Preview
Eugene C. Blackard Jr. (Bar No. 142090)
Jasun C. Molinelli (Bar No. 204456)
Kime H. Smith (Bar No. 230740)
ARCHER NORRIS ELECTRONICALLY
A Professional Law Corporation
2033 North Main Street, Suite 800 Su FILED ala,
Walnut Creek, California 94596-3759 County of San Francisco
Telephone: 925.930.6600 JUN 24 2010
Facsimile: 925.930.6620
Clerk of the Court
BY: ALISON AGBAY
Attorneys for Defendant Deputy Clerk
ALBAY CONSTRUCTION COMPANY
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO
LOUIS CASTAGNA, Case No. CGC-07-274230
Plaintiff, ALBAY CONSTRUCTION COMPANY’S
INDEX OF EXHIBITS IN SUPPORT OF
v. ITS MOTION FOR SUMMARY
JUDGMENT (EXHIBIT “E” ~ Part 3 of 3)
ASBESTOS DEFENDANTS (BP),
Date: September 9, 2010
Defendant. Time: 9:30 am.
Dept: 220
Judge: Hon. Harold E, Kahn
Action Filed; June 6, 2007
Trial Date: October 12, 2010
ALM3003/977530-1
ALBAY CONSTRUCTION COMPANY’S INDEX OF EXHIBITS IN SUPPORT OF ITS MOTION FOR,
SUMMARY JUDGMENT (EXHIBIT E ~ PART 3 OF 3)Exhibit “E” caer 3 of 5)BRAYTONGPURCELL LLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
202 RUSH LANDING ROAD
PO BOX GED
NOVA TO, CALIFORNIA 99988-6169
(G15) 898-1555
oP YD A AR ww NM
10
ALAN R. BRAYTON, ESQ., 8.B. #73685
DAVID R. DONADIO, ESQ,, $.B, #154436
JAMIL L. WHITE, ESQ., S.B. #244028
BRAYTON®*PURCELL LLP
Attorneys at Law
222 Rush Landing Road
P.O. Box 6169
Novato, California 94948-6169
(415) 898-1555
Attorneys for Plaintiff
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO
ASBESTOS
No, CGC-08-274230
LOUIS CASTAGNA, }
)
; PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSE TO
)
)
Plaintiff,
DEFENDANT ALBAY CONSTRUCTION
COMPANY’S FORM.
INTERROGATORIES, SET ONE
vs.
ASBESTOS DEFENDANTS (B%P)
PROPOUNDING PARTY: Defendant ALBAY CONSTRUCTION COMPANY
RESPONDING PARTY: _ Plaintiff LOUIS CASTAGNA
SET NUMBER: ONE (1)
RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 17.1: No.
{a) One.
(b) Plaintiff objects to this Interrogatory on the grounds that it is overly broad. Plaintiff
objects to this Interrogatory on the grounds that it is vague and ambiguous with respect to the use
of undefined terms and phrases, including but not limited to, “state all facts,” “upon which” and
“base your response.” Plaintiff objects to this Interrogatory on the grounds, and to the extent,
that it requires a lay person to draw a legal conclusion and make an evidentiary determination.
Plaintiff further objects to this Interrogatory on the grounds that it seeks information equally or
more available to, or already in possession of, defendant, making it unduly burdensome for
laintiff to respond. Plaintiff objects to the use of this Judicial Council Form Interrogatory, as it
is duplicative in substance to defendant’s Special Interrogatories, as such it is burdensome,
oppressive and an abuse of the discovery process. Subject to said objections and without waiver
thereof, plaintiff responds as follows:
Tncluding but not limited to the jobsites listed below, plaintiff worked around employees
of ALBAY CONTSTRUCTION COMPANY (hereinafter “Defendant” or “ALBAY”) who were
installing, applying, removing, disturbing, handling, and otherwise working with asbestos-
containing equipment, products, and materials. Plaintiff was exposed to dust from asbestos-
containing products installed, applied, manipulated, disturbed, swept up, removed, repaired,
and/or replaced by employees of defendant and by subcontractors hired by defendant, over whom
defendant exercised control and was legally responsible. Defendant knew or should have known
KAlnjuredl 1O2208\pld\jet-rsp-ALBAY.wpd 1 aw2 MW A A kB we
BN YP RP PN KR DN BB moe Some oe
& IU &F GES S fF SF Ce RTREEBEHE AS
of the health hazards associated with exposure to asbestos and asbestos-containing products prior]
to its work with asbestos-containing products in plaintiff's presence. Defendant knew or should
have known that its work with asbestos-containing products would release asbestos fibers into
the air, and that plaintiff would inhale those fibers because plaintiff was working in close
proximity to defendant's employees. Defendant failed to take available safety precautions or to
warn plaintiff, a reasonably foreseeable injured party due to plaintiff's proximity to defendant’s
employees, of the dangers defendant's employees created when they installed, applied,
manipulated, disturbed, swept up, removed, repaired and/or replaced asbestos-containing
materials. Defendant was an industrial contractor who was responsible for coordinating,
managing and overseeing the installation, removal and maintenance of asbestos and asbestos-
a
containing products at plaintiff's jobsite(s).
Employer Location of Exposure Job Title Exposure Dates
C.F, Braun & Co., Corp. Standard Oil, Richmond, — Steamfitter 6/30/1975-7/1975
1000 S, Fremont Aye. CA
Alhambra, CA 91802
Employer Location of Exposure Job Tithe Exposure Dates
Brocon, Inc. Standard Oil, Richmond, Steamfitter TOTS 12/975
Three Greenway Plaza A
Houston, TX 77046
Emplover Location of Exposure Job Title Exposure Dates
Ehrhart & Associates Standard OilRichmond, CA Steamfitter WAANOTS-
12/1975
Employer Location ofEx posure lob Tithe Exposure Dates
Pacific Mechanical Corp.Box Standard OifRichmond, CA Steamfitter 12/2/1975-
4041 Concord, CA 94524 1/18/1976
Employer Location ofExposure Job Title Exposure Dates
C.F. Braun Standard Oil, Richmond, — Stearfitter 19/1976
A
Employer Location ofExposure Job Title Exposure Dates
Bechtel, Inc.50 Beale St.San Phillips PetroleumAvon, — Stearnfitter 1/20/1976-
Francisco, CA 94.105 CA 3/30/1976
Job Duties: Plaintiff recalls this new and old constraction at bay area refineries. Plaintiff cut
carbon steel pipes. Plaintiff installed GARLOCK and BLEXITALLIC gaskets, valves, and
pumps. Plainuff recalls ALBAY CONSTRUCTION CO, performing demolition to insulated
piping 5 to 25 feet from him and performing pipefitting, labor work, carpentry, electrical work,
pump work, insulating, welding, cutting, demolishing and replacing the lines. Plaintiff recalls
seeing ALBAY employees as early as 1975, at various bay area refineries performing pipefitting,
Tabor work, carpentry, electrical work, pump work, insulating, welding, cutting, demolishing and
replacing lines, and demolishing insulated pipes. Plaintiff recalls ALBAY employees demolish
lagging in tight spaces, above and aside Plaintiff. In 1976, Plaintiff recalls ALBAY employees
using Lincoln welding rods and disturbing lagging 5 -25 feet aside or above him.
KAinjuredi O2208\ptd\e-rop-ALBAY.epd 2 mwco SB WA RR WY wD
10
The hazards associated with exposure to asbestos and the effect of asbestos exposure on
humans have been well documented throughout this century. As carly as the 1930s, there existed
a wealth of information available for defendant which evidences that exposure to asbestos and
asbestos-containing products was a health hazard. California promulgated industrial safety
standards for workmen around asbestos-containing products beginning in the 1930s. By 1937,
California listed asbestosis as a compensable disease under Worker's Compensation laws.
Numerous articles and studies relating to the health hazards of exposure to asbestos have
appeared in medical and scientific literature since the turn of the century and have also been
summarized in various publications. Additionally, safety orders have existed since the 1940s
regarding the control of asbestos dust in the workplace.
¢ actions of defendant and the actions of other workers under defendant’s control,
caused the release of large amounts of asbestos fiber and dust into the workplace and surrounding
air, Consequently, plaintiff was exposed to and inhaled these asbestos fibers and dust causing
him injury and damage.
After a reasonable and good-faith inquiry to other persons and organization, pursuant to
C.C.P, § 2030,220(a)-(c), plaintiff has no further information responsive to this Interrogatory at
this time. Plaintiff's investigation and discovery are continuing, Plaintiff expressly reserves the
right to amend this Response pending the outcome of plaintiff's investigation.
(c) Plaintiff objects to this Interrogatory on the grounds that it is overly broad. Plaintiff
objects to this Interrogatory on the grounds that it is vague and ambiguous with respect to the use
of undefined terms and phrases, including but not limited to, “PERSONS,” and “have knowledge
of those facts,” Plaintift objects to this Interrogatory on the grounds, and to the extent, that it
requires plaintiff, a lay person, to draw a legal conclusion and make an evidentiary determination,
Plaintiff also objects to this Inferrogatory on the grounds that it calls for information regarding
plaintiff's retained litigation consultants which is protected by the attorney work-product doctrin
and C.C.P. § 2018.030. Plaintiff also objects to this Interrogatory on the grounds, and to the
extent, that it seeks the premature disclosure of information within the possession of plaintiff's
retained litigation consultants in violation C.C.P. § 2034.210 et seq. Plaintiff further objects to
this Interrogatory on the grounds that it seeks information that is equally or more available to
defendant, or information that is equally available to defendant, thus making it unduly
burdensome for plaintiff to respond. Plaintiff objects to the use of this Judicial Council Form
Interrogatory, as itis duplicative in substance to defendant's Special Interrogatories, as such it is
burdensome, oppressive and an abuse of the discovery process, Subject to this objection and
without waiver thereof, plaintiff responds as follows: Plaintiff refers to and incorporates by
reference response to Interrogatory 17.1, One (b), above and response to defendant's Special
Interrogatories.
