Krik v. Crane Co., et al

RESPONSE

N.D. Ill.March 7, 2014

035-9511kbf IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS EASTERN DIVISION CHARLES KRIK ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) No: 1:10-cv-07435 ) CRANE CO., et al., ) District Judge John Z. Lee ) Defendant ) DEFENDANT CRANE CO.’s RESPONSES AND OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF’S MOTIONS IN LIMINE NO. 4, NO.5, NO.6, NO.8, NO.9, NO.11, NO.12 and NO. 13 Defendant, CRANE CO., by and through its undersigned counsel, hereby files its Responses and Objections to Plaintiff’s Motion in Limine No. 4, 5, 6, 8, 9, 11, 12, 13 and in support thereof, states the following: Plaintiff’s Motion in Limine No. 4: The time or circumstances under which Plaintiff employed his attorney. CRANE CO. RESPONSE: Crane Co. does not object to Plaintiff’s Motion in Limine No. 4 as written. Plaintiff’s Motion in Limine No. 5: That the law firm of Cascino Vaughn Law Offices represents, or has been referred other cases involving, other asbestos-exposed individuals and/or asbestos product liability actions, except to show bias of experts or of a witness represented by CVLO. CRANE CO. RESPONSE: Crane Co. does not object to Plaintiff’s Motion in Limine No. 5 as written. Plaintiff’s Motion in Limine No. 6: Asbestos lawsuits, or Plaintiff’s claims, are in any way “lawyer-made” lawsuits or claims, or in any other way infer that such cases are generated or Case: 1:10-cv-07435 Document #: 235 Filed: 03/07/14 Page 1 of 4 PageID #:6556 2 caused by Plaintiff’s counsel. CRANE CO. RESPONSE: Crane Co. does not object to Plaintiff’s Motion in Limine No. 6 as written. Plaintiff’s Motion in Limine No. 8: The United States government stockpiled asbestos CRANE CO.RESPONSE: Crane Co. does not object to Plaintiff’s Motion in Limine No. 8 as written. Plaintiff’s Motion in Limine No. 9: Asbestos insulation products “won the war” or any reference to such products being necessary during World War II or any other war. CRANE CO. RESPONSE: At the time of trial Crane Co. does not intend to argue that asbestos insulation products “won the war.” However, it does intend to explain the how the characteristics of asbestos insulation products enabled naval vessels during the relevant time period to be lighter and faster, which further enabled them to carry more fuel and ammunition. Plaintiff’s Motion in Limine No. 11: That the United States government’s ban of asbestos was overturned on appeal in the United States Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit. CRANE CO. RESPONSE: At the time of trial Crane Co. does not intend to reference, mention or present evidence that the United States government’s ban of asbestos was overturned on appeal, unless Plaintiff “opens the door” and infers or argues to the jury that asbestos is banned in the United States. Thus, Crane Co. requests This Honorable Court reserve ruling on this motion in limine until the time of trial. Plaintiff’s Motion in Limine No. 12: References, other than during jury selection, to names of persons as being potential witnesses or that they were identified in interrogatory answers or other Case: 1:10-cv-07435 Document #: 235 Filed: 03/07/14 Page 2 of 4 PageID #:6557 3 discovery documents as potential witnesses absent a finding by the court that a missing witness instruction is proper under Federal Jury Instructions of the Seventh Circuit, 1.19. CRANE CO. RESPONSE: Crane Co. does not intend to reference, mention or present evidence of missing witnesses at trial until the issue arises. Therefore, Crane Co.’s requests This Honorable Court reserve ruling on this motion in limine until the time of trial. Plaintiff’s Motion in Limine No. 13: That plaintiff was required to present documentary evidence from defendant to prove the presence of its asbestos in proximity to plaintiff CRANE CO. RESPONSE: Crane Co. does not object to Plaintiff’s Motion in Limine No. 13 as written. Dated: March 7, 2014 Respectfully submitted, s/ James P. Kasper James P. Kasper, One of the Attorneys for Defendant, CRANE CO. Susan Gunty, Esq. 3127982 James P. Kasper, Esq. 6283202 Catherine L. Carlson, Esq. 6281129 Gunty & McCarthy 150 South Wacker Drive, Suite 1025 Chicago, IL60606-4102 (312) 541-0022 (312) 541-0033 Case: 1:10-cv-07435 Document #: 235 Filed: 03/07/14 Page 3 of 4 PageID #:6558 4 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE The undersigned attorney certifies that on March 7, 2014, these papers were filed with the Clerk of the Court for the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois using the CM/ECF system, which will send notification of such filing upon all parties who have appeared. /s/ James P. Kasper James P. Kasper Susan Gunty, Esq. 3127982 James P. Kasper, Esq. 6283202 Catherine L. Carlson, Esq. 6281129 Gunty & McCarthy 150 South Wacker Drive, Suite 1025 Chicago, IL60606-4102 (312) 541-0022 (312) 541-0033 Case: 1:10-cv-07435 Document #: 235 Filed: 03/07/14 Page 4 of 4 PageID #:6559