On December 17, 2010 a Motion,Ex Parte was filed involving a dispute between Ross, Jean, Ross, Robert, and Acco Engineered Systems, Inc., Advanced Mechanical, Advance Mechanical Contractors, Inc., Air Systems Mechanical Contractor, A & K Heating Company, Inc., Albay Construction Company, Allen-Simmons Heating & Sheet Metal Company Inc., Allied Fire Protection, Allied Sprinkler Company, Inc., Allsberry Mechanical Corporation, Anderson, Rowe & Buckley, Inc., Associated Insulation Of California, A. Teichert & Son, Inc., Balliet Bros. Construction Corporation, Banner Drywall & Painting Co. Inc., Barnes Construction Co., Bayer Cropscience Inc., Bayer Cropscience, Inc., Successor To Amchem, Bell Products Inc., Beta Mechanical Contractors, L.P., Bragg Investment Company, Inc., Cahill Construction Co., Inc., Cahill Construction Services, Inc., Cahill Contractors, Inc., California Drywall Co., Castro Construction, Inc., C.C. Moore & Co. Engineers, Cincinnati Valve Company, Cjr Plastering, Clausen-Patten, Inc., Clausen-Patten, Inc., A Dissolved Corporation, Climate Air, Inc., Climate Control Co., Inc., Collins Electrical Company, Inc., Commair Mechanical Services, Consolidated Insulation, Inc., Cosco Fire Protection, Inc., Cosco Sprinkler, Critchfield Mechanical, Inc., C & R Plastering, Inc., Csk Auto, Inc., Cupertino Electric, Inc., Delucchi Sheet Metal Works, Dilland Sederberg Plumbing, Does 1-8500, Domco Products Texas Inc., Domco Products Texas, L.P., Donovan Construction, Dorn Refrigeration, Dorn Refrigeration And Air Conditioning, Dpr Construction, Duro Dyne Corporation, D.W. Nicholson Corporation, D. Zelinsky & Sons, Inc., Emil J. Weber Electric Co., Erwin Mechanical Inc., Ex- Fme, Inc. (Fka Fischbach And Moore Electric,, Fairmont Hotel Company, Fluor Corporation, Foley Electric Co., Foley Electric, Inc., Fuller Floors, General Mills, Inc., Giampolini & Co., Graybar Electric Company, Inc., Hanson Permanente Cement, Inc. Formerly Known As, Harold Beasley Plumbing And Heating, Inc., Harry Lee Plumbing & Heating, H & C Investment Associates, Inc., Henry C. Beck Company, Imperial Plastering & Drywall, Insulation Specialties, Inc., James A. Nelson Co., Inc., Johnson Controls, Inc., Jones Plastering Company, Joseph Bruno Sheet Metal Co., Inc., J.T. Thorpe & Son, Inc., J.W. Mcclenahan Company, J.W. Mcclenahan Company, Inc., Kentile Floors, Inc., Laub Sheet Metal Works, Lone Star Industries, Inc., Mack Construction Co., Magee, Robert, Malm Metal Products, Inc., Marine Engineering And Supply Company, Marshco Auto Parts, Inc., Mattock Construction Company, Mcclure Electric, Inc., Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, Michael Brothers, Midstate Mechanical, Inc., Mitchell Bros. Truck Lines, Inc., Monsanto Company, Sued As "Pharmacia Corporation", Oakfabco, Inc., Ortho-Craft, Pacific Fireproofing, Pacific Mechanical Corporation, Parker Insulation Contracting & Supply Co. Inc., Perini Corporation, Pharmacia Corporation, Which Will Do Business In, Pribuss Engineering, Pribuss Engineering, Inc., Raymond Interior Systems-North, Red Top Electric Co. Emeryville, Inc., Robert Magee, Rollie R. French, Inc., Rollins Construction, Rountree Plumbing & Heating Inc., Scott Co. Of California, S F L, Inc., S.J. Amoroso Construction Co., Inc., Slakey Brothers, Inc., Sugden Engineering Co., Swinerton Builders, Temper Insulation, Temporary Plant Cleaners, Inc., Texaco, Inc., The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company, The W.W. Henry Company, Tuttle And Bailey Corp, Van Mulder Sheetmetal, Van-Mulder Sheet Metal, Inc., Walnut Creek Sheet Metal, Furnace & Air, W.C. Thomason, W.C. Thompson, Webcor Builders, Inc., Westburne Supply, Inc., Willard Electric, Wright Schuchart Harbor, Wright Schuchart Harbor Company, Ross, Jean, Ross, Robert, for civil in the District Court of San Francisco County.
