Document 4kD6K0rx2VEyYdvN5D314bva

SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK ------------------- - -x THE CITY OF NEW YORK, THE NEW YORK CITY : HOUSING AUTHORITY and THE NEW YORK CITY HEALTH AND HOSPITALS CORPORATION, : Plaintiffs, : >';G ' HO~ , %& No.'14365/89 - against - LEAD INDUSTRIES ASSOCIATION, INC., NL INDUSTRIES, INC., EAGLE-PICHER INDUSTRIES, INC., ATLANTIC RICHFIELD COMPANY, THE SHERWIN-WILLIAMS COMPANY, SCM CORPORATION, THE GLIDDEN COMPANY, AMERICAN CYANAMID COMPANY, and FULLERO'BRIEN CORPORATION, : IAS Part 39 (Justice Freedman) : ANSWER OF DEFENDANT : AMERICAN CYANAMID COMPANY ; : Defendants. : ------------------- - -x Defendant American Cyanamid Company ("Cyanamid"), by its undersigned attorneys, Donovan Leisure Newton & Irvine, as and for its answer to plaintiffs' Amended Complaint dated September 3, 1993 ("Amended Complaint"), respectfully alleges as follows: 1. Denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 1 of the Amended Complaint. 2. Denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 2 of the Amended Complaint. 3. Paragraph 3 of the Amended Complaint asserts a conclusion of law, as to which no responsive pleading is required. 4. Paragraph 4 of the Amended Complaint asserts a conclusion of law, as to which no responsive pleading is required. 5. Paragraph 5 of the Amended Complaint asserts a conclusion of law, as to which no responsive pleading is required. 6. Denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 6 of the Amended Complaint. 7. Denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 7 of the Amended Complaint. 8. Denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 8 of the Amended Complaint. 9. Denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 9 of the Amended Complaint. 10. Denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 10 of the Amended Complaint. -2 CYPL 0000028 11. Denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 11 of the Amended Complaint. 12. Denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 12 of the Amended Complaint. 13. Admits that Cyanamid is a Maine corporation with its principal place of business in New Jersey, and except as so admitted, denies the allegations of Paragraph 13 of the Amended Complaint. 14. Denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 14 of the Amended Complaint. 15. Denies the allegations of Paragraph 15 of the Amended Complaint to the extent they are directed against Cyanamid, and denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations to the extent they are directed against other defendants. 16. Paragraph 16 sets forth a definition, as to which no responsive pleading is required. 17. Admits that Cyanamid did and does business in the State of New York and that Cyanamid has transacted business in the State of New York, and except as so admitted, denies the allegations of Paragraph 17 of the Amended -3- CYPL 0000029 Complaint to the extent they are directed against Cyanamid, and denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations to the extent they are directed against other defendants. 18. Admits that Cyanamid derives substantial revenue for the sale and use of its products in New York, and except as so admitted, denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 18 of the Amended Complaint to the extent they are directed against other defendants. 19. Denies the allegations of Paragraph 19 of the Amended Complaint. 20. Denies the allegations of Paragraph 20 of the Amended Complaint. 21. Denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 21 of the Amended Complaint. 22. Denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 22 of the Amended Complaint. 23. Denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 23 of the Amended Complaint. -4- CYPL 0000030 24. Denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 24 of the Amended Complaint. 25. Denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 25 of the Amended Complaint. 26. Denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 26 of the Amended Complaint. 27. Denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 27 of the Amended Complaint. 28. Denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 28 of the Amended Complaint. 29. Denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 29 of the Amended Complaint. 30. Denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 30 of the Amended Complaint. 31. Denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 31 of the Amended Complaint. -5- CYPL 0000031 32. Denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 32 of the Amended Complaint. 33. Denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 33 of the Amended Complaint. 34. Denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 34 of the Amended Complaint. 35. Denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 35 of the Amended Complaint. 36. Denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 36 of the Amended Complaint. 37. Denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 37 of the Amended Complaint. 