Subject to and without waiver of these objections, plaintiff responds as follows: Plaintiff
identifies himself, c/o Brayton%*Purcell LLP, James Saathoff, c/o Brayton%Purcell LLP, Dick
Dole, address currently unknown; and supervisor Vern Gosney, c/o Paul, Hanley & Harley, Gene
Yates, address currently unknown, Gene Gosney, deceased, and George Bell, c/o
Brayton**Purcel] LLP,
Plaintiff also identifies any and all Persons Most Knowledgeable and Custodians of
Record(s), both past and present, of defendant, as well as any people who have verified
defendant’s responses to interrogatories. Plaintiff further identifies the Person(s) Most
Knowledgeable and Custodian(s) of Records of plaintiff's employers, as detailed above or as
identified in his Social Security records and/or Plaintiff's Responses to Standard Asbestos Case
Interrogatories. Plaintiff also identifies all doctors and other medical professionals identified in
plaintiff's medical records which are equally available to defendant through coordinating defense
counsel, Berry & Berry
Plaintiff identifies the Person(s) Most Knowledgeable and Custodian(s) of Records for all
other named defendants in this action.
After a reasonable and good-faith inquiry to other persons and organizations, pursuant to
C.CP. § 2030,220(a)-(c), plaintiff has no further information responsive to this Interrogatory at
this time. Plaintiff's investigation and discovery are continuing, Plaintiff reserves the right to
supplement this Response if additional information is discovered.
KNiguredh102298\plo\of-rep-ALBAY pd 3 aLOo Oe ND A Rw
10
(d) Plaintiff objects to this Interrogatory on the grounds that it is overly broad, Plainuff
objects to this Interrogatory on the grounds that it is vague and ambiguous with respect to the use!
of undefined terms and phrases, including but not limited to, “DOC ENTS,” “other tangible
things,” and “support.” ‘Plaintiff objects to this Interrogatory on the grounds, and to the extent,
that it requires plaintiff, a lay person, to draw a legal conclusion and make an evidentiary
determination, Plaintiff also objects to this Interrogatory on the grounds that it calls for
information regarding plaintiff’s retained biigation consultants which is protected by the attorney
work-product doctrine and C.C.P. § 2018.030. Plaintiff further objects to this Interrogatory on
the grounds that it seeks information that is equally or more available to defendant, or
information that is equally available to defendant, thus making it unduly burdensome for plaintiff
to respond, Plaintiff objects to the use of this Judicial Council Form Interrogatory, as it is
duplicative in substance to defendant's Special Interrogatories, as such it is burdensome,
oppressive and an abuse of the discovery process,
Without waiving the foregoing objections, plaintiff currently identifies the following
documents: Plaintiff identifies the Complaint served in this matter and plaintiff’ s responses to
Standard Asbestos Case Interrogatories, and all exhibits attached thereto. Plaintiff also identifies
his and his father’s, Merle Sandy’s, Social Security records, Union records, and medical records
and billings, which are equally available to defendant through coordinating defense counsel
Berry & Berry. Plaintiff identifies the transcripts of his deposition(s), and all attachments
thereto, equally available to defendant.
Plaintiff further identifies the deposition testimony, including all exhibits attached
thereto, of all Persons Most Knowledgeable and Custodians of Record(s), both past and present,
of defendant. Plaintiff believes that defendant is in possession of these documents.
Plaintiff further identifies all prior deposition and/or trial transcripts and exhibits marked,
teceived in evidence or otherwise identified in all prior actions or trials handled by Brayton
Purcell, LLP.
Plaintiff also identifies the General Order No. 129 responses, and all supplements,
amendments and exhibits thereto of defendant. Plaintiff further identifies defendant’s Job Lists
in reference to plaintiff’s jobsites identified in response to interrogatory No. | above.
Plaintiff further identifies all the papers, photographs, films, recordings, memoranda, books,
records, pamphlets, circulars, handbooks, manuals, periodicals, files, envelopes, notices,
instructions, transcripts, notes, telex messages, communications (including reports, notes,
notation and memoranda of telephone conversations and conferences, electronic mail, minutes,
transcriptions, correspondence, etc.) writings, letters, telegrams, correspondence, notes of
meetings or of conversations either in writing or upon any mechanical or electronic devices,
notes, accountants’ statements or summaries, reports, invoices, canceled checks, check stubs
receipts, bank statements, diaries, desk calendars, appointment books, payment records,
telephone bills in defendant's constructive possession, custody, care or control relating to
asbestos-containing products and materials manufactured, sold, supplied and/or distributed by
defendant, at the jobsite(s) at which plaintiff’s father worked. Plaintiff further identifies all of
the agreements and contracts between defendant and all general contractors and sub-contractors
present at the jobsite(s) where plaintiff’s father worked. Plaintiff further identifies all of the
labeling and packaging materials for all of the asbestos-containing products and materials
manufactured, sold, supplied and/or distributed by defendant and used at plaintiff's father’s
jobsite(s). Plaintiff believes defendant is in possession of these documents.
Plaintiff further identifies numerous articles and studies relating to health hazards
associated with exposure to asbestos which have appeared in the medical and scientific
literatures since the turn of the century, and have also been summarized in various publications.
Two texts that contain summaries and/or bibliographies of this literature are:
Asbestos: Medical and Legal Aspects, Barry I. Castleman, Prentice-Hall Law and
Business, 1990.
Sourcebook of Asbestos Disease, Medical. Legal, and Engineering Aspects,
George A Peters and Barbara J. Peters, Garland STPM Press, Vol. 1, 1980,
ol. 2, 1986.
KAlnjores302298\pljet-r9p-ALBAY pd 4 nwSo 4 A ew Bw HK
10
Plaintiff is in possession of these texts and will make them available for defendant's
review. Plaintiff further identifies the NESHAP for asbestos, which are found at Code of Federal|
Regulations, Title 40, Chapter 1, Subchapter C, Part 61, Subpart M, ublished under the Federal
Clean Air Act of 1970; 42 U.8.C.A, Section 7412(b)U. (A); 42 U.S.C.A. Section 7412(b)(1)(B).
Plaintiff further identifies all applicable OSHA (federal) and CAL-OSHA (state) regulations
pertaining to asbestos exposure, including but not limited to Code of Federal Regulations, Title
9, Chapter 17, Section 1910, et seq,; and Title 8, Section 5208 of the California OSHA
regulations pertaining to asbestos exposure. Plaintiff further identifies Workers’ Compensation
Law since the 1930's, under which asbestos has been a compensable disease. Plaintiff further
identifies General Industry Safety Orders promulgated pursuant to California Labor Code § 6400,
et seq. and California Administrative Code under the California Department of Industrial
Relations, Division of Industial Safety, including, but not limited to, Title VIN, Group 9
(Control of Hazardous Substances) Article 81, Section 4150, 4104-4108, and Threshold Limit
Values as documented for asbestos and other toxic substances under Appendix A, Table I of said
Safety Orders. Due to copyright laws, plaintiff cannot provide copies of these texts to defendant.
Plaintiff also identifies the following documents relevant to Standard Oil, Richmond,
California: Albay Construction Company Contract Ledgers, the deposition transcript, and all
exhibits attached thereto, of John Arts taken on September 27, 2004, in John Arts v. Asbestos
Defendants, San Francisco Superior Court Case No. 717505, reported by Aiken & Welch Inc.,
One Kaiser Plaza, Suite 505, Oakland, California, 94612, (415) 451-1580; Plaintiff identifies the
deposition transcript, and all exhibits attached thereto, of Robert A. Cantley taken on June 4,
2007, in Cantley v. Asbestos Defendants, San Francisco Superior Court Case No. 448821,
reported by Aiken & Welch, Inc., One Kaiser Plaza, Suite 505, Oakland, California 94612 (510)
451-1580; the deposition transcript, and all exhibits attached thereto, of Delmar Stephens taken
on August 29, 2003, in Delmar Stephens v. Asbestos Defendants, San Francisco Superior Court
Case No. 408577, reported by Aiken & Welch, Inc., One Kaiser Plaza, Suite 505, Oakland,
California 94612 (310) 451-[580; the deposition transcript, and all exhibits attached thereto, of
Dee R. Stiles taken on December 18, 2003, in Dee Stiles v. Asbestos Defendants, San Francisco
Superior Court Case No. 415301 reported by Aiken & Welch, Inc., One Kaiser Plaza, Suite 505,
Oakland, California 94612 (510) 451-1580. .
Plaintiff further identifies the following documents relevant to Union Oil Refinery,
Rodeo/Oleum, California: the deposition transcript, and all exhibits attached thereto, of Donald
Blevins, taken on June 4, 2001, in Blevins v. Asbestos Defendants., San Francisco Superior
Court Case No. 308596, reported by Aiken & Welch, Inc., One Kaiser Plaza, Suite 505, Oakland,
California 94612 (510) 451-1580. :
Plaintiff also identifies the following documents relevant to Shell Oil Refinery, Martinez,
California: Albay Construction Company Contract Ledgers; the deposition transcript of William
Andrews taken on November 4, 2002 in William Andrews v. Asbestos Defendants, San
Francisco Superior Court Case No,317697, reported by Aiken & Welch, Inc., One Kaiser Plaza,
Suite 505, Oakland, California 94612 (510) 451-1580; the deposition transcript, and all exhibits
attached thereto, of Billy Armstrong taken on July 9, 1997 in Armstrong v. Asbestos Defendants,
San Francisco Superior Court Case No. 985289, reported by Tooker & Antz, 350 Sansome
Street, #700, San Francisco, California 94104 (415) 392-0650; the deposition transcript, and al]
exhibits attached thereto, of John Bennett taken on March 25 2002, in Bennett v, fs
Defendants, San Francisco Superior Court Case No, 320121, reported by Aiken & Welch, Inc.,
One Kaiser Plaza, Suite 505, Oakland, California 94612 (510) 451-1580; the deposition
transcript, and all exhibits attached thereto, of Donald Blevins, taken on February 1, 2001, in
Blevins y. Asbestos Defendants., San Francisco Superior Court Case No. 308596, reported by
Aiken & Welch, Inc., One Kaiser Plaza, Suite 505, Oakland, California 94612 (510) 451-1580;
the deposition transcript, and all exhibits attached thereto, of Alfred Breiter taken on August 10,
2006, in Arthur Breiter v. Asbestos Defendants, San Francisco Superior Court Case No, 445095,
reported by Aiken & Welch Inc., One Kaiser Plaza, Suite 505, Oakland, California, 94612, (415)
451-1580; the deposition transcript, and all exhibits attached thereto, of Harmon Clifton taken on
February 15, 200, in Clifton v. Asbestos Defendants, San Francisco Superior Court Case No.
302974; reported by Aiken & Welch Inc., One Kaiser Plaza, Suite 505, Oakland, California,
94612, (415) 451-1580; the deposition transcript, and all exhibits attached thereto, of Robert
KAnjuredt02208plA\jetrsp-ALBAY.wpd 3 awte
Oo-o WA RH RY
YM PDP MP BN NR DP ee Be ms ee
& 328% FSS fF FS FSS UR RES SoS
Corona, Sr. taken on March 4, 2002 in Robert Corona v. Asbestos Defendants, San Francisco
Superior Court Case No. 320064, reported by Aiken & Welch, Inc.; the deposition transcript, and
all exhibits attached thereto, of Gary Darling taken on September 1, 2006, in Gary Darling v.
Asbestos Defendants, San Francisco Superior Court Case No, 446219, reported by Aiken &
Welch, Inc., One Kaiser Plaza, Suite 505, Oakland, California, 94612, (415) 451-1580; the
deposition transcript, and all exhibits attached thereto, of Howard Dobler taken on July 29, 2002,
in Dobler v. Asbestos Defendants, San Francisco Superior Court Case No. 323430, reported by
Aiken & Welch Inc., One Kaiser Plaza, Suite 505, Oakland, California, 94612, (415) 451-1580;
the deposition transcript, and all exhibits attached thereto, of Charles Dodson taken on July 25,
2002, in Charle: son v. ts, San Francisco: Superior Court Case No.
322239, jeporied by Aiken & Welch Inc., One Kaiser Plaza, Suite 505, Oakland, California,
94612, (415) 451-1580; the deposition transcript, and all exhibits attached thereto, of Duane
Dughman taken on October 7, 2002, in Dughman v. Asbestos Defendants, San Francisco
Superior Court Case No. 324005, reported by and available through court reporters Ludwig Kling
Reporters, 10868 Kling Street, Toluca Lake, California, 800-540-0681; the deposition transcript,
and all exhibits attached thereto, of Michael Egger taken on July 8, 2002 in Egger v. Asbestos
Defendants, San Francisco Superior Court Case No, 324212, reported by Aiken & Welch, Inc.,
One Kaiser Plaza, Suite 505, Oakland, California 94612 (510) 451-1580; the deposition
transcript, and al! exhibits attached thereto, of Calvin Fisk taken on July 24, 2002 in Calvin Pisk
v. Asbestos Defendants, San Francisco Superior Court Case No, 321784, reported by Aiken &
Welch, Inc., One Kaiser Plaza, Suite 505, Oakland, California 94612 (510) 451-1580, the
deposition transcript, and all exhibits attached thereto, of Charles Fountain taken on November
25, 2002 in Calvin Fisk v. Asbestos Defendants, San Francisco Superior Court Case No. 407975,
reported by Tooker & Antz, 350 Sansome Street, #700, San Francisco, California 94104 (415)
392-0650; the deposition transcript, and all exhibits attached thereto, of Henry Freeman taken on
January 4, 2000 in Henry Freernan v. Asbestos Defendants, San Francisco Superior Court Case
No, 999123, reported by Aiken & Welch, Inc., One Kaiser Plaza, Suite 505, Oakland, California
94612 (510) 451-1580; the deposition transcript, and all exhibits attached thereto, of Vern
Gosney taken on January 14, 2001, in Gosney_v. Green, San Francisco Superior Court Case No.
301324, reported by Grossman & Cotter; the deposition transcript, and all exhibits attached
thereto, of Don Jackson taken on May 5, 2000 in Don Jackson y, Asbestos Defendants, San
Francisco Superior Court Case No. 304110 reported by Aiken & Welch, Inc., One Kaiser Plaza,
Suite 505, Oakland, California 94612 (510) 451-1580; the deposition transcript, and all exhibits
attached thereto, of Robert E. Jones taken on October 29, 2001 in Jones v, Asbestos Defendants,
San Francisco Superior Court Case No, 317055. reported by Aiken & Weich, Inc., One Kaiser
Plaza, Suite 505, Oakland, California 94612 (510) 451-1580; the deposition transcript, and all
exhibits attached thereto, of Thomas Kent taken on September 1, 2006, in Thomas Kent v.
Asbestos Defendants, San Francisco Superior Court Case No. 446221, reported by Aiken &
Welch, Inc., One Kaiser Plaza, Suite 505, Oakland, California 94612 (510) 451-1580; the
deposition transcript, and all exhibits attached thereto, of Robert M. Lee taken on March 28,
2006, in Robert M, Lee v, Asbestos Defendants, San Francisco Superior Court Case No. 440189,
reported by Aiken & Welch, Inc., One Kaiser Plaza, Suite 505, Oakland, California 94612 (510)
451-1580; the deposition transcript, and all exhibits attached thereto, of Javier Leper taken on
April 21, 1998 in 2M. , San Francisco Superior Court Case No. 983695. reported
by Aiken & Welch, Inc., One Kaiser Plaza, Suite 505, Oakland, California 94612 (510) 451-
1580; the deposition transcript, and all exhibits attached thereto, of Edward Meyer taken on May
6, 2002 in Mever y. Asbestos Defendants, San Francisco Superior Court Case No, 322333,
reported by Aiken & Welch, inc., One Kaiser Plaza, Suite 505, Oakland, California 94612 (510)
451-1580; the deposition transcript, and ail exhibits attached thereto, of John Minster taken on
January 4, 1999 in Minster v. Asbestos Defendants, San Francisco Superior Court Case No,
989622, reported by Aiken & Welch, Inc,, One Kaiser Plaza, Suite 505, Oakland, California
94612 (510) 451-1580; the deposition transcript, and all exhibits attached thereto, of James
O’Dell taken on December 16, 1998 in O’Dell_v. Abex, et al., San Francisco Superior Court
Case No, 992162, reported by Aiken & Welch, Inc., One Kaiser Plaza, Suite 505, Oakland,
California 94612 (510) 451-1580; the deposition transcript and all exhibits attached thereto, of
John Price taken on August 21, 2006, in John Price v. Asbestos Defendants,, San Francisco
KAlnjured\LOZ208\pleljet-rsp-ALBAY wpa 6 awCOD WRU B® BY DR me
Ree ee Be ee ee
SS 2 32 2a ROH TS
21
Superior Court Case No. 447151, reported by Aiken & Welch, Inc., One Kaiser Plaza, Suite 505,
Oakland, California 94612 (510) 451-1580; the deposition transcript, and all exhibits attached
thereto, of Thomas Pruett taken on January 11, 2001, in Pruett v. Asbestos Defendants, San
Francisco Superior Court Case No, 309572, reported by Aiken & Welch, Inc., One Kaiser Plaza,
Suite 505, Oakland, California 94612 ($10) 451-1580; the deposition transcript, and all exhibits
attached thereto, of Dale Riley taken on January 8, 2008, in Dale Riley v. Asbestos Defendants,
San Francisco Superior Court Case No, 449358, reported by Aiken & Welch, Inc., One Kaiser
Plaza, Suite 505, Oakland, California 94612 (510) 451-1580; the deposition transcript, and all
exhibits attached thereto, of John San Miguel taken on March 3, 2002 in Sap Miguel v-Asbestos
Defendants, San Francisco Superior Court Case No. 320543, reported by Aiken & Welch, Inc.,
One Kaiser Plaza, Suite 505, Oakland, California 94612 (510) 451-1580; the deposition
transcript, and all exhibits attached thereto, of Merle Sandy taken on October 7, 2002, in Sandy
y, Asbestos Defendants, San Francisco Superior Court Case No. 324212, reported by Aiken &
Welch, Inc,, One Kaiser Plaza, Suite 505, Oakland, California 94612 (510) 451-1580; the
deposition transcript, and all exhibits attached thereto, of Fred Shair taken on August 19, 2002 in
Shair v, Asbestos Defendants, San Francisco Superior Court Case No. 318442 reported by Aiken
& Welch, Inc., One Kaiser Plaza, Suite 505, Oakland, California 94612 (510) 451-1580; the
deposition transcript, and all exhibits attached thereto, of Melvin Thomas taken on February 7,
2007, and all subsequent dates, in Thomas v. Asbestos Defendants, San Francisco Superior
Court Case No. 451749 reported by Aiken & Welch, Inc., One Kaiser Plaza, Suite 305, Oakland,
California 94612 (510) 451-1580; the deposition transcripts, and all exhibits attached thereto, of
Michael Todd taken on October 11-12, 2006, in Michael Todd v. Asbestos Defendants, San
Francisco Superior Court Case No. 443881, reported by Aiken & Welch, Inc., One Kaiser Plaza,
Suite 505, Oakland, California 94612 (510) 451-1580; the deposition transcript, and all exhibits
attached thereto, of Bill Turley taken on June 17, 2002 in Turley y. Asbestos Defendants, San
Francisco Superior Court Case No, 320935, reported by Aiken & Welch, Inc., One Kaiser Plaza,
Suite 505, Oakland, California 94612 (510) 451-1580; the depose transcript, and all exhibits
attached thereto, of Michael Viramontes taken on December 8, 2002 in Vi ntes v, Asbestos
Defendants, San Francisco Superior Court Case No. 400752, reported by Aiken & Welch, Inc.,
One Kaiser Plaza, Suite 505, Oakland, California 94612 (510) 451-1580; the deposition
transcript, and all exhibits attached thereto, of William Ward taken on May 21, 2002 in Ward_v.
