Item 1. Legal Proceedings
Item 1. Legal Proceedings
Our subsidiaries and our holding company are subject, from time to time, to a variety of civil and administrative proceedings arising out of our normal operations, including, without limitation, product liability claims, health, safety, and environmental claims, and employment-related actions. Among such proceedings are cases alleging that plaintiffs have contracted, or have been placed at risk of contracting, beryllium sensitization or chronic beryllium disease or other lung conditions as a result of exposure to beryllium (beryllium cases). The plaintiffs in beryllium cases seek recovery under negligence and various other legal theories and demand compensatory and often punitive damages, in many cases of an unspecified sum. Spouses of some plaintiffs claim loss of consortium.
Beryllium Claims
As of June 30, 2023, our subsidiary, Materion Brush Inc., was a defendant in one beryllium case. In Richard Miller v. Dolphin, Inc. et al., case number CV2020-005163, filed in the Superior Court of Arizona, Maricopa County, the Company is one of six named defendants and 100 Doe defendants. The plaintiff alleges that he contracted beryllium disease from exposures to beryllium-containing products supplied to his employer, Karsten Manufacturing Corporation, where he was a production worker, and asserts claims for negligence, strict liability – failure to warn, strict liability – design defect, and fraudulent concealment. The plaintiff seeks general damages, medical expenses, loss of earnings, consequential damages, and punitive damages, and his wife claims loss of consortium. A co-defendant, Dolphin, Inc., filed a cross-claim against the Company for indemnification. On August 12, 2020, the Company moved to dismiss the cross-claim for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. The court denied the motion on October 23, 2020. On December 7, 2020, the Company filed a Petition for Special Action in the Court of Appeals seeking to appeal the denial of the motion to dismiss the cross-claim. The Court of Appeals declined to accept jurisdiction on December 30, 2020. The court entered a scheduling order on September 14, 2021 that did not set a date for trial. Amended scheduling orders were entered on April 8, 2022, August 4, 2022, and November 1, 2022 that likewise did not set a trial date. On March 30, 2023, the court dismissed all claims against four of the Company’s co-defendants, as well as the cross-claim by those co-defendants against the Company, pursuant to a confidential settlement agreement between those co-defendants and the plaintiffs. Following a court-ordered mediation on June 20, 2023, the Company and the other remaining defendant entered into a confidential settlement agreement with plaintiffs, pursuant to which all remaining claims in the case are to be dismissed with prejudice, subject to court approval.
No beryllium cases were filed in the second quarter of 2023.
The Company has insurance coverage, which may respond, subject to an annual deductible.
Other Claims
On October 14, 2020, Garett Lucyk, et al. v. Materion Brush Inc., et. al., case number 20CV0234, a wage and hour purported collective and class action, was filed in the Northern District of Ohio against the Company and its subsidiary, Materion Brush Inc. (collectively, the Company). Plaintiff, a former hourly production employee at the Company's Elmore, Ohio facility, alleges, among other things, that he and other similarly situated employees nationwide are not paid for all time they spend donning and doffing personal protective equipment in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act and Ohio law. Plaintiff filed a motion for conditional certification, which the Company opposed. On August 2, 2022, the court conditionally certified a class of employees at the Company’s Elmore facility only and rejected certification of a class across the Company’s other facilities.
In November 2022, the parties reached a settlement for an immaterial amount. The court preliminarily approved the settlement on March 30, 2023 and a final approval hearing was held on July 6, 2023. There were no objections to the settlement and the court entered an order approving the final settlement on July 7, 2023. The final settlement amount approximated the amount previously reserved for related to this matter.
37
Text extracted from the filing as submitted to EDGAR. Formatting, tables and exhibits are simplified for reading; the original document is authoritative for anything you rely on.