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
						
                                

Preview

& CORDERY, LLP 1 Law IMAL, TADLOCK, K. Theodore T. Cordery, Esq. (Bar No. 114730) Valerie R. Marvin, Esq. (Bar No. 254194) IMAI, TADLOCK, KEENEY & CORDERY, LLP ELECTRONICALLY 100 BUSH STREET, SUITE 1300 SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94104 FILED | Telephone: (415) 675-7000 Superior Court of California, Facsimile: (415) 675-7008 County of San Francisco APR 22 2009 Attorneys for Defendant GORDON PARK-LI, Clerk ELLIOTT COMPANY FKA “ELLIOTT TURBOMACHINERY CO., IR@JUDITH NUNEZ ty Clerk eputy Clet IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA IN AND FOR THE CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO UNLIMITED JURISDICTION LOUIS CASTAGNA, CASE NO.: CGC-07-274230 ELLIOTT COMPANY FKA “ELLIOTT Plaintiff, TURBOMACHINERY CO., INCL”S. JOINDER IN CO-DEFENDANT THE v. WILLIAM POWELL COMPANY’S ASBESTOS DEFENDANTS (B*P) As MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER Reflected on Exhibits B, B-1,C, D, H, k and | RE: PLAINTIFF’S DEPOSITION DOES 1-8500; and SEE ATTACHED LIST. , DATE: MAY 11, 2009 TIME: 10:30 a.m. Defendant. Dept: 610 Judge: Comm. Bruce E. Chan Complaint Filed: June 6, 2007 Trial Date: None Set Defendant ELLIOTT COMPANY FKA “ELLIOTT TURBOMACHINERY CO., INC.” (hereinafter “Elliott Company”) joins in co-defendant The William Powell Company’s Motion for Protective Order re: Plaintiff's Deposition in the above-captioned matter. Elliott Company has not had the opportunity to fully cross-examine Plaintiff regarding his work on at least two vessels where he identified work with or around Elliott Company products. Dated: April 22, 2009 IMAT, TADLOCK, KEENEY & CORDERY, LLP By: /s/ Valerie R, Marvin Valerie R. Marvin Attorneys for Defendant ELLIOTT COMPANY FKA “ELLIOTT TURBOMACHINERY CO., INC.” ae ELLIOTT COMPANY FKA “ELLIOTT TURBOMACHINERY CO., INC.”’S JOINDER IN CO- DEFENDANT THE WILLIAM POWELL COMPANY’S MOTION FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER RE: PLAINTIFF'S DEPOSITION