arrow left
arrow right
  • LOUIS CASTAGNA VS. ASBESTOS DEFENDANTS (B/P)AS REFLECTED ON EXHIBITS et al ASBESTOS document preview
  • LOUIS CASTAGNA VS. ASBESTOS DEFENDANTS (B/P)AS REFLECTED ON EXHIBITS et al ASBESTOS document preview
  • LOUIS CASTAGNA VS. ASBESTOS DEFENDANTS (B/P)AS REFLECTED ON EXHIBITS et al ASBESTOS document preview
  • LOUIS CASTAGNA VS. ASBESTOS DEFENDANTS (B/P)AS REFLECTED ON EXHIBITS et al ASBESTOS document preview
  • LOUIS CASTAGNA VS. ASBESTOS DEFENDANTS (B/P)AS REFLECTED ON EXHIBITS et al ASBESTOS document preview
  • LOUIS CASTAGNA VS. ASBESTOS DEFENDANTS (B/P)AS REFLECTED ON EXHIBITS et al ASBESTOS document preview
  • LOUIS CASTAGNA VS. ASBESTOS DEFENDANTS (B/P)AS REFLECTED ON EXHIBITS et al ASBESTOS document preview
  • LOUIS CASTAGNA VS. ASBESTOS DEFENDANTS (B/P)AS REFLECTED ON EXHIBITS et al ASBESTOS document preview 
						
                                
Preview

                                BRAYTON@PURCELL LLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
222 RUSH LANDING ROAD
POBOX 6169
NOVATG, CALIFORRIA 94948-6169

(445) 898-1555

=

104.

Ce I Rm BR WK

ALAN R. BRAYTON, ESQ, S.B. #73685
DAVID R. DONADIO, ESQ., S.B. #154436

UMU K. TAFISI, ESQ., S.B. #269862
BRAYTONSPURCETL LLP ELECTRONICALLY
Attorneys at Law FILED
222 Rush Landing Road Superior Court of California,
P.O. Box 6169 County of San Francisco
Novato, California 94948-6169 AUG 25 2010
Ee eT cons mat , Cle ofthe Cour
g Contest Email: contestasbestosTR@braytonlaw.compy. ALISON AGBAY

ee Deputy Clerk
Attomeys for Plaintiff eres

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA
» COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO

hope

LOUIS CASTAGNA,
Plaintiff,

ASBESTOS
No, CGC-07-274230

PLAINTIFF'S SEPARATE STATEMENT
OF DISPUTED MATERIAL FACTS IN
OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT NIBCO
INC.’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY
JUDGMENT OR, IN THE
ALTERNATIVE, SUMMARY
ADJUDICATION

vs.

ASBESTOS DEFENDANTS (BP)

ee

Date: Septernber 8, 2010

Time; 9:30 a.m, :

Dept: 220, Hon. Harold E. Kahn
Trial Date: October 12, 2010
Action Filed: June 6, 2007

Pursuant to. California Code of Civil Procedure § 437c(b), plaintiff submits the following
Separate Statement of Disputed Material Facts.in Opposition toa Defendant NIBCO INC.’s

Motion for Summary Judgment or, in the Alternative, Summary Adjudication.

PLAINTIFF'S DISPUTED
MATERIAL FACTS SUPPORTING EVIDENCE
1. Plaintiff, LOUIS CASTAGNA, was 1. Declaration of Louis Castagna, (No. 2,
employed as a steamfitter and worked with attached as Exhibit A to the Declaration of
NIBCO INC. manufactured valves Umu Tafisi. Deposition Testimony of
throughout his career, including at Tosco Louis Castagna, Vol. 10, Page 1022, Line
and Chevron. 12 ~ Line 24, attached as Exhibit B to the

: Declaration of Umu Tafisi.
if
K Majorca azz Ry ise: NIBCO ws 1 . ug

PLAINTIFF'S SEPARATE STATEMENT OF DISPUTED MATERIAL FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT NIBCO INC.’S.
MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, SUMMARY ADJUDICATION10 OO mI RN RR Noe

S

2. On several occasions throughout his
career as a steamfitter, during the 1970's
through the mid-1980's, plaintiff performed
work on NIBCO INC. manufactured valves
at locations including Tosco in Avon,
California; Chevron, in Richmond, California;
and Fast Flux Test Area (FFTF) at AEC
Hanford in Richland, Washington.

3. Throughout plaintiff's career from 1967
to 1995, he packed between 150 to 206
NIBCO INC, manufactured valves at
various locations. Plaintiff also testified that
he repacked 50 new NIBCO valves
throughout his career.

4. Plaintiffidentified NIBCO INC.
manufactured -valves that he worked with
based on the name, “NIBCO,” on the valves.

5. Plaintiff installed NIBCO INC.
manufactured valves during new
construction at Tosco, in Avon California,
and Chevron, in Richmond, California.

6, Plaintiff handled and distributed, or
installed, new NIBCO INC. manufactured

-yalves at Tosco, in Avon California,

Chevron, in Richmond, California, Fast
Flux Test Area (FFTF) in Richland,
Washington, and General Motors in
Fremont, California, during the 1970's to
the mid-1980's, Furthermore, Plaintiff
handled and distributed, or installed, new
NIBCO valves at several other jobsites in
the 1970's to the mid-1980's, but is unable
to identify the specific locations. .

