Motion-Secondary: ROBERT ROSS et al VS. C.C. MOORE & CO. ENGINEERS

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

						
                                
Preview
                                HAKE LAW,
A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION

oO 8B ROD Oh BR BH DY Ye

Qo 8

15
16

William M. Hake, Esq. (State Bar No. 110956)
Melissa D. Ippolito, Esq. (State Bar No. 239811)

Kathryn L. Hoff, Esq. (State Bar No. 260420) FILED
HAKE LAW, A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION

655 Montgomery Street, Suite 1000 County of San Francii

ELECTRONICALLY

Superior Court of California,

CO

San Francisco, CA 94111 MAY 03 2013
Tel: (415) 926-5800 Clerk of the Court
Fax: (415) 926-5801 BY: CAROL BALISTRERI
bill@hakelaw.com Deputy Clerk
melissa@hakelaw.com
lucy@hakelaw.com
Attorneys for Defendant
ANDERSON, ROWE & BUCKLEY, INC.
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA
IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO
ROBERT ROSS and JEAN ROSS, Case No.: CGC-10-275731
Plaintiffs, DECLARATION OF KATHRYN L. HOFF
IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT
vs, ANDERSON, ROWE & BUCKLEY,
INC.’S REPLY IN SUPPORT OF ITS
C.C. MOORE & CO. ENGINEERS, et al. MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
Defendants. Hearing Date: May 9, 2013
Time: 9:30 a.m.
Judge: Hon. Teri Jackson
Dept.: 503
Complaint: December 17, 2010
Trial Date: June 10, 2013
I, Kathryn L. Hoff, declare as follows:
1. 1am an attorney licensed to practice law in the State of California and am an

associate of the law firm Hake Law, a Professional Corporation, attomeys of record for
Defendant Anderson, Rowe & Buckley, Inc. I have personal knowledge of each fact stated in
the declaration and, if called upon to testify, could and would competently testify thereto.

2. A true and correct copy of Excerpts of Reporter’s Daily Transcript of Proceedings
in Jeraldine Nicholson, et al. v. Asbestos Defendants, et al., Los Angeles Superior Court Case
No. BC413220 (“Nicholson 402 hearing”), dated June 24, 2011 is attached hereto as Exhibit A.
AfHAKE LAW,
A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION

3. A true and correct copy of Excerpts of Deposition of David Schwartz, M.D. in
Jeraidine Nicholson v. Asbestos Defendants, Los Angeles Superior Court Case No. BC413220
(Nicholson transcript”), dated April 27, 2011 is attached hereto as Exhibit B.

4. A true and correct copy of Excerpts of Deposition of David Schwartz, M.D. in
Edward Shortall v. Bucyrus International, Inc., et al., San Francisco Superior Court Case No.
275222 (“Shortall transcript”), dated January 30, 2013 is attached here to as Exhibit C,

5. A true and correct copy of Excerpts of Deposition of David A. Schwartz, M.D.,
Volume H, in Edward Shortall y. Bucyrus International, Inc., et al., San Francisco Superior
Court Case No. 275222 (“Shortall II transcript”), dated F ebruary 21, 2013 is attached hereto as
Exhibit D.

6. A true and correct copy of Excerpts of Deposition of David Schwartz, M.D. in
Robert Ross y. Allis-Chalmers Corp., et al., San Francisco Superior Court Case No. 274099
(“Ross transcript”), dated February 7, 2012, is attached hereto as Exhibit E.

7. A true and correct copy of the Institute of Medicine of the National Academies,
National Academy of Sciences, Committee on Asbestos, Asbestos: Selected Cancers,
Washington DC: National Academies Press; 2006 (“IOM 2006 Report”), which was previously
attached as Exhibit D to the Declaration of Robert W. Morgan, M.D. served with the moving
papers, is attached hereto as Exhibit F.

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the

foregoing is true and correct. Executed on May 3, 2013 at San Francisco, California.

Dated: May 3, 2013 koh oe. Hes

Kathryn®L. Hoff, Esq”

DECTARATION OF KATHRYN 'L. HOFF IN SUPPORT OF Di (NT ANDERSON, ROWE & BUCKLEY INC'S”

REPLY IN SUPPORT OF ITS MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENTExhibit AoO

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

Department 43 Hon, Elizabeth A. White, Judge

Jeraldine Nicholson, et al.,
Plaintiffs,

vs. Case No: BC413220

Asbestos Defendants, et al.,

Defendants.

REPORTER'S DAILY TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS

FRIDAY, JUNE 24, 2011

APPEARANCES:

For the Plaintiffs: Brayton Purceli, LLP

BY: JAMES P. NEVIN, ESQ
JANETTE H, GLASER, ESQ.
KSENIA L. SNYLYK, ESQ.

222 Rush Landing Road

PO Box 6169 1940

Novato, California 94948-6169

(415) 898-1555

For Defendant: Selman Breitman, LLP
Amcord: BY: RHONDA L. WOO, ESQ.
BRAD D. BLEICHNER, ESQ.
33 New Montgomery
Sixth Floor
San Francisco, California 94105
(415) 979-0400

(Appearances continued next page.)
Reported by:

Louis R. Machuca, CSR No. 12274
Official Court Reporterancentnenynencrnimnennce onan snnensennscsnsnan

ot
r

8 NM NM RoR
yb FE Oo © ow

RES

DIRECT EXAMINATION
BY MR. NEVIN:
Good morning, Dr. Schwartz.
Good morning.

What kind of a doctor are you?

PO Ff O

I'm an internist, a pulmonologist, a
specialist in occupational medicine.

Q What does it mean to be an internist?

A it means that you have gone through medical
school, then been specifically trained in adult medicine
during a three-year residency training program. And
then that qualifies you to sit for the boards and then I
took the boards. And you pass the boards and then
you're a board certified internist.

Q What is pulmonary medicine?

A Pulmonary medicine is a specialty beyond
internal medicine, and it involves a three-year
fellowship beyond the internal medicine training program
where you practice pulmonary medicine, learn pulmonary
medicine. You qualify to sit for the boards, you take
the boards, and then you -- then you're board certified.

If you pass the boards, you're a board certified

pulmonologist.

Q What is occupational medicine?

A Occupational medicine is a separate set of
boards separate from internal medicine. It is a

preventative medicine board, and it requires going to

the school of public health, getting a master's in

—______——...|public health and, at the same time, learning
specifically occupational medicine. That qualifies you
to sit for the boards.

And then one takes the boards and then that
person is a board certified occupational medicine
physician. And IE took the boards and passed the boards
in that case, as well.

Q For how long have you been board certified?

A T received my internal medicine boards in
1984. I passed my internal medicine boards in 1984. 1
passed my occupational medicine boards in 1986 and my

pulmonary medicine boards in 1988.

° Where do you currently practice?

A At the University of Colorado.

9 And what do you do there?

A i'm chairman of medicine at the University of

Colorado, and I also direct a center for genes
environment and health.

Q What are your duties as chairman?

A The duties are to oversee a large diffuse
department of medicine that involves various aspects of
medicine: Pulmonary medicine; hematology; oncology;
cardiology; all sorts of specialties in medicine. There
are over 600 faculty in my department that I oversee and
13 different divisions.

MR. NEVIN: Your Honor, may I approach?

THE COURT: You may.

MR. NEVIN: Doctor, I'd like to show you what I've16

be el
ay

RD
0

is fluid and lymphatic cells or immune cells throughout
the body.

So the lymphatics are a major defense
mechanism in the body that allow the lymphocytes to
circulate, recirculate, get exposed to things and then
come back to lymphoid centers, like the spleen and the
thymus and lymph nodes, and communicate with those
different organs to identify whether there are foreign
agents that the body needs to try to eradicate, like a
bacterial infection or a viral infection.

It's a circulatory system.

Q How does asbestos reach the colon?

MS. WOO: Your Honor, objection. tkacks foundation.
Calls for speculation, Specifically, this expert has no
expertise in that regard.

MR. NEVIN: It's the whole purpose of this 402
hearing.

MS. WOO: Your Honor, I would like the opportunity
to voir dire if he's allowed to give any opinion --

THE COURT: I'll allow voir dire. Go ahead.

VOIR DIRE EXAMINATION

BY MS. WOO;
Oo Good morning, Dr. Schwartz.
A Good morning.
Q Dre. Schwartz, do you have any specialized

training, education or experience in determining the

cause of colon cancer?-
&

eemm-rsnnannsinne

mR Re
Pe Oo 2

22

17

MR. NEVIN: Objection. Vague. Overbroad.

THE COURT: Overruled.

THE WITNESS: I have experience in terms of
occupational and environmental causes ef colon cancer.

I don't have specific experience in terms of treating
colon cancer.

Q BY MS. WOO: Do you hold yourself out to be an
expert in the treatment of colon cancer?

A No.

Q Your areas of expertise involve the lungs; is
that fair to say?

MR. NEVIN: Objection. Vague. Misstates evidence.

THE COURT: Overruled.

THE WITNESS: My areas of expertise involve the
lung, the environment, occupational diseases and the
interaction between environmental slash occupational
exposures and host defense factors.

Qo BY MS. WOO: You have some principal areas of

research; is that fair to say?

A That's correct.

Q And those principal areas of research are
what?

A The principal -- the overarching theme of my

research is to understand the interaction between
genetic and environmental determinants of complex human
diseases that are focused on pulmonary fibrosis, asthma
and innate immunity.

° Have you done any research regarding the

otcamoretonnesinoinstitninsctn

18
coo ——_———
colon?
A No.
Q In instances where you have diagnosed a

patient with colon cancer, you refer the patient to a
specialist; is that correct?

A Yes.

Q You've never been the primary care physician
for a patient with colon cancer; is that fair to say?

A Yes.

Q And you've never published any peer-reviewed
literature regarding asbestos as a cause of colon
cancer; is that correct?

A Yes, that's correct.

Q You've never published anything on the topic
of cancers and what causes cancer of the colon; is that
fair to say?

A That's two questions. Which one would you
like me to answer?

Q All right. Let me break it up for you.

Have you ever published anything on the topic
of what cancers are caused by exposure to asbestos?

A Yes.

Q And in those occasions where you've talked
about or published on cancers and asbestos, did it
include the colon?

A No.

2 Have you ever prepared any written materials,

even though they weren't published, in any peer-reviewedene

Sew anne un al

19

literature summarizing your opinions whether asbestos

causes colon cancer?

A No.

Q Have you ever conducted or participated in any
epidemiological study to determine whether or not
asbestos causes colon cancer?

A No.

Qo Have you ever performed any animal studies for

the purpose of determining whether asbestos causes colon

cancer?
A No.
QO Other than asbestos as a cause of mesothelioma

in lung cancer, have you ever lectured about asbestos as
a cause of any cancer?
A I may have given a talk early in my career in
the relationship between asbestos and B-Cell lymphomas.
Q And other than mesothelioma, lung cancer, and
B-Cell lymphoma, have you ever lectured about asbestos

as a cause of any other cancer?

A No.
Q Have you ever testified at trial regarding
whether asbestos -- or excuse me, regarding asbestos as

a cause of colon cancer?

A No.

MS. WOO: Those are my questions for now, Your
Honor.

MR. SUN: Your Honor, may I?

THE COURT: Yes. And then we'll go back to thepocorn
nO
o

20

question that was posed by plaintiff.

MR. NEVIN: IF don't think this has anything to do
with the question.

THE COURT: 2 understand your position. You can
sit down, by the way.

MR. SUN: This is still part of the voir dire, Your
Honor.

THE COURT: Yes.

VOIR DIRE EXAMINATION

BY MR. SUN:

Q Yes, Dr, Schwartz, prior to your
specialization in pulmonary medicine, you received
training in the general anatomy of the body, correct?

A Yes.

Q Yes. Beyond that general training of the
anatomy, have you received any other specialized
training specific to the anatomy of the GI tract?

A No.

9 And have you ever participated in any animal
research that specifically has to do with exposing
animals to asbestos in such a way that would cause

gastrointestinal abnormalities?

A No.
Q Okay. Have you ever reviewed such studies?
A No.

MR. SUN: Thank you, Your Honor.

THE COURT: All right. If we could -- I'm sorry.21

MR. SUBDLESON: I have some additional voir dire,
Your Honor. Should I do it from the box?
THE COURT: That's fine right there.

MR. SUDDLESON: Thank you.

VOIR DIRE EXAMINATION

BY MR. SUDDLESON:

Good morning, Dr. Schwartz.

Good morning.

You are not an epidemiologist, correct?

That's correct.

oO F OD Ff OC

You understand that the study of epidemiology
is to relate causation to populations, correct? To
study populations ~-

A I don't think it is, but I think it's more to
try to understand the relationship between exposures and
disease and to try to understand the causes of disease.

2 With regard to cancers, the only way to
determine the causation of a cancer is by epidemiology,
correct?

MR. NEVIN: Objection. Vague.

THE WITNESS: No, I don't think so.

THE COURT: He's answered. Overruled.

° BY MR. SUDDLESON: You cannot look at a
specific tumor under a microscope and determine what
caused it, correct?

A That's correct.

2 The reason we know that lung cancer can be22

Roo ee
Oo @ WEa

20

27

28

caused by cigarette smoking is because of epidemiologic

studies, correct?

MR. NEVIN: Objection. Misleading. Incomplete --

THE COURT: Sustained.

THE WITNESS: That's one of --

THE COURT: Sustained. Sustained. You don't need
to answer.

THE WITNESS: I'm sorry.

THE COURT: That's all right. That's all right.

°Q BY MR. SUDDLESON: And you are not a
epidemiologist, correct?

A I thought I answered that.

Q All right. And you agree that epidemiclogy is
important in determining whether a substance can cause
colon, correct?

A It's one of the important factors, yes.

2 Okay. And you have not studied the literature
relating to whether asbestos causes colon cancer,
correct?

MR. NEVIN: Objection. Vague. Overbroad.

THE COURT: Overruled.

THE WITNESS: No, I have.

oO BY MR. SUDDLESON: Okay. As I understand from
your prior testimony, you are aware that there are some
studies by Dr. Selikoff that suggests that there's a
relationship between asbestos exposure and colon cancer,
correct?

A I think what I -~-28 A Yes.

33
fe

subsequently. Asbestos is a classic agent that causes
disease many years after the initial exposure takes
place. And so the patient may not be entirely aware of
the exposures that they incurred that could have an
affect on the development of disease.

Q In determining whether or not an individual --
a colon cancer patient has an asbestos caused colon
cancer, is it important to look for markers of asbestos
exposure?

MS. WOO: Lacks foundation. Calls for speculation.

THE COURT: Sustained.

Q BY MR. NEVIN: When you, either in a clinical

setting or a legal setting, look at an individual to
determine causation, do you consider radiology?

A Yes.

Q Why?

A Because that will give you additional evidence
of exposure to asbestos. It will not only give you
additional evidence of exposure to asbestos, it will
give you additional evidence of substantial exposure to
asbestos.

Q And when you say "substantial," you mean a lot

of exposure?

A I mean a lot of exposure that's enough to
cause pulmonary fibrosis or plural fibrosis.

Q Is a finding of asbestosis a marker of that

type of exposure?27

28

34

Q Is it important to consider pathology, a
pathology as available?

MS. WOO: Vague and overbroad, Your Honor.
Ambiguous.

THE COURT: Overruled.

THE WITNESS: Yes, it is.

Q BY MR. NEVIN: Why is that?

A Pathology can be helpful in many ways.
Pathology can help define the disease more precisely
than vadiographic studies. Pathology can also be usad
as a way of identifying exposure to asbestos by

identifying asbestos bodies.

Q How about --
A And asbestos fibers. Excuse me.
Qo How about tools such as a pulmonary function

test? Is that important?

MR. SUN: Objection. Your Honor, are we still

talking about colon cancer here?

MR. NEVIN: Yeah, we are.

THE COURT: I'm going to allow it. Go ahead.

THE WITNESS: Pulmonary function tests can be
helpful as weil.

Q BY MR. NEVIN: When you look at an individual
who has colon cancer and determine whether or not the
colon cancer was asbestos caused, what do you look for?

MS. WOO: Lacks foundation. Calls --

THE COURT: Sustained.

Q BY MR. NEVIN: Why do you look for anything?83

meant by that; and, two, that shows exactly why what the
court has done today is incorrect under the law. It is

not the court's job to weigh his terminology. And when

he said the word "association," did he mean more likely

than not. That is the job for the jury.

It is not the job -- the judge -~ the court's
role to keep out an issue in dispute that would
otherwise be tried by the jury in this case.

THE COURT: All right. With regard to Motion in
Limine Number 19, which is to preclude testimony as to
the causal association between asbestos exposure and
colon cancer, the court is concerned that plaintiff has
not established, A, sufficient foundation through this
expert for him to testify as to any causal association
er link between colon cancer and asbestos.

The court is guided by Evidence Code Section
801(B), which requires that if a witness is testifying
as an expert, his testimony in the form of an opinion is
limited to such opinion as is -- and I'm going straight
to 801(B), based on matter, including his special
knowledge, skill, experience, training and education,
which is perceived by or personally known or made known
to him at or before the hearing, whether or not
admissible, that is of a type that reasonably may be
relied upon by an expert in forming an opinion.

The court is concerned that Dr. Schwartz has
not indicated that anything that he relies on is of a

type that may reasonably be relied upon by an expert inbe pet
Re FP Oo ©

be
w

oO

oo“
ie
is

84

senate

forming the opinion that colen cancer bears a causal
connection to asbestos exposure,

Furthermore, as to the foundation that
Dr. Schwartz premises his opinion on, he: A, has never
treated a patient with colon cancer; B, has not done any

epidemiological studies; C, has not done any animal

studies; D, has not really, to any extent, surveyed the
literature.

So when he, himself, indicated that an opinion
needed to be based on various different factors,
including family history, colitis, polyps, dietary
history, he did not even look at the underlying
pathology. He merely relied on written reports, so he
could not even testify that in the pathologic samples of

Mrs. Nicholson's colon that, in fact, asbestos fibers

were found in those pathological samples. He did not go
to that level of detail.

[It would be I think error on the court's part
to allow the jury to hear Dr. Schwartz's testimony.
There's a secondary problem, and that is raised in
Motion in Limine Number 57 and that is the Kennemer
motion,

The court did take the time to review the
deposition and cited those portions of the deposition
for the record where Dr. Schwartz confirmed that the
only literature he could cite to at the time of the
deposition was Dr. Selikoff's report. He did not

specify a decade. He did not specify a time frame forany particular Selikoff report.

The court is familiar with Selikoff having
heard many asbestos cases over the course of the four
and a half years that I've sat in this court, and it is
clear to the court that there is more than one Sellkoff£
report. I don't know if he was relying on the 1964
report or any other report. It was just a vague
reference to Selikoff.

In response to counsel's question at the
deposition whether or not he'd undertaken to review any
other literature, he couldn't cite any other literature
in response to the question whether or not he'd done
everything that he intended to do ta form his opinion,
He answered yes that he had, and he did not intend to do
anything different, in fact, going so far as to say that
he would do no further work.

So we have the additional problem raised in
the Kennemer case which is that it is unfair to now
allow Dr. Schwartz to testify to matter that he did not
testify to at his deposition. Dr. Schwartz was not
offered for a second deposition, nor were any additional
epinions offered in any form whatsoever, separate and
apart from a second deposition.

So the court bases its finding of granting
both motions in liming on what I've heard here today,
namely, his lack of experience, lack of credentials
lack of underlying foundational work to form an opinion

and, B, the Kennemer motion. And on that basis, both

L—

Li

86

motions will be granted.
Thank you.
MS. WOO: Thank you, Your Honor.
MR. SUN: Thank you your Honer.
THE COURT: Did you want Exhibits 111 and 112
received for purposes --

MR. NEVIN: Yes.

THE COURT: Any objection to the receipt of Exhibit

Lil and 112?
MR. SUN: No, Your Honor,
MS. WOO: No, Your Honor.

THE COURT: All right.

(Exhibits 111 and 112 were admitted

into evidence.)

MS. AGOPIAN: And, Your Honor, I believe the next

order of business -~ I don't know if the court was
inclined to go there -~ is to set up a schedule for
our =~

MR. NEVIN: For what's next.
THE COURT: For what's next, yeah. We've

reached ~~ we're about five minutes away from the noon

hour, so we do need to talk about scheduling. I'm going

to give counsel a moment to meet and confer, perhaps get

together over the lunch hour and come back at 1:30 and

advise me as to how you wish to proceed in Light of the

court's rulings.SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

Department 48 Hon. Elizabeth A. White, Judge

Jeraldine Nicholson, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

Asbestos Defendants, et al.,

)
)
)
)
vs. }) Case No: BC413220
)
)
)
Defendants. )
)

I, Louis R. Machuca, official court reporter
of the Superior Court of the State of California, for
the County of Los Angeles, do hereby certify that the
foregoing pages 1 through 88, inclusive, comprise a
full, true, and correct daily transcript of the
proceedings held in the above-entitled matter

on June 24, 2011.

Dated this 25th day of June, 2011.

LOUIS RS MACHUGE
CSR NO. 12274

LOUIS R. MACHUCA, CSR NO. 12274 (213) 617-1190Exhibit BDAVID SCHWARTZ, M.D.

4/27/2011

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

JERALDINE NICHOLSON,
Plaintil,
VS. No, BC413220
ASBESTOS DEFENDANTS (B*P},
Defendants,

1 APPEARANCES:
2
For Plainniff:
3
BRAYTON PURCELL, LLP.
4 BY: WILLIAM MC DEVITT, ESQUIRE
222 Rush Landing Road
5 Novato, Califormia 94948-6369

(415) 898-1555

7 For Defendant CalPontand Co.:

@ BERKES, CRANE, ROBINSON & SEAL, LLP
BY: ROBERT RERKES, ESQUIRE
9 515 South Figueroa Street, Suite £500
‘Los Angeles, California 90071
30 (213) 955-8155

For Defendant George M. Rayinond:

TELEPHONIC DEPOSITION OF DAVID SCHWARTZ, M.D. 4

Wednesday, April 27, 2011

Reported by:

JACQUELINE R. GRENACHE
CSR NO. 4631

Job No, 162124

Page 1

FOLEY & MANSFIELD,
13 BY; BETH HOPWOOD, ESQUIRE
300 Lakewide Drive, Suite 1990
‘Oakland, California 94612

(510) 390-9500
15
46 For Defendant Amcord Incorporated:
17 SELMAN BREITMAN
BY: BRUCE CHUSID, ESQUIRE
38 1176 Wilshire Boulevard, Sixth Floor
Los Angetes, California 90023-6338
19 (310) 445-0800
} 20
For Defendant Lear Siegler:
21
KEESAL, YOUNG & LOGAN
22 BY: ELIZABETH KENDRICK, ESQUIRE
400 Ooeangsne
23 {Long Beach, California 96801-1730
(362) 436-2000
24
25

1 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 2 APPEARANCES (CONTINUED):
2 FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES For Defendant Fishback & Moore Electrical Group:
3
3 SINUNU BRUNI, LLP
4 JERALDINE NICHOLSON, 4 BY: JAMES SINUNU, ESQUIRE
333 Pine Street, Suite 400
5 Plaintiff, 8 ‘Sam Francisco, California 94104
6 vs. No. BC413220 6 «83829700
7 ASBESTOS DEFENDANTS (B*P), 7 For Defendant Highland Staaco:
o 3 ARCHER NORRIS, PLC
8 Defendants. BY: JOCELYN SORIANO, ESQUIRE
9 2 2033 North Main Street, suite 800
Walnut Creek, Cabifornia 94596,
10 10 (925) 930-6600
aa ®
For Defendant Hendricks Building Supply:
4.2 we
BRYDON, HUGO & PARKER:
a3 a3 BY: ERIN CARPENTER, ESQUIRE
a 35 Main Street, 20th Floor
a4 San Frincisco, California 94114
15 Telephonic deposition of DAVID SCHWARTZ, as (415) 808-0300
16 M.D. taken on behalf of Defendants, beginning at 46 For Defendant Patex USA:
1” PRINDLE, DECKER & AMARO
17 5:07 pam, and ending at 6:06 pm. on Wednesday. BY: TAMPS MURRAY, ESOUIRE
18 April 27, 2011, before Jacqueline R. Grenache, 48 219 Gollen Shore Smet, Fourth Flor
Long 1. Californie 2
19 CSR. No. 4631, 1 Gap aso
20 20
For Defendant Thompson Building Materials:
21 a
22 LOW, BALL & LYNCH
22 BY: JAMES REGAN, ESQUIRE
23 505 Montgomery Street, 71h Floor
23 ‘San Francisco, Catifomia 94111-2584

(415) 981-4630

Page 3

Page 4

‘Sarnoff. 1

877.955.3855

(Pages 1 to 4)DAVID SCHWARTZ, M.D. 4/27/2011

Q. Have you asked to do any further work that
you have not had the opportunity to complete?

A. No.

Q. Do you consider yourself fully prepared to
express the opinions that you have reached in this
case?

A. Yes.

Q. And what were you asked to do in this case?

A. Iwas asked to review the medical records
and arrive at an opinion as to whether Mr, --
whether Ms. Nicholson had an asbestos form of
disease,

Q. And is that the only thing that you've been
asked to do in this case to date?

A. Yes.

Q. Other than reviewing the records that you
just mentioned, have you done anything else in order
to form any opinions with respect to whether
Ms. Nicholson has an asbestos-related disease?

