On September 29, 2006 a Motion,Ex Parte was filed involving a dispute between Rodamer, James, Rodamer, Nancy, and All Asbestos Defendants, Allis-Chalmers Corporation Product Liability Trust, Armstrong International, Inc., Asbestos Corporation, Ltd., A.W. Chesterton Company, Buffalo Pumps, Inc., Cleaver Brooks, Cleaver-Brooks, Inc., Crane Co., Crane Co. Individually And As Sii To Chapman Valve, Crown, Cork & Seal, Individually And As, Csr, Ltd., Aka Colonial Sugar Refinery, Does 1-300, Inclusive, Domco Products Texas, L.P, Douglass Insulation Company, Inc., Durabla Manufacturing Company, Elliott Company,, Fairbanks Morse Pump, Fairbanks Morse Pump Corp., Familian Corporation, Familian Corporation Dba Familian Pipe &, Foster Wheeler Llc, Foster Wheeler, Llc, Gardner Denver, Inc., Garlock Sealing Technologies, Llc, Garlock Sealing Technologies, Llc Individually And, General Electric Company, Goulds Pumps, Inc., Grinnell Corporation, Henry Vogt Machine Co., Hill Brothers Chemical Company, Imo Industries Inc.,, Imo Industries, Inc., Ingersoll-Rand Company, International Paper Company, Itt Corporation,, Itt Industries, Individually And As Sii To, J.T. Thorpe & Son, Inc., Kaiser Gypsum Company, Inc., Kentile Floors, Inc., Leslie Controls, Inc., Lydall, Inc., Lydall, Inc.,, Metex Mfg. Corporation, Owens-Illinois, Inc., Parker Hannifin Corp., Individually And As Sii To, Parker Hannifin Corporation, Plant Insulation Company, Quintec Industries, Inc., Ray L. Hellwig Plumbing, R. F. Macdonald, R.F. Macdonald Co., Soco West, Inc., Sterling Fluid Systems, The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company, Thomas Dee Engineering Company, Thomas Dee Engineering Company, Inc., Union Carbide Corporation, Uniroyal, Inc., Warren Pumps, Llc, Westburne Supply Inc., Yarway Corporation, for ASBESTOS in the District Court of San Francisco County.
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
Please wait a moment while we load this page.
Preview
“Om Gordon & Rees LLP Embarcadero Center West 275 Battery Street, Suite 2000 San Francisco, CA ¥419] 28 GOOD; 1042038/12 5228 5y.} MICHAEL J. PIETRYKOWSKI (SBN: 118677) BETHANY A. STAHLEY (SBN: 209421} ELECTRONICALLY GORDON & REES LLP Embarcadero Center West FILED 275 Battery Street, Twentieth Floor San Francisco, CA 94111 Superior Court of California, County of San Francisco Telephone: (413) 986-5900 MAR 28 2007 Facsimile: (415) 986-8054 GORDON PARK-LI, Cler BY: CHRISTLE ARRIOLA Attotucys for Defendant Deputy Cler THE GOODYEAR TIRE & RUBBER COMPANY SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA | COUNTY GF SAN FRANCISCO JAMES RODAMER and NANCY RODAMER,) CASE NO. COC 06-456569 ) ) SEPARATE STATEMENT OF Plaintiffs, ) UNDISPUTED MATERIAL FACT IN ) SUPPORT OF THE GOODYEAR TIRE Vv. ) & RUBBER COMPANY'S MOTION ) FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT ) A.W. CHESTERTON COMPANY, et al... ) Date: April 13, 2007 ) Time: 9:30 a.m. Defendants. ) Bept.: 301 ) Judge: Hon. Peter J. Busch ) ) Action Filed: September 29, 2006 ) Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 437c(b), defendant The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Compury (“Goodyear”) submits the following statement of undisputed material facts, together with references to supporting evidence, in support of this motion, These facts entitle Goodyear to eniry of summary judement. The following facts pertain lo and apply with equal weight, force and cffect to every cause of action slated in plaintiffs James Rodamer and Nancy Rodamer (“plaintiffs”) complaint. Thus, in the interest of brevity and conservation of judicial time and resources, each cause of action is not stated and the same facts are not repeated for each cause of action. Hf If 1 SEPARATE STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED MATERIAL FACTS [N SUPPORT OF THE GOODYEAR TIRE & RUBBER Trial Date: | April 30, 2067 | 3 ! | I | | COMPANY'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENTGordon & Rees LLP. UNDISPUTED MATERIAL FACTS SUPPORTING EVIDENCE 1, Plaintiffs James Rodamer and Nancy Rodamer’s (“plaintiffs”) claims against Goodyear are based on their allegation that plaintiff James Rodamer was exposed to asbestos-containing products manufactured, supplied, or distributed by Goodyear during the couise of his career us a helper, maintenance mechanic, leadman, plumber, and installer for various employers in California and New Jersey from 1957 through 1996. 