Asbestos Defendants, reported by Aiken & Welch, Inc., One Kaiser Plaza, Suite 505, Oakland,
California 94612 (510) 451-1580; the deposition transcript, and all exhibits attached thereto, of
Leonard Williams taken on December 15, 1999 in Williams v. Asbestos Defendants, San
Francisco Superior Court Case No, 306034, enone by Aiken & Welch, Inc., One Kaiser Plaza,
Suite 505, Oakland, California 94612 (510) 451-1580; the deposition transcripts, and all exhibits
attached thereto, of Norman Yates taken on January 24- 25, 2006, in Norman vaics {Asbestos
Defendants, San Francisco Superior Court Case No, 443881, reported by Aiken & Welch, Inc.,
One Kaiser Plaza, Suite 505, Oakland, California 94612 (510) 451-1580; and J.T. Thorpe and
Sons Jobsite Index, equally available to defendant.
Plaintiff further identifies the following documents relevant to Exxon Oil Refinery,
Benicia, California: the deposition transcript, and all exhibits attached thereto, of John Minster
taken on November 18, 1998, in John Minster v, Asbestos Defendants, San Francisco Superior
Court Case No. 989622, reported by Aiken & Welch, Inc., One Kaiser Plaza, Suite 505, Oakland,
California 94612 (510) 451-1580; the deposition transcript, and all exhibits attached thereto, of
Carl Poole taken on October 28, 2003, in Carl Poole _v. Asbestos Defendants, San Francisco
Superior Court Case No. 407305, reported by Aiken & Welch, Inc., One Kaiser Plaza, Suite 505,
Oakland, California 94612 (510) 451-1580; the deposition transcript, and all exhibits attached
thereto, of Prank Wornig, taken ‘on January 5, 2009, in Wornig v. Asbestos Defendants, San
Franeisco Superior Court Case No. 274169, reported by Aiken & Welch, Inc, One Kaiser Plaza,
Suite 505, Oakland, California 94612 (510) 451-1580.
Plaintiff has made a reasonable and good-faith effort to obtain the requested information
by inquiry to other natural persons or organizations, and believes that there is no further relevant
and/or responsive information to disclose at this time, Plaintiff reserves the right to supplement
this Response as investigation and discovery are continuing.
K Majuredlt02208\pld\jef-rsp-ALBAY.wpd 7 nw(a) Two.
® (b) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17,1 One
), above.
(hab c) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One
c), above.
(d) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One
(d), above.
(a) Three.
tb), ab (b) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17,1 One
, above.
) (c) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One
{c), above,
(d), ab d) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One
, above.
a) Four,
b b) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17,1 One
(b), above.
(c) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One
(c), above.
d) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One
(d), above,
(a) Five,
() b) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One
b), above.
),ab (c) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One
c), above.
(d) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One
(d), above,
(a) Six,
(o), ab (b) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One
, above,
fohab c) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One
c), above,
d) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One
(d), above.
(a) Seven.
(b), ab (b) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One
, above,
(©), abo c) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One
¢), above,
d) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, hig response to 17,1 One
(d), above,
(a) Bight.
(b), ab (b) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One
, above.
(@),ab c) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One
c), above,
(d).ab d) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One
, above,
KAlnjured 102298\plajet-rsp-ALBAY pd 8
awCe RAH RB wD wD Ee
BN PMY PR NR RP DB Se ee eB Be ee Se oe
ea 2k ae SH FSF ERR RAE BER AS
(a) Nine.
8 Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One
(b), above.
(ab ‘c) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17,1 One
¢), above.
(d) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One
(d), above.
{a) Ten,
(bh), ab (b) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One
, above,
(e), ab c) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response fo 17.1 One
c), above,
d) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17,1 One
(d), above.
(a) Eleven,
(b), ab (b) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One
, above,
(ab c) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One
c), above.
) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One
{d), above.
e
(a) Twelve.
©), 8b b) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17,1 One
, above,
(oa (c) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One
¢), above,
’) (d) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One
(d), above.
(a) Thirteen.
(b), ab (b) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One
, above.
(o),ab ¢) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One
¢), above,
d) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17,1 One
(d), above.
(a) Fourteen.
(b), ab (b) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One
, above.
to), ab (c) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One
c), above.
(@, ab (d) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One
, above.
(a) Fifteen,
oy ab (b) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One
, above.
(c) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17,1 One
| (c), above.
(d) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One
(d), above.
KAinjured\tO2298\plaljef-rep-ALBAY wd 9
awoO WA RR wD Ye
yb NR BP NM BP we RM Be YP = Se oe
eo 2 a Ae BS FSS ERR GE ESR ES
® Sixteen.
{b) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One
(b), above.
(hab (c) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.4 One
c), above.
(d) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One
(d), above,
‘a) Seventeen,
b) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One
(b), above,
ab ) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17,1 One
c), above.
‘d) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One
{d), above.
Ss
{a) Eighteen.
te), ab (b) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One
, above.
) (c) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17,1 One
{c), above.
(d) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17,1 One
(d), above.
(a) Nineteen.
(b), ab (b) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17,1 One
, above.
(hab (c) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One
¢), above,
(d) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One
(d), above.
(a) Twenty.
¢b), ab (b) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One
, above.
{c) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One
{c), above.
d) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One
(d), above,
{a) Twenty-one,
(b), ah b) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One
, above.
(ab (c) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One
c), above.
) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One
(d), above.
a
2
(a) Twenty-two,
(o), ab (b) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One
, above.
(o), ab c) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One
‘c), above.
(d) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One
(d), above,
KAlnjuredi102298\plahjef-rsp-ALBAY wpd 10
1Co Oo a AN eh BR Ww
10
WW
12
13
14
18
16
17
18
19
20
2
2
2B
24
25
26
21
28
{a) Twenty-three.
(b), ab (b) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One
, above.
©) (c) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One
¢), above.
(d) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One
(d), above.
Dated: BRAYTON“’PURCELL LLP
By:
Jang] L.White
Attorneys for Plaintiff
KAlnjuredh O2208\pldijef-rsp-ALBAY wpe i
swVERIFICATION TO FOLLOW
KAFORMS\VERJFVER2FOLW,WPD
am t+ HO mE BD
10
a seek
sssiees (ts)
S919 B5696 VINIOATT¥S OLYAON
oI XOTOd
GON ONIGHYT HSN TEE
AWTLY SASNYOLLY
dT] TISOUNd ONOLAVESCc ec RM AN UW
PROOF OF SERVICE BY MAIL.
Tam employed in the County of Sonoma, State of California. 1am over the age of 18
ears and am not a party to the within action. My business address is 1324 Rand Street,
Petaluma, California 94954,
On FEBS 20a , Lserved the within:
PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT ALBAY CONSTRUCTION
COMPANY’S FORM INTERROGATORIES, SET ONE
on the interested parties in this action by transmitting a true copy thereof in the following
manner.
I placed in a sealed envelope, postage thereon prepaid, addressed and served as follows:
ALBAY CONSTRUCTION COMPANY
Archer Norris
P.O. Box 8035
2033 N, Main Street, Suite 800
Walnut Creek, CA 94596
BY MAIL SERVICE: {am readily farnitiar with the business practice at
my place of business for collection and processing
of correspondence for delivery by mail.
Correspondence so collected and processed is
deposited with the United States Postal Service on
the same day in the ordinary course of business. On
the above date the said envelope was collected for
the United States Postal Service following ordinary
business practices.
Bxecuted FERS 201 , at Petaluma, California.
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the
foregoing is true and correct. 3}
is Castagna v, Asbestos Defendants (BY.
San Francisco Superior Court Case No. CGC-08-274230
PROOF OF SERVICE BY MAIL,BRAYTON@PURCELL LLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
22] RUSH LANDING ROAD.
NOVATO, CALIFORNIA 94948-6169
{425) 898-1595
1 VERIFICATION
Louis Castagna, :
San Francisco Superior Court Case No. CGC-08-274230
Tam the plaintiff in the above-entitled action. The foregoing Plaintiff's Response to
rendant, Alba: ruction Company’s Form Interr Qne , propounded by
2
3
4
5] 1, Louis Castagna, declare:
6
7
8|| Albay Construction Company, are true and correct as to those statements for which | have
9]| personal knowledge. As to those niatters which are therein stated on my information and belief
10) and, as to those matters, I believe them true.
Il I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the
12] foregoing is true and correct.
13
14 Dated: A-G@-2vle
15
’ i
16 Signed: oats Coilipia.
17
18|| Please do not write below this line. If you have any changes, please submit them ona
19]| separate sheet of paper. Thank you.
20
DYD ae ce ee ct ee wate ge
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Preview
Eugene C. Blackard Jr. (Bar No. 142090) Jasun C. Molinelli (Bar No. 204456) Kime H. Smith (Bar No. 230740) ARCHER NORRIS ELECTRONICALLY A Professional Law Corporation 2033 North Main Street, Suite 800 Su FILED ala, Walnut Creek, California 94596-3759 County of San Francisco Telephone: 925.930.6600 JUN 24 2010 Facsimile: 925.930.6620 Clerk of the Court BY: ALISON AGBAY Attorneys for Defendant Deputy Clerk ALBAY CONSTRUCTION COMPANY SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO LOUIS CASTAGNA, Case No. CGC-07-274230 Plaintiff, ALBAY CONSTRUCTION COMPANY’S INDEX OF EXHIBITS IN SUPPORT OF v. ITS MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (EXHIBIT “E” ~ Part 3 of 3) ASBESTOS DEFENDANTS (BP), Date: September 9, 2010 Defendant. Time: 9:30 am. Dept: 220 Judge: Hon. Harold E, Kahn Action Filed; June 6, 2007 Trial Date: October 12, 2010 ALM3003/977530-1 ALBAY CONSTRUCTION COMPANY’S INDEX OF EXHIBITS IN SUPPORT OF ITS MOTION FOR, SUMMARY JUDGMENT (EXHIBIT E ~ PART 3 OF 3)Exhibit “E” caer 3 of 5)BRAYTONGPURCELL LLP ATTORNEYS AT LAW 202 RUSH LANDING ROAD PO BOX GED NOVA TO, CALIFORNIA 99988-6169 (G15) 898-1555 oP YD A AR ww NM 10 ALAN R. BRAYTON, ESQ., 8.B. #73685 DAVID R. DONADIO, ESQ,, $.B, #154436 JAMIL L. WHITE, ESQ., S.B. #244028 BRAYTON®*PURCELL LLP Attorneys at Law 222 Rush Landing Road P.O. Box 6169 Novato, California 94948-6169 (415) 898-1555 Attorneys for Plaintiff SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO ASBESTOS No, CGC-08-274230 LOUIS CASTAGNA, } ) ; PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSE TO ) ) Plaintiff, DEFENDANT ALBAY CONSTRUCTION COMPANY’S FORM. INTERROGATORIES, SET ONE vs. ASBESTOS DEFENDANTS (B%P) PROPOUNDING PARTY: Defendant ALBAY CONSTRUCTION COMPANY RESPONDING PARTY: _ Plaintiff LOUIS CASTAGNA SET NUMBER: ONE (1) RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 17.1: No. {a) One. (b) Plaintiff objects to this Interrogatory on the grounds that it is overly broad. Plaintiff objects to this Interrogatory on the grounds that it is vague and ambiguous with respect to the use of undefined terms and phrases, including but not limited to, “state all facts,” “upon which” and “base your response.” Plaintiff objects to this Interrogatory on the grounds, and to the extent, that it requires a lay person to draw a legal conclusion and make an evidentiary determination. Plaintiff further objects to this Interrogatory on the grounds that it seeks information equally or more available to, or already in possession of, defendant, making it unduly burdensome for laintiff to respond. Plaintiff objects to the use of this Judicial Council Form Interrogatory, as it is duplicative in substance to defendant’s Special Interrogatories, as such it is burdensome, oppressive and an abuse of the discovery process. Subject to said objections and without waiver thereof, plaintiff responds as follows: Tncluding but not limited to the jobsites listed below, plaintiff worked around employees of ALBAY CONTSTRUCTION COMPANY (hereinafter “Defendant” or “ALBAY”) who were installing, applying, removing, disturbing, handling, and otherwise working with asbestos- containing equipment, products, and materials. Plaintiff was exposed to dust from asbestos- containing products installed, applied, manipulated, disturbed, swept up, removed, repaired, and/or replaced by employees of defendant and by subcontractors hired by defendant, over whom defendant exercised control and was legally responsible. Defendant knew or should have known KAlnjuredl 1O2208\pld\jet-rsp-ALBAY.wpd 1 aw2 MW A A kB we BN YP RP PN KR DN BB moe Some oe & IU &F GES S fF SF Ce RTREEBEHE AS of the health hazards associated with exposure to asbestos and asbestos-containing products prior] to its work with asbestos-containing products in plaintiff's presence. Defendant knew or should have known that its work with asbestos-containing products would release asbestos fibers into the air, and that plaintiff would inhale those fibers because plaintiff was working in close proximity to defendant's employees. Defendant failed to take available safety precautions or to warn plaintiff, a reasonably foreseeable injured party due to plaintiff's proximity to defendant’s employees, of the dangers defendant's employees created when they installed, applied, manipulated, disturbed, swept up, removed, repaired and/or replaced asbestos-containing materials. Defendant was an industrial contractor who was responsible for coordinating, managing and overseeing the installation, removal and maintenance of asbestos and asbestos- a containing products at plaintiff's jobsite(s). Employer Location of Exposure Job Title Exposure Dates C.F, Braun & Co., Corp. Standard Oil, Richmond, — Steamfitter 6/30/1975-7/1975 1000 S, Fremont Aye. CA Alhambra, CA 91802 Employer Location of Exposure Job Tithe Exposure Dates Brocon, Inc. Standard Oil, Richmond, Steamfitter TOTS 12/975 Three Greenway Plaza A Houston, TX 77046 Emplover Location of Exposure Job Title Exposure Dates Ehrhart & Associates Standard OilRichmond, CA Steamfitter WAANOTS- 12/1975 Employer Location ofEx posure lob Tithe Exposure Dates Pacific Mechanical Corp.Box Standard OifRichmond, CA Steamfitter 12/2/1975- 4041 Concord, CA 94524 1/18/1976 Employer Location ofExposure Job Title Exposure Dates C.F. Braun Standard Oil, Richmond, — Stearfitter 19/1976 A Employer Location ofExposure Job Title Exposure Dates Bechtel, Inc.50 Beale St.San Phillips PetroleumAvon, — Stearnfitter 1/20/1976- Francisco, CA 94.105 CA 3/30/1976 Job Duties: Plaintiff recalls this new and old constraction at bay area refineries. Plaintiff cut carbon steel pipes. Plaintiff installed GARLOCK and BLEXITALLIC gaskets, valves, and pumps. Plainuff recalls ALBAY CONSTRUCTION CO, performing demolition to insulated piping 5 to 25 feet from him and performing pipefitting, labor work, carpentry, electrical work, pump work, insulating, welding, cutting, demolishing and replacing the lines. Plaintiff recalls seeing ALBAY employees as early as 1975, at various bay area refineries performing pipefitting, Tabor work, carpentry, electrical work, pump work, insulating, welding, cutting, demolishing and replacing lines, and demolishing insulated pipes. Plaintiff recalls ALBAY employees demolish lagging in tight spaces, above and aside Plaintiff. In 1976, Plaintiff recalls ALBAY employees using Lincoln welding rods and disturbing lagging 5 -25 feet aside or above him. KAinjuredi O2208\ptd\e-rop-ALBAY.epd 2 mwco SB WA RR WY wD 10 The hazards associated with exposure to asbestos and the effect of asbestos exposure on humans have been well documented throughout this century. As carly as the 1930s, there existed a wealth of information available for defendant which evidences that exposure to asbestos and asbestos-containing products was a health hazard. California promulgated industrial safety standards for workmen around asbestos-containing products beginning in the 1930s. By 1937, California listed asbestosis as a compensable disease under Worker's Compensation laws. Numerous articles and studies relating to the health hazards of exposure to asbestos have appeared in medical and scientific literature since the turn of the century and have also been summarized in various publications. Additionally, safety orders have existed since the 1940s regarding the control of asbestos dust in the workplace. ¢ actions of defendant and the actions of other workers under defendant’s control, caused the release of large amounts of asbestos fiber and dust into the workplace and surrounding air, Consequently, plaintiff was exposed to and inhaled these asbestos fibers and dust causing him injury and damage. After a reasonable and good-faith inquiry to other persons and organization, pursuant to C.C.P, § 2030,220(a)-(c), plaintiff has no further information responsive to this Interrogatory at this time. Plaintiff's investigation and discovery are continuing, Plaintiff expressly reserves the right to amend this Response pending the outcome of plaintiff's investigation. (c) Plaintiff objects to this Interrogatory on the grounds that it is overly broad. Plaintiff objects to this Interrogatory on the grounds that it is vague and ambiguous with respect to the use of undefined terms and phrases, including but not limited to, “PERSONS,” and “have knowledge of those facts,” Plaintift objects to this Interrogatory on the grounds, and to the extent, that it requires plaintiff, a lay person, to draw a legal conclusion and make an evidentiary determination, Plaintiff also objects to this Inferrogatory on the grounds that it calls for information regarding plaintiff's retained litigation consultants which is protected by the attorney work-product doctrin and C.C.P. § 2018.030. Plaintiff also objects to this Interrogatory on the grounds, and to the extent, that it seeks the premature disclosure of information within the possession of plaintiff's retained litigation consultants in violation C.C.P. § 2034.210 et seq. Plaintiff further objects to this Interrogatory on the grounds that it seeks information that is equally or more available to defendant, or information that is equally available to defendant, thus making it unduly burdensome for plaintiff to respond. Plaintiff objects to the use of this Judicial Council Form Interrogatory, as itis duplicative in substance to defendant's Special Interrogatories, as such it is burdensome, oppressive and an abuse of the discovery process, Subject to this objection and without waiver thereof, plaintiff responds as follows: Plaintiff refers to and incorporates by reference response to Interrogatory 17.1, One (b), above and response to defendant's Special Interrogatories. Subject to and without waiver of these objections, plaintiff responds as follows: Plaintiff identifies himself, c/o Brayton%*Purcell LLP, James Saathoff, c/o Brayton%Purcell LLP, Dick Dole, address currently unknown; and supervisor Vern Gosney, c/o Paul, Hanley & Harley, Gene Yates, address currently unknown, Gene Gosney, deceased, and George Bell, c/o Brayton**Purcel] LLP, Plaintiff also identifies any and all Persons Most Knowledgeable and Custodians of Record(s), both past and present, of defendant, as well as any people who have verified defendant’s responses to interrogatories. Plaintiff further identifies the Person(s) Most Knowledgeable and Custodian(s) of Records of plaintiff's employers, as detailed above or as identified in his Social Security records and/or Plaintiff's Responses to Standard Asbestos Case Interrogatories. Plaintiff also identifies all doctors and other medical professionals identified in plaintiff's medical records which are equally available to defendant through coordinating defense counsel, Berry & Berry Plaintiff identifies the Person(s) Most Knowledgeable and Custodian(s) of Records for all other named defendants in this action. After a reasonable and good-faith inquiry to other persons and organizations, pursuant to C.CP. § 2030,220(a)-(c), plaintiff has no further information responsive to this Interrogatory at this time. Plaintiff's investigation and discovery are continuing, Plaintiff reserves the right to supplement this Response if additional information is discovered. KNiguredh102298\plo\of-rep-ALBAY pd 3 aLOo Oe ND A Rw 10 (d) Plaintiff objects to this Interrogatory on the grounds that it is overly broad, Plainuff objects to this Interrogatory on the grounds that it is vague and ambiguous with respect to the use! of undefined terms and phrases, including but not limited to, “DOC ENTS,” “other tangible things,” and “support.” ‘Plaintiff objects to this Interrogatory on the grounds, and to the extent, that it requires plaintiff, a lay person, to draw a legal conclusion and make an evidentiary determination, Plaintiff also objects to this Interrogatory on the grounds that it calls for information regarding plaintiff’s retained biigation consultants which is protected by the attorney work-product doctrine and C.C.P. § 2018.030. Plaintiff further objects to this Interrogatory on the grounds that it seeks information that is equally or more available to defendant, or information that is equally available to defendant, thus making it unduly burdensome for plaintiff to respond, Plaintiff objects to the use of this Judicial Council Form Interrogatory, as it is duplicative in substance to defendant's Special Interrogatories, as such it is burdensome, oppressive and an abuse of the discovery process, Without waiving the foregoing objections, plaintiff currently identifies the following documents: Plaintiff identifies the Complaint served in this matter and plaintiff’ s responses to Standard Asbestos Case Interrogatories, and all exhibits attached thereto. Plaintiff also identifies his and his father’s, Merle Sandy’s, Social Security records, Union records, and medical records and billings, which are equally available to defendant through coordinating defense counsel Berry & Berry. Plaintiff identifies the transcripts of his deposition(s), and all attachments thereto, equally available to defendant. Plaintiff further identifies the deposition testimony, including all exhibits attached thereto, of all Persons Most Knowledgeable and Custodians of Record(s), both past and present, of defendant. Plaintiff believes that defendant is in possession of these documents. Plaintiff further identifies all prior deposition and/or trial transcripts and exhibits marked, teceived in evidence or otherwise identified in all prior actions or trials handled by Brayton Purcell, LLP. Plaintiff also identifies the General Order No. 129 responses, and all supplements, amendments and exhibits thereto of defendant. Plaintiff further identifies defendant’s Job Lists in reference to plaintiff’s jobsites identified in response to interrogatory No. | above. Plaintiff further identifies all the papers, photographs, films, recordings, memoranda, books, records, pamphlets, circulars, handbooks, manuals, periodicals, files, envelopes, notices, instructions, transcripts, notes, telex messages, communications (including reports, notes, notation and memoranda of telephone conversations and conferences, electronic mail, minutes, transcriptions, correspondence, etc.) writings, letters, telegrams, correspondence, notes of meetings or of conversations either in writing or upon any mechanical or electronic devices, notes, accountants’ statements or summaries, reports, invoices, canceled checks, check stubs receipts, bank statements, diaries, desk calendars, appointment books, payment records, telephone bills in defendant's constructive possession, custody, care or control relating to asbestos-containing products and materials manufactured, sold, supplied and/or distributed by defendant, at the jobsite(s) at which plaintiff’s father worked. Plaintiff further identifies all of the agreements and contracts between defendant and all general contractors and sub-contractors present at the jobsite(s) where plaintiff’s father worked. Plaintiff further identifies all of the labeling and packaging materials for all of the asbestos-containing products and materials manufactured, sold, supplied and/or distributed by defendant and used at plaintiff's father’s jobsite(s). Plaintiff believes defendant is in possession of these documents. Plaintiff further identifies numerous articles and studies relating to health hazards associated with exposure to asbestos which have appeared in the medical and scientific literatures since the turn of the century, and have also been summarized in various publications. Two texts that contain summaries and/or bibliographies of this literature are: Asbestos: Medical and Legal Aspects, Barry I. Castleman, Prentice-Hall Law and Business, 1990. Sourcebook of Asbestos Disease, Medical. Legal, and Engineering Aspects, George A Peters and Barbara J. Peters, Garland STPM Press, Vol. 1, 1980, ol. 2, 1986. KAlnjores302298\pljet-r9p-ALBAY pd 4 nwSo 4 A ew Bw HK 10 Plaintiff is in possession of these texts and will make them available for defendant's review. Plaintiff further identifies the NESHAP for asbestos, which are found at Code of Federal| Regulations, Title 40, Chapter 1, Subchapter C, Part 61, Subpart M, ublished under the Federal Clean Air Act of 1970; 42 U.8.C.A, Section 7412(b)U. (A); 42 U.S.C.A. Section 7412(b)(1)(B). Plaintiff further identifies all applicable OSHA (federal) and CAL-OSHA (state) regulations pertaining to asbestos exposure, including but not limited to Code of Federal Regulations, Title 9, Chapter 17, Section 1910, et seq,; and Title 8, Section 5208 of the California OSHA regulations pertaining to asbestos exposure. Plaintiff further identifies Workers’ Compensation Law since the 1930's, under which asbestos has been a compensable disease. Plaintiff further identifies General Industry Safety Orders promulgated pursuant to California Labor Code § 6400, et seq. and California Administrative Code under the California Department of Industrial Relations, Division of Industial Safety, including, but not limited to, Title VIN, Group 9 (Control of Hazardous Substances) Article 81, Section 4150, 4104-4108, and Threshold Limit Values as documented for asbestos and other toxic substances under Appendix A, Table I of said Safety Orders. Due to copyright laws, plaintiff cannot provide copies of these texts to defendant. Plaintiff also identifies the following documents relevant to Standard Oil, Richmond, California: Albay Construction Company Contract Ledgers, the deposition transcript, and all exhibits attached thereto, of John Arts taken on September 27, 2004, in John Arts v. Asbestos Defendants, San Francisco Superior Court Case No. 717505, reported by Aiken & Welch Inc., One Kaiser Plaza, Suite 505, Oakland, California, 94612, (415) 451-1580; Plaintiff identifies the deposition transcript, and all exhibits attached thereto, of Robert A. Cantley taken on June 4, 2007, in Cantley v. Asbestos Defendants, San Francisco Superior Court Case No. 448821, reported by Aiken & Welch, Inc., One Kaiser Plaza, Suite 505, Oakland, California 94612 (510) 451-1580; the deposition transcript, and all exhibits attached thereto, of Delmar Stephens taken on August 29, 2003, in Delmar Stephens v. Asbestos Defendants, San Francisco Superior Court Case No. 408577, reported by Aiken & Welch, Inc., One Kaiser Plaza, Suite 505, Oakland, California 94612 (310) 451-[580; the deposition transcript, and all exhibits attached thereto, of Dee R. Stiles taken on December 18, 2003, in Dee Stiles v. Asbestos Defendants, San Francisco Superior Court Case No. 415301 reported by Aiken & Welch, Inc., One Kaiser Plaza, Suite 505, Oakland, California 94612 (510) 451-1580. . Plaintiff further identifies the following documents relevant to Union Oil Refinery, Rodeo/Oleum, California: the deposition transcript, and all exhibits attached thereto, of Donald Blevins, taken on June 4, 2001, in Blevins v. Asbestos Defendants., San Francisco Superior Court Case No. 308596, reported by Aiken & Welch, Inc., One Kaiser Plaza, Suite 505, Oakland, California 94612 (510) 451-1580. : Plaintiff also identifies the following documents relevant to Shell Oil Refinery, Martinez, California: Albay Construction Company Contract Ledgers; the deposition transcript of William Andrews taken on November 4, 2002 in William Andrews v. Asbestos Defendants, San