A. No, I have not.

Q. And [ think it was inferred from a previous
answer, but have you ever seen Jeraldine Nicholson?

A. No, [have not.

Q. Have you ever seen any of the actual
tadiographic films for Ms. Nicholson?

Center. Do you also currently have in your
possession the records from those facilities?

A. Yes, Ido.

Q. Are there any other reports or records that
you have -- that you have not yet identified?

A. Thave billing information,

Q. And from what facilities do you have
billing information?

A. From the Havasu Regional Medical Center.

Q. Anywhere else?

A. Just give me a second here.

Q. Take your time.

A, From Dr. O'Neil, from Dr. Carlz, from Dr.
Weaver, from the Lake Havasu Imaging Center, from
the Kingman Regional Medical Center, and from
Sunrise Hospital and Medical Center.

One more file to open. Sorry. y

Q. Okay.

A. Same thing.

Q. Same thing as what?

A. As I just mentioned.

Q. Okay. And were these records e-mailed to
you by Brayton Purcell?

A. Yes, they were.

Q. About when were they e-mailed to you?
Page 13

UPWNHHOOBIHANAWHHOODRIHUAWNE
AEWNROODIHAAEWNPOWRIH HV AWNHH

Page 15

1 A. Within the past couple of weeks. L A. No.

2 Q. Other than the records that you just told. 2 Q. Have you ever seen any of the pathology

3 us about, have you reviewed any other materials in 3 materials that were taken from Ms. Nicholson?

4 preparation for your testimony in this case? 4 A. No.

5 A. No. 5 Q. Is it correct that you have no independent

6 Q. Have you consulted any textbooks or 6 opinions concerning the interpretation of any of the
7 ~~ literature published in the -- in medical journals 7 pathology materials?

8 with respect to your work on this case? 8 MR. MC DEVITT: I'm going to object to the |
9 A. No. 9 — question as being vague and ambiguous and

Q Q. Have you spoken to Mrs. Nicholson, 0 argumentative.

1 Jeraldine Nicholson? 1 MR. BERKES: Okay. Let me just see if I can
2 A. No, [ have not. 2 cure the objection, if cure is necessary.

3 Q. Have you spoken to her husband? I believe 3 Q. Other than simply noting what other

4 it's Patrick Nicholson. 4 pathologists have concluded, do you have any

5 A. No. 5 independent opinions, that is independent of what
6 Q. Have you spoken to any of the experts that 6 — other pathologists have said, concerning the

7 have been retained by plaintiff's counsel in this 7 interpretation of the pathology materials for

8 case? 8 Ms. Nicholson?

9 A. No, [have not. 9 A. No.

o Q. Have you spoken to anybody about this case Q. Do you have any opinions independent of

1 before we started your deposition today? 21 those expressed by other physicians with respect to
2 A. No. 22 the interpretation of any of the radiology

3 Q. Have you asked for any materials of any 23 materials?

4 kind that you have not yet received? ba A. No,

5 A. No. g5 Q. And as a result of your work on this case

Page 14] Page 16

Sarnoff. 4 (Pages 13 to 16)

877.955.3855DAVID SCHWARTZ, M.D.

4/27/2011

QreWNFPOwCaT

become an occupational medicine specialist?

A. Yes.

Q. Doctor, I now want to turn for a moment to
your opinion regarding asbestosis and Ms. Nicholson
having asbestosis.

What is your opinion that she has
asbestosis based on?

A. My opinions are based on a couple of
things: First, that she was exposed to asbestos.

Second, that there was a proper latency
period in her first exposure to asbestos to the
onset of disease.

Third, the presence of interstitial
abnormalities on the CT scan -- high resolution CT
scan from November 11th, 2008.

TSO EY EE RE a a

AeWNHKFOCHIHRAPWNHROLOIMRGeWHE

Page 26

Sarnoff.

1 A. No. 1 And fourth, the presence of grade 1
2 Q. Are you aware of anything in the published | 2 asbestosis on a lung biopsy that was obtained that
3 medical literature that sets out what exposure -- | 3 was evaluated by Dr. Salyer.
4 — what level of exposure to asbestos is necessary in 14 Q. And do you have any reason to disagree with
5 order to attribute colon cancer to asbestos? 5 any of the findings of Dr. Salyer?
6 A. No, I'm not. A, No,
7 Q. The last time I deposed you on this I 7 Q. And what is grade -- cap NIOSH grade 1
8 believe you testified that one of the things that 8 asbestosis?
9 you were relying upon for your opinion that colon 9 A, It's interstitial lung disease. [ don't
LO cancer is -- can be caused by exposure to asbestos 0 know the exact grading system. I'm nota
fl was some Selikoff studies. Is that generally a 1__ pathologist.
2 correct statement? 2 Q. Is there a -- are you familiar with how, if
13 A. Yes. 3 atall, the grading system -- the pathological
L4 Q. Other than Selikoff studies can you 4 — grading system translates clinically?
5 — identify for us any other study by name or author or 5 MR. MC DEVITT: I'm going to object that it
6 participant in the study that supports your opinion 6 assumes facts.
7 that asbestos causes colon cancer? 7 MR. BERKES: Well, and -- fair point.
8 A. Not at this time. 18 Q. If at all?
9 Q. And the Selikoff studies that you are 9 A. No, I don't.
O familiar with that in your opinion support the 0 Q. Doctor, one of the things that you reviewed
1 association between asbestos and colon cancer, those ‘1 in preparation for your opinions was Dr. Bordeaux's
2 studies were performed when? In what decade? 2 of August 11, 2009, is that correct?
3 A. I thought we went over this. I don't 3 A. Yes.
4 recall. 4 Q. And do you rely on this report, at least in
5 Q. It was before 2000, correct? The year Ps part, for your opinions regarding whether
Page 25 Page 27
1 20007 Ms. Nicholson has asbestosis?
2 A. Yes, it was, A. Excuse me, could you repeat that question,
3 Q. And have you received any specialized please.
4 training with respect to attributing asbestos as a Q. Yes. Do you rely on Dr. Bordeaux's August
5 cause of colon cancer? 11, 2009 report, at least in part, for your opinion
6 A. I've received training in occupational that Ms. Nicholson has asbestosis?
7 medicine, and so | think that that's relevant to A. No.
8 this issue. Q. Why not?
9 Q. And the training you received is basically A, I told you what I relied on, I don't
LO the general training that one receives in order to recall the details of Dr. Bordeaux's report.

Q. Okay. Let me -- if you have it there, if
you could turn -- do you have it on your computer,
or access to it on your computer?

A. Yes, Ido.

Q. If you could turn to -- I guess it would
be -- let's see -- page -- the top of -- it starts
on page 4 of his report and carries over to the top
of page 5. His summary of pulmonary function
studies,

A. It will take me a little bit to get to it.

Q. Sure.

A. Which page?

Q. It's page 4 of his report. The page number
is at the top in the header.

A. Okay.
» Page 28

7 (Pages 25 to 28)

877.955.3885DeWNH ROO DIRNAWNE OW OIA HAW

corskerEee

GTAWNE SOO dH Tew

HOWDY MA He WHE

Se ea

file gt

DAVID SCHWARTZ, M.D.

4/27/2011

that was found in her lung is metastasis of her
colon cancer?

A. [believe it is.

Q. Do you have any opinion that Ms. Nicholson
has a primary lung cancer?

A. No, I don't.

Q. Turn to -- Dr. Salyer's materials were
handwritten notes, correct?

A. Yes.

Q. Have you ever seen a typewritten or printed
report from Dr. Salyer?

A. No.

Q. Turning to the page of Dr. Salyer's report
that on the upper right-hand corner has the number 2
circled.

A. Yes.

Q. Do you see that?

A. Yes.

Q. If you look at the very bottom of the page
he lists out a number of findings based on his
review of the pathology, and the third from the
bottom is focal peribronchiolar fibrosis. Is that
how you say that?

A. Yes.

Q. What is that?

A, That's pulmonary fibrosis. Fibrosis that
occurs in the lung around the airways, the terminal
airways.

Q. And do you have any information that that
is the fibrosis that Dr. Salyer found based on his
review of the pathology that led him to conclude
that Ms, Nicholson has cap NIOSH grade | asbestosis?

A. Excuse me?

Q. Yes. Do you know if his finding of the
focal peribronchiolar fibrosis is the extent of the
fibrosis that he is calling asbestosis cap NIOSH
grade 1?

MR. MC DEVITT: I'm going to object to that as
calling for speculation.

THE WITNESS: I don't know the answer to that.
BY MR. BERKES:

Q. You'll note that in the -- right below the
entry for focal peribronchiolar fibrosis Dr. Salyer
finds evidence on pathology of mild emphysema?

A. Yes,

Q. Do you have any information as to how
Ms. Nicholson would have contracted mild emphysema? 2

A. No.

Q. Is mild emphysema something that could be

found in individuals that are exposed to secondary
Page 34/

1
2
3
4
5
‘6
7
8
9
po
“hi
2
3
4
5
6
7
&

a9
0
1
2
3
a
5

smoke?

A. Yes.

Q. And, in your view, is Ms. Nicholson's mild
emphysema contributing in any way to any functional
impairment that she may have?

A. No.

Q. In your opinion, is Ms. Nicholson's
asbestosis contributing in any way to any functional
impairment?

A. Idon't -- I told you previously that the
asbestosis is resulting in a decrease in the DLCO,
but there is no disability associated with that.

Q. Ms. Nicholson is seventy -- let's see. She
would be what? 78 or 9 right now?

She just turned 79, right?

A. Yes.

Q. Based on someone of that age, given the
extent of asbestosis that you believe she has, would
you anticipate that it is more likely than not that
Ms. Nicholson would have any effect, or any ~- let
me strike that and start over.

Do you have an opinion as to whether it's
more likely than not that Ms. Nicholson, given her
current age and the extent of any asbestosis that

she has, will have any impairment, any disability,
Bage 35

as a result of that asbestosis in her natural
lifetime?

A. I don't know.

Q. Do you have an opinion as to whether
Ms. Nicholson's life expectancy has been shortened
in any way as a result of asbestosis?

A. I don't know.

Q. Do you have any opinion concerning whether
Ms. Nicholson's life expectancy has been shortened
in any way as a result of her colon cancer?

A. I believe it has,

Q. And to what extent has her colon cancer
resulted in a shortened life expectancy?

A. I'm not sure I understand the question.

Q. How much has her life been shortened?

A, I don't -- don’t know the answer to that.

I'm not an expert in colon cancer.

Q. Do you have any opinion concerning the
treatment that Ms. Nicholson received for her colon
cancer?

A. No,

Q. Do you have any opinions concerning the
cost of her treatment?

A. Ido.

Q. And what are those opinions?

Page 36
3° =}

Sarnoff.

9 (Pages 33 to 36)

877.955.3855DAVID SCHWARTZ, M.D.

4/27/2011

GRWNHRDTOCHAHRTEWNHOLCOIRDRHERAWHE

RST EOE Ee ep

URWNHHFOCDIANEWNHEOKMOIMU EWN

spend traveling?

A. Yes, Ido.

Q. And at what rate?

A. $300 an hour.

Q. And what do you charge for review of
medical records?

A. $600 an hour.

Q. And have you agreed to testify in the trial
of this case?

A. Yes, [ have.

Q. Have you been told when the trial date is?

A. No.

Q. if | were to tell you that it was in June
of this year, do you see if there's any reason
personally or professionally that you would be
unable to come to trial?

A. No.

MR. BERKES: Doctor, that is all the questions
Ihave. I will turn it over to other people.

And [understand Mr. McDevitt will probably
want to know who's going to pay for the second hour,
so with that I will see if there's any other
questions at all.

Hearing none --

MR. SINUNU: Bob, just one further thing.
Page 41

DARUNEOOSBIAURWNHOSCBIMHAWHH

EXAMINATION

BY MR. SINUNU;

Q. Dr. Schwartz, do you plan to do any further
work between now and the time of trial?

A. Only if requested.

Q. And you have not been requested, have you,
sir?

A. That's correct.

MR. SINUNU: Okay. Thank you.

FURTHER EXAMINATION
BY MR. BERKES:

Q. And have you already prepared -- you
haven't prepared any demonstrative exhibits, Power
Points, or anything like that, for this case, have
you, Doctor?

A. No.

Q. Well, I think we're done.

And so you would consider an additional
$100 to be satisfactory?

A. Yes.

Q. Do you waive signing, or do you want --

A. I waive signing.

MR. BERKES: Okay. Let's go off the record, ba
then. 25

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
oO
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
29
0
21
2
3

Page 42/

(Discussion off the record.
MR. BERKES: Back on the record.
I propose a stipulation that the court
reporter can be relieved of any responsibility for
maintaining the original transcript; that once it is
prepared, the original will be sent to the office of
Berkes, Crane and Seal; we will maintain custody of
the original, make it available upon any reasonable
notice. And if the original transcript is not
available, lost or otherwise not available, an
unsigned -- excuse me -- a certified copy can be
used in its place.
MR. MC DEVITT: That's agreeable.
MR. BERKES: Thanks very much.
(Deposition concluded 6:06 p.m.)

Page 43

I, the undersigned, a Certified Shorthand
Reporter of the State of California, do hereby
certify:

That the foregoing proceedings were taken
before me at the time and place herein set forth;
that any witnesses in the foregoing proceedings,
prior to testifying, were duly sworn; that a record
of the proceedings was made by me using machine
shorthand which was thereafter transcribed under my
direction; that the foregoing transcript is a true
record of the testimony given.

Further, that if the foregoing pertains to
the original transcript of a deposition in a Federal
case, before completion of the proceedings, review
of the transcript [ ] was [ ] was not requested.

I further certify that I am neither
financially interested in the action nor a relative
or employee of any attorney or any of the parties.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, | have this date
subscribed my name.

Dated: 5/6/2011

JACQUELINE R. GRENACHE, CSR. No. 4631

Page 44

‘aSarnoff.

11 (Pages 41 to 44)

877.955.3855Exhibit CoO Oo OO NH DO TO BF WY DB mw

BM NO MB DB MBM NY ew mw we ek i a ki
ao FF OW N= OD O© ON OD GD AB O ND A

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO
~--000~=—
EDWARD SHORTALL,
Plaintiff,
-Vs- NO. 275222

BUCYRUS INTERNATIONAL, INC., et

al.,

Defendants.

TELEPHONIC DEPOSITION OF DAVID SCHWARTZ, M.D.

Taken before NICOLETTE SMITH, CSR, RPR
CSR No. 11275

January 30, 2013

Aiken Welch Court Reporters
One Kaiser Plaza, Suite 505
Oakland, California 94612
(510) 451-2580/(877) 451-1580
Fax: (S10) 451-3797
www.aikenwelch.comPecineermncsn

Oo © © N OD Go kB wD @

—_

21
wouldn't differ if I used "rectal cancer." Is that fair?

A. That's correct.

Q. Okay. And just in terms of what you understand
Mr. Shortall was diagnosed with, was he diagnosed with a
rectal cancer?

A. My understanding is that he was diagnosed with a
rectal cancer.

Q. Okay. And you have no reason to disagree with
that diagnosis, do you?

A. No.

Q. Have you ever published in any form, whether
it's peer-reviewed publication or any other publication,
anything regarding asbestos causing -- as a cause of
colorectal cancers?

A. No.

Q. Have you ever written any letter or anything to
any publication criticizing any publication that
suggested that asbestos was not a cause of colorectal
cancers?

MS. GLASER: Assumes facts.
THE WITNESS: No.
BY MR. BERKES:

Q. Have you ever participated in any way, either as

a primary research scientist or as a consultant or any

other capacity, with any epidemiological study to

Aiken Welch Court Reporters D. Schwartz, MD 01/30/2013oO fC ON DO TH fF WO NY =

spent neensinenasaent
=

|

NO Re ae ee |
- Oo O© Oo N OD ay

Ny NR hf
a & w

22

determine whether asbestos is a cause of colorectal
cancers?

A. No.

Q@. Have you ever done a meta-analysis of any aspect
of asbestos as a cause of colorectal cancer?

A. No.

Q. All right. Have you ever conducted a survey of
the literature available on whether asbestos is or is not
a cause of colorectal cancer?

A, No.

Q. Now, it is your opinion that Mr. Shortall's

rectal cancer was caused in part by his exposure to

asbestos?
A. Yes.
Q. What else caused Mr. Shortall's cancer -- his

rectal cancer?

A. I don’t know.

Q. Is cigarette smoking a risk factor for rectal
cancers?

A. It certainly can be.

Q. And Mr. Shortall had a history of cigarette
smoking, correct?

A. That's correct.

Q. And was his cigarette smoking sufficient enough

to qualify that as a risk factor for his colorectal

FN TE NO ER I SNF SET ERT RN SE TE
nN
hp

Aiken Welch Court Reporters D. Schwartz, MD 01/30/2013=

oO Oo 6D NN OO GO F&F WwW DY

23

cancer?

A. Yes.

Q. Obesity or being overweight is a risk factor for
colorectal cancer?

A. Yes.

Q. Do you know anything about Mr. Shortall's
weight?

A. No.

Q. So would it be correct to say that you don't
know one way or the other whether Mr. Shortall's weight
is a risk factor for his colorectal cancer?

A. That's correct.

Q. Diet is a consideration as to a potential cause
for colorectal cancers,. correct?

A. Yes.

Q. Do you know anything about Mr. Shortali's
dietary habits?

A. No.

Q. So it would be correct to say that you cannot
express an opinion as to whether Mr. Shortall's dietary
habits contributed to his colorectal cancers -~ cancer?

A. That's correct.

Q. Can you identify any other risk factors for
colorectal cancers, that we haven't discussed?

A. No.

Aiken Welch Court Reporters D. Schwartz, MD 01/30/201324
Q. And what publications from the peer-reviewed
literature do you rely upon for your opinion that

asbestos played any role in causing Mr. Shortall's rectal

cancer?

A. There's -- there are a number of articles that I
would rely on related to colorectal cancer.

Q. Can you cite them for us.

A. There was an article published by Selikoff in
1964 in JAMA;

There were opinion pieces published by
International Agency for Research on Carcinogens in 1982;

The Federal Register in 1983 that associated GI
cancers with asbestos exposure;

The EPA statement in June of 1386;

The Canadian Labour force article in the Journal
of Occupational Medicine in 1993;

The Berry article in Occupational --
Occupational Environmental Medicine in 2000;

The Goldberg article in the American Journal of
Industrial Medicine, 2001;

The Wingren, W-i-n-g-r-e-n, article in the
International Archives of Occupational Environmental
Health in 2004;

The Align study, A-l-i-g-n, CARET study that was

published in the American Journal of Epidemiology in

Aiken Welch Court Reporters D. Schwartz, MD 01/30/2013oOo 0 ON ODO HO RB wD HD ow

NR MEN NN NY we we Bw ew ow BO Ok
oO FLW NHN = FD GO w®AN DARD DP I

25
2005;

The Ehrlich paper that was published in the
American Journal of Industrial Medicine in 1991;

And the Frumkin, F-r-u-m-k-i-n, paper that was
published in the American Journal of Industrial Medicine,
1988.

Q. Do you have a listing of those reliance
articles?

A. Yes, I do.

Q. Is it handwritten or typewritten?

A. It's handwritten.

Q. I'm sorry?

A. [t's handwritten.

MR. BERKES: Okay. I'd ask that you make that
handwritten list available, and we'll mark that as
Exhibit 4 to the deposition.

(Defendants' Exhibit 4 was marked for

identification.)
BY MR. BERKES:

Q. Can you think of any other publications that you
rely upon, that are not on the list that we've marked as
Exhibit 4?

A. No.

Q. Have you read articles or publications that

conclude that asbestos is either not a cause of

Aiken Welch Court Reporters D. Schwartz, MD 01/30/2013¢

ete sma come eanAPE

26
colorectal cancers or the evidence is insufficient to
establish asbestos as a cause of colorectal cancers?

A. Could you repeat the question?

Q. Sure. Why don't we have the court reporter read

it back.

(The record was read by the court reporter.}

THE WITNESS: I have reviewed articles. I don't
know of those -- I don't have those listed.

BY MR. BERKES:

Q. Are you able to cite any of those articles to us
today?

A. No.

@. And what is it about those articles that you
disagree with, other than the conclusion?

bet me formulate that question a little
differently.

Can you tell us what it is about the articles
that either conclude that asbestos is not a cause of
colorectal cancer or that the evidence is insufficient to
establish a causal relationship? What about those
articles do you find less compelling than the articles
that you just cited to us that are on Exhibit 4?

A. Well, I dontt believe that they represent the
consensus opinion. So the consensus opinion as held by

the International Archives -~ I'm sorry -- the

Aiken Welch Court Reporters D. Schwartz, MD 01/30/201327 |
1 International Agency on Research Carcinogens, the OSHA
2 guidelines, the EPA conclusions, the conclusions by the
3 National Toxicology Program all support a relationship
: 4 between asbestos exposure and colon cancer.
/ 5 Q. The TARC opinion plece that you cited was 1982?
| 6 A. Yes.
: 7 Q. Have you read more recent monographs from IARC
| 8 on the issue of cancer causation and asbestos?
9 A. No,
10 Q. And is the IARC opinion piece -- is that one of
41 their monographs?
12 A. Yes.
13 Q. Bo you know what number it is?
14 A. No, I don't.
: 15 Q. Are any of the studies that you listed on
i 16 Exhibit 4 epidemiological studies?
417 A. Yes,
18 Q. Which ones are epi studies?
| 19 A. All of the studies that I listed are
| 20 epidemiological studies.
| 21 Q. Well, the IARC is Just an opinion plece,
i 22 correct, sir?
i 23 A. No. Ail of then except for IARC, the Federal
| 24 Register, and the EPA are epidemiological studies.
35 | Q. Okay. Are you able to express an opinion today
5

Aiken Welch Court Reporters D. Schwartz, MD 01/30/201347
REPORTER'S CERTIFICATE

I, NICOLETTR SMITH, a Court Reporter, State of
California, do hereby certify:

That DAVID SCHWARTZ, M.D., in the foregoing
deposition named, was telephonically present and by me,
pursuant to stipulation, sworn as a witness in the
above-entitled action at the time and place therein
specified.

That said deposition was taken before me at said
time and place, and was taken down in shorthand by me, a
Certified Shorthand Reporter of the State of California,
and was thereafter transcribed into typewriting, and that
the foregoing transcript constitutes a full, true and
correct report of said deposition and of the proceedings
which took place.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, f have hereunder subscribed

my hand this 5th day of February 2013.

— Verte SD rnbir-

NICOLETTE SMITH, CSR NO. 11275
State of California

Aiken Weich Court Reporters D. Schwartz, MD 01/30/2013Exhibit DoO Oo ON ODO mM BP &H BP MH

N MB NY N NM MRD wm aa a a
a FF YW NN = OC © @ NY aA aE OA A

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO

—-000--

EDWARD SHORTALL,

vs.

Plaintiff,

No. 275222

BUCYRUS INTERNATIONAL,

INC.,

et al.,

Defendants.

TELEPHONIC DEPOSITION OF DAVID A. SCHWARTZ, M.D.

(Volume II, Pages 48 to 86)

Taken before JANICE L. BELCHER
CSR No. 12342

February 21, 2013

Aiken Welch Court Reporters
One Kaiser Plaza, Suite 505
Oakland, California 94612
(510) 451-1580/(877) 451-1580
Fax: {510} 451-3797
www.aikenwelch.com_gereenpenn theoreti

oclUmDlUlUDOUMNLUCUC OOO DN

aS Sie ok
wo NES

=
hb

=
a

Nm N NH = = |= Se
yu |= CF OO ODO NN G@

23

Q. Okay. All right. Have you authored any peer
reviewed paper on the causal relationship between
asbestos exposure and colorectal cancer?

A. No,

Q. Have you authored any peer reviewed paper on,
just, in general, the disease colon cancer or rectal
cancer?

A. No.

@. Have you authored any peer reviewed paper on
any malignancies within the gastrointestinal tract?

A. No.

Q. Have you written any textbooks or book chapters
on the causal relationship between asbestos exposure and
colorectal cancer?

A. No.

Q. Excuse me. And your CV also contained a
section which, I think, lists your research grants. TI
think it's in the first 10 pages or so. Again, the vast
majority of those research has to do with pulmonary
diseases?

A. Yes.

Q@. And there were also some studies on genetics --
or genomics and immunology, correct?

A. Correct.

Q. Did you receive any research grant for the

58

Aiken Welch Court Reporters D. Schwartz, M.D., Vol il 2-21-13ancunsornomucie

:
i
i

study of or investigation of whether asbestos causes
colorectal cancer?

A. No.

Q. And your CV also has a section that lists the
editorials, reviews, and the consensus statements that
you were involved with. Any of those related to the
investigation of whether asbestos caused -- causes
colorectal cancer?

A. No.

Q. Excuse me. Is it fair to say that your
expertise on the causal relationship between asbestos
exposure and colorectal cancer is based on your review
of literature on the subject?

A. Yes.

Q. I believe last time when counsel were asking
you question, different counsel were asking you
question, you had a handwritten list of literature that
you relie