Skip to Main Content
(215) 567-3500

Call Us, We Can Help.

Important Decision Goes Against Ford

An important decision regarding Ford liability was  issued by Judge Hanna in Ohio. First, Ford has been playing games by attacking the authenticity of company documents submitted in opposition to summary judgment motions. Judge Hanna finds that all the exhibits submitted in opposition to our MSJ were supported by evidence supporting an inference of authenticity. . Second, Judge Hanna found that the evidence supported a triable issue of fact as to Ford’s “continued use of a braking system that required replacements brakes to include asbestos.” Thus, the court found that the product that Ford is responsible for is not only the OEM brakes and the replacement brakes it sold, but also Ford’s “braking system” that required the use of asbestos. Congratulations to Wayne Margolis and Chip Hickey who secured this victory.

.IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS

CUYAHOGA COUNTY, OHIO

ASBESTOS DOCKET

OPINION

JUDGE HARRY A. HANNA

Bettie Jane Raniolo, ct aI.,

Plaintiff,

v.

American Laundry Machinery,

Inc., ct aI.,

Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No: 752429

The Court has reviewed Plaintiffs Exhibits A through S filed in opposition to

Defendant Ford Motor Company’s motion for summary judgment. It appears that these

exhibits bear sufficient evidence of authenticity to be admissible in opposition to a Rule

56 motion. They consist of excerpts from depositions or discovery responses filed in the

state courts of Califomia, Delaware, Maryland, New York and Texas by lawyers

purporting to represent Ford, along with govemment documents and other documents on

Ford Motor Company stationary.

These documents viewed in a light most favorable to Plaintiff, would permit the

inference of some awareness on Ford’s part of the hazards of asbestos, the uncertainty of

that hazard, an insistence on continuing to use asbestos in its brakes into the 1990’s eer.

Ex F.), and continued use ora braking system that required replacement brakes to include

asbestos.

The motion for summary judgment is overruled.

So Ordered:

Judge Harry A. Hanna

Contact us for your consultation (215) 567-3500

Site By: