![]() Upjohn contends the statement of facts in plaintiffs' Amended Appellants' Brief violates Rule 84.04(c) that it is not a fair and concise statement of facts, without argument, relevant to questions for determination on appeal. The rules that Upjohn claims plaintiffs violated include Rules 84.04(c) and 84.04(h). Upjohn's motion to dismiss asserts noncompliance with rules applicable to appellate procedure. Plaintiffs filed an Amended Appellants' Brief that contained a jurisdictional statement but did not change other parts of the original brief that Upjohn claimed violated requirements for appellate briefs. Plaintiffs' request to insert a jurisdictional statement in its brief was denied, but plaintiffs were allowed ten days in which to file a corrected brief. Respondent's Motion to Dismiss Appeal was ordered taken with the case. Upjohn's motion sought dismissal of the appeal because plaintiffs failed to include a jurisdictional statement in their brief and failed to comply with other Supreme Court Rules applicable to appellate briefs. Upjohn filed a motion entitled "Respondent's Motion to Dismiss Appeal" May 4, 1993. On May 3, 1993, plaintiffs moved to "insert a jurisdictional statement" in the brief. The brief contained no jurisdictional statement. Plaintiffs filed their brief April 7, 1993. Vodicka's disabilities to his heavy smoking. He also testified that he inhaled isocyanate fumes when he extinguished a fire in the plant in December 1979. He claims that fumes were emitted from cracks in the oven doors. He contends that he was also exposed to fumes that exited the plant through ventilation stacks and to fumes inside rooms in the plant where the ovens were located that cured the products being manufactured. Vodicka contends that the poisonous fumes were in the air that circulated throughout the plant. He claims he had been constantly exposed to isocyanate fumes caused by the PAPI that was part of the J-1019 mixture. Vodicka claims that he sustained disabling respiratory injuries from isocyanate poisoning. The process entails pulling the cord, on rollers, through several ovens and the chemical dips. ![]() It is one of two chemical dips through which the thread-like cord passes. J-1019, the chemical mixture that includes the isocyanate product (usually PAPI), is used in the first stage of the manufacturing process. The rubber product is cut into fan belts. The treated cord is then embedded in a rubber product that is cured and vulcanized in steam pots. The first stage in Dayco's manufacture of fan belts is processing and chemically treating a thread-like cord. J-1019 is a dip Dayco uses in the manufacturing process for fan belts. Dayco mixes PAPI with toluene to make a substance known as J-1019. Dayco uses an isocyanate product that is manufactured and sold by Upjohn under the trade name PAPI. ![]() One of the products Dayco manufactures is fan belts. For the reasons that follow, the appeal is dismissed.Įdward Vodicka was employed by Dayco Corporation (Dayco), a manufacturing company. Judgment was entered in accordance with the verdicts. ![]() Shirley Vodicka, his wife, sought damages for loss of consortium based on Edward's injuries. Vodicka sought damages for personal injuries that he alleged were sustained from inhaling fumes from a chemical product manufactured and sold by The Upjohn Company (Upjohn). ![]() Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied January 21, 1994.Įdward A. Lynn Myers, Springfield, for defendant-respondent. Rouse, Baker, Sterchi & Cowden, Kansas City, R. Meyers, Kansas City, for plaintiffs-appellants. Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer Denied January 21, 1994.Īpplication to Transfer Denied February 22, 1994. Missouri Court of Appeals, Southern District, Division One. The UPJOHN COMPANY, Defendant-Respondent. VODICKA and Shirley Vodicka, Plaintiffs-Appellants, ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |