales Corporation, Johns-Manville Products Corporation, Owens Corning Fiberglass Corporation, Ruberoid Company, U. S. Rubber Company, Philip Carey Manufacturing Company, Mundet Cork Corporation, Nicolet Industries, Inc., Glass Fibers, Inc., Keasly & Mattison Company, Baldwin-Ehret-Hill, Inc., Eagle Picher Company, Inc., Arrowhead Products^ Inc., H. I. Thompson Fiberglass Company, Pittsburg Corning Corporation, R. J. Reynolds Tobacco Company and P. Lorillard & Company, in solido, in the full sum of $204,832.41, and in favor of petitioner, Mrs. Gladys Faciane, on behalf of the minor, Catherine Jean Faciane and against the defendants, in solido, in the full sum of $51,000.00; and in favor of petitioner, Gary Phillip Faciane, and against defendants, in solido, in the full sum of $45,000.00, together with legal interest on each of said amounts from judicial demand until paid. In the alternative, and in th event that petitioners are not entitled to damages as herein prayed for, then and in that event, petitioner, Mrs. Gladys Faciane, individually and for the use and benefit of the minors, Catherine Jean Faciane and Ronald Markel Faciane, prays that there be judgment herein in her favor and against the defendants, Aber Company, Inc., M. W. Kellogg & Company, B & B Engineering & Supply Company, Armstrong Contracting & Supply Corporation, and Travelers Insur ance Company, in solido, for Workmen1s Compensation Benefits at the rate of $35.00 per week beginning March 20, 1960 and continuing weekly thereafter for a period of 400 weeks, to gether with legal interest on each past due installment from its maturity date until paid, and for funeral expenses in the sum of $600.00, together with legal interest thereon from judicial demand until paid. Petitioners further pray for all costs, all necessary orders, general and eq u itable r e li e f . By Attorneys: FILED H. ALVA BRUMFIELD VELMA P. GERDING ROBERT E. TURNER CERTIFIED TRUE COPY ;vL 08 1982 yr * 205 American Bank/Bldg. Baton Rouge, Louisiana t MRS. GLADYS FACIANE versus' THE TRAVELERS INSURANCE COMPANY NUMBER 77,004* DIVISION "C" 19TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT PARISH OF EAST BATON ROUGE STATE OF LOUISIANA SUPPLEMENTAL AND AMENDED PETITION BOW INTO COOTT comes Brs. Gladys Faoiane, plaintiff in the above entitled and numbered cause and with respect shops that she desires to supplement and amend her original petition filed herein in the following particulars, to wit: . 1. That Union Asbestos and Rubber Company is a corporation organ ized and existing under the laws of the State of Illinois, being domiciled at 1111 West Perry Street in Bloomington, Illinois, therein, actually doing business in the State of Louisiana but having failed to appoint an agent for service of process. 2. Your petitioners now show that the death of the said Clarence A. Faciane-wars-further caused by the negligence of the defend ants, Johns-Manville Sales Corporation, Johns-Manville Products Corp oration, Owens Corning Fiberglass Corporation, Ruberoid Company, U.S. Rubber Company, Philip Carey Manufacturing Company, Mundet Cork Corporation, Nicolet Industries, Inc., Glass Fibers, Inc., Keasby & Mattison Company, Baldwin-Ehret-Hill, Inc., Eagle Picher Company, Inc., A r r o w h e a d P r o d u c t s , Inc., j u I. T h o m p s o n F i b e r G l a s s C o m p a n y , P i t t s b u r g Corning Corporation and Union Abestos and Rubber Company in failing to warn the decedent of the dangers inherent in the products manufactured b y t h e m and Used on the jobs by the decedent; in assu r i n g the said Clarence A. Faciane that there were no dangers inherent in said products; in manufacturing the said products with the use of dangerous and defect ive materials and in warranting the said products were without defects or vices. j 'S 3. Petitioners now show that they reiterate each and every allegation of the original petition filed herein except as amended herein. WHEREFORE, petitioners pray that this supplemental and amended petition be filed and allowed and that there be service and citation according to law and after all legal delays and due proceedings had, that there be judgment herein in favor of petitioner, Mrs. Gladys Faciane a n d a g a i n s t t h e d e f e n d a n t s , A b e r C o m p a n y , Inc.', M. W. K e l l o g & C o m p a n y , B. & B.Engineering & Supply Company, Armstrong Contracting & Supply Corporation, Travelers Insurance Company, Johns-Manville Sales Corporation, John Mansville Products Corporation, Owens Corning-Fiberglass Corporation, Ruberoid Company, U.S. Rubber Company, Philip Carey Manufacturing Com pany, Mundet. Cork-Corporation, Nicolet Industries, Inc., Glass Fibers,Inc., Keasly & Mattison Company, Baldwin-Ehret-Hill, Inc., Eagle Picher Com pany, Inc., A r r o w h e a d P r o d u c t s , Inc., H. I. T h o m p s o n , F i b e r g l a s s C o m p a n y , P i t t s b u r g C o r n i n g C o r p o r a t i o n , R. J. R e y n o l d s T o b a c c o C o m p a n y , a E . L o r i l l a r d & Company and Union Asbestos and Rubber Company, in solido, in the full sum of $204,832.41* and in favor of petitioner, Mrs. Gladys Faciane, on behalf of the minor, Catherine Jean Faciane and against the defendants, in solido, in the full sum of $51,000.00; and in favor of petitioner, G a r y P h i l l i p Faiciane:,. and. a g a i n s t d e f e n d a n t s , in s o l i d o , in th e f u l l sum of $45,000.00, together with legal interest on each of said amounts from judicial demand until paid. ' In the alternative, and in the event that petitioners are not entitled to damages as herein prayed for, then and in that event, petitioner, Mrs. Gladys Faciane, Individually and for the use and benefit of the minors, Catherine Jean Faciane and Ronald Markel Faciane, prays that there be judgment herein in her favor and against the defendants, A b e r Company, Inc., M. W. K e l l o g g & Company, B & B E n g i n e e r i n g & S u p p l y Company, Armstrong Contracting & Supply Corporation, and Travelers Insur- t / ande Company, in solido, for Workmen's Compensation Benefits at the r a t e o f $ 3 5 . 0 0 p e r wefek b e g i n n i n g M a r c h 20, I 9 6 0 a n d c o n t i n u i n g w e e k l y thereafter for a period of 400 weeks, together with legal interest on each past due installment from its maturity date until paid, and for funeral expenses in the sum of $600.00, together with legal interest thereon from judicial demand until paid. Petitioners further pray for all costs, all necessary orders, general and equitable relief. By Attorneys: 205 American Ban* Building Baton Rouge, Louisiana C CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of the foregoing answers have this day been mailed, properly address and postage prepaid, t o C. W. P h i l l i p s , Esq., E d Gray, Esq., F r a n k S. Craig, Jr., Esq., G o r d o n Kean, Jr., Esq., Joseph Keogh, Esq,, Maurice J. Wilson, E s q . # A. L e o n Hebert, Esq., R i c h a r d C. Cadwallader, Esq., David W. R o b i n s o n , Esq., E. Leland Richardson, Esq., Benjamin R. Slater, Jr., Esq., H a r r y McCall, Jr., Esq., Carl J. Schumacher, Jr., Esq., Charles W i l l i a m Roberts, Esq., Calvin E. Hardin, Esq., and Arr o w Head Products, Inc., attorneys of record herein. B a t o n Roug-e, L o u i s i a n a , this 19th da y of April, 1962. filed CERTIFIED TRUE COPY / K R S . GLADYS FACIANE VERSUS THE TRAVELERS INSURANCE COMPANY, ET AL FILED; 'h jA .o J ' .1962 : NUM3ER 77,004 DIVISION "C" : 19TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT PARISH OF EAST BATON ROUGE : STATE OF LOUISIANA Deputy Clerk ORDER It is ordered by the Court that defendant, Eagle-Picher Company, is hereby granted an extension of time in which to plead through April 23, 1962. Baton Rouge, Louisiana, March --- _, 1962. V <jc-- \ T?TT iJL' <\J ', " * 'r - CERTIFIED T^UF COPY 1 MRS. GLADYS FACIAME VERSUS THE TRAVELERS INSURANCE COMPANY, ET AL FILED: 1962 NUMBER 77,004 DIVISION $* 19TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT PARISH OF EAST BATON ROUGE STATE OF LOUISIANA Deputy Clerk PEREMPTORY EXCEPTION OF NO CAUSE OR RTCHT rn? arrrmw ' Now into Court, through undersigned counsel, comes Eagle-Pi cher Company referred to in the supplemental and amended petition filed herein as Eagle Pi cher Company, Inc., named as a defendant herein, appearing herein solely for.he purpose of this exception and hereby excepts to the petition and the supplemental and amended petition filed herein on the following ground, to-wit: I. That the petition and the supplemental and amended petition does not state a cause or right of action against Eagle-Picher Company inasmuch as there was no privity of contract or contractual relationship between de fendant Eagle-Picher Company and decedent Clarence A. Faciane, Sr . , or plaintiff. WHEREFORE, exceptor, Eagle-Picher Company, prays that this peremptory exception of no cause or right of action be maintained and that, accordingly, judgment be rendered herein in favor of defendant, Eagle-Picher Company and against plaintiff, Mrs. Gladys Faciane, rejecting plaintiff*s demands at her costs, and for all additional relief as law, equity and the nature of the case m a y permit. M5NR0E Sc LEMANN Malcolm L. Monroe Benj. R. Slater, Jr Attorneys for Eagle-Picher Company* I424 Whitney Building New Orleans, Louisiana CERTIFICATE I hereby certify that a copy of the above and foregoing exception has been served upon each of the following persons: H. Alva Brumfield, Esq., 205 American Bank Building, Baton Rouge, Louisiana; Harry McCall, Esq., 1500 , National Bank of Ccmaerce Building, New Orleans, Louidana; Edward W . Gray, ! : j I 205 R e m a i n Building, Baton Rouge, Louisiana; Charles W. Phillips,3100 La. j National Bank Building, Baton Rouge, La.; Mary Bird Perkins, 304 La. National ! Bank Building, Baton Rouge, La.; F. S. Craig & R.F. Cangelosi, Jr., 301 Fidelity; National Bank Building, Baton Rouge, La.; Aubrey MeCleary, 201 Baton Rouge J i Savings & Loan Building, Baton Rouge, Louisiana; Maurice J. Wilson, Fidelity ; National Bank Building, Baton Rouge, La.; David W. Robinson, 137 St. Ferdinand St.; E. Leland Richardson, 410 Reynond Bldg.; Baton Rouge, Louisiana; Joseph F. K e o gh,?. 0. Box 2523, Baton Rouge, Louisiana; Paul B. Deal, 1336 National Bank of Cossaerce Blag., New Orleans, La., Calvin E. Hardin, Jr., 403 La. National Bank Bldg., Baton Rouge, La.; and A. Leon Hebert, 113 St. Louis St., Baton Rouge, La., by depositing same in the United States mail. New Orleans, Louisiana, April 23, 1962. APR 2 4 1962 CERTIFIED TRI IR CO PY / MRS. GLADYS FACIAME VERSUS THE TRAVELERS INSURANCE company, et al rmsPiJW . 