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
Please wait a moment while we load this page.
Preview
— 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 2 J “ 6 7 18 19 20 21 22 27 28 {GOOD /10674747165908 18.1 MICHAEL J. PIETRYKOWSKI (SBN: 118677) mpietrykowski@gordonrees.com KATHRYN J. LAFEVERS (SBN: 252003) ELECTRONICALLY klafevers@gordonress.com GORDON & REES LLP FILED Superior Court of California, Embarcadero Center West County of San Francisco 275 Battery Street, Twentieth Floor San Francisco, CA 94111 AUG 28 2013 Telephone: (415) 986-5900 Clerk of the Court Facsimile: (415) 986-8054 BY: WILLIAM TRUPEK eputy Clerk Attomeys for Defendant THE GOODYEAR TIRE & RUBBER COMPANY SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO ROBERT ROSS and JEAN ROSS, CASE NO. CGC-10-275731 Plaintiffs, THE GOODYEAR TIRE & RUBBER COMPANY’S MOTION IN LIMINE TO EXCLUDE REFERENCES TO GOODYEAR PRODUCTS NOT AT ISSUE [MIL #2] v. ALTA BUILDING MATERIAL COMPANY., etal., Action Filed: December 17, 2010 Defendants. Trial Date: September 9, 2013 ee ee ee ee el Soe Defendant The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company (“Goodyear”) moves this Court in limine to exclude from trial any reference, argument, testimony, documents, exhibits, demonstrative aids, or other evidence concerning Goodyear products or premises that are not at issue in this case as irrelevant and unduly prejudicial under Evidence Code sections 350 and 352. Plaintiffs’ claims against Goodyear consist of their allegations that Mr. Ross worked around others handling asbestos-containing Goodyearite, Wingfoot (originally identified as “Widget”), and Durabla gaskets while he worked as an insulator at various jobsites between 1961 and 1977, Under Evidence Code section 350, any evidence of or reference to products -l- THE GOODYEAR TIRE & RUBBER COMPANY’S MOTION IN LIMINE TO EXCLUDE EVIDENCE OF OR REFERENCE TO ANY GOODYEAR PRODUCTS NOT AT ISSUE IN THIS CASEGordon & Rees LLP Embarcadero Center West 275 Battery Street, Suite 2000 San Francisco, CA 94111 Oo RW DD Hh BF BW Nm Ny NY NY NY HY NY YP NY Ye S| > et _— = e238 & FO 8 FSF Seda DRE BORE S manufactured by Goodyear other than Goodyearite, Wingfoot, or Durabla gaskets must be excluded as whoily irrelevant at trial. Goodyear manufactures and has manufactured thousands of products over the course of Mr. Ross’ working life; information about those other products is irrelevant here. Absent evidence that Mr. Ross was exposed to asbestos from any product other than Goodyearite, Wingfoot, or Durabla gasket material that was manufactured by Goodyear, information about any other products has no causal relationship to plaintiffs’ claims; such evidence is speculative and irrelevant and should be excluded. Moreover, even if evidence concerning Goodyear products with no connection to Mr. Ross were deemed relevant, such evidence must be excluded because its probative value is substantially outweighed by the probability that its admission will create substantial danger of undue prejudice, confusion of issues, or misleading the jury. (Evid. Code, § 352.) In this case, all of these concerns outweigh any conceivable probative value that arguably exists. If plaintiffs are permitted to introduce evidence regarding Goodyear products that Mr. Ross never used, the jurors may erroneously believe that he actually used those additional products and/or that those products caused or contributed to his injuries. This directly contradicts plaintiffs’ fundamental burden to first establish use of a particular defendant’s product (and that it contained asbestos to which Mr. Ross was exposed) before any such evidence may be admissible. (See, e.g., Bockrath v. Aldrich Chemical Co. (1999) 21 Cal.4th 71, 80; Rutherford v. Owens-Illinois (1997)16 Cal.4th 953, 976-77; see also CALJIC No. 435.) This Court has the power to avoid the prejudice, confusion, and potential misleading of the jury that is likely to result by excluding any evidence of Goodyear products not actually at issue herein. Based on the foregoing, Goodyear respectfully requests that this court exclude from trial any reference, argument, testimony, documents, exhibits, demonstrative aids, or other evidence concerning any premises or product manufactured by Goodyear other than Goodyearite, Wingfoot, or Durabla gasket material unless and until plaintiffs demonstrate that those are at issue herein. “ i 2- THE GOODYEAR TIRE & RUBBER COMPANY’S MOTION IN LIMINE TO EXCLUDE EVIDENCE OF OR REFERENCE TO ANY GOODYEAR PRODUCTS NOT AT ISSUE IN THIS CASEGordon & Rees LLP Embarcadero Center West 275 Battery Street, Suite 2000 San Francisco, CA 94111 DATED: August 28, 2013 3. GORDON & REES LLP wy, AC KATHR 2 Attorneys for Defendant THE GOODYEAR TIRE & RUBBER COMPANY THE GOODYEAR TIRE & RUBBER COMPANY’S MOTION IN LIMINE TO EXCLUDE EVIDENCE OF OR REFERENCE TO ANY GOODYEAR PRODUCTS NOT AT ISSUE IN THIS CASEID A FF WN PROOF OF SERVICE ROBERT ROSS AND JEAN Ross v. C.C. MOORE & Co. ENGINEERS SAN FRANCISCO SUPERIOR COURT CASE NUMBER CGC-10-275731 Iam a resident of the State of California, over the age of eighteen years, and not a party to the within action. My business address is: Gordon & Rees LLP 275 Battery Street, Suite 2000, San Francisco, CA 94111. On August 28, 2013 I served the within documents: DEFENDANT THE GOODYEAR TIRE & RUBBER COMPANY’S MOTION IN LIMINE TO EXCLUDE REFERENCS TO GOODYEAR PRODUCTS NOT AT ISSUE [MIL#2] by transmitting via facsimile the document(s) listed above to the fax number(s) set forth below on this date before 5:00 p.m. Oo o by personally having Nationwide Legal, Inc. delivery the document(s) listed above to the person(s) at the address(es) set forth below. Oo by placing the document(s) listed above in a sealed envelope with postage thereon fully prepaid, in United States mail in the State of California at San Francisco, addressed as set forth below. by electronically serving the document(s) described above via File & Serve Xpress on the recipients designated on the Transaction Receipt that is located on the File & Serve Xpress website and as set forth below: BRAYTON“ PURCELL 222 Rush Landing Road Novato, CA 94948 Tele: 415-898-1555 Plaintiffs’ Counsel I am readily familiar with the firm’s practice of collection and processing correspondence for mailing. Under that practice it would be deposited with the U.S, Postal Service on that same day with postage thereon fully prepaid in the ordinary course of business. I am aware that on motion of the party served, service is presumed invalid if postal cancellation date or postage meter date is more than one day after the date of deposit for mailing in affidavit. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the above is true and correct. Executed on August 28, 2013 at San Francisco, California. Vanessa Santellan Proof of Service