James Witte died of malignant mesothelioma in 2021, but before he succumbed to his disease, he and his wife Holly filed suit against the companies that they blamed for his exposure to asbestos. Among the defendants was a fire door company whose asbestos-contaminated doors he’d encountered while supervising the renovation of an old Broadway theater. Though the company attempted to have the case against them dismissed, their motion for summary judgment was denied due to multiple weaknesses in their argument.
Mesothelioma Victim Exposed to Asbestos from Fire Doors
Prior to his mesothelioma death, Mr. Witte offered extensive testimony about his exposure to asbestos, including from fire doors manufactured by T.M. Cobb Company. He described the work he did as Vice President for sales and production for Teletape New York during the late 1960s through 1973, including constructing studios. He spoke of “a lot of dust. A lot of old insulation,” and described the new T.M. Cobb fire doors that were installed in his presence.
In response to the mesothelioma claim, T.M. Cobb asked for the case against them to be dismissed based on a lack of personal jurisdiction. They argued that they were a California company and had never sold products or conducted business in New York State. To support that assertion they offered deposition testimony from their president, Jeffrey Cobb.
Judge Rules that Mesothelioma Claim Can Move Forward
In examining the arguments from both the mesothelioma victim’s family and the door company, Justice Adam Silvera of the Supreme Court of New York noted that, under New York law, Mr. Witte’s testimony alone would be sufficient to establish that Cobb had done business during the 1960s. He then went on to point out that Cobb had failed to provide any proof that his statements were incorrect.
Though Mr. Cobb testified that his company had not sold doors in New York during the time period described by the mesothelioma victim, the judge noted that though he was the company’s current president, he had no personal knowledge of what the company had or had not done in the 1960s. He also pointed out that Cobb had testified that the company had no document retention policy, writing, “Mr. Cobb confirmed that T.M. Cobb has not retained any sales records from the 1960s, has no document retention policy, and that he was unaware of which states T.M. Cobb’s customers (largely dealers and distributors) were in.” This lack of records, as well as a lack of testimony from anybody with personal knowledge of the company’s sales from the time in question, led to the motion for summary judgment being denied. The case will move forward to a jury.
If you or someone you love has been diagnosed with malignant mesothelioma, the Patient Advocates at Mesothelioma.net are here to help. Contact us today at 1-800-692-8608.