2 1 .M t e K : NUMBER 77,004 DIVISION "C" 2 I9TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT : PARISH OF EAST BATON ROUGE : STATE OF LOUISIANA A % -U - Deputy Cleric MOTION . Now into Court, through undersigned counsel, comes Eagle-Picher Company (referred to in the supplemental and amended petition filed herein as Eagle Picher Company, Inc.), appearing solely herein for the purpose of this motion and with full reservation of all rights to plead to the jurisdiction or -venue of the Court, and moves the Court for an extension of time within-which to plead as follows: I. Maver shows that this matter was on April 7, 1961 removed from the Nineteenth Judicial District Court for the Parish of East Baton Rouge ^ '\ to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana, X . Baton Rouge Divi:sion* bearing Civil Action No. 2452 on the docket of said Court; that on May 15, 1961 mover was granted an extension of time within which to plead through thirty (30) days after disposition of the motion to remand by the- United states District Court; mover is informed that by order of the said United States District Court the case was remanded to the Nineteenth Judicial District Court for the Parish of East Baton Rouge by order entered March 15, 1962; that mover desires that this Honorable Court grant an order extending the time within which to plead herein through April 23, 1962. MONROE & LEMANN Malcolm L. Monroe Benj. R. Slater, Jr. 1424 Whitney Building New Orleans, Louisiana Attorneys for Mover, Eagle-^icher Company MRS. GLADYS FACIANE VERSUS NUMBER 77,004 DIVISION "C" 19TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT PARISH OF EAST BATON ROUGE MOTION On motion of The Eagle-Picher Company, named defendant herein, appearing herein through undersigned counsel solely for the ' purposes of this Motion, and on suggesting to the Court that the delays for answering the petition and supplemental and amended petition filed | herein by plaintiff will expire on or about April 7, 1961 and that de- ; fendant needs an additional thirty (30) days to enable defendant to i properly investigate the matters alleged in the petition and supplemental ! and amended petition in order to prepare and file proper defensive ; pleadings herein; IT IS ORDERED by the Court that defendant, The Eagle-Picher Company, be and it is hereby granted an additional thirty (30) days in which to plead to the petition and supplemental and amended petition filed herein. Baton Rouge, Louisiana, this 3 dav of April, 1961. 1424 Whitney Building New Orleans, Louisiana Attorneys for Defendant The Eagle-Picher Company 3Y CERTIFICATE I hereby certify that a copy of the above and foregoing Motion has been served upon H. Alva Brumfield, Esq., 205 American Bank Building, Baton Rouge, Iouisiana, attorney for plaintiff, by depositing the same in the United States mail on this day of 1961. MRS. GLADYS FACIALE, ET A: V. THE TRAVELERS INSURANCE COMPANY, ET AL NO. JT,OOh - DIVISION "A" 19TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT PARISH OF EAST EATON ROUGE STATE OF LOUISIANA MOTION AND JUDGMENT AS TO EAGIE PICHER COMPANY Now into Court, comes defendant, Eagle Picher Company, appearing herein through undersigned counsel, and on suggesting to the Court that on October 19; 196^ a hearing on the Peremptory Exceptions of No Cause of Action filed by defendant, Eagle Picher Cbmpany, herein was held and the Court entered an Order on October 19, 196^ sustaining the Exception of No Cause of Action and allowing plaintiffs fifteen (15) days within which to amend their petition as supplemented and amended, and on further suggesting to the Court tihs^ on or about November 2, 196^ on motion of plaintiffs the Court granted plaintiffs an additional thirty (30) days within which to amend the petition; that the times allowed plaintiffs to amend the petition have now elapsed and plaintiffs have failed to amend and, accordingly, a judgment of dismissal should be entered herein as against defendant, Eagle Picher Company, in accordance with the Court *s Order of October 19; 1 9 ^ ; IT IS ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that plaintiffs* above captioned and numbered suit be, and the same is hereby, dismissed as against defendant, , Eagle Picher Company, at plaintiffs* costs. i JUDGMENT HEAD, RENDERED AND SIGNED in Open Court on this J - L day of December, 196^. MONRCE & LEMANN Malcolm L. Monroe Ben-i. R. Slater, Jr. JUDGE I hereby certify that a copy of the above and foregoing Motion and J - .. -t a-1__ti_____ Svlvia 'RnhPT'hS- MRS. GLADYS FACLANE VERSUS THE TRAVELERS INSURANCE CO. N U M B E R 77,004, DIVISION "A" 19TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURI PARISH OF EAST BATON ROUGE STATE OF LOUISIANA MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME WITHIN WHICH ______________ T O A M E N D P E T I T I O N NOW INTO COURT,' through undersigned counsel, comes Mrs. Gladys Faciane, plaintiff in the above captioned matter, who shows the Court: T h a t o n O c t o b e r 19, 1964, a h e a r i n g o n t h e e x c e p t i o n s filed on behalf of defendant, Eagle Picher Company was held, and in accordance with an order of the Court entered on O c t o b e r 19, 1 9 6 4 t_jpla i n t i f f w a s g r a n t e d f i f t e e n d a y s in w h i c h to amend her petition, and on suggesting to the Court that p l a i n t i f f w i l l r e q u i r e a n a d d i t i o n a l p e r i o d o f s i x t y (60) days in whi c h to acquire facts needed to amend h e r petition, plaintiff respectfully requests that an additional period o f s i x t y (60) d a y s b e g r a n t e d in w h i c h t o a m e n d h e r p e t i t i o n . WHEREFORE, plaintiff, Mrs. Gladys Faciane moves the Court for such order as may be appropriate in the cir cumstances and in accordance with law. By Attorneys: H. A L V A BRUMFIELD SYLVIA ROBERTS 205 American Bank Building Baton Rouge, Louisiana By : SYLVIA ROBERTS I ORDER PREMISES CONSIDERED: . IT IS ORDERED, that plaintiff, Mrs. Gladys Faciane, is g r a n t e d an extension of time of s d a y s in which to amend her petition. Baton Rouge, Louisiana, this 2nd day of November, 1964. JUDGE, 19th-Judicial District Court CERTIFICATE I Thereby certify that a copy of the foregoing M o t i o n for extension of time has this day been mailed, postage prepaid, a d d r e s s e d to B e n j a m i n R. Slater, Jr., Esquire, of t h e f irm of Monroe and Lemann, 1424 Whitney Building, New Orleans, Louisiana, counsel of record for Eagle Picher Company, defendant. Baton Rouge, Louisiana, this 2nd day of November, 1964 F I L E D NOV 2 - 1964 Si__i SYptflA ROBERTS I l< CERTIFIED TRUE COPY l/ MES. GLADYS FACIAHE v. THE TRAVELERS INSURANCE COMPANY NO. 77,00k - DIVISION ''a 19TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT PARISH OF EAST BATON ROUGE STATE OF LOUISIANA Fl IiPil) , 196k : DEPUTY CLERK PEREMPTORY EXCEPTION OF NO CAUSE OF ACTION Now into Court, through undersigned counsel, comes Eagle-Picher Company, referred to in the first and second supplemental and amended petitions filed herein as Eagle Picher Company, Lie., named as a co-defendant, appearing herein for the purpose of this exception and with full reservation of all ex ceptions filed heretofore, and hereby excepts to the petition and the first and second supplemental and amended petitions filed herein on the following grounds, to-wit : 1. That the allegations of the petition as supplemented and amended . by the first and second supplemental and amended petitions are not sufficient ; to state a cause of action against co-defendant Eagle-Picher Company. j i The first supplemental and amended petition in paragraph 37 and I the second supplemental and amended petition in paragraph 2 allege that the , decedent's death wan further caused by the negligence of defendants, including j . j co-defendant, Eagle-Picher Company, through some connection with certain I products of defendant that were allegedly dangerous and defectively manu- ; factured which were used on the jobs b y decedent. j The petitions fail to state either the names or the products which . were allegedly dangerous or defectively manufactured by exceptor, Eagle-Picher Company, nor the jobs on which the said products were used, nor the dates of , any sales of the products, nor in what respects the products were dangerous or defectively manufactured, nor what dangerous and defective materials were used in the products, nor what dangers were inherent in the products. The terms, "dangerous" and "defectively manufactured" are mere conclusions of the t pleader and cannot serve as a replacement for these facts which must be alleged I Y in order to state a cause of action against exceptor. WHEREFORE, exceptor, Eagle-Picher Company, prays that this perempcorj exception of no cause of action "be maintained and that accordingly judgment be rendered herein in favor of defendant, Eagle-Picher Company, and against plaintiff, Mrs. Gladys Faciane, rejecting plaintiff's demands at her costs and . for all general and equitable relief. MOHRGE & L E M A M Benj. R. Slater, Jr. W. Malcolm Stevenson It)- lk 2 k Whitney Building Rev Orleans, Louisiana Attorneys for EAGLE-PICHER CCMPAH CERTI F I CA TE I hereby certify that a copy of the above and foregoing exception has been served upon H. Alva Brumfield, 205 American Bank Building, Baton Rouge, Louisiana, Attorney for Plaintiff, by depositing same in the United States mail on this 3o^eLay of September, 196k , file d T CERTIFIED TRUE COPY MRS. GLADYS FAGIANE VS. THE TRAVELERS INSURANCE COMPANY NUMBER 77,004, DIVISION "C" 19TH j u d i c i a l d i s t r i c t c o u r t PARISH OF EAST BATON ROUGE STATE OF LOUISIANA DILATORY EXCEPTION ON BEffAT.p OF KEASBEY S, MATTISON c o m p a m v W B ,, n T0 188 HONORABLE NINETEENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT FOR t w f PARISH OF EAST BATON ROUGE, STATE OF LOUISIANA: KEASBEI i. MATTISON COMPANY, purportedly made defendant in the above numbered end- entitled cauae, appearing herein aolely for the purpoae, of thia-emception,. except, to all of the petitions filed herein by plaintiff -on the- following grounds, to-wit: 1. Plaintiff's petition, as supplemented and amended, is so vague and ambiguous that exceptor cannot safely plead to it. Paragraph thirtyseven of the original petition alleges that the death of Clarence A. Faciane was "further'* caused by the negligence of Keasbey 4 Mattison Company, along with others, in connection with products allegedly manu factured by Keasbey i, Mattison Company and used on jobs by decedent. The petition fails to specify what product or products allegedly manufactured by Keasbey 4 Mattison Company,were used, nor does it specify the job or jobs on which such products were allegedly used; nor does it state which of decedent's alleged employers purchased and used said products nor when said sales took place; nor in what respects said products were inherently dangerous; nor in what respects the products were defective; nor what dangerous and defective materials were used in the manufacture of such products; nor wherein such products were dangerous. WHEREFORE, exceptor prays that this dilatory exception be main tained and plaintiff be ordered to amend her- petition by particularizing  the vague and ambiguous allegations complained of herein; that, in default of such amendment within a reasonable delay to be fixed by this Court, plaintiff's petition be dismissed as to exceptor, all at plaintiff's costs. By Attorneys ; i Baton Rpige, Louisiana Attorneys for Keasbey A Mattison Company C ERTIFICATE I certify that a copy of the foregoing exception has this day been served on H. Alva Brumfield, Esquire, attorney for plaintiff, by placing same in the United States Mail, postage prepaid and properly addressed to him at his offices located at 205 American Bank Building, Baton Rouge, Louisiana; further, that a copy of said exception has this day been