arrow left
arrow right
  • ROBERT ROSS et al VS. C.C. MOORE & CO. ENGINEERS ASBESTOS document preview
  • ROBERT ROSS et al VS. C.C. MOORE & CO. ENGINEERS ASBESTOS document preview
  • ROBERT ROSS et al VS. C.C. MOORE & CO. ENGINEERS ASBESTOS document preview
  • ROBERT ROSS et al VS. C.C. MOORE & CO. ENGINEERS ASBESTOS document preview
  • ROBERT ROSS et al VS. C.C. MOORE & CO. ENGINEERS ASBESTOS document preview
  • ROBERT ROSS et al VS. C.C. MOORE & CO. ENGINEERS ASBESTOS document preview
						
                                

Preview

1 CHRISTOPHER D. STRUNK (SBN: 214110) cstrunk@grsm.com 2 JAMES MOKHTARZADEH (SBN: 319860) ELECTRONICALLY jmokhtarzadeh@grsm.com 3 GORDON REES SCULLY MANSUKHANI, LLP F I L E D Superior Court of California, 1111 Broadway, Suite 1700 County of San Francisco 4 Oakland, CA 94607 Telephone: (510) 463-8685 07/20/2022 5 Facsimile: (510) 984-1721 Clerk of the Court BY: SANDRA SCHIRO Deputy Clerk 6 Attorneys for Intervenor TRAVELERS INDEMNITY CO., intervening on behalf of defunct corporation SFL, INC. 7 8 SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA 9 COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 10 11 ROBERT ROSS and JEAN ROSS ) CASE NO. CGC-10-275731 Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani, LLP ) 12 Plaintiffs, ) DECLARATION OF SCOTT 1111 Broadway, Suite 1700 ) HOMERSHAM IN SUPPORT OF Oakland, CA 94607 13 vs. ) TRAVELERS INDEMINITY ) COMPANY’S MOTION TO SET 14 C.C. More & Co. Engineers et al, ASIDE DEFAULT AND DEFAULT ) JUDGEMENT ENTRED AGAINST 15 Defendants. ) SFL, INC. ) 16 ) Accompanying Documents: ) 1. Memorandum of Points and 17 ) Authorities ) 2. Declaration of Christopher D. Strunk 18 ) 3. Declaration of Scott Homersham ) 3. [Proposed] Order 19 ) ) Date: August 15, 2022 20 Time: 9:30 a.m. ) Dept: 503 21 ) Judge: Hon. Cynthia Ming mei-Lee ) 22 ) ) 23 ) ) 24 25 I, Scott Homersham, hereby declare: 26 1. I am over 18 years of age and fully competent and qualified to give this 27 affidavit. The facts stated herein are true of my own personal knowledge except those 28 matters stated on information and belief, and as to those matters, I believe them to be -1- DECLARATION OF SCOTT HOMERSHAM IN SUPPORT OF INTERVENOR'S MOTION TO SET ASIDE DEFAULT AND DEFAULT JUDGMENT 1 true. If called on as a witness, I could and would competently testify to the same. I make 2 this declaration in support of Traveler’s motion to set aside the default and default 3 judgment entered against SFL, Inc., or in the alternative, an Order that Travelers 4 Indemnity Company is not responsible for the default judgment. 5 2. I am currently Regional Director for the Strategic Resolution Group for 6 Travelers Insurance Company. It is part of my job duties to manage litigation involving 7 our various insureds. 8 3. As a result of my duties at Travelers Insurance Company, I am familiar 9 with matters related to the insurance policies issued to our various insureds and the 10 issuing entities, including Travelers Indemnity Company (“Travelers”). 11 4. SFL, Inc. was insured by a liability policy issued by Travelers under two Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani, LLP 12 (2) policies from February 1, 1973 to February 1, 1974 and February 1, 1974 until the 1111 Broadway, Suite 1700 Oakland, CA 94607 13 purported cancellation on August 14, 1974. 14 5. Travelers was not made aware of the subject case, or any cases, filed 15 against SFL, Inc. until May 7, 2020, after the default judgment was entered against SFL, 16 Inc. when Plaintiff’s counsel sent a letter advising of the default judgment. The tender 17 letter was from plaintiffs’ firm to Travelers “and its associated companies, Aetna 18 Casualty and Surety Co., United States Fidelity and Guaranty Company.” The letter 19 noted that, “we have reason to believe that Travelers issued general liability and umbrella 20 liability insurance covering SFL, Inc.” There was no reference to policy numbers, years 21 of policies and what specific “associated companies” were at issue. 22 6. Given the very limited information and the need to research multiple 23 entities and documents from many decades ago, the time and resources required to 24 determine if any policies existed took approximately five months to identify the two 25 policies from 1973 and 1974. In prior tenders from the Brayton firm, we have, on 26 occasion, learned that the insured and named defendant were not the same. In other 27 situations, we have also learned that the policies were not applicable to the claims of the 28 case. -2- DECLARATION OF SCOTT HOMERSHAM IN SUPPORT OF INTERVENOR'S MOTION TO SET ASIDE DEFAULT AND DEFAULT JUDGMENT 1 7. When this case was tendered to Travelers, so too were three other cases 2 implicating SFL.1 Further complicating these issues, one of the complaints, Jerry 3 Verworn v. Soco West, Inc. et al., lists a company named “Daniels Dry Wall, Inc” as an 4 alternate entity for SFL, INC. Accordingly, my office needed to look for any polices 5 associated with “SFL, Inc.” and/or “Daniels Dry Wall, Inc.” 6 8. Because Travelers was not notified of the subject case or the subsequent 7 entry of default judgment until after it was entered, it was denied an opportunity to 8 defend its insured and prevent the default judgment from being entered against SFL, Inc. 9 Had Travelers been put on notice prior to entry of default judgment, Travelers would 10 have intervened to defend its insured and prevent the default judgment from being 11 entered. Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani, LLP 12 I declare under the penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that 1111 Broadway, Suite 1700 Oakland, CA 94607 13 the foregoing is true and correct. 14 Executed on July ___, 11 Centennial 2022 in ___________, CO _______. 15 16 17 Scott Homersham 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 1Joan McLain, et al. v. Crane Co. et al, SFSC Case. No. CGC-13-276208; Patricia Casey et al., v. Kaiser Gypsum Company, Inc. et al., SFSC Case No. CGC-11-275879; and Jerry Verworn v. 28 Soco West, Inc., et al., SFSC Case No.: CGC-17-276582. 1224477/68972259v.1 -3- DECLARATION OF SCOTT HOMERSHAM IN SUPPORT OF INTERVENOR'S MOTION TO SET ASIDE DEFAULT AND DEFAULT JUDGMENT