7. When plaintiff received new NIBCO
INC. manufactured valves to install or
distribute during his employment at several
different jobsites during the 1970's to the
mid. 1980's, including Tosco, in Avon
California, Chevron, in Richmond,
California, FFTF in Richland, Washington,
and General Motors, in Fremont, California,
several of these valves had been jostled and
disassembled during the shipment process.
Thus, throughout the 1970's to the mid-
1980's, before he installed or distributed
several new NIBCO INC. manufactured
valves, he had to push down on the packing

K MnjuresP3 82298 pigs NIBCO-wpd

2. Declaration of Louis Castagna, 4 No. 3,
attached as Exhibit A to the Declaration of
Umu Tafisi.

3. Declaration of Louis Castagna, 4 No. 4,
attached as Exhibit A to the Declaration of
Umu Tafisi. Deposition Testimony of
Louis Castagna, Vol. 10, Page 1025, Line 1
~ Line 13; Vol. 13, Page 1284, Line | - Page.
1285, Line 19, attached as Exhibit B to the
Declaration of Umu Tafisi.

4, Declaration of Louis Castagna, {/ No.5,
attached as Exhibit.A to the Declaration of
Umu Tafisi. : .

5. Declaration of Louis Castagna, 4 No. 6,
attached as Exhibit A to the Declaration of
Umnu Tafisi. Deposition Testimony of
Louis Castagna, Vol. 10, Page 1025, Line
10 - Line 25, attached as Exhibit B to the
Declaration of Umu Tafisi.

6. Declaration of Louis Castagna, § No. 7,
attached as Exhibit A to the Declaration of
Umu Tafisi. :

7. Declaration of Louis Castagna, J No. 8,
attached as Exhibit A to the Declaration of -
Umu Tafisi.

UXT

PLAINTIFF'S SEPARATE STAFEMENT OF DISPUTED MATERIAL FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT NIBCO INC.’S
MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, SUMMARY ADJUDICATIONSCO em NN A BR we ON

Ban Fs

inside the disassembled parts. He used a
flat head screwdriver to push down on the

packing. He then re-assembled the packing

glands to get the packing in place.

8. The packing in these new, but
disassembled, NIBCO INC. manufactured

valves was original because the valves were

new when Plaintiff obtained them during
new construction at several different

jobsites during the 1970's to the mid-1980's,

including Tosco, in Avon California;

“Chevron, in Richmond, California; FFTF in

Richland, Washington; and General Motors
in Fremont, California.

9. Plaintiff saw dust and debris from the

frayed parts of the packing, when he:pushed: .

down on the packing inside‘the © =. :
disassembled valve parts. Plaintiff used a
flat head screwdriver to push down on this

packing. He then re-assembled the packing

glands to get the packing in place. This
occurred before he installed or distributed
these valves during new construction at

several different locations during the 1970's
to the mid-1980's, including Tosco, in Avon

California; Chevron, in Richmond,
California; and FFTF in Richland,
Washington, and General Motors in Fremont,
California. He was not wearing a mask or
any form of breathing protection when he
saw this dust. The dust got on his hands.
He breathed in this dust.

10. Defendant NIBCO INC. acknowledges
in its Responses to San Francisco General
Order No. 129, dated May 31, 2007, that it.
began manufacturing valves.in the 1930's,
and certain of the valves had enclosed
within their metal structure an asbestos-
containing stem packing. Defendant
NIBCO INC. acknowledged that it stopped
vane asbestos in its valves during 1985 to

NIBCO acknowledges that the starting date
for use of asbestos-containing valve
packing materials manufactured by other
companies is not known, but is believed by
NIBCO to be some time in the 1960's.

11. The NIBCO INC. manufactured valves

described and packed by Plaintiff LOUIS
CASTAGNA more likely than not

KMajured\ 102292 Liss NIBCO:

3

8. Declaration of Louis Castagna, § No. 9,
attached as Exhibit A to the Declaration of
Umu Tafisi.

». 9. Declaration of Louis Castagna, §:Na:/10,

attached as Exhibit A to the Declaration of
Umu Tafisi. : hand

10. Responses to San Francisco General
Order No. 129, dated May 31, 2007
{Response to Interrogatory No. 30, Page 24,
Line 18 - Line.25); (Response to
Interrogatory No. 31, Subsection.C, Page
26, Line 21 - Line 27, attached herein as
Exhibit C to the Declaration of Umu Tafisi.

Responses to San Francisco General Order
No. 129, dated October 7, 2004 (Response
to Interrogatory No. 31, Page 25, Line 10 -
Line 13, attached herein as Exhibit C to the
Declaration of Umu Tafisi.

11, Declaration of Charles Ay, No. 22,

attached as Exhibit D to the Declaration of
‘Umu Tafisi.

UKT

PLAINTIFF'S SEPARATE STATEMENT OF DISPUTED MATERIAL FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANT NIBCO INC.’S
MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, SUMMARY ADJUDICATIONoe UAH Bw NY

RRP ww NR RRR Be ee eB ee eR Be me ee
BRRRREBEBRB Se BADE AH AS:

contained asbestos in their packing given
the description of the product and the time
period it was used.

12. The pushing down of the packing inside
the disassembled parts of new NIBCO INC.
manufactured valves more likely than not
teleased respirable asbestos fiber into the
surrounding air exposing Plaintiff LOUIS
CASTAGNA. This is especially so given
that Plaintiff LOUIS CASTAGNA directly
pushed down, with a flat head screwdriver,
on the packing inside the new NIBCO INC.
manufactured valves before he installed

em.

Dated:

EMinjgned\ 10229 vidios NIBCQ wed

By

12. Declaration of Charles Ay, 4 No. 23,
attached as Exhibit D to the Declaration of
Umu Tafisi,

: BRAYTON*PURCELLLLP -

: {
Unit X Tafisi
Attorneys for Plaipfiff

4 UKE

PLAINTIFF'S SEPARATE STATEMENT OF DISPUTED MATERIAL FACTS IN OPPOSITION TQ DEFENDANT NIBCO INC.’S.
MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, SUMMARY ADJUDICATION