mailed to all other counsel of record in this proceeding. Baton Rouge, Louisiana, Maj FILED CERTIFIED TRUE COPY ( I MRS. GLADYS FACIANE VS. THE TRAVELERS INSURANCE COMPANY NUMBER 77,004, DIVISION : 19TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT : PARISH OF EAST BATON ROUGE : STATE OF LOUISIANA JUDGMENT SUSTAINING DILATORY EXCEPTION This matter came on for regular hearing pursuant to previous assignment on Tuesday, May 31, 1966. Present for plaintiff: Miss Sylvia Roberts; present for Keasbey & Mattison Company, defendant-exceptor, Maurice J . Wilson, when after considering the pleadings filed herein and the arguments of counsel the following minute entry was made by the Court: "Whereupon, for oral reasons this day assigned the Court sustained the said exception of vagueness and ordered plaintiff to amend her petition to specify and name the edUo n % h 1(^8dl7 " anufactured by defendant company and used on the job, and to specify which job said products were used and to state which of decedent's alleged em ployers purchased and used said products and to state when said sales took place and to state in what respect said products were dangerous and defective and what de fective materials were used in the products, and to specify the alleged inherent danger in said products. On plaintiff s failure to amend her petition as herein directed within 28 days of this date, plaintiff's suit to be dismissed as to defendant, Keasbey & Mattison Company,11 and, on this date it having been demonstrated to the Court that more than twenty-eight (28) days have elapsed since the aforesaid minute entry was made and further that plaintiff's petition has not been amended as required by the order of this Court; IT IS ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that plaintiff's action be. and the same is hereby dismissed as to Keasbey & Mattison Company, at plain tiff's cost. JUDGMENT READ, RENDERED AND SIGNED in Open Court at Baton Rouge, Louisiana, on this 2 4 - d a y o f June, 1966. Judge, 19th Judicial DistrictCtfJrt \ \. MRS. GLADYS FACIANE VERSUS THE TRAVELERS INSURANCE COMPANY, ET AL NUMBER 77,004 CIVIL DOv.. I9TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT PARISH OF EAST BATON ROUGE STATE OF LOUISIANA PETITION FOR RULE The petition of PITTSBURGH CORNING CORPORATION, a defendant herein, respectfully represents that: 1. Petitioner was purportedly made a party defendant in these proceedings by amended and supplemental petition filed on behalf of plaintiff on March 15, 1961. 2. In said pleadings, plaintiff alleged that petitioner was qualified to do business in Louisiana and had appointed CT Corporation System as its agent for service of process, and directed that service be "wide on petitioner through said CT Corporation System. 3. As appears in the record of this case, the petition and cita tion directed to petitioner were returned by the Sheriff of Orleans Parish with the notation that CT Corporation System was not the agent for service of process on petitioner's behalf. 4. No further effort has been made by plaintiff to obtain service of process on petitioner and petitioner made no appearance in these pro ceedings until well after the lapse of five (5) years from the filing of said amended and supplemental petition; accordingly, there having been no step taken either in the prosecution or defense of this action as to petitioner, this suit should be dismissed as to petitioner for lack of prosecution under Article 561, Louisiana Code of Civil Procedure. WHEREFORE, petitioner preys that a rule nisi issue herein directed to the plaintiff, Mrs. Gladys Faciane, to show cause, if an ahe has, on a date and at an hour to be fixed by this Court why her suit should not be dismissed as to Pittsburgh Corning Corporation at her cose. WATSON, BLANCHE, WILSON, POSNER & THIBAUT, Attorneys for'>'BttsLurgh Corporat i o r J David W. Robinson 505 North Boulevard Baton Rouge, Louisiana n SERVE PIAINTIFF, Mrs. Gladys Faciane Through H. Alva Brumfield, her attorney of record, 509 St. Louis Street Baton Rouge, Louisiana CERTIFIED TRUE COPY 0 8 1982 CLERK MRS. GLADYS FACIANE VERSUS THE TRAVELERS INSURANCE COMPANY, ET AL NUMBER 77,004 CIVIL DOCKET 43 19TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT PARISH OF EAST BATON ROUGE STATE OF LOUISIANA ORDER The foregoing petition considered: IT IS ORDERED that a rule nisi issue herein directed to the plaintiff, Mrs. Gladys Faciane, to show cause, if any she has on the -- day of . 1968, at /<? o'clock a.m., why her suit should not be dismissed as to Pittsburgh Corning Corporation at her cost. Baton Rouge, Louisiana, July ^ . 1968. Judge, 19th Judicial District Court f'le d CERT! FSE D TRUE COPY /- ' w MRS. GLADYS FACLANE VERSUS THE TRAVELERS INSURANCE COMPANY. ET AL NUMBER 77.004 CIVIL DOCKET # 1STH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT PARISH OF EAST BATON ROUGE JUDGMENT ON RULE STATE OF LOUISIANA \ This cause was heard on July 15, 1968, pursuant to assignment, on the rule of Pittsburgh Corning Corporation to dismiss plaintiff's suit as to that defendant for lack of prosecution, and counsel for plaintiff having stated to the Court that there was no objection to granting the rule: IT IS ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the rule issued herein be made absolute and that, accordingly, plaintiff's suit is dismissed as to Pittsburgh Corning Corporation at plaintiff's cost. JUDGMENT RENDERED, READ AND SIGNED in Open Court at Baton Rouge, Louisiana, on the JJF_ day of July, 1968. JUDGE, 19TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT FILED JUL 15 1968 DY. CLcrih Or juIm I rR 7 ! R E D / MRS. GLADYS FACIANE ; VERSUS f ! THE TRAVELERS INSURANCE | COMPANY NUMBER 77,004 DIVISION "A" I9TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT PARISH OF EAST BATON ROUGE STATE OF LOUISIANA JUDGMENT SUSTAINING DILATORY EXCEPTION ;! This matter came on for regular hearing pursuant to previous j assi8nment on Monday, June 20, 1966. Present for plaintiff: Miss Sylvia |i Roberts; present for Johns-Manville Sales Corporation, Johns-Manville li |! Products Corporation and Glass Fibers, Inc., defendants-exceptors, Daniel ji ! j R. Atkinson. When after considering the pleadings filed herein and on t i: stipulation of counsel the following minute entry was made by tie Court: Jt J "This matter came before the court on a dilatory excep- j tion filed on behalf of Johns-Manville Sales Corporation, j' Johns-Manville Products Corporation and Glass Fibers, Inc. j On joint stipulation of counsel the exception of vague ness was submitted to the Court. Whereupon, for oral reasons this day assigned defendant's exception is sus tained and the plaintiff ordered to amend her petition to specify and name the products allegedly manufactured by defendant companies and used on the job, to specify on which job the products were used and to state which of decedent's.alleged employers purchased and used said products and to state when said sales took place and to state in what respect said products were dangerous and defective and what defective materials were used in the products, and to specify the alleged inherent danger in said products. On plaintiff's failure to amend her peti tion as herein diracted within thirty (30) days of this ^3te, plaintiff s siit is tobe dismissed as to defendants, Johns-Manville Sales Corporation, Johns-Manville Products Corporation, and Glass Fibers, Inc." | and, on this date it having been demonstrated to the Court that more than I . |! thirty (30) days have elapsed since the aforesaid minute entry was made and |i ji further that plaintiff's petition has not been amended as required by the i! order of this Court; IT IS ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that plaintiff's action be and the same is hereby dismissed as to Johns-Manville Sales Corporation, Johns- Manville Products Corporation, and Glass Fibers, Inc.' at plaintiff's cost. JUDGMENT READ, RENDERED AND SIGNED in Open Court at Baton Rouge, 1 t the vague and ambiguous allegations complained of herein; that, in default of such amendment within a reasonable delay to be fixed by this Court, plaintiff's petition be dismissed as to exceptors, all at plaintiff's costs. By Attorneys, DALE, RICHARDSON & DALE Daniel R. Atkinson 710 Reymond Building Bton Rouge, Louisiana Attorneys for Johns-Manville Sales i Corporation, Johns-Manville Products j Corporation, and Glass Fibers, Inc. CERTIFICATE I certify that a copy of the foregoing exception has this day been served on H. Alva Brumfield, Esquire, attorney for plaintiff, by i; ;J placing same in the United States Mail, postage prepaid and properly i addressed to him at his offices located at 509 St. Louis Street, Baton jj Rouge, Louisiana; further, that a copy of said exception has this day I: been mailed to all other counsel of record in this proceeding. Baton Rouge, Louisiana, June 7, 1966. ! filed Daniel R. Atkinson CERT! FiE D TRUE COPY NO. 77*004 NINETEENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT PARISH OF EAST BATON ROUGE STATE OF LOUISIANA DIVISION " C " DOCKET NO. MRS. GLADYS FACIANE VS THE TRAVELERS INSURANCE CO., ET AL M l ); *7X0^. 1-T. n i l | H ccA l \J D e p u t y Cleric EXCEPTION TO THE CITATION AND TO THE JURISDICTION RATIONE PERSONAE ON BEHALF OF DEFENDANT, THE ______________ R U 3 E R 0 I D C O M P A N Y ________________._________ TO THE HONORABLE, THE JUDGES COURT FOR THE PARISH OF EAST DIVISION "C": OF THE NINETEENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT BATON ROUGE, STATE OF LOUISIANA, Now into court through its undersigned counsel comes The Ruberoid Company, made defendant herein, appearing solely for the purpose of urging the following exception, and excepts to the citation on the following grounds, to-wit: Exception to Citation The citation and petition addressed to the exceptor, The R u o er o i d Company, was served t h r ough the Secretary of State for the State of Louisiana on , that said service is defective, null and void, for the reason that t h e S e c r e t a r y of" S t a t e f o r the S t a t e of L o u i s i a n a h a s n e v e r been designated as an agent for the service of process by the Ruberoid Company and because exceptor is not engaged in business activities in the State of Louisiana as set forth in Article 10 of the supplemental and amended petition, but, on the contrary, is neither domiciled nor doing business in the State of Louisiana and therefore cannot be cited and served through the Secretary of State of the State of Louisiana. Exception to the Jurisdiction Ratione Personae Defendant The Ruberoid Company further appearing solely for the purpose of urging these exceptions excepts to the j u r i s d i c t i o n o f th e c o u rt r a tio n e p erson ae on th e fo llo w in g grounds, to -w it: That exceptor is not.engaged in business activities i n t h e S t a t e of L o u i s i a n a , as set f o r t h i n A r t i c l e 10 of the s u p p l e m ental and amended p e t i t i o n but, on the contrary, is neither domiciled in nor doing business in the State of Louisiana, and that this Honorable Court is without jurisdiction ratione personae. W H E R E F O R E , e x c e p t o r pr:ays t h a t t h e s e e x c e p t i o n s b e m a i n t a i n e d a n d the p l a i n t i f f 's suit be d i s m i s s e d as to the exceptor The Ruberoid Company, at the plaintiff's costs; and for all general and equitable relief. LEMLE & KELLEHER 1836 N a t i o n a l B a n k of C o m m e r c e B u i l d i n g New Orleans, Louisiana FILED s MAY 15 981 CERTIFIED TF?I !E COPY NO. 77,004 NINETEENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT PARISH OP EAST 3AT0N ROUGE STATE OP LOUISIANA D I V I S I O N "C" D O C K E T NO, HRS. GLADYS FACIANE VS THE TRAVELERS INSURANCE CO., ST AL PILED: , fqfa/ J [/ D e p u t y Cleric EXCEPTION TO THE CITATION AND TO THE JURISDICTION R A T I O N S P E R S O N A E O N B E H A L F OP' T H E D E P E N D A N T __________ B A L D f f I N - E H R E T - H I L L . INC.____________________ JUDGES OF THE NINETEENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT SmSiS ^ PAEISS" EASTBAT0KE0U0E' STATE0FMSsSSIf Now into court through Its undersigned counsel comes Baldwin-Ehret-Hill, Inc., made defendant herein, appearing solely for the purpose of urging the following exception, and excepts to the ei-tation on the following grounds, to-wit: Exception to Citation The c.ruation and petition addressed to the exceptor, Baldwirn-Ehret-Eill, Inc., was served through the Secretary of State for the State of L o u i s i a n a on 1 that said service is defective, null and void, for the reason that the Secretary of State for the State of Louisiana has never heen designated as an agent for the service of process by the Baldwin-Ehret-Hilh, Inc., and because exceptor is not engaged in busines-s activities in the State of Louisiana as set forth in Article 17 of the supplemental and amended petition, but, on the contrary, is neither domiciled nor doing business in the S t a t e oi L o u i s i a n a a n d t h e r e f o r e c a n n o t be c i t e d a n d s e r v e d through the Secretary of State of the State of Louisiana. E x c e p t i on to the Jurisdiction Ratione Personae Defendant Baldwin-Ehret-Hill, Inc., further appearing solely for the purpose of u r g i n g these ex c e p t i o n s excepts to the ) ' j u r i s d ic t i o n o f th e co u rt r a tio n e p erson ae on th e fo llo w in g grounds, to-w i t : That exceptor is not engaged in business activities in the State of Louisiana, as set forth in Article 17 of plaintiff's supplemental, and amended p e t i t i o n but, on the contrary, is neither domiciled in nor doing business in the State of Louisiana, and that this Honorable Court is without jurisdiction ratione personae. WHEREFORE, exceptor prays that these exceptions be maintained and the plaintiff's suit be dismissed as to the exceptor Baldwin-Ehret-Hill, Inc., at the plaintiff's costs; and for all general and equitable relief. LEMLE & KELLEHER By 1836 N a t i o n a l B a n k of C o m m e r c e B u i l d i n g New Orleans, Louisiana WAY 1 5 1981 C E R T IF IE D TRUE COPY CERTIFICATE I hereby certify that copies of the above and foregoing motion have been served upon each of the following persons: H. Alva Brumfield, Esq*, 205 American Bank Building, Baton Roug^ Louisiana, attorney for plaintiff; Harry McCall, Jr., Esq., 1500 National Bank of Commerce Building, New Orleans, Louisiana, and Calvin E. Hardin, Jr, Esq., Louisiana National Bank Building, Baton Rouge, Louisiana, attorneys for defendants, R. J. Reynolds Tobacco Company and P. Lorillard Company; by depositing same in the United States mail. New Orleans, Louisiana, M a r . a 23, 1962. CERTIFIED TRI !E CO PY V jjO. 7 7 , 0 0 k X j HiliETEENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT PARISH OF EAST BATON ROUGE STATE OF LOUISIANA D I V I S I O N "C" DOCKET NO. aO a MRS. GLADYS FACIANE VS THE TRAVELERS INSURANCE CO., ET AL F I L E D : ----` I1T , 1 S ------- .Deputy Clerk EXCEPTION TO THE CITATION AND TO THE JURISDICTION RATIONS PERSONAE ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENDANT ___________ N I C O L E T I N D U S T R I E S . I N C . __________________ TO THE HONORABLE, THE JUDGES COURT FOR THE PARISH OF EAST D IVISION "C* : OF THE NINETEENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT BATON ROUGE, STATE OF LOUISIANA, X Nov- into court through its undersigned counsel comes Nicolet Industries, Inc., made defendant herein, appearing solely for the purpose of urging the following exception, and excepts to the citation on the following grounds, to-wit: Exception to Citation The citation and petition addressed to the exceptor, Nicolet--Industries, Inc., was served through the Secretary of State for the State of Louisiana on > tliat said service is defective, null and void, for the reason that the Secretary of State for the State of Louisiana has never Been designated as an agent, for the service of process hy the Nicolet Industries, Inc., and Because exceptor is not engaged in Business activities in the State of Louisiana as set forth in Article lk of the supplemental and amended petition, But, on the contrary, is neither domiciled nor doing Business in the State of Louisiana and therefore cannot Be cited and served through the Secretary of State of the State of Louisiana. Exception to the Jurisdiction Ratione Personae Defendant Nicolet Industries, Inc., further appearing solely for the purpose of urging these exceptions excepts to the < j u r i s d i c t i o n o f th e c o u r t r a t io n e p e r s o n a e on th e f o llo w in g ' grounds, to - v it: That exceptor is not engaged in business activities in the State of Louisiana, as set forth in Article lk of p l a i n t i f f ' s u p p l e m ental and amended p e t i t i o n but, on the contrary, is neither domiciled in nor doing business in the State of Louisiana, and that this Honorable Court is without jurisdiction ratione personae. WHEREFORE, exceptor prays that these exceptions be m a i n t a i n e d a n d the p l a i n t i f f 's suit b e d i s m i s s e d as to the exceptor Nicolet Industries, Inc., at the plaintiff's costs; and for all general and equitable relief. ' T.THMT.'R . VRT.T.W TTVP By ( 1836 N a t i o n a l B a n k of C o m m e r c e B u i l d i n g New Orleans, Louisiana C E R T IF IE D TRl IF COPY NINETEENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT PARISH OP EAST BATON ROUGE STATE OF LOUISIANA ffO. 7 7 , 0 0 4 D I V I S I O N "C" MRS. GLADYS FACIANE Versus THE TRAVELERS INSURANCE COMPANY / FILED: 1U- ! 9 ^ DEPUTY CLERK ^^tf*************************************************^^^^ EXCEPTION OF VAGUENESS Now come the Ruberoid Company, Nicolet Industries, Inc., and Baldwin-Ehret-Hill, Inc., and except to the Petition and to the Supplemental and Amended Petition of plaintiff for the reason that the said petitions are too vague and indefinite to allow exceptors to file responsive pleadings thereto in the following respects among others: 1. P l a i n t i f f ' s S u p p l e m e n t a l a n d A m e n d e d 'P e t i t i o n a l l e g e s t h a t t h e d e a t h of C l a r e n c e A. F a c i a n e w a s c a u s e d b y the n e g l i gence of exceptors and other defendants "in failing to warn the decedent of the dangers inherent in the products manufactured by them and used on the jobs by the decedent." These allegations do not set forth facts sufficient to assess exceptors of the act or act s of n e g l i g e n c e for w h i c h e a c h is alleged"1;,- r e s p o n s i b l e . The Supplemental and Amended Petition does not state to which p r o d u c t s m a n u f a c t u r e d b y exceptors p l a i n t i f f refers; nor does it state what dangers were inherent in the said products; nor does it state on what jobs the said products were used by decedent. Exceptons should not be obliged to answer these vague and indefinite allegations, and plaintiff should be required to state in detail and specifically the products which were allegedly defective, the nature of the dangers inherent in each of them, and the jobs on which the said products were used by decedent. 2. The vague and indefinite nature of plaintiff's Petition and Supplemental and Amended Petition is compounded by the fact that plaintiff has charged that decedent's death was"further caused" by the negligence of certain of the defendants who manufacture and sell tobacco products. The assignment of cigarette smoking as an additional cause of decedent's death c o m p l icates the defense of the suit insofar as exceptors are c o ncerned and makes it imperative that pl a i n t i f f be very specific in stating the products manufactured by each of the exceptors which were allegedly instrumental in decedent's death, the nature of the dangers inhejaent in the said products and the jobs on which the said products were used by decedent. WHEREFORE, exceptors move the Court to enter an order compelling pl a i n t i f f to file a d ditional pleadings stating in detail and specifically the products manufactured by the exceptors which allegedly uaused decedent's death, the nature of the dangers inherent in the said products, and the jobs on which the said products were used by the decedent; and in default thereof exceptors move that plaintiff's suit be dismissed. C E RI I F I C A T E I certify that a copy of the above and foregoing Excep t i o n of V a g u e n e s s has b e e n s e r v e d on H. A l v a B r u m f i e l d b y p l a c i n g same in the United States mail, postage prepaid, addressed to his offices, 205 American Bank Building, Baton Rouge, Louisiana, this 3 J 2 . day of December, 19^3 \ l .. NINETEENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT PARISH OF EAST BATON ROUGE NO. 77 >OO h STATE OF LOUISIANA MRS. GLADYS FACIANE tf n n D I V I S I O N "C Versus FILED: L THE TRAVELERS INSURANCE C O M P A Q J& U j j / i't deputy' clerk ************************************************************ MEMORANDUM OF AUTHORITIES A. E X C E P T I O N O F .V A G U E N E S S U n d e r A r t i c l e 891 of th e L o u i s i a n a Cod e of C i v i l Procedure, a p e t i t i o n e r is r e q u i r e d to p r e s e n t a clear s t a t e m e n t of the m a t e r i a l facts u p o n w h i c h his cause of a c t i o n is based. P l a i n t i f f 's P e t i t i o n a n d S u p p l e m e n t a l and A m e n d e d P e t i t i o n has c h a r g e d that the d e c e d e n t 's de a t h was c a u s e d b y the n e g l i g e n c e of t w e n t y - o n e d i fferent defendants. It is alleged that the decedent died of a lung condition and that each of these parties were partially responsible for his death. A c a s u a l e x a m i n a t i o n of p l a i n t i f f 's P e t i t i o n and S u p p l e m e n t a l and Amended Petition will show that the parties defendant are engaged in the manufacture or distribution of many different types of products, used in many different ways and under many different conditions. We submit that each defendant should be g i v e n sufficient in f o r m a t i o n b y petitioner, who is the moving party in this lawsuit and who bears the burden of proof, to / 0 enable it to file responsive pleadings and to prepare an ade quate defense. The mere allegation that twenty-one different defendants manufactured or distributed some products which con t a i n e d inherent dangers causing d e c e d e n t ' s death is not sufficient to give any of them the necessary information to prepare a defense. To succeed in this lawsuit, plaintiff must prove the n a t u r e of the p r o d