Document VKG5yDa4kvE2JqN9Rd2EpJm4w
D YKEM A. GOSSETT. SPEN C ER . G O O DNO W & TR IG G 35T H FLO O R 4 0 0 R EN AISSAN C E CENTER D ETR O IT. M IC H IG A N 4 0 2 4 3 :
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION
PRISCILLA LEE, Personal Representative of the Estate of JERRY LEE, Deceased,
Plaintiff,
Civil Action No. 84 CV 2398DT
UNION CARBIDE CORPORATION, a foreign corporation; DIAMOND SHAMROCK CORPORATION, a foreign corporation; STAUFFER CHEMICAL COMPANY, a foreign corporation; TENNECO RESINS, INC., a foreign corporation; UNIROYAL, INC., a foreign corporation; ALLIED CHEMICAL CORPORATION, a foreign corporation; OCCIDENTAL CHEMICAL CORPORATION, a foreign corpora* tion; THE FIRESTONE TIRE & RUBBER COMPANY, a foreign corporation, THE B. F. GOODRICH COMPANY, a foreign corporation? THE GOODYEAR TIRE & RUBBER COMPANY, a foreign corporation.
Defendants.
Hon. Julian Abele Cook
URL 11233
Ii
UNIROYAL, INC.'S ANSWER AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES TO COMPLAINT
Defendant Uniroyal, Inc. answers plaintiff's Complaint;
as follows:
!
O VKEM A, G O SSETT. SPENCER. G O O O N O W ft TR IG G 35TM FLOOR 4 0 0 R E N A IS S A N C E CENTER D ETR O IT, M IC H IG A N 4 B 2 4 3
URL 11234
COUNT I
1. Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations of paragraph 1.
2. Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations of paragraph 2.
3. Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations of paragraph 3.
4. Defendant admits the allegations of paragraph 4.
5. Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations of paragraph 5.
6. Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations of paragraph 6, as they relate to all defendants, but this defendant acknowledges its jurisdictional contacts with Michigan.
7. Defendant admits that in the past it has sold polyvinyl chloride resin, and otherwise is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations of paragraph 7.
2
D YKEM A. GOSSETT. SPEN C ER . GOODNOW a TR IG G 35T H FLO O R 4 0 0 R E N A IS S A N C E CENTER O ETR O IT. M IC H IG A N 4 8 2 4 3 :
URL 11235
8. Defendant admits that in the past it has sold
;
i
polyvinyl chloride resin, and otherwise is without knowledge or j
information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the
allegations of paragraph 8.
j
9. Defendant is without knowledge or information
i
sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations
of paragraph 9.
10. The allegations of paragraph 10 constitute legal
conclusions which defendant denies to the extent they are inconsistent with the applicable law.
i
|
11. Defendant denies as untrue the allegations of paragraph 11 and its sub-paragraphs
12. Defendant denies as untrue the allegations of paragraph 12.
13. Defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations of paragraph 13.
14. Defendant denies as untrue the allegations regarding entitlement to recovery, but otherwise is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the allegations of paragraph 14.
3
v
URL 236
4-1 44 0O
<0 4ua4t c
44 cai E0(0}
0t o
4(0to0>)
4-> oua
u
Ca 44H34
*44CH34O
> Mat
444H444
40J1 (030) cautr
4J 1c0 4'O4c4> a
44ooa44t * 4ocr4t O(0 4OU4
*c4 r<aH0 44 0cH) <CT00 4ta04o>)
'D
*.
2w
at3<o0t
(0
--
>ati
bo 2ww
u oc 44 o
c 44uO44 <0
44 c
c(D0
T0EO3Jn)*
4to4 o(a0
M
mHorCh\ urUi
44a34t
4O4
1V0d
a0<c0)t
M 44
-4tro4l 4(V04i
ue3O crl
(a0i to
to 43
4aw0t CuU
4c4 aas
aatutoot
4ca4> a
at 4434
4O4
m 0)
He
4oH4
10
i~caHnt
rH
<0
44 0 rr4touc(aHHHo04>> at
44a34t a3t 4U c 3 ttoo (a0t
t-t
acDt 44atccao44t aat
trHo
trHo
43
<u0 a<0i tuo a
44 O
4(oeH40 to rrOaHHt' to
44a34t
4Ua34t c3
<(00
(0 aHt acot
44 *4ccato4ot Qat
r*
Hr-
H 43
tVo-| otVt0ood>4
(0 M 4a4t aet 4o4
44 cat (to0 (t<ao00t
44 OU3 U
cto 44H43
trot 4434 4ttoo4 a3t acVdtr 44 4acca4att
44ua34t at O' 4o4 * -cort 44 Oto Vd 4O4
444H444 rtCHrol a 44 to crl to cton
4ata4ott
a &
atot r(0
w2 OEl,
2W33
3o u oc 44
>act 44uo44 to
SO
44 co
cat **EO3on'
to 4(04 01 oo
MM fZoor* u
at MH
4434 44
4O4 Oc3
tVaodt
o TtCoJ
to cto
HH 44
4r4)l
c3 O
4<40 tUatoot to aut
o Tct
4(aVt3o0d
44 teo 4aca4t aat
D<taVo0d1 44a34t 4o4
GrHO (c0
4oH4
<O0l
raHt
rH
<0
44 O
-4toHCo4 rr1o0HH0)
44a34t
4a3v4*t e
a
CO to
-tarott act
a
44 (c0 ca 4a4t oat
0rH> r<HT
43 Q<0< uOl tVod tOot
44 o <c0 4oH4 rrtoa1HHo0>t 44a43t 4a3CV4ti 3 CO to aCrOtl Tca3t 44 TCtDo 4Ca4t a O oCN Ol
4OatV<o304' tUo a
:PZ8* NVDIH3IM ilO13Q U31N33 33NVSSIVN3U OOP UOOli HiSC OSItli YONOOOO 33N3dS '113SS09 'VH3MAO:
D VKC M A, G O SSETT. SPEN C ER . G O O DNO W A TR IG G 3STN FLO O R 4 0 0 R EN AISSAN C E CENTER D ETR O IT, M IC H IG A N 4 8 2 4 3 :
21. Defendant denies as untrue the allegations of paragraph 21.
WHEREFORE, defendant requests this Court to enter a judgment of no cause for action, together with an assessment of costs and attorney's fees against plaintiff.
AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES I
Failure To State A Claim Each count of plaintiff's Complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.
II Statute Of Limitations Plaintiff's claims are barred by the applicable statute of limitations.
III Comparative Negligence The damages allegedly sustained by plaintiff were caused by the negligence and contributory negligence of plaintiff and plaintiff's decedent, and must be diminished proportion to the amount of negligence attributable to them.
5
;O VKEM A. GOSSETT. SPEN C ER . C O O D N O W ft TR IG G 35T H FLO O R 4 0 0 R E N A IS S A N C E C EN TER D ETR O IT. M IC H IG A N 4 * 2 4 3 :
URL 11238
IV Sole Negligence Of Others; Intervening And Superseding Cause
All of the damages, if any, allegedly suffered by plaintiff were caused by the acts and conduct of other parties, which intervened between defendant's acts and conduct and
i
plaintiff's alleged damages, thereby barring plaintiff from any! recovery from defendant.
V Abuse, Misuse And Alteration Of Product
All of the damages, if any, allegedly suffered by plaintiff were caused by the abuse, misuse and alteration of defendant's product, thereby barring plaintiff from any recovery from defendant.
VI Sophisticated Vendee
Ford Motor Company is a sophisticated vendee of the product at issue, and was aware both of any risks associated with that product and the proper use of that product.
VII No Proximate Cause
There exists no proximate causation between any alleged acts or omissions or any alleged breach of duty or warranty by defendant and plaintiff's alleged damages; all of
6
iD Y K E M A . G O SSETT. SPEN C ER . G O O O NO W ft TR IG G 3S T H FLO O R 4 0 0 R E N A IS S A N C E C EN TER O E TR O IT. M IC H IG A N 4 8 X 4 3 :
plaintiff's alleged damages were the result of the conduct,
I i
product or causes attributable to persons other than defendant, j
and defendant's product was not a substantial factor in causing!
plaintiff's damages.
j
VIII Assumption Of Risk
Plaintiff's claims are barred to the extent that plaintiff or plaintiff's decedent assumed the risk of knowingly exposing themselves to materials at the Ford Vinyl Plant without proper precautions.
IX Absence Of Duty
Defendant had no duty and made no warranty to plaintiff or plaintiff's decedent in connection with the product at issue.
x
Mo Benefit Of Presumption
URL 11239
Plaintiff must prove this case without the benefit of any presumption to the extent she seeks to recover damages caused by products 10 or more years old.
7
O VKEM A. GOSSETT. SPENCER. G O O D N O W ft T R IG G 3 STM FLO O R 4 0 0 R EN AISSAN C E CENTER D ETR O IT. M IC H IG A N 4 8 2 4 3
nan
XI Reservation Of Right
Defendant reserves the right upon completion of its investigation and discovery to file such amended answer and such additional defenses as may be appropriate.
WHEREFORE, defendant requests this Court to enter a
ij
judgment of no cause for action, together with an assessment of j
I
costs and attorney's fees against plaintiff.
' ii
DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
*
Defendant hereby demands a jury trial of all issues in this case.
DYKEMA,
TT, SPENCER, GOODNOW & TRIGG
By: /[ / VWVUJ Jennis M. Haffey (P26378) Attorneys for Defendant 35th Floor - 400 Renaissance Center Detroit, Michigan 48243 (313) 568-6704
Dated: June 15, 1984
8