Francisco Superior Court Case No,317697, reported by Aiken & Welch, Inc., One Kaiser Plaza, Suite 505, Oakland, California 94612 (510) 451-1580; the deposition transcript, and all exhibits attached thereto, of Billy Armstrong taken on July 9, 1997 in Armstrong v. Asbestos Defendants, San Francisco Superior Court Case No. 985289, reported by Tooker & Antz, 350 Sansome Street, #700, San Francisco, California 94104 (415) 392-0650; the deposition transcript, and al] exhibits attached thereto, of John Bennett taken on March 25 2002, in Bennett v, fs Defendants, San Francisco Superior Court Case No, 320121, reported by Aiken & Welch, Inc., One Kaiser Plaza, Suite 505, Oakland, California 94612 (510) 451-1580; the deposition transcript, and all exhibits attached thereto, of Donald Blevins, taken on February 1, 2001, in Blevins y. Asbestos Defendants., San Francisco Superior Court Case No. 308596, reported by Aiken & Welch, Inc., One Kaiser Plaza, Suite 505, Oakland, California 94612 (510) 451-1580; the deposition transcript, and all exhibits attached thereto, of Alfred Breiter taken on August 10, 2006, in Arthur Breiter v. Asbestos Defendants, San Francisco Superior Court Case No, 445095, reported by Aiken & Welch Inc., One Kaiser Plaza, Suite 505, Oakland, California, 94612, (415) 451-1580; the deposition transcript, and all exhibits attached thereto, of Harmon Clifton taken on February 15, 200, in Clifton v. Asbestos Defendants, San Francisco Superior Court Case No. 302974; reported by Aiken & Welch Inc., One Kaiser Plaza, Suite 505, Oakland, California, 94612, (415) 451-1580; the deposition transcript, and all exhibits attached thereto, of Robert KAnjuredt02208plA\jetrsp-ALBAY.wpd 3 awte Oo-o WA RH RY YM PDP MP BN NR DP ee Be ms ee & 328% FSS fF FS FSS UR RES SoS Corona, Sr. taken on March 4, 2002 in Robert Corona v. Asbestos Defendants, San Francisco Superior Court Case No. 320064, reported by Aiken & Welch, Inc.; the deposition transcript, and all exhibits attached thereto, of Gary Darling taken on September 1, 2006, in Gary Darling v. Asbestos Defendants, San Francisco Superior Court Case No, 446219, reported by Aiken & Welch, Inc., One Kaiser Plaza, Suite 505, Oakland, California, 94612, (415) 451-1580; the deposition transcript, and all exhibits attached thereto, of Howard Dobler taken on July 29, 2002, in Dobler v. Asbestos Defendants, San Francisco Superior Court Case No. 323430, reported by Aiken & Welch Inc., One Kaiser Plaza, Suite 505, Oakland, California, 94612, (415) 451-1580; the deposition transcript, and all exhibits attached thereto, of Charles Dodson taken on July 25, 2002, in Charle: son v. ts, San Francisco: Superior Court Case No. 322239, jeporied by Aiken & Welch Inc., One Kaiser Plaza, Suite 505, Oakland, California, 94612, (415) 451-1580; the deposition transcript, and all exhibits attached thereto, of Duane Dughman taken on October 7, 2002, in Dughman v. Asbestos Defendants, San Francisco Superior Court Case No. 324005, reported by and available through court reporters Ludwig Kling Reporters, 10868 Kling Street, Toluca Lake, California, 800-540-0681; the deposition transcript, and all exhibits attached thereto, of Michael Egger taken on July 8, 2002 in Egger v. Asbestos Defendants, San Francisco Superior Court Case No, 324212, reported by Aiken & Welch, Inc., One Kaiser Plaza, Suite 505, Oakland, California 94612 (510) 451-1580; the deposition transcript, and al! exhibits attached thereto, of Calvin Fisk taken on July 24, 2002 in Calvin Pisk v. Asbestos Defendants, San Francisco Superior Court Case No, 321784, reported by Aiken & Welch, Inc., One Kaiser Plaza, Suite 505, Oakland, California 94612 (510) 451-1580, the deposition transcript, and all exhibits attached thereto, of Charles Fountain taken on November 25, 2002 in Calvin Fisk v. Asbestos Defendants, San Francisco Superior Court Case No. 407975, reported by Tooker & Antz, 350 Sansome Street, #700, San Francisco, California 94104 (415) 392-0650; the deposition transcript, and all exhibits attached thereto, of Henry Freeman taken on January 4, 2000 in Henry Freernan v. Asbestos Defendants, San Francisco Superior Court Case No, 999123, reported by Aiken & Welch, Inc., One Kaiser Plaza, Suite 505, Oakland, California 94612 (510) 451-1580; the deposition transcript, and all exhibits attached thereto, of Vern Gosney taken on January 14, 2001, in Gosney_v. Green, San Francisco Superior Court Case No. 301324, reported by Grossman & Cotter; the deposition transcript, and all exhibits attached thereto, of Don Jackson taken on May 5, 2000 in Don Jackson y, Asbestos Defendants, San Francisco Superior Court Case No. 304110 reported by Aiken & Welch, Inc., One Kaiser Plaza, Suite 505, Oakland, California 94612 (510) 451-1580; the deposition transcript, and all exhibits attached thereto, of Robert E. Jones taken on October 29, 2001 in Jones v, Asbestos Defendants, San Francisco Superior Court Case No, 317055. reported by Aiken & Weich, Inc., One Kaiser Plaza, Suite 505, Oakland, California 94612 (510) 451-1580; the deposition transcript, and all exhibits attached thereto, of Thomas Kent taken on September 1, 2006, in Thomas Kent v. Asbestos Defendants, San Francisco Superior Court Case No. 446221, reported by Aiken & Welch, Inc., One Kaiser Plaza, Suite 505, Oakland, California 94612 (510) 451-1580; the deposition transcript, and all exhibits attached thereto, of Robert M. Lee taken on March 28, 2006, in Robert M, Lee v, Asbestos Defendants, San Francisco Superior Court Case No. 440189, reported by Aiken & Welch, Inc., One Kaiser Plaza, Suite 505, Oakland, California 94612 (510) 451-1580; the deposition transcript, and all exhibits attached thereto, of Javier Leper taken on April 21, 1998 in 2M. , San Francisco Superior Court Case No. 983695. reported by Aiken & Welch, Inc., One Kaiser Plaza, Suite 505, Oakland, California 94612 (510) 451- 1580; the deposition transcript, and all exhibits attached thereto, of Edward Meyer taken on May 6, 2002 in Mever y. Asbestos Defendants, San Francisco Superior Court Case No, 322333, reported by Aiken & Welch, inc., One Kaiser Plaza, Suite 505, Oakland, California 94612 (510) 451-1580; the deposition transcript, and ail exhibits attached thereto, of John Minster taken on January 4, 1999 in Minster v. Asbestos Defendants, San Francisco Superior Court Case No, 989622, reported by Aiken & Welch, Inc,, One Kaiser Plaza, Suite 505, Oakland, California 94612 (510) 451-1580; the deposition transcript, and all exhibits attached thereto, of James O’Dell taken on December 16, 1998 in O’Dell_v. Abex, et al., San Francisco Superior Court Case No, 992162, reported by Aiken & Welch, Inc., One Kaiser Plaza, Suite 505, Oakland, California 94612 (510) 451-1580; the deposition transcript and all exhibits attached thereto, of John Price taken on August 21, 2006, in John Price v. Asbestos Defendants,, San Francisco KAlnjured\LOZ208\pleljet-rsp-ALBAY wpa 6 awCOD WRU B® BY DR me Ree ee Be ee ee SS 2 32 2a ROH TS 21 Superior Court Case No. 447151, reported by Aiken & Welch, Inc., One Kaiser Plaza, Suite 505, Oakland, California 94612 (510) 451-1580; the deposition transcript, and all exhibits attached thereto, of Thomas Pruett taken on January 11, 2001, in Pruett v. Asbestos Defendants, San Francisco Superior Court Case No, 309572, reported by Aiken & Welch, Inc., One Kaiser Plaza, Suite 505, Oakland, California 94612 ($10) 451-1580; the deposition transcript, and all exhibits attached thereto, of Dale Riley taken on January 8, 2008, in Dale Riley v. Asbestos Defendants, San Francisco Superior Court Case No, 449358, reported by Aiken & Welch, Inc., One Kaiser Plaza, Suite 505, Oakland, California 94612 (510) 451-1580; the deposition transcript, and all exhibits attached thereto, of John San Miguel taken on March 3, 2002 in Sap Miguel v-Asbestos Defendants, San Francisco Superior Court Case No. 320543, reported by Aiken & Welch, Inc., One Kaiser Plaza, Suite 505, Oakland, California 94612 (510) 451-1580; the deposition transcript, and all exhibits attached thereto, of Merle Sandy taken on October 7, 2002, in Sandy y, Asbestos Defendants, San Francisco Superior Court Case No. 324212, reported by Aiken & Welch, Inc,, One Kaiser Plaza, Suite 505, Oakland, California 94612 (510) 451-1580; the deposition transcript, and all exhibits attached thereto, of Fred Shair taken on August 19, 2002 in Shair v, Asbestos Defendants, San Francisco Superior Court Case No. 318442 reported by Aiken & Welch, Inc., One Kaiser Plaza, Suite 505, Oakland, California 94612 (510) 451-1580; the deposition transcript, and all exhibits attached thereto, of Melvin Thomas taken on February 7, 2007, and all subsequent dates, in Thomas v. Asbestos Defendants, San Francisco Superior Court Case No. 451749 reported by Aiken & Welch, Inc., One Kaiser Plaza, Suite 305, Oakland, California 94612 (510) 451-1580; the deposition transcripts, and all exhibits attached thereto, of Michael Todd taken on October 11-12, 2006, in Michael Todd v. Asbestos Defendants, San Francisco Superior Court Case No. 443881, reported by Aiken & Welch, Inc., One Kaiser Plaza, Suite 505, Oakland, California 94612 (510) 451-1580; the deposition transcript, and all exhibits attached thereto, of Bill Turley taken on June 17, 2002 in Turley y. Asbestos Defendants, San Francisco Superior Court Case No, 320935, reported by Aiken & Welch, Inc., One Kaiser Plaza, Suite 505, Oakland, California 94612 (510) 451-1580; the depose transcript, and all exhibits attached thereto, of Michael Viramontes taken on December 8, 2002 in Vi ntes v, Asbestos Defendants, San Francisco Superior Court Case No. 400752, reported by Aiken & Welch, Inc., One Kaiser Plaza, Suite 505, Oakland, California 94612 (510) 451-1580; the deposition transcript, and all exhibits attached thereto, of William Ward taken on May 21, 2002 in Ward_v. Asbestos Defendants, reported by Aiken & Welch, Inc., One Kaiser Plaza, Suite 505, Oakland, California 94612 (510) 451-1580; the deposition transcript, and all exhibits attached thereto, of Leonard Williams taken on December 15, 1999 in Williams v. Asbestos Defendants, San Francisco Superior Court Case No, 306034, enone by Aiken & Welch, Inc., One Kaiser Plaza, Suite 505, Oakland, California 94612 (510) 451-1580; the deposition transcripts, and all exhibits attached thereto, of Norman Yates taken on January 24- 25, 2006, in Norman vaics {Asbestos Defendants, San Francisco Superior Court Case No, 443881, reported by Aiken & Welch, Inc., One Kaiser Plaza, Suite 505, Oakland, California 94612 (510) 451-1580; and J.T. Thorpe and Sons Jobsite Index, equally available to defendant. Plaintiff further identifies the following documents relevant to Exxon Oil Refinery, Benicia, California: the deposition transcript, and all exhibits attached thereto, of John Minster taken on November 18, 1998, in John Minster v, Asbestos Defendants, San Francisco Superior Court Case No. 989622, reported by Aiken & Welch, Inc., One Kaiser Plaza, Suite 505, Oakland, California 94612 (510) 451-1580; the deposition transcript, and all exhibits attached thereto, of Carl Poole taken on October 28, 2003, in Carl Poole _v. Asbestos Defendants, San Francisco Superior Court Case No. 407305, reported by Aiken & Welch, Inc., One Kaiser Plaza, Suite 505, Oakland, California 94612 (510) 451-1580; the deposition transcript, and all exhibits attached thereto, of Prank Wornig, taken ‘on January 5, 2009, in Wornig v. Asbestos Defendants, San Franeisco Superior Court Case No. 274169, reported by Aiken & Welch, Inc, One Kaiser Plaza, Suite 505, Oakland, California 94612 (510) 451-1580. Plaintiff has made a reasonable and good-faith effort to obtain the requested information by inquiry to other natural persons or organizations, and believes that there is no further relevant and/or responsive information to disclose at this time, Plaintiff reserves the right to supplement this Response as investigation and discovery are continuing. K Majuredlt02208\pld\jef-rsp-ALBAY.wpd 7 nw(a) Two. ® (b) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17,1 One ), above. (hab c) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One c), above. (d) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One (d), above. (a) Three. tb), ab (b) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17,1 One , above. ) (c) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One {c), above, (d), ab d) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One , above. a) Four, b b) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17,1 One (b), above. (c) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One (c), above. d) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One (d), above, (a) Five, () b) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One b), above. ),ab (c) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One c), above. (d) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One (d), above, (a) Six, (o), ab (b) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One , above, fohab c) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One c), above, d) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One (d), above. (a) Seven. (b), ab (b) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One , above, (©), abo c) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One ¢), above, d) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, hig response to 17,1 One (d), above, (a) Bight. (b), ab (b) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One , above. (@),ab c) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One c), above, (d).ab d) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One , above, KAlnjured 102298\plajet-rsp-ALBAY pd 8 awCe RAH RB wD wD Ee BN PMY PR NR RP DB Se ee eB Be ee Se oe ea 2k ae SH FSF ERR RAE BER AS (a) Nine. 8 Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One (b), above. (ab ‘c) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17,1 One ¢), above. (d) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One (d), above. {a) Ten, (bh), ab (b) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One , above, (e), ab c) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response fo 17.1 One c), above, d) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17,1 One (d), above. (a) Eleven, (b), ab (b) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One , above, (ab c) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One c), above. ) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One {d), above. e (a) Twelve. ©), 8b b) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17,1 One , above, (oa (c) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One ¢), above, ’) (d) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One (d), above. (a) Thirteen. (b), ab (b) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One , above. (o),ab ¢) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One ¢), above, d) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17,1 One (d), above. (a) Fourteen. (b), ab (b) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One , above. to), ab (c) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One c), above. (@, ab (d) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One , above. (a) Fifteen, oy ab (b) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One , above. (c) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17,1 One | (c), above. (d) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One (d), above. KAinjured\tO2298\plaljef-rep-ALBAY wd 9 awoO WA RR wD Ye yb NR BP NM BP we RM Be YP = Se oe eo 2 a Ae BS FSS ERR GE ESR ES ® Sixteen. {b) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One (b), above. (hab (c) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.4 One c), above. (d) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One (d), above, ‘a) Seventeen, b) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One (b), above, ab ) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17,1 One c), above. ‘d) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One {d), above. Ss {a) Eighteen. te), ab (b) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One , above. ) (c) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17,1 One {c), above. (d) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17,1 One (d), above. (a) Nineteen. (b), ab (b) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17,1 One , above. (hab (c) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One ¢), above, (d) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One (d), above. (a) Twenty. ¢b), ab (b) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One , above. {c) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One {c), above. d) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One (d), above, {a) Twenty-one, (b), ah b) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One , above. (ab (c) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One c), above. ) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One (d), above. a 2 (a) Twenty-two, (o), ab (b) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One , above. (o), ab c) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One ‘c), above. (d) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One (d), above, KAlnjuredi102298\plahjef-rsp-ALBAY wpd 10 1Co Oo a AN eh BR Ww 10 WW 12 13 14 18 16 17 18 19 20 2 2 2B 24 25 26 21 28 {a) Twenty-three. (b), ab (b) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One , above. ©) (c) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One ¢), above. (d) Plaintiff refers to, and incorporates by reference herein, his response to 17.1 One (d), above. Dated: BRAYTON“’PURCELL LLP By: Jang] L.White Attorneys for Plaintiff KAlnjuredh O2208\pldijef-rsp-ALBAY wpe i swVERIFICATION TO FOLLOW KAFORMS\VERJFVER2FOLW,WPD am t+ HO mE BD 10 a seek sssiees (ts) S919 B5696 VINIOATT¥S OLYAON oI XOTOd GON ONIGHYT HSN TEE AWTLY SASNYOLLY dT] TISOUNd ONOLAVESCc ec RM AN UW PROOF OF SERVICE BY MAIL. Tam employed in the County of Sonoma, State of California. 1am over the age of 18 ears and am not a party to the within action. My business address is 1324 Rand Street, Petaluma, California 94954, On FEBS 20a , Lserved the within: PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT ALBAY CONSTRUCTION COMPANY’S FORM INTERROGATORIES, SET ONE on the interested parties in this action by transmitting a true copy thereof in the following manner. I placed in a sealed envelope, postage thereon prepaid, addressed and served as follows: ALBAY CONSTRUCTION COMPANY Archer Norris P.O. Box 8035 2033 N, Main Street, Suite 800 Walnut Creek, CA 94596 BY MAIL SERVICE: {am readily farnitiar with the business practice at my place of business for collection and processing of correspondence for delivery by mail. Correspondence so collected and processed is deposited with the United States Postal Service on the same day in the ordinary course of business. On the above date the said envelope was collected for the United States Postal Service following ordinary business practices. Bxecuted FERS 201 , at Petaluma, California. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct. 3} is Castagna v, Asbestos Defendants (BY. San Francisco Superior Court Case No. CGC-08-274230 PROOF OF SERVICE BY MAIL,BRAYTON@PURCELL LLP ATTORNEYS AT LAW 22] RUSH LANDING ROAD. NOVATO, CALIFORNIA 94948-6169 {425) 898-1595 1 VERIFICATION Louis Castagna, : San Francisco Superior Court Case No. CGC-08-274230 Tam the plaintiff in the above-entitled action. The foregoing Plaintiff's Response to rendant, Alba: ruction Company’s Form Interr Qne , propounded by 2 3 4 5] 1, Louis Castagna, declare: 6 7 8|| Albay Construction Company, are true and correct as to those statements for which | have 9]| personal knowledge. As to those niatters which are therein stated on my information and belief 10) and, as to those matters, I believe them true. Il I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the 12] foregoing is true and correct. 13 14 Dated: A-G@-2vle 15 ’ i 16 Signed: oats Coilipia. 17 18|| Please do not write below this line. If you have any changes, please submit them ona 19]| separate sheet of paper. Thank you. 20 DYD ae ce ee ct ee wate ge 22 23 24 25 26 27 28