u c t m a n u f a c t u r e d b y each d e f e n d a n t w h i c h is allegedly responsible for decedent's death. Since plaintiff must make such proof, it is reasonable to require h i m to make specific, factual allegations in his pleadings. The preparation of the d e f e n s e of t h i s l a w s u i t b y a n y orie of th e d e f e n d a n t s at this stage in the pleadings would be nothing more than a guess ing game. ooy 7 We respectfully pray that plaintiff be required to file additional pleadings that will recite completely all of the facts upon which charges of negligence are based. B. MOTION TO COMPEL PLAINTIFF TO FILE ANSWERS TO INTERROGATORIES We have heretofore filed interrogatories on the plaintiff in an effort to obtain the essential details which we considered lacking in plaintiff's Petition. Plaintiff filed answers to those interrogatories which are completely unresponsive and which are obviously calculated to disclose no i n f o r m a t i o n whatever. We b e l i e v e that it is not n ecessary to belabor this point as a mere reading of those answers will adequately support our criticisms: We respectfully pray that, in a d d i t i o n to b e i n g r e q u i r e d to su p p l e m e n t the P e t i t i o n as hereinabove requested, plaintiff be required to file answers to our int e r r o g a t o r i e s which are truly res p o n s i v e and, in default thereof, that plaintiff's suit be dismissed. Respectfully Submitted: / ^ 2 CERTIEICA TE I hereby certify that a copy of the above and foregoing M e m o r a n d u m of A u t h o r i t i e s has b e e n s e r v e d on H. A l v a B r u m f i e l d by placing same in the United States mail, postage prepaid, addressed to his offices, 205 American Bank Building, Baton Rouge, L o u i s i a n a , this 2 a . d a y of D e c e m b e r , 1963. 7 a a c' S' CERTIFIED TRUE COPY 3 NINETEENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT PARISH OF EAST BATON ROUGE STATE OF LOUISIANA NO. 7 7 , OOlj- DIVISION C MRS. GLADYS FAGIANE Versus THE TRAVELERS INSURANCE COMPANY Filed: Deputy Clerk **** ******************************* ***************************** MOTION TO COMPEL FILING OF ANSWERS TO INTERROGATORIES On motion of the Ruheroid Company, Nicolet Industries, Inc., and Baldwin-Ehret-Hill, Inc., and on suggesting to the Court that Movers have filed interrogatories herein addressed to the plaintiff, and that copies of these interrogatories were served on the p l a i n t i f f h y m a i ling them to her a t t o r n e y on August 6, 1963; and, on f u r t h e r s u g g e s t i n g t h a t m o r e t h a n f i f t e e n days has e l a p s e d since service of these interrog a t o r i e s on the p l a i n t i f f 's attorney and that plaintiff has filed no answers to them: IT IS ORDERED that the plaintiff show cause on the 1963, w h y she s h o u l d no t he c o m p e l l e d to answer the interrogatories propounded to her hy The Ruheroid Com pany, Nicolet Industries, Inc., and Baldvin-Ehret-Hill, Inc. Baton Rouge, Louisiana 2 Respectfully Submitted: LEMLE & KELLEHER BY :QMJr)(.)L Albert H. Hanemann, Jr. Attorneys for Movers 1836 R a t i o n a l B a n k of C o m m e r c e New Orleans 12, Louisiana Building CE RTI FI CA TE I certify that a copy of the above and foregoing Motion has b e e n served on H. A lva B r u m f i e l d b y p l a c i n g same in the U n i t e d States mail, postage prepaid, addressed to his offices, 205 Ameri- can Bank Building, Baton Rouge, Louisiana, this day of October, 19^3* ? a </ > V : CERTIFIED TRUE COPV NINETEENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT PARISH OF EAST BATON ROUGE STATE OF LOUISIANA NO. 77,001* DIVISION X ' ^ MRS. GLADYS FACIANE VS. THE TRAVELERS INSURANCE COMPANY F I L E D :_______________________ ______________________ _ DEPUTY CLERK **************************** MOTION TO DISMISS On motion of The Ruberoid Company, Nicolet Industries, Inc. and Baldwin-Ehret-Hill, Inc., appearing herein through their undersigned counsel of record, and on suggesting to the Court that a Judgment was signed h e r e i n on J u n e 21, 1965 m a i n t a i n i n g M o v e r s ' E x c e p t i o n of Vagueness and reserving to p l a intiff the right to amend her Petition within 30 days of the date of the said Judgment so as to cure the defects in the Petition, in default of which plaintiffs' suit against Movers would he dismissed; and, On further suggesting that plaintiff has failed to file an amended Petition within 30 days of the date of the said Judgment: IT IS ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the above e n t i t l e d and n u m b e r e d cause be and it is h e r e b y dismissed as to The Ruberoid Company, Nicolet Industries, Inc. and Baldwin-Ehret-Hill, Inc. J - 2Baton Rouge, Louisiana, July 1965. CERTIFIED TRUE COPY I NOTICE OF ORDER OF JUDGMENT IN COMPLIANCE WITH LOUISIANA REVISED STATUTES OF 1950 13:3346 VS THE TRAVELERS INSURANCE GO. Nn 77,004 Div.. 19th JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT PARISH OF EAST BATON ROUGE STATE OF LOUISIANA ' H. Alva Brumfield, Esq. . Tn -Albert H. Hanemann, Jr., Esoa GREETING: You are hereby notified that a decision was rendered and spread on the m^^tes of Div--------- l:_ on th e __ -- _day o f ____ J u n e __________________ t 19.65. in the above entitled and numbered cause, and the following is a true copy of the entry of said decision: Considering the exception of vagueness filed on behalf of exceptors, The Ruberoid Company, Nicolet Industries, Inc. and Baldwin-EhretHill, Inc. and the court considering the pleadings, the argument of counsel and the law and the evidence being in favor of exceptors, it is therefore ordered, adjudged and decreed that said exception be sustained and accordingly plaintiff amend her petition to specify and name the products allegedly manufactured by exceptora, to name the jobs on which the products were used by the decedent, to name the employers who purchased and used the products manufactured by except ors and in what respects the products were defective and what dt^ge-rous a n d defective materials were used in the products and to name the alleged inherent dangers in the products. On plaintiff's failure to amend her petition in accordance herewith within 30 days of this date plaintiff's suit to be dismissed as to thes exceptors. G) Oral decision ( ) Written decision, a copy of which is enclosed herewith. t Thus done, signed and mailed at Baton Rouge, Louisiana, on this. day of Time ____ 19_cl-. La w O f f i c e s o f L e m l e Sc K e l l e h e r Na t i o n a l B a n k o r C o m m e r c e B u i l d i n g cable AeoRess"tMMOft" N ew O r l e a n s 12 A u g u s t 6, 1963 { sc u m B .ucM ue(i9 ie -i9 e o ) L o u i s G. L c M i e Ha r r y B. k cl l e h e r H a m m y V. S o u c h q n C h a r l e s Ko h l m e y e r , j m . G e o r o e B. Ma t t h e w s h . Ma r t i n h u n l e y Ca r l J . S c h u m a c h e r , J r . T h o m a s f, J o r d a n W illiam S t e i n . J m. C h a r l e s E. L u o e n o u m l C. Mu r p h y m o s s , j m Al le n R .F o n t e n o t S h i r l e y C. F r i e n d , J r . G e o r o e A . F r i l o t lit N. B u c k n e r B a r k l e y , J r . Albert h. hanemann, j r . D erm ot S. m c G u n c h ey Paul S. Deal Wa y n e S . W o o d y A' J a m e s A . C h u r c h i l l T h o m a s W. T h o r n e ,J r . P aul . Hu r l e y David l . Ca m p b e l l Clerk of Court 19th. J u d i c i a l D i s t r i c t C o u r t Parish of East Baton Rouge . East Baton Rouge Parish Courthouse Baton Rouge, Louisiana Dear Sir: Re: No. 77,004 - Division C - Mrs. G l a d y s F a c i a n e v. The T r a v e l e r s I n s u r a n c e C o m p a n y - 19th JD C - Our File 6l-284 I enclose interrogatories which we are propounding to the plaintiff. Please file these interrogatories in the record of the case. I would appreciate your acknowledging receipt and fil ing of these interrogatories on the copy which is enclosed and returning it to me in the enclosed self-addressed stamped envelope. Veiy truly yours, * LEMLE & KELLEHER A H H :m a h Enclosures atUr)/. A l b e r t H. H a n e m a n n , Jr. / / / 4 NINETEENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT PARISH OF EAST BATON ROUGE STATE OF LOUISIANA NO. 77,004 DIVISION C MRS. GLADYS FACIANE Versus THE TRAVELERS INSURANCE COMPANY Filed 1 IU .2L. \ c^^JUL D e p u t y (Tlerk * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * # * * * * * * * * * * * * * # ^.iHt,# * #####i(. INTERROGATORIES PROPOUNDED ON BEHALF OF THE RUBERDID COMPANY, NICOLET INDUSTRIES, INC., AND B A L DWIN-EHRET-'HILL, INC.______ TO: Mrs. Gladys Faciaae Under the authority of Article 1491 of the Louisiaia Code of Civil Procedure, you are directed to answer, the following interrogatories, in writing and under oath, within fifteen days of your receipt hereof: 1. In Article 37 of your Supplemental and Amended Petition you allege that The Ruberoid Company, Nicolet Industries, Inc., and Baldvin-Ehret-Hill, Inc. were negligent in failing to warn the decedent of the dangers inherent in the products manufactured by them and used by the decedent. Please specify the particular product or products to which you refer which were manufactured by these three defendants. / 2 2. ' Specify the Jobs on which each of these allegedly da n g e rous products were used, and state the approximate dates of their use. 3Specify the "dangers inherent in the products manufac tured" by these three defendants. . What "dangerous and defective materials" were used "in manufacturing the said products" manufactured by these three de fendants? LEMLE & KELLEHER Oy BY Albert H. Hanemann, Jr. Attorneys for The Ruberoid mpany, Nicolet Industries, Inc. and Baldwin-Ehret-Hill, Inc. 1836 N a t i o n a l B a n k of C o m m e r c e B u i l d i n g New Orleans 12, L o u i s i a n a C ERTIFI CATE I certify that a copy of the above and foregoing I n t e r rogatories has b e e n s e r v e d on H. A l v a B r u m f i e l d b y p l a c i n g same in the United States mail, postage prepaid, addressed to his offices, & 205 American Bank Building, Baton Rouge, Louisiana, this j g i ^ a a y of A u g u s t , 1963* C E R T IF IE D TRUE COPY .'I A l b e r t H. Hanemann, J r ^ FILED (" AUG 7 - i=53 ' OY. CLERK G * COUHl. M R S . GLADYS FACLANE N U M B E R 77,004, DIVISION "C" VERSUS 19TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT THE TRAVELERS INSURANCE COMPANY, ET AL PARISH OF EAST BATON ROUGE STATE OF LOUISIANA ANSWERS TO INTERROGATORIES PROPOUNDED BY DEFENDANTS, THE RUBEROID COMPANY, NICOLET INDUSTRIES, INC., AND BALDWIN-EHRET-HILL, INC. NOW INTO COURT, through undersigned counsel, comes Mrs. Gladys Faciane, plaintiff in the above captioned matter who answers the interrogatories propounded to her as follows: 1. Insulation materials, the exact name of which is unknown to plaintiff. 2. Petitioner does not h a v e this information, but as soon as this information is obtained, it will be furnished to.jiafendant. 3. Insulating materials and asbestos fibers will cause a tissue reaction in the lungs. 4. Petitioner does not have knowledge of the identity of the materials used in the manufacture of products manufactured by the defendant. By Attorney: H. ALVA BRUMFIELD 205 American Bank Building Baton Rouge, Louisiana CERTIFICATE I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing Answers to Interrogatories has this day been mailed, postage prepaid, a d d r essed to A l b e r t H. Hanemann, Jr., Esguire, 1836 National Bank of Commerce Building, New Orleans, La. MRS. GLADYS FACLANE VERSUS THE TRAVELERS INSURANCE COMPANY, ET AL N U M B E R 77,004, D I V I S I O N "C" 19TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT PARISH OF EAST BATON ROUGE STATE OF LOUISIANA ANSWERS TO INTERROGATORIES BEFORE ME, the undersigned authority, personally came and appeared Mrs. Gladys Faciane, plaintiff in the above entitled and captioned matter, who after by me being duly sworn did answer the interrogatories propounded by defendant, Aber Company, herein as follows: ... 1. C l a r e n c e A l f o n s o F a c i e n e , Sr., b o r n S e p t e m b e r 1, 1898, at Slidell, Louisiana, Social Security Number 434-05-4064. 2. 3 # 4^ Unknown. This information is not available to plaintiff at this time. This information is not available to plaintiff at this time. 5. Yes. 0^ Clarence A. Faciene, Sr. worked with materials including, but no t l i m i t e d to, the following: foam glass, fiberglass, asbestos, vegetable cork, rock cork, hair felt, asbestos powder, asbestos c e m e n t , u n i b e s t o s , s p o n g e ffelt, a s b e s t o s mud, a n d 85% magnesium. 7 Autopsy report, worv records and hospital records. MRS. GGLAADD'Y S F A C I E N E SWORN TO A N D SUBSCRIBED BEFORE ME, this day of / / ----- r 1963. NOTARY PUBLic / / / NILEISSITH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT PARISH OF BAST BATCH RCUGE LIMEES 77,004 - DIVISICI; VS. THE TRA7SI2RS INSURANCE COMPANY ANSWER CF P. LCRILLARD CCMPAHT, A DEFENDANT, TO ORIGINAL PETITION SUPFIEMSNTAL AND AMENDED PETITION FILED B PLAINTIFFS ' TO TEE HONORABLE, THE JUDGES OF THE NII-STEEHTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT W U H I M AND FOR THE PARISH OF EAST BATON ROUSE, STATE OF LOUISIANA: Now into Court, through undersigned counsel, comes P. Lorillard Company, purportedly made a defendant herein, and, for answer to the original petition filed herein by plaintiffs and to the supplemental and amended petition filed herein by plaintiffs, and to said original petition as supple mented and amended by said supplemental and amended petition, denies of the allegations contained in said petitions, except such thereof, if any, that may be hereafter especially admitted. Further answering said petitions categorically, respondent avers, alleges and pleads as follows: 1 For lack of sufficient information to justify a belief with regard thereto, respondent denies all of the allegations contained in paragraph 1 of said original petition. 2 For lack of sufficient information to justify a belief with regard thereto, respondent denies all of the allegations contained in paragraph 2 of 1 said original petition cf said original petit: 4. For lac:-: o: sufficient information to justify a belief with regard thereto, respondent denies ail the allegations contained in paragraph 4 of said original petition. $. For lack of sufficient information to justify a belief with regard thereto, respondent denies all the allegations contained in paragraph 5 of said original petition. / Q. For lack of sufficient information to justify a belief with regard thereto, respondent denies all the allegations contained in paragraph 6 of said original petition. ' 7. For lack of sufficient information to justify a belief with regard thereto, respondent denies all the allegations contained in paragraph 7 of said original oetitior.. I For lack of sufficient information to justify a belief with regard j ij the reto, respcrdent denies all the allegations contained in paragraph 8 of j t t said original petition. j 9. For lack of sufficient information to justify a belief with regard j thereto, respondent denies allthe allegations contained in paragraph 9 j of said original petition. j I, I ' ! For lack of sufficient information to justify a belief with regard j ! thereto, respondent denies ail cf the allegations contained in paragraph 10 of * j i said original petition. ! * i II. , For lac.-: of sufficient inf or.ration to justify a belief with regard ' tarsi c, respondent denies allthe allegations contained inparagraph11 of . S'n -`'`XT'a i / i! 12. For lack of sufficient information to justify a belief with regird thereto, respondent deniss all of the allegations contained in paragraph 12 of said original petition. 13. For lack of sufficient information to Justify a belief with regard thereto, respondent denies all the allegations contained in paragraph 13 of said original petition. 14. For lack of sufficient information to justify a belief with regard thereto, respondent denies the allegations contained in paragraph 14 0f said original petition. 15. Respondent alleges that paragraph 15 of said original petition contains no allegations of fact and therefore should require no answer; if answer is required, then for lac.c of sufficient information to justify a beliet with regard thereto, respondent denies the allegations contained in paragraph \ 15 of said original petition. 16. . For lack of sufficient information to justify a belief with regard H jj thereto, respondent denies all of the allegations contained in paragraph 1 il of said supplemental and amended petition. 17. For lac.< of sufficient information to justify a belief with regard j thereto, respondent denies all of the allegations contained in paragraph 2 of said supplemental and amended petition. _ j lo j For lac.: of sufficient infornation to justify a belief with regard j thereto,respondentdenies/tialienations contained in paragraph 3 of said j supplemental andamended petition. ! I' i i -3! ! 19. For lack of sufficient information to justify a belief with regard thereto, respondent denies all of the allegations contained in paragraph 4 of i said supplemental and amended petition. 20. For lack of sufficient information to justify a belief with regard thereto, respondent denies all of the allegations contained in paragraph 5 of said supplemental and amended petition. 21. For lack of sufficient information to justify a belief with regard thereto, respondent denies all of the allegations contained in paragraph 6 of j said supplmentai and amended petition. 22. For lack--of sufficient information to justify a belief with regard thereto, respondent denies all of the allegations contained in paragraph 7 of said supplemental and amended petition. 23. For lack, of sufficient information to justify a belief with regard ! i . i | thereto, respondent denies all of the allegations contained in paragraph 8 ! of said supplementaland amended petition. 24. , ' I For lack of sufficient information to justify a belief with regard | 5* thereto, respondent denies all of the allegations contained in paragraph 9 of j i ) said supplemental and amended petition. J *. i \\ I| For lack of sufficient information to justify a belief witn regard j i all of _ : thereto, respondent denies/the allegations contained in paragraph 10 of ! said supplementaland amended petition. i ^ / . O , jl For lack of sufficient infjrmat ion to justify a belief wi h regard | thereto, respondent denies all of the all egtions contained in para raph 11 of; 1 said supplemental and amended petition. ; l 1 I 27. For lack cf sufficient information to justify a belief with regard thereto, respondent denies all of the allegations contained in paragraph 12 o said supplemental and amended petition. 28. For lack o f .sufficient information to justify a belief with regard thereto, respondent denies all of the allegations contained in paragraph 13 of said supplemental and amended petition. 29. ' For lack of sufficient information to justify a belief with regard thereto, respondent denies all of the alegations contained in paragraph 14 of said supplemental and amended petition. 3C. "For lack of sufficient information tc justify a belief with regard thereto, respondent denies -11 cf tne allegations contained in paragraph 1? of said supplemental and amended petition. 31. For lack cf sufficient information to justify a belief with regard j ' ^ I thereto, respondent ernes a__ oi the allegations contained in paragraph 1c j cf said supplemental and amended petition. j 32. ! i For-lack of sufficient information to justify a belief with regard j respondent cennes --i > q2. tne allegations contained in paragrapn 17 j of said supplemental and amended petition. j 33. ! | For lack of sufficient information to justify a belief with regard ; thereto, respondent denies a_l cf tne allegations contained in paragraph IS of-said supplemental and amend: iutnon. O J For lack of sufficient information to justify a oelief with regard thereto, resocr.der.t denies all of the alleiaticns contained in paragraph 19 oi said suppleneni i_l ano. ameno.ec. petition. 1 I 35. For lack of sufficient information to justify a belief with regard thereto, respondent denies all of the allegations contained in paragraph 20 of said supplemental and amended petition. 36. For lack of sufficient information to justify a belief with regard thereto, respondent denies all of the allegations contained in paragraph 21 of said supplemental and amended petition. 37. For lack of sufficient information to justify a belief with regard thereto, respondent dbiies all of the allegations contained in paragraph 22 of said supplemental and amended petition. 3S. For lack of sufficient information to justify a belief with regard thereto, respondent denies all of the allegations contained in paragraph 23 of said supplemental and amended petition. -Respondent admits that the allegations contained in paragraph 24 of said supplemental and amended petition are. suostantiallj^ correct. *+- For lack of sufficient information to justify a belief with regard thereto, respondent denies all of the allegations contained in paragraph 25 of said supplemental and amended petition. ' . For lack of sufficient information to justify a belief -with regard thereto, respondent denies all of the allegations contained in paragraph 2o of said supplemental and amended petition. 42. For lack of sufficient information to justify a belief with regard thereto, respondent denies all oi the allegations contained in pars, raph 27 of said supplemental and ane/ded petition. 43 For lack of sufficient information to justify a belief with regarc thereto, respondent denies all of the allegations contained in paragraph 28 of said supplemental and amended petition. 44. . For lack of sufficient information to justify a belief with regarc tnereto, respondent denies all of the allegations contained in paragraph 29 of said jupplenental and amended petition. ' 45. For lack of sufficient information to justify a belief with regarc thereto, respondent denies all of the allegations contained in paragraph 30 of said supplemental and amended petition. 4c* For lack of sufficient information to justify a belief with regarc 1 thereto, respondent denies all of the allegations contained in paragraph 3 1 j of said supplemental and amended petition. 47. For lack of sufficient information to justify a belief with re gard thereto, respondent denies all of the allegations contained in paragrap 32 of said supplemental and amended petition, except that respondent denies outright that it published or gave such advertisements and assurances of safety and warranties as are alleged. LS. Respondent denies all of the allegations contained in paragraph 33 of said supplemental :d amended Petition. 49. For lack of sufficient information to justify a belief with regard thereto, respondent denies all of the allegations contained in paragraph 34 of said supplemental and amended petition. 5. Respondent denies all of the allegations contained in paragraph 35 of said supplemental and amended petition. 51. For lack of sufficient information to justify a belief with regard thereto, respondent denies all of the allegations contained in paragraph 36 of said supplemental and amended petition. 52. .~ For lack-of: sufficient information to justify a belief with regard thereto, respondent denies all of the allegations contained in paragraph 37 of said supplemental and amended petition. 53. Respondent denies all of the allegations contained in paragraph 38 . I of said supplemental and amended petition. 54. Respondent denies all of the allegations contained in paragraph 39 / of said supplemental and amended petition. 55. Respondent denies all of the allegations contained in paragraph 40 i of said supplemental and amended petition. 56. . . . * Respondent denies all of the allegations contained in paragraph 41 ' i of said supplemental and amended petition. ! 57. ' ; Respondent denies all of the allegations contained in paragraph 42 ; of said supplemental and amended petition. --or\-- I Jk 58. For lack of sufficient information to justify a belief tilth regard thereto, respondent denies all of the allegations contained in paragraph 44 of said supplemental and amended petition. 59. For lack of sufficient information to justify a belief with regard tnereto, respondent denies all of the allegations contained in paragraph 45 of said supplemental and amended petition. 60. For lack of sufficient information to justify a belief with regard thereto, respondent denies all of the allegations contained in paragraph 46 of said supplemental and amended petition. - " 61. For answer"to paragraph 47 of said supplemental and amended petition respondent now reiterates each and every allegation and denial contained in paragraphs 1 to 15, inclusive, of this answer, the same as if repeated in extenso* *' ' " ** Further answering said petitions,'respondent avers, alleges and pleads as follows: ' 62. ; Respondent particularly denies that either the illness or the death of the late Clarence A. Faciane ,(hereafter referred to as decedent) was caused by, further caused by, or in any way related to any fault on the p a r t : of respondent, the existence of any such fault being likewise.particularly : denied. , ! 3. In the alternative, and solely in the event that respondent should be found to have been guilty of any negligence related to decedent*s death (which is denied), respondent avers that any claim which plaintiffs may have against it in respect of the illness or death, of decedent (for which respondent denies tr =f- Ls any legal basis) is barred by the prescription _G_ ; / provided by Articles 2534, 2546 and 3536 of the Louisiana Civil Code, and by such other period or periods, statutory or otherwise, as nay be applicable. 64. In the alternative, and solely in the event that respondent should be found to hire been guilty of any negligence related to decedent *s death (which is denied), respondent further avers that any recovery by plaintifis is barred by decedent's having assumed any risks incident to the smoking of cigarettes manufactured by respondent. 65. In the alternative, and solely in the event that respondent should be found to have-.been guilty of any negligence related to decedent's death (which is denied)., respondent further avers that decedent was ccntributoril; r negligent in continuing to smoke when he knew or should have known, in the exercise of due care, that doing so night be injurious to his health. VJH3R3F0HS, respondent, ?. Lorillara Company, prays that as to your said respondent, the demands of plaintiffs and each and all of them be all rejected and denied, and that as to your said respondent, this suit be dismissed, at the costs of plaintiffs herein. Respondent further prays for all necessary orders, and for all general and equitable relief, and for all costs. 3y Attorneys: DIRH2TT, KARDIi HUHEER, DA42R0L Sc FRITCHLS Calvin 2. Hardin, Jr Lav: Address: 403 .Louisiana Baton Rouge, Louisiana, Lcrillard Company Attorney at national Bank Builain counsel for P. -<x> C E ?. T I F I C A T E ' I certify tnat a copy of the foregoing pleading was this day mailed, postage prepaid, to each of the following: Charles W, Phillips, Esquire Taylor, Porter, Brooks, Fuller & Phillips Attorneys at Law 1100 Louisiana National Bank Building Baton Rouge, Louisiana, counsel for The Travelers Insurance Company and Armstrong Contracting & Supply Corporation, defendants Edward . Gray, Esquire 1 Percy -and Macnnirdo ' Attorneys at Law - 205 Roumain Building Baton Rouge, Louisiana Counsel for Aber Company, Inc., a defendant ` . - / - ' . Frank S.Craig, Jr., Esquire Kizer, Heaton, Craig & Cangelosi Attorneys at Law 801 Fidelity National Bank Buildhg 'Ihird Street Baton Rouge, Louisiana Counsel for Owens-Corning Fiberglass Corporation, a defendant Jr., R. Gordon Kean,/Esquire Sanders, Killer, Dooming, Rubin & Kean 201 3aton Rouge Savings & Loan 3uilding Baton *Vage, Louisiana Counsel for U. S. Rubber Company, a defendant Joseph F. Keogh, Esquire Seale, Hayes, Smith, Keogh & Franklin Attorneys at Law 700 Florida Street Baton Rouge, Louisiana Counsel for H. I. Thompson Fiberglass Company and Philip Carey Manufacturing Company, defendants Maurice J . 'Wilson, Esquire Breazeale, Sachse 1 Wilson Attorneys at Lav; Fidelity National Baric Building Third Street Baton Rouge, Louisiana Counsel for Keasbey Kattison Company, a defendant A, Leon Hebert, Esquire Attorney at law 113 St. Louis Street,Baton Rouge, Louisiana. Counsel for i-i. >1, Kellogg Company, a defendant Richard C. Cadwallader, Esquire Attorney at Law 304 Louisiana National Bank Building Eaton Rouge, Louisiana counsel for 3 & B Engineering & Supply a defendant Company, David W. Robinson, Esquire Watson, Blanche, Wilson, Posner & Thibaut Attorneys at Law 137 St. Ferdinand Street Baton Rouge, Louisiana Counsel for Pittsburg Corning Corporation, a defendant E. Leland Richardson, Esquire Attorney at Law 410 Eeynond Building Baton Rouge, Louisiana Counsel for Johns-Manville Sales Corporation and Johrs-Lanville Product Corporation and Glass Fibers, Inc., defendants Benj. E. Slater, Jr., Esquire lionroe & Lenann Attorneys at Lav/ 1425 Whitney Building, Hew Orleans, Louisiana,counsel for Company Eagle Picher Harry I-IcCall, Jr., Esquire Chaffee, I-SCall, Phillips, Burke & Hopkins Attorneys at Lav/ 1500 latioral Bank of Comerce Building liew Orleans, Louisiana, counsel for R. J. Reynolds Tobacco Company, a defendant Carl J. Schumacher, Jr., Esquire Lenle & Kelleher Attorneys at Law 1836 national Bank of Commerce Building Hew Orleans, Louisiana, counsel for Baldwin-Ehret-Hill, Inc. and iiicolet Industries, Inc. and The Ruberoid Company, defendants. Charles Win.. Roberts, Esquire Burton, Roberts & VJard Att o rneys at Lav/ 206 La. Avenue, Baton Rouge, Louisiana Counsel for 1lundet Cork Corporation, a defendant 12- I Arrow Head Product3, Inc. 2342 Curry Street Long -eacr., California, a defendant H. Alva Brurfield, squire Attorns- at Law 205 American Bank Building 352 Florida. Street Baton Bc'^ge.Louisiana Counsel zor Plaintiffs Baton Rouge, Louisiana, this Jk day of April, 1962. FILED RPR i 6 ISI2 **.s#? ' sissrz. . P. Calvin S. Hardin, Jr., Escuire, >^toVney a Law ` / _ Address: 403 Louisiana National Bank Buildim 3aton Rouge, Louisiana, counsel for P. Lorillard Company ! I ! I \ l ) i ! - 13- ; i1 i CERTIFIED t I TRUE COPY Y\ C o n t i n u e d Irc'u J / c i d a l I (o ^ J o o J l ..d/ j v * & --" G o J ^ Z -- MINUTE ENTRY: FEBRUARY 26, 1962 WEST, J. MRS. GLADYS FACXANZ VERSUS TRAVELERS INSURANCE CO., ET AL NO. 2452 - CIVIL ACTION BATON ROUGE DIVISION **** * This matter came on for hearing at a former day on a m ari^ <jf $ha plaintiff to remand tide case to the Nineteenth Judicial D istrict Court in and for the Parish of East Baton Rouge, State of Louisiana. After hearing argument of counsel for the respective parties, and after receiving briefs from the respective parties, the matter waajsubmitted when the Court took time to consider. Now, after due cessfderation thereof: IT IFORDEREIThythe Court that the motion filed by the plaintiff to 'w remand this case to the Nineteenth Judicial D istrict Court for the Parish cf East Baton Rouge, State of Louisiana, be and the same is hereby GRANTED. -- 'Wi'^Mieuiiwiyiiiiiiiiy iiiitiii iL^w^ ijytjumi - PER CURIAM In order for one of several defendants to be able to remove a against such defendant to th e Federal Court, there must be a "separate and claim or cause of action, which would be removable if sued upon alone1' joined with other non-removable claim s. It is the opinion of this Court that no such "separate and independent claim or cause of action" exists here. American Fire & Casualty Co. v. Finn, 71 S. St. 534; 341 U.S. 6. Edwards v. E. L duPont deNemoars & C o., 133 F. 2d 165; Kolb v. Prudential Insurance Co. of America, 170 F. Supp. 97; Butler Manufacturing Co. v. Wallace & Tiarnan Sales Corp., 32 F. Supp. 635. F urtherm ore, the n ecessa ry d iversity of citizenship is lacking fcr a com plete rem oval because of the fact that one of the p laintiff's em ployers, who is a citizen and resident of Louisiana, i s joined a s a defendant in the tort action a s w ell a s in the alternative claim for workm an's com pensation Since the plaintiff h as a right under Louisiana Law to sue h is em ployer in tort, and a ltern a tiv ely in w orkm an's com pensation, such an alternative p le a ---- r r t be aid to be frivolou sly m ade fo r the purpose o f defeating jurisdiction in the F ed eral Court Jackson v . Southern K raft C orp ., 183 So. 133. (SIGOTD) e , 60ED0H 51 JUDGE, UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT F IL E BT.CLCTX OF COUS* t. certified t r u e COPY MINUTE ENTRY: A P R I L 20, 1962 WEST, TjyprTr.tv^^^w Jl S DISTF'~T COURT ^ EASTERN DISTRICT OF 1 TISIANA:v ~ 7 : : : : - BATON ROUGE DTVISiJL'N ____ ;LiiiR}:S OFitGE ' . , A TRUE COPY' til --1 auHis.ee^ ~ -:x <J'"' order for._oae-of a a v e ^ j ie f e B d i^ rai ^del =L -foeparateand Independent claim or .-. -_-.ajK.'-^~'!b^a;r~', 'i_-V 'V <rUtm m f t i f e l # - . F urtherm ore, the n ecessa ry d iversify of ciilxensM p is l acking fo r alcom plete;)i_,_ - .- ***>V-- '1-^.-?-"': ~ " * ~ '* "J' * ` - ' ' 1 ' v ' i>V vJajfjfe'V .'2 * ^ i' 'xa ril*eeaaseof tfcefoettha*esse<rftheplaintiff, s ** >~_ -*-'- / * - - .-. i c & s e a and re sid e n t o fL o u isiaaa,- fo joined; a * a d elead ast l t& e: ' . ' - ' y / . ^ - i ' - * ^ ' * "' - .- ' , ' W : - --. * . -.-r . `t-te-A '- * / : !. clairo^for workman1! com pensati oau V- - - V ' - ^Vv` .* _.. - ,.TM._. - \ y ^ r S ^ - r - :.-. - y :'--;-.`^'-.- ' i s a ^ ^ ^ a n ie * : IxidisUna !-*-#'to sue Ids.'en^oyer in tort; and altsrna t ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ vrcrkman1 compensation, such an alternative plea ca nnot be said to be - . --v; irivolonsly tp^* icr the purpose c i defeating jtxisdiction in the Federal Court. 'ckson v . Southern Kraft Corp., 133 So. 135, V'4 A.V ''' V-. T" }T --" =rW ` , 'r- - ' -^'&rA'r2_`-,z_*r,u^..r r r-- 7T ^ -J ?sS".Pi: ^CstoAUti, T ": ; ^ - r o f o E , T I l g T S a g T S T 25: iiidi i a C t l p } &- ->- - . r - - 1/ \ GLADYS FACIANE NUMBER: 77,004 DOCKET 2 versus 19TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT PARISH OF EAST BATON ROUGE THE TRAVELERS INS. C O . , ET AL * STATE OF LOUISIANA * * * * JUDGMENT This cause came on for hearing pursuant to assignment on the exception of vagueness filed by Philip Carey Manufacturing Company. P r e s e n t in C o u r t was F r a n k J. Polczola, attorney for Philip Carey Manufacturing Company. i ' The Court considering the law and evidence to be in favor of exceptor; _ IT IS ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the exception of vagueness be and it is hereby sustained. L IT IS F U R T H E R ORDERED, A D J U D G E D A N D DECREED that the plaintiff be and she is hereby given fifteen days to amend her p e t i t i o n to state w i t h p a rticularity the matters complained of, and; IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that if plaintiff fails to amend her petition within fifteen days, that her suit be dismissed against Philip Carey Manufacturing Company at her costs with prejudice. JUDGMENT RENDERED April 28, 1969. .JUDGMENT READ AND SIGNED on this ^ & day of April, 196 Respectfully submitted: JUDGE \ Judgment of Dismissal MRS. GLADYS FACIANE vs. THE TRAVELERS INSURANCE COMPANY, ET AL 77,004 No *4 19th Judicial District Court Parish of East Baton Rouge, State of Louisiana In the above entitled and numbered cause now comes the plaintiff, and with respect moves that said suit be dismissed at plaintiff's costs. w ith p r e ju d ic e a s to a l l d e fe n d a n ts. On motion of counsel for plaintiff in above entitled and numbered cause: It is ordered, adjudged and decreed that said suit be dismissed at plaintiff's costs., w ith p r e ju d ic e Done, read and signed in Open Court on this_ 3 U . day of as to a ll defendants, March 19. 9 if*A - Judge 18th Judicial D is tr ic t' This is to certify that the costs of Court, incurred in the above entitled and numbered cause, including this Judgment of Dismissal, amounting to $ B3 -- due the Sheriff of East Baton Rouge, and $ 3 / qZ due the Clerk of Court), are paid in full. Signed this ^ ^ _____ day of -- -------------- , 19 4%. Deputy Clerk o/ Court yClo-w-; Deputy! leriff NINETEENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT j' OF THE . STATE OF LOUISIANA PARISH OF EAST BATON ROUGE . | MRS. GLADYS FAC LANE : NUMBER 77,004 I VS. ' : 11 ARMSTRONG CONTRACTING AND SUPPLY : 11 CORPORATION; THE TRAVELERS INSURANCE : !! COMPANY; THE ABER COMPANY; and QUEEN : I INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA : JOINT PETITION ! i ! " 1 The joint petition of MRS. GLADYS FACIANE, a resident of the full age I j of majority of East Baton Rouge Parish, Louisiana, hereinafter sometimes called j "Faciane"; ARMSTRONG CONTRACTING AND SUPPLY CORPORATION and THE ABER COMPANY, II hereinafter sometimes referred to as "Employers"; and QUEEN INSURANCE COMPANY : i i |OF AMERICA and THE TRAVELERS INSURANCE COMPANY, foreign insurance corporations, |with respect represent that: - ! On or prior to September of 1959, Employers were engaged in the business of installation and were insured against liability under the Workmen's Compensation Laws of the State of Louisiana by Insurance Companies, Queen Insurance Company of America and The Travelers Insurance Company. 2. On or prior to September of 1959, Faciane's husband, Clarence A. Faciane, Sr., who was employed as an installator, was injured in East Baton Rouge Parish as follows: Petitioner alleges that her husband died as a result i | of lung damage caused by the inhalation of insulation material. I I 3 l| Sixty-five percent (65%) of Clarence-A. Faciane, Sr.'s, average ji - j! weekly earnings is in excess of the statutory maximum weekly compensation 1 - 1 ; l! benefit of Thirty-five and No/100 Dollars ($35.00). Insurance Companies have ,not paid Mrs. Gladys Faciane any workmen's compensation. 4. Insurance Companies have paid Mrs. Gladys Faciane no medical expense. 5. . Petitioner claims and contends that as a result of the aforesaid incident, she is entitled to permanent and total disability benefits and is accordingly entitled to the maximum statutory indemnity and medical expense and funeral expense as afforded by the Louisiana Workmen's Compensation Act. * 6. ' The Aber Company, Armstrong Contracting and Supply Corporation, The Travelers Insurance Company, and Queen Insurance Company of America deny that Clarence A. Faciane, Sr., suffered any accident or injury in the course and scope of his employment for Employers. In the alternative, Queen Insurance Company of America and The Travelers Insurance Company also contend that the death of Clarence A. Faciane, Sr., was due to causes unrelated to his employ ' ment for The Aber Company and Armstrong Contracting and Supply Corporation. For these and other reasons Aber Company and Armstrong Contracting and Supply Corporation contend that petitioner is entitled to be paid no workmen's compensation or medical expenses whatsoever. 7. Therefore, bona fide disputes exist between petitioner and Employers and Insurance Companies, as defined by the Louisiana Workmen s Compensation Act. i ! . 8. oirdsr to compromise and settle said disputes, Insurance C01np3.11i.ss ; and Employers have agreed to pay to Faciane the sum of Three Thousand One I Hundred Fifty and No/100 Dollars ($3,150.00), .in a lump sum, in full settle- j ment, satisfaction and compromise of the aforesaid claim, subject to the i approval of this Honorable Court, which offer of compromise is made and 1 accepted primarily to end litigation. i WHEREFORE, petitioners pray that the proposed compromise settlement be approved by and made the judgment of this Honorable Court, and that Mrs. Gladys Faciane have and recover judgment against Armstrong Contracting and Supply Corporation, The Travelers Insurance Company, The Aber Company, and Queen Insurance Company of America, in the sum of Three Thousand One Hundred Fifty and No/100 Dollars ($3,150.00), payable in a lump sum. Petitioners further pray that the fee of Faciane's undersigned attorney be fixed by this Court at twenty per cent (20%) of the said Three Thousand One Hundred Fifty and No/100 Dollars ($3,150.00) and be paid by Faciane therefrom. Petitioners further pray that The Travelers Insurance Company pay all c o s t s of these proceedings. c H. Alva Brumfield, Attorney fof Faciane . / ARMSTRONG CONTRACTING AND SUPPLY CORP.; THE TRAVELERS INSURANCE COMPANY; THE ABER TAYLOR, PORTER, BROOKS, FULLER & PHILLIPS Attorneys for Armstrong Contracting and Supply Corporation; The Travelers Insurance Company; The Aber Company; and Queen Insurance Compa:11 (of America / !i State of Louisiana j; Parish of East Baton Rouge !i !i 11 Before me, the undersigned authority, personally came and appeared !l MRS. GLADYS FACIANE, who, being by me first duly sworn, did depose and say J that she is one of the petitioners in the above and foregoing petition; that she has read the same; and that all of the allegations of fact therein con i' tained are true and correct. NINETEENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT l OF THE STATE OF LOUISIANA I PARISH OF EAST BATON ROUGE j MRS. GLADYS FACLANE NUMBER 77,004 VS. UARMSTRONG CONTRACTING AND SUPPLY j j CORPORATION; THE TRAVELERS INSURANCE !j COMPANY; THE ABER COMPANY; and QUEEN INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA This matter having been presented to the Court on the joint petition ! j of Mrs. Gladys Faciane, Armstrong Contracting and Supply Corporation, The Travelers Insurance Company, The Aber Company and Queen Insurance Company of America, and the Court having been fully informed in the premises and having discussed the proposed compromise settlement with Faciane, who appeared personally before the Court accompanied by her attorney and it appearing that Faciane has been fully advised of her rights, and the Court being of the opinion that there exist between the parties bona fide disputes, and that the said compromise settlement is fair and equitable and that it was entered into primarily to end litigation: IT IS ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the said compromise settle ment be, and it is hereby, approved, and that Mrs. Gladys Faciane have and recover judgment against Armstrong Contracting and Supply Corporation, The Travelers Insurance Company, The Aber Company and Queen Insurance Company of I j America, in solido, in the sum of Three Thousand One Hundred Fifty and No/100 Dollars ($3,150.00), payable in a lump sum, in full and final payment, settle- i , I ment, satisfaction and compromise of all workmen's compensation and all medical i expenses due her and to become due her by Armstrong Contracting and Supply i j Corporation, The Travelers Insurance Company, The Aber Company and Queen i !| Insurance Company of America, or any of them, under the Workmen's Compensation i i ! I , I; Laws of Louisiana, as well as any claim the said Faciane may have against them, . V / ' r -fff or any of them, in tort, on account of the alleged accident on or around September of 1959 described in the said agreement of compromise. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that the fee of Faciane' attorney be fixed at twenty percent (20%) of the said Three Thousand One Hundred Fifty and No/100 Dollars ($3,150.00) and be paid by Faciane therefrom. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECREED that The Travelers Insurance Company pay all costs of these proceedings. Judgment read, rendered and signed in Chambers on this / _ ^ T 'day of Judge, 19th Judicial District Court |! u - RECEIPT AND RELEASE - State of Louisiana Parish of East Baton R.ouo;u|p On this / 'Z' day of authority, personally appeared , 1969, before me, the undersigned MRS. GLADYS FACIANE,- a resident of the full age of majority of East Baton Rouge Parish, Louisiana, who acknowledged that she has this day received from Armstrong Contracting and Supply Corporation, The Travelers Insurance Company, The Aber Company and Queen Insurance Company of America, the sum of Three Thousand One Hundred Fift} and No/100 Dollars ($3,150.00), cash, in full payment, settlement and satisfac tion of the aforesaid judgment and in compromise ofthe claim described in the above entitled and numbered matter, hereby releasing Armstrong Contracting and Supply Corporation, The Travelers Insurance Company, The Aber Company and Queer Insurance Company of America, and the employees, directors, stockholders and executive officers of Armstrong Contracting and Supply Corporation, The Travelers Insurance Company, The Aber Company and Queen Insurance Company of America, from any and all liability growing out of the said accident, whether arising under the Workmen's Compensation Laws of Louisiana or in tort. | Appearer directs the Clerk of Court and Recorder of Mortgages for the i parish named in the caption hereof not to inscribe the said judgment in the I mortgage records of his office.