Case 3:17-cv-00817-CSH Document 11 Filed 07/27/17 Page 1 of 7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT

ANDERSON TRUCKING SERVICES, INC.,

Case No.: 3:17-cv-00817-CSH
Plaintiff,

-v-
ANSWER TO COMPLAINT,
EAGLE UNDERWRITING GROUP, INC.; COUNTERCLAIM AGAINST
WOODS HOLE OCEANOGRAPHIC PLAINTIFF AND CROSS CLAIM
INSTITUTION; RIDGEWAY INTERNATIONAL AGAINST CO-DEFENDANT
USA, INC.; AUSTRALIA NATIONAL EAGLE UNDERWRITING GROUP,
MARITIME MUSEUM, INC.
Defendants.

Defendant Ridgeway International USA, Inc. (“Ridgeway”), by its attorneys, Blank Rome

LLP, for its answer to the complaint, counterclaim and cross-claims alleges upon information and

belief as follows:

1. Denies having knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth

of the allegations contained in paragraphs 1 through 3 of the Complaint.

2. Admits that Ridgeway is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the

State of New York with its principal place of business in the State of New York.

3. Denies having knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth

of the allegations contained in paragraph 5 of the Complaint.

4. Denies the allegations contained in paragraphs 6 through 9 of the Complaint.

5. Denies having knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth

of the allegations contained in paragraph 10 of the Complaint.

6. Denies the allegations contained in paragraph 11 of the Complaint.

692233.06519/105979848v.1
 Case 3:17-cv-00817-CSH Document 11 Filed 07/27/17 Page 2 of 7

7. Denies having knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth

of the allegations contained in paragraph 12 of the Complaint.

8. Denies the allegations contained in paragraph 13 of the Complaint.

9. Denies having knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth

of the allegations contained in paragraph 14 of the Complaint.

10. Denies the allegations contained in paragraphs 15 through 17 of the Complaint.

11. Denies having knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth

of the allegations contained in paragraph 18 of the Complaint.

12. Denies the allegations contained in paragraph 19 of the Complaint.

13. Denies having knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth

of the allegations contained in paragraph 20 of the Complaint.

14. Denies the allegations contained in paragraphs 21 through 25 of the Complaint.

15. Admits that while cargo was being transported by Plaintiff Anderson Trucking

Services, Inc. (“ATS”), Plaintiff’s trailer caught on fire while traveling on I-95 in Connecticut,

causing damage to the shipment referred in the Complaint, but otherwise denies the allegations

contained in paragraph 26 of the complaint.

16. Denies having knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth

of the allegations contained in paragraphs 27 through 31 of the Complaint.

17. Denies the allegations contained in paragraph 32 of the Complaint.

PLAINTIFF’S FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION

(DECLARATORY JUDGMENT AS TO COGSA)

18. Denies the allegations contained in paragraphs 33 through 40 of the Complaint.

PLAINTIFF’S SECOND CAUSE OF ACTION

(DECLARATORY JUDGMENT AS TO CARMACK AMENDMENT)

19. Denies the allegations contained in paragraphs 41 through 48 of the Complaint.

692233.06519/105979848v.1
 Case 3:17-cv-00817-CSH Document 11 Filed 07/27/17 Page 3 of 7

AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES

20. Ridgeway repeats and realleges each and every admission, denial and denial of

knowledge or information hereinabove set forth, with the same force and effect as if herein

repeated and set forth at length.

FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

21. The Court lacks personal jurisdiction over Ridgeway.

SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

22. The claims alleged by plaintiff are barred against Ridgeway because the damages

claimed by plaintiff were caused by superseding, intervening acts or omissions for which

Ridgeway is not liable or by the acts or omissions of persons or entities for whom or for which

Ridgeway is not responsible and has no liability.

THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

23. Ridgeway is not liable for any loss or damage to the shipment referred in the

Complaint.
FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

24. Plaintiff’s own negligent acts or omissions were the sole proximate cause of any

damage or loss to the shipment referred in the Complaint.

FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

25. The complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.

SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

26. The alleged underlying cargo loss or damage claim referred to in the Complaint is

time-barred and Plaintiff’s claims are time-barred.

692233.06519/105979848v.1
 Case 3:17-cv-00817-CSH Document 11 Filed 07/27/17 Page 4 of 7

SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

27. No suit has been filed by any party for cargo loss or damage and there is no dispute

for which declaratory relief can be granted.

EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

28. Plaintiff committed acts causing the spoliation of highly material evidence in this

matter which have greatly prejudiced Ridgeway’s ability to defend the underlying cargo loss or

damage claims and for which Plaintiff should be held liable.

NINTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

29. All of the other named defendants are persons required to be joined in this action

and if any one or more of them do not appear or are not subject to jurisdiction in this Court, the

case should be dismissed.

RIDGEWAY’S FIRST COUNTERCLAIM AGAINST PLAINTIFF

30. In the event Ridgeway is found to be subject to the jurisdiction of this Court,

Ridgeway repeats and realleges each and every admission, denial, and denial of knowledge or

information set forth above with the same force and effect as if repeated and set forth at length

herein.

31. Any loss or damage to the shipment referred in the Complaint was solely caused by

Plaintiff’s fault, neglect, or omission, and no acts, omissions, breach of contract or negligence on

the part of Ridgeway cause or contributed thereto.

32. In the event any liability is imposed on Ridgeway for any loss or damage to the

cargo, Ridgeway is entitled to full and complete indemnity from Plaintiff, plus attorneys’ fees,

costs and interest incurred in the defense of this action

692233.06519/105979848v.1
 Case 3:17-cv-00817-CSH Document 11 Filed 07/27/17 Page 5 of 7

RIDGEWAY’S SECOND COUNTERCLAIM AGAINST PLAINTIFF

33. Plaintiff engaged in spoliation of evidence when it intentionally destroyed

documents and physical evidence relating to the fire that caused the alleged damage to the

shipment referred to in the Complaint.

34. Shortly after the fire that resulted in the alleged damage to the shipment referred to

in the Complaint, Ridgeway’s counsel placed Plaintiff on notice of its duty to preserve evidence.

However, by the time Plaintiff made the trailer available for inspection several months after the

incident, Plaintiff already had destroyed relevant documents, including driver’s logs, on-board

computer records, daily inspection reports and other maintenance records that had been identified

as relevant material for future litigation and had already been requested to be protected and

preserved.

35. During the inspection of Plaintiff’s trailer on or about October 19, 2016, Plaintiff’s

employee prematurely and without the consent and knowledge of all parties in attendance, backed

off the trailer’s slack adjustors in anticipation of removing the brakes. Plaintiff’s unilateral and

wrongful actions changed the length of the stroke and obliterated this crucial piece of information

needed to assess the cause of the fire.

36. Plaintiff breached its duty to preserve material evidence by removing, discarding,

and otherwise destroying relevant documents and records and by tampering with physical

evidence.

37. Ridgeway has been prejudiced in its ability to investigate the cause of the fire and

subsequent loss to the shipment referred to in the Complaint, and consequently, Ridgeway has

been precluded from mounting a full and complete defense to Plaintiff’s claims and allegations.

38. Plaintiff's failure to preserve evidence that it had a duty to preserve and knew would

be material to a potential civil action has caused Ridgeway damage in this matter.

692233.06519/105979848v.1
 Case 3:17-cv-00817-CSH Document 11 Filed 07/27/17 Page 6 of 7

39. In the event it has any liability for the cargo loss or damage referred to in the

Complaint, which is denied, Ridgeway is entitled to full and complete indemnity from Plaintiff,

plus attorneys’ fees, costs and interest incurred in the defense of this action.

AS AND FOR RIDGEWAY’S CROSS-CLAIM AGAINST DEFENDANT

EAGLE UNDERWRITING GROUP, INC.

40. Without prejudice to the above defenses and counterclaims, Ridgeway repeats and

realleges each and every admission, denial, and denial of knowledge or information set forth above

with the same force and effect as if repeated and set forth at length herein.

41. Ridgeway is covered as an insured under cargo policy No. 50T 0845 issued by

Eagle Underwriting Group, Inc. (“EUG”). The cargo policy in question covers, among other

things, damage to the cargo referred to in Plaintiff’s complaint arising out of the fire.

42. If Ridgeway is liable for the cargo loss or damage referred to in the Complaint, it

is entitled to indemnity from EUG for all such liability and for all expenses, including attorney’s

fees, costs and interest, incurred in defending Plaintiff’s action.

43. Ridgeway reserves the right to amend its Answer, Counterclaims, and Cross-Claim

and to assert any additional defenses or claims that may be applicable as additional information

becomes known.

WHEREFORE, Ridgeway prays that:

a) the Court enter judgment dismissing the Complaint;

b) in the event Ridgeway is held liable for the cargo loss or damage referred to in the

Complaint, it is entitled to full and complete indemnity from Plaintiff, plus attorney’s fees,

interest and all costs;

692233.06519/105979848v.1
 Case 3:17-cv-00817-CSH Document 11 Filed 07/27/17 Page 7 of 7

c) if judgment is entered in favor of Plaintiff against Ridgeway, the Court should enter

judgment in favor of Ridgeway and judgment against co-defendant Eagle Underwriting

Group, Inc. on the cross-claim herein, together with interest, costs and attorney’s fees;

d) if any liability is found on the part of Ridgeway, such liability should be limited to $500

per package or other limitation set forth in the governing contracts of carriage or as

provided under the law; and

e) the Court award Ridgeway its costs and reasonable attorney’s fees, and grant such other

and further relief as the Court deems just and appropriate.

Dated: July 27, 2017

BLANK ROME LLP
Attorneys for Defendant Ridgeway International
USA, Inc.

By: /s/ John D. Kimball

John D. Kimball, Esq.
The Chrysler Building
405 Lexington Avenue
New York, NY 10174-0208
Tel.: (212) 885-5000
Fax: (212) 885-5001
jkimball@blankrome.com

692233.06519/105979848v.1