2. Plaintiff also claim that plaintiff James Rodamer was exposed to asbestos from the clothing and person of his father who was exposed to asbestos while working at Johns- Manville plant in Manville, New Jersey, in the 1940s. 3. Plaintiffs’ claims against Goodyear are based on James Rodamer’s alleged exposure to asbestos-containing products manufactured, supplied, or distributed by Goodyear; however, plaintiffs failed to provide responses to Goodvear’s clicnt-specific discovery and, therefore, failed to identify any specific products to which he was exposed and failed to identify any specific job sites, locations, or time periods of such exposure. 4, Plaintiff Jan testimony does not provide any evidence that he was ever exposed to asbestas-containing products manufactured, supplied, or distributed by Goodyear at any time. 5. Plaintiffs’ counsel stipulated that plaintiff Nancy Rodamer will not provide deposition, declaration, or trial testimony in this action with regard to product accordingly, plaintiff Nancy Rodamer’s deposition teslimony does not provide any evidence that James Rodamer was ever exposed to asbestos from ashestos-containing products manufzctured, supplied, or distributed by Goodyear at any time. 6. On December 28, 2006, Goodyear served client-specific Form Interrogatories (Set One), Special Interrogatories (Set One), Request for Admissions (Set One), and Request for Production of Documents (Set One) to plaintiffs in which Goodyear sought specific facts, witnesses, and documents in support of 1. Declaration of Bethany A. Stahley in Support of The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company’s Motion for Summary Judgment (“Stahley Declaration”), {| 2; Exhibit A. 2. Stahley Declaration, | 2 & 3; Exhibit A. 3, Stahley Declaration, €4 2, 6, 7 & 8; Exhibit | A; Exhibit C; Special Interrogatory No. 31. 4, Stahley Declaration, 44; Exhibit B, Vol. V, pp. 697:13-699:12. 5. Stahley Declaration, € 5. 6. Stahley Declaration, € 6; Exhibit C. 2 ‘SEPARATE STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED MATERIAL FACTS (N SUPPORT OF THE GOODYEAR TIRE & RUBBER COMPANY'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENTGordon & Rees LLP. Embarcadero Center West 2000 275 Battery Street, ‘San Francisco, plaintiffs’ claims against Goodyear in this action. 7. Plaintiffs only responded to Goodyear’s Request for Admissions (Set One) in which they denied all requests. 8. To date, plaintiffs have not specifically identified any wimesses or produecd any witnesses for deposition who will place James Rodamer in the vicinity of asbestos-containing products manufactured, suppticd, or distributed by Goodyear ai any job site at any time, 9. To date, plaintifi’s have not identified or produced any documentary evidence to establish their allegation that James Rodamer worked in the vicinity of asbestos-containing products manufactured, supplied, or distributed by Goodyear at any job site at any time. DATED: March 2 Fo By: Attorneys for Defendant THE GOODYEAR TIR| 7. Stahley Declaration, #7 & 8. 8, Stabley Declaration, $f 6, 7, 8 & 9 Exhibit C, Special interrogatory No. {1 9. Stahley Declaration, {fj 6, 7, 8, & 10; Exhibit C, Special Interrogatory No. 10, Request for Production Nos. 1,2 & 3, GORDON & REES LLP THANY A. STATI 3 ‘UBBER COMPANY ‘SEPARATE STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED MATERIAL FACTS IN SUPPORT OF THE GOODYEAR TIRE & RUBBER COMPANY'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGME r