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
						
                                

Preview

HOWARD ROME MARTIN & RIDLEY LLP 1 || HENRY D. ROME, ESQ. [SBN: 48567] RYAN KUJAWSKIL, ESO. [SBN: 226873] ELECTRONICALLY 2 || HOWARD ROME MARTIN & RIDLEY LLP FILED 1775 Woodside Road, Suite 200 Superior Court of California, 3 || Redwood City, CA 94061-3436 County of San Francisco Telephone: (650) 365-7715 JUN 18 2010 4 Attorneys for Defendant oclerk of the Court 5 || IMO INDUSTRIES INC. Deputy Clerk 6 7 8 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 9 IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 10 =, I |/LOUIS CASTAGNA, Case No. CGC-07-274230 Boe 12 Plaintiff, COMPENDIUM OF OUT-OF-STATE 5 ag AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF 6 13 vs. DEFENDANT IMO INDUSTRIES INC.’S we MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, & 5 14 || ASBESTOS DEFENDANTS (BéP), et al. OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE, SUMMARY ABE ADJUDICATION 8 ge ts Defendants. 265 Date: September 9, 2010 Ee 16 Time: 9:30 am. Dept: 220 17 Judge: Hon. Harold Kahn 18 19 Defendant Imo Industries Inc. (hereinafter “IMO”) hereby submits its compendium of Out- 0 of-State Authorities in support of its Motion for Summary Judgment, or in the Alternative, 4 Summary Adjudication, pursuant to rule 3.1113(i) of the California Rules of Court. it 22 it 23 if 24 Mt 25 it 26 1 COMPENDIUM OF OUT-OF-STATE AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT IMO INDUSTRIES INC.’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE, SUMMARY ADJUDICATIONHOWARD ROME MARTIN & RIDLEY LLP 1775 WOODSIDE ROAD, SUITE 200 CA 9461 3436 REDWOOD TELEPHONE (650} 365 7715 Case Exhibit Baughman y. General Motors Corporation (4th Cir. 1985) 780 F.2d 1131... Celotex or v, Catrett (1989) Ford Motor Co. v. Wood (Md, 1998) 703 A213 1S Loe ieee edison edie senesced sees ienieseeiecrdneeseeirreaeenees Cc Lindstrom v. A-C Products Nabil Trust wen Cir. 2008) Rastelli v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. (1992) 79 N.Y.2d 289... Walton v. Harnischfeger. ae App. 1990) 796 S.W.2d 225, 227-228... ceeeseeseeseateaeeseesseneeniesesiesienssnesuienienieeaiieiieieniessieenenesensesssssee Date: June 18, 2010 HOWARD ROME MARTIN & RIDLEY LLP By: /s/ Ryan Kujawski HENRY D. ROME, ESO. [SBN: 48567] RYAN KUJAWSKI, ESQ. [SBN: 226873] HOWARD ROME MARTIN & RIDLEY LLP 1775 Woodside Road, Suite 200 Redwood City, CA 94061-3436 Telephone: (650) 365-7715 Attorneys for Defendant IMO INDUSTRIES INC. 2 COMPENDIUM OF OUT-OF-STATE AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT IMO INDUSTRIES INC.’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE, SUMMARY ADJUDICATION