38. Denies the allegations of Paragraph 38 of the Amended Complaint to the extent they are directed against Cyanamid, and denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations to the extent they are directed against other defendants. -6- CYPL 0000032 39. Denies the allegations of Paragraph 39 of the Amended Complaint to the extent they are directed against Cyanamid, and denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations to the extent they are directed against other defendants. PLAINTIFFS' DAMAGES 40. Denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 40 of the Amended Complaint. 41. Denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 41 of the Amended Complaint. 42. Denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 42 of the Amended Complaint. 43. Denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 43 of the Amended Complaint. 44. Denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 44 of the Amended Complaint. -7- CYPL 0000033 PLAINTIFFS ACTIVITIES TO ABATE __________LEAD PAINT HAZARDS 45. (a-e). Denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations of Paragraphs 45(a-e) of the Amended Complaint. AS AND FOR AN ANSWER TO THE FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION 46. By order entered June 2, 1994 and judgment entered June 17, 1994, plaintiffs' cause of action for negligent product design was dismissed by this Court as against Cyanamid, and thus no responsive pleading is required by Cyanamid to paragraphs 46 through 52 of the Amended Complaint. AS AND FOR AN ANSWER TO THE SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION 47. By order entered June 2, 1994 and judgment entered June 17, 1994, plaintiffs' cause of action for negligent failure to warn was dismissed by this Court as against Cyanamid, and thus no responsive pleading is required by Cyanamid to paragraphs 53 through 56 of the Amended Complaint. -8- CYPL 0000034 AS AND FOR AN ANSWER TO THE THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION 48. By order entered June 2, 1994 and judgment entered June 17, 1994, plaintiffs' cause of action for strict products liability was dismissed by this Court as against Cyanamid, and thus no responsive pleading is required by Cyanamid to paragraphs 57 through 62 of the Amended Complaint. AS AND FOR AN ANSWER TO THE FOURTH CAUSE OF ACTION 49. Denies the allegations of Paragraph 63 of the Amended Complaint to the extent they are directed against 11 1 Cyanamid, and denies knowledge or information sufficient to Si form a belief as to the truth of the allegations to the |l ! extent they are directed against other defendants. ij jj 50. Denies knowledge or information sufficient to ;; form a belief as to the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 64 of the Amended Complaint. 51. Denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 65 of the Amended Complaint. 52. Denies the allegations of Paragraph 66 of the Amended Complaint. -9- CYPL 0000035 53. Denies the allegations of Paragraph 67 of the Amended Complaint. 54. Paragraph 68 of the Amended Complaint contains no factual allegations to which a responsive pleading is required. 55. Denies the allegations of Paragraph 69 of the Amended Complaint to the extent they are directed against Cyanamid, and denies knowledge or information sufficient to | form a belief as to the truth of the allegations to the ! extent they are directed against other defendants. AS AND FOR AN ANSWER TO THE FIFTH CAUSE OF ACTION 56. Denies the allegations of Paragraph 70 of the Amended Complaint to the extent they are directed against Cyanamid, and denies knowledge or information sufficient to | | form a belief as to the truth of the allegations to the j extent they are directed against other defendants. 57. Denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 71 of the Complaint. 58. Denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 72 of the Complaint. -10- CYPL 0000036 59. Denies the allegations of Paragraph 73 of the Amended Complaint. 60. Denies the allegations of Paragraph 74 of the Amended Complaint. 61. Denies the allegations of Paragraph 75 of the Amended Complaint to the extent they are directed against Cyanamid, and denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations to the extent they are directed against other defendants. AS AND FOR AN ANSWER TO THE SIXTH CAUSE OF ACTION 62. By order entered June 2, 1994 and judgment entered June 17, 1994, plaintiffs' cause of action for fraud and misrepresentation was dismissed by this Court as against Cyanamid, and thus no responsive pleading is required by Cyanamid to paragraphs 76 through 83 of the Amended [;!I Complaint. I AS AND FOR AN ANSWER TO PUNITIVE DAMAGES 63. Denies the allegations of Paragraph 84 of the Amended Complaint to the extent they are directed against Cyanamid, and denies knowledge or information sufficient to -11- CYPL 0000037 form a belief as to the truth of the allegations to the extent they are directed against other defendants. 64. Admits that plaintiffs purport to seek punitive or exemplary damages, but otherwise denies the allegations of Paragraph 85 of the Amended Complaint to the extent they are directed against Cyanamid, and denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations to the extent they are directed against other defendants. AS AND FOR AN ANSWER TO JOINT AND SEVERAL LIABILITY: ____________CIVIL CONSPIRACY 65. Denies the allegations of Paragraph 86 of the Amended Complaint to the extent they are directed against Cyanamid, and denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations to the extent they are directed against other defendants. 66. Denies the allegations of Paragraph 87 of the Amended Complaint to the extent they are directed against Cyanamid, and denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations to the extent they are directed against other defendants. 67. Denies the allegations of Paragraph 88 of the Amended Complaint to the extent they are directed against -12- CYPL 0000038 Cyanamid, and denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations to the extent they are directed against other defendants. 68. Denies the allegations of Paragraph 89 of the Amended Complaint to the extent they are directed against Cyanamid, and denies knowledge or information sufficient to I form a belief as to the truth of the allegations to the extent they are directed against other defendants. AS AND FOR AN ANSWER TO JOINT AND SEVERAL LIABILITY: _________CONCERT OF ACTION 69. Denies the allegations of Paragraph 90 of the Amended Complaint to the extent they are directed against Cyanamid, and denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations to the extent they are directed against other defendants. 70. Denies the allegations of Paragraph 91 of the Amended Complaint to the extent they are directed against Cyanamid, and denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations to the extent they are directed against other defendants. 71. Denies the allegations of Paragraph 92 of the Amended Complaint to the extent they are directed against Cyanamid, and denies knowledge or information sufficient to -13- CYPL 0000039 form a belief as to the truth of the allegations to the extent they are directed against other defendants. 72. Denies the allegations of Paragraph 93 of the Amended Complaint to the extent they are directed against Cyanamid, and denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations to the extent they are directed against other defendants. AS AND FOR AN ANSWER TO JOINT AND SEVERAL LIABILITY: ENTERPRISE LIABILITY 73. Denies the allegations of Paragraph 94 of the Amended Complaint to the extent they are directed against Cyanamid, and denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations to the extent they are directed against other defendants. 74. Denies the allegations of Paragraph 95 of the Amended Complaint to the extent they are directed against Cyanamid, and denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations to the extent they are directed against other defendants. 75. Denies the allegations of Paragraph 96 of the Amended Complaint to the extent they are directed against Cyanamid, and denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations to the extent they are directed against other defendants. -14- CYPL 0000040 AS AND FOR AN ANSWER TO JOINT AND SEVERAL LIABILITY ALTERNATIVE AND MARKET SHARE LIABILITY 76. Denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 97 of the Amended Complaint. 77. Denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 98 of the Amended Complaint. 78. Admits that it is impossible to identify the manufacturers of the lead pigment found in any specific building in the City, and except as so admitted, denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations of Paragraph 99 of the Amended Complaint. 79. Denies the allegations of Paragraph 100 of the Amended Complaint. 80. Denies the allegations of Paragraph 101 of the Amended Complaint to the extent they are directed against Cyanamid, and denies knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations to the extent they are directed against other defendants. 81. Denies the allegations of Paragraph 102 of the Amended Complaint to the extent they are directed against Cyanamid, and denies knowledge or information sufficient to -15- CYPL 0000041 form a belief as to the truth of the allegations to the extent they are directed against other defendants. AS AND FOR A FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 82. The Amended Complaint fails to state a cause of action against defendant Cyanamid upon which relief can be granted. AS AND FOR A SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 83. Plaintiffs' causes of action in the Amended Complaint are barred in whole or in part by the applicable statute of limitations to the extent they are directed against Cyanamid. AS AND FOR A THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 84. Defendant Cyanamid is not a proper party to some or all of the causes of action asserted in the Amended Complaint. -16- CYPL 0000042 AS AND FOR A FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 85. Plaintiffs' causes of action are barred in whole or in part by the equitable doctrines of laches, waiver and estoppel. AS AND FOR A FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 86. Plaintiffs have failed to join parties indispensable to a just adjudication of this lawsuit. AS AND FOR A SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE ji 87. Plaintiffs are barred from recovery for some ; or all of the causes of action asserted against Cyanamid ^ because plaintiffs' own fault or negligence caused or i ; contributed to the alleged injuries. ji i AS AND FOR A SEVENTH I AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 88. Plaintiffs assumed the risk of some or all of the conditions and damages alleged in the Amended Complaint. -17- CYPL 0000043 AS AND FOR AN EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 89. Some or all of the causes of action asserted by Plaintiffs are precluded because Plaintiffs have failed to mitigate damages. AS AND FOR A NINTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 90. Plaintiffs' damages, if any, were caused by the acts or omissions of third parties over whom Cyanamid had no control and with respect to whom Cyanamid has no liability. AS AND FOR A TENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 91. Some or all of the causes of action stated in the Amended Complaint seek to impose liability for conduct that is protected from liability by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution and by Article 1, 8 of the Constitution of the State of New York. AS AND FOR AN ELEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 92. The Amended Complaint fails to state any cause of action against Cyanamid for which punitive or exemplary damages can be awarded. -18- CYPL 0000044 AS AND FOR A TWELFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 93. Cyanamid owed no legally recognized duty to the City of New York or to the New York City Housing Authority in the City's or the Housing Authority's management of the City's or the Housing Authority's properties and, accordingly Cyanamid cannot be liable or responsible to the City or the Housing Authority for any compensatory, punitive, or exemplary damages sought to be recovered in this action. AS AND FOR A THIRTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 94. Plaintiffs' causes of action for restitution and indemnification are barred by the equitable doctrine of unclean hands. AS AND FOR A FOURTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 95. The causes of action stated in the Amended Complaint unlawfully seek to recover the cost of providing governmental services. -19- CYPL 0000045 AS AND FOR A FIFTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 96. At all relevant times, customers of Cyanamid's alleged predecessor-in-interest were sophisticated users of lead pigment, having knowledge equal to or greater than Cyanamid's alleged predecessor-in-interest with respect to the properties of lead pigment and the potential hazards and appropriate uses of lead-based paint. Accordingly, no liability may directly or indirectly be imposed on Cyanamid based upon an alleged failure to warn adequately such users of lead pigment, their customers or others who subsequently became exposed to lead pigment or paint. AS AND FOR A SIXTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 97. Cyanamid has no duty to abate lead paint or to take any other action allegedly taken by the plaintiffs relating to the alleged risks presented by lead paint. AS AND FOR A SEVENTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 98. Plaintiffs' damages, if any, were caused by the superseding acts or conduct of third persons other than Cyanamid. Such acts or conduct include, but are not limited to, the failure of the City of New York, a principal, -20- CYPL 0000046 fiduciary and effective managing head of the Housing Authority, which had substantial knowledge respecting alleged lead-based paint hazards, and which information respecting lead-based paint, to take those steps necessary to protect the Housing Authority and its properties from any damage caused by the Housing Authority's use of lead-based paint. AS AND FOR AN EIGHTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 99. Plaintiffs' causes of action are barred in whole or in part by the absence or any specific intent, conscious agreement, or common design or purpose on the part of Cyanamid to join with other defendants to injure plaintiffs or others. AS AND FOR A NINETEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 100. Plaintiffs' causes of action restitution and indemnification are barred by their active fault and their violation of their own duty to abate any alleged hazards resulting from paint containing lead. AS AND FOR A TWENTIETH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 101. Plaintiffs' causes of action, to the extent they seek to impose liability on Cyanamid for duties imposed -21- CYPL 0000047 on Plaintiffs under federal statutory and/or regulatory law, are preempted by federal law and barred by the Supremacy Clause of the United States Constitution. AS AND FOR A TWENTY-FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 102. Plaintiffs' claim for punitive damages violates the Excessive Fines Clause of the Eighth Amendment and the Due Process Clauses of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution and violates Article 1 5 and 6 of the Constitution of the State of New York. AS AND FOR A TWENTY-SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 103. Plaintiffs' claims are barred by their inability to identify Cyanamid or its alleged predecessor in interest as the particular manufacturer of the products that allegedly caused their injuries. AS AND FOR A TWENTY-THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 104, Plaintiffs' causes of action are barred because of the plaintiffs' breaches of duties which include, but are not limited to, the failure of the City of New York, a principal, fiduciary and effective managing head of the -22- CYPL 0000048- Housing Authority sufficiently to maintain or provide the funds needed to maintain the properties of the Housing Authority and otherwise to protect the Housing Authority and its properties from any damage caused as a result of the Housing Authority's use of lead-based paint. AS AND FOR A TWENTY-FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 105. Plaintiffs' causes of action do not arise out of the same transaction, occurrence, or series of transactions or occurrences, and should therefore be severed on the ground of misjoinder under CPLR 603 and 1003. AS AND FOR A TWENTY-FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 106. Plaintiffs' causes of action are barred in whole or in part to the extent the products that allegedly caused them injury complied with federal, New York State, New York City Housing Authority, or New York City specifications. AS AND FOR A TWENTY-SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 107. Plaintiffs' claims against Cyanamid should be dismissed because of misuse of the product in question and because pigment was not intended or sold for ingestion. -23- CYPL 0000049 AS AND FOR A TWENTY-SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 108. Plaintiffs' alleged injuries were caused in whole or in part by the unforeseeable misuse of lead paint by persons or entities other than Cyanamid. AS AND FOR A TWENTY-EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 109. Based on the state of scientific and technological knowledge at the time lead pigment was marketed, such pigment was reasonably safe for its normal and foreseeable use. AS AND FOR A TWENTY-NINTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 110. The causes of action set forth in the Amended Complaint are barred in whole or in part because of the lack of defect in lead pigment. -24- CYPL 0000050 WHEREFORE, American Cyanamid Company respectfully demands judgment dismissing the Amended Complaint and awarding Cyanamid fees, and such other and further relief as this Court may deem just and proper. Dated: New York, New York August 8, 1996 DONOVAN LEISURE NEWTON & IRVINE Attorneys for Defendant American Cyanamid Company 30 Rockefeller Plaza New York, New York 10112 (212) 632-3000 TO: John R. Low-Beer, Esq. DORON GOPSTEIN First Assistant Corporation Counsel of the City of New York 100 Church Street, Room 326N New York, NY 10007 Attorneys for Plaintiffs The City of New York and The New York City Health and Hospitals Corporation ALAN D. AVILES, ESQ. New York City Housing Authority Carol Fisler, Esq. 75 Park Place New York, NY 10007 Attorneys for Plaintiff New York City Housing Authority -25- CYPL 0000051 KIRKLAND & ELLIS 655 15th Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20005 - and - BARTLITT BECK HERMAN PALENCHAR & SCOTT Courthouse Place, Suite 300 54 West Hubbard Chicago, Illinois 60610 - and - KORNSTEIN, VEISZ & WEXLER 757 Third Avenue New York, New York 10017 Attorneys for Defendant NL Industries, Inc. ARNOLD & PORTER 399 Park Avenue New York, New York 10022 - and - DEAN M. HARRIS, ESQ. Atlantic Richfield Company 515 South Flower Street Los Angeles, California 90071 Attorneys for Defendant Atlantic Richfield Company -26- CYPL 0000052 JONES, DAY, REAVIS & POGUE One Mellon Bank Center 31st Floor 500 Grant Street Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15219 - and JONES, DAY, REAVIS & POGUE 599 Lexington Avenue New York, New York 10022 Attorneys for Defendant The Sherwin-Williams Company SULLIVAN, SULLIVAN & PINTA 100 Franklin Avenue Boston, Massachusetts 02110 - and GILBERT, SEGALL & YOUNG 430 Park Avenue New York, New York 10022 Attorneys for Defendant Lead Industries Association, Inc. MOSES & SINGER 1301 Avenue of the Americas New York, NY 10019-6076 - and CROWLEY, BARRETT & KARABA 20 South Clark Street, Suite 2310 Chicago, Illinois 60603 Attorneys for Defendant Fuller-0'Brien Corporation -27- CYPL 0000053 POPHAM, HAIK, SCHNOBRICH & KAUFMAN, LTD. 3300 Piper Jaffray Tower 222 South 9th Street Minneapolis, MN 55402 - and - POPHAM, HAIK, SCHNOBRICH & KAUFMAN, LTD. 1300 I Street, N.W. Suite 500 East Washington, D.C. 20005 - and - HAYTHE & CURLEY 237 Park Avenue New York, New York 10017 Attorneys for Defendants SCM Corporation and The Glidden Company -28- CYPL 0000054