Product Liability -- 2018



Condon v. Advance Thermal Hydronics, Inc.   (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div.)

Allowing non-settling defendants to present cross-claim proofs

The NAM filed an amicus brief in support of the trial court’s decision to allow non-settling defendants to present cross-claim proofs in a case concerning apportioning liability for asbestos exposure between multiple defendants. The issue is whether settled defendants remain “parties” for purposes of allowing non-settling defendants to present cross-claim proofs and enable the jury to apportion fault among all defendants (settled and non-settling) that may have contributed to the plaintiff’s harm. The presentation of cross-claim proofs against settled defendants is critical to help ensure that non-settling defendants do not bear an unfair and disproportionate burden and to preserve assets for future claimants that could be threatened if current plaintiffs are able to receive large, windfall recoveries for their injuries in the tort system. The NAM’s brief argued that 1) providing windfall recoveries to plaintiffs would harm manufacturers; 2) windfall recoveries threaten potential recoveries for future plaintiffs; and 3) non-settling defendants should be allowed to introduce settled defendants’ prior deposition testimony to prove their cross claims. In a win for manufacturers, the appellate court vacated the jury verdict against one of the remaining defendants.


Related Documents:
NAM brief  (November 24, 2015)