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
  • 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

A SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO Document Scanning Lead Sheet Sep-20-2013 2:53 pm Case Number: CGC-10-275731 Filing Date: Sep-20-2013 2:51 Filed by: DANA OKAZAKI Juke Box: 001 Image: 04209758 JUDGMENT FOR DEFENDANT ROBERT ROSS et al VS. C.C. MOORE & CO. ENGINEERS 001004209758 Instructions: Please place this sheet on top of the document to be scanned.CoC om IN DWH FF YB YD NY BW NY YN NH NY ND mm IY HA A Bow NH = Bo went DAH &F BH NY KF BUTY 8 CURLIANO LLP. ‘555. 42" STREET ‘Sure 128 ‘OAKLAND, GA 94807 '540.287,3000 JASON J. CURLIANO [SBN 167509] GEORGE S. SULLIVAN [SBN 187793] BUTY & CURLIANO LLP &e ff 555 — q2"" Street, Suite 1280 San Francisco County Superior Court Oakland, CA 94607 Tel: 510.267.3000 SEP 2 0 2013 Fax: 510.267.0117 Email: mlb@butycurliano.com CL. F THE COURT jsullivan@butycurliano.com BY: eputy Clerk Attorneys for Defendant HAROLD BEASLEY PLUMBING & HEATING, INC. SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA. COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO — UNLIMITED JURISDICTION ROBERT ROSS and JEAN ROSS, No. CGC-10-275731 (GMENT FOR DEFENDANT HAROLD BEASLEY PLUMBING & HEATING, INC. Plaintiffs, v. C.C, MOORE & CO. ENGINEERS, ¢¢ al., ) ) ) ) ) ) ; Defendants. } JUDGMENT IS ENTERED in favor of defendant Harold Beasley Plumbing & Heating, Inc. and against plaintiffs Robert Ross and Jean Ross as to all claims in accordance with the Order Granting Defendant Harold Beasley Plumbing & Heating, Inc.’s Motion for Summary Judgment filed on May 8, 2013, which is attached as Exhibit A. Plaintiffs receive nothing from defendant Harold Beasley Plumbing & Heating, Inc., and defendant Harold Beasley Plumbing & Heating, Inc. will recover costs in an amount of according to proof. Ti — DATED: SEP 2.0 208 GE Of THE SUPERIOR COURT" TERI L. JACKSON AY ROFOSED} JUDGMENT FOR HAROLD BEASLEY PLUMBING & HEATING, INC.EXHIBIT Aw BUTS CURLIANO LLP Sena sick Suge 1280 OAK;AND,GA 81007 ‘10 267 3000 JASON J. CURLIANO [SBN 167509] GEORGE S. SULLIVAN [SBN 187793] 5 | BUTY & CURLIANO LLP ENDORSES son 555 — 12" Street, Suite 1280 ‘Superior Cou Oakland, Califomia 94607 San Francisco County Tel: 310.267.3000 MAY 08 2013 Fax: 510.267.0117 : Email: jasonc@butycurliano.com CLERK OF THE COURT jsullivan@pbutycurliano.com py JHULIE ROG ue oak 8] Attorneys for Defendant HAROLD BEASLEY PLUMBING & HEATING, INC. SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO — UNLIMITED JURISDICTION No. CGC-10-275731 ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT HAROLD BEASLEY PLUMBING & HEATING, INC.’°S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT ROBERT ROSS and JEAN ROSS, Plaintiffs, v. C.C. MOORE & CO. ENGINEERS; et al., Defendants. ee SS Se ee Defendant HAROLD BEASILEY PLUMBING & HEATING, INC.’s Motion for Summary Judgment came on for hearing on May 8, 2013 in Department 503 of the above-entitled court before The Honorable Teri L. Jackson. Counsel for plaintiffs and defendant HAROLD BEASLEY PLUMBING & HEATING, INC. appeared. After full consideration of the papers filed in support and in opposition to this motion for summary judgment, and ora! argument, the Court adopts its tentative ruling and hereby orders: 1 ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT HAROLD BEASLEY PLUMBING & HEATING, INC.’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENTY Cm DN WH B&B WD Bares CUmANG LP ‘358-12 Simca Defendant sustained its initial burden. Plaintiffs failed to submit evidence creating a triable issue whether defendant owed a duty to plaintiff, a non-employee. Specifically, plaintiffs failed to submit evidence creating a triable issue whether defendant knew or should have known that the products or materials to which it exposed Mr. Ross contained asbestos. Even accepting plaintiffs’ argument that the duty was created pursuant to the 1955 General Industry Safety Orders (GISOs), plaintiffs failed to submit evidence creating a triable issue whether defendant knew or should have known that the products or materials allegedly disturbed and/or used by defendant’s employees in Mr. Ross’ presence, who was a non-employee, were hazardous (i.e. asbestos) and exceeded the dust count acceptable under the 1955 GISOs. Defendant’s objections to Dr. Cohen’s declaration are sustained. IT IS SO ORDERED TERI L. JACKSON DATED: WAY 08 2013 HONORABLE TERI L. JACKSON Judge of the Superior Court 2 ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT HAROLD BEASLEY PLUMBING & HEATING, INC.’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT