Exhibit,Appendix: ROBERT ROSS et al VS. C.C. MOORE & CO. ENGINEERS

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

						
                                
Preview
                                1 | TAN P. DILLON, State Bar No. 203612
idillon@wfbm.com
2 ||/PAMELA E. STEVENS, State Bar No. 232609
pstevens@wfbm.com a ELECTRONICALLY
3 | ALEX A. LOZADA, State Bar No, 275416 FILED
alozada@wfibm.com Superior Court of California,
4 | WALSWORTH FRANKLIN BEVINS & McCALL, LLP County of San Francisco
601 Montgomery Street, Ninth Floor
5 | San Francisco, California 94111-2612 FEB 25 2013
Telephone: (415) 781-7072 BY WLUAM TRUPEH
6|Facsimile: (415) 391-6258 Deputy Clerk
7 | Attorneys for Defendant
D. ZELINSKY & SONS, INC.
8
9 SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA
0 COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO
ll
2 ROBERT ROSS and JEAN ROSS, Case No, CGC-10-275731
Plaintiffs, Hon: Teri L. Jackson
3 Dept: 503
vs. Date: May 7, 2013
4 . Time:
C.C. MOORE & CO. ENGINEERS; et al.,
15 EXHIBIT F-U TO THE DECLARATION
Defendant. OF ALEX A. LOZADA IN SUPPORT OF
6 DEFENDANT D. ZELINSKY AND SONS,
INC.'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY
7 ADJUDICATION
8 Trial Date: June 10, 2013
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Wawa, 1
McCall, LLP EXHIBIT F-U TO THE DECLARATION OF ALEX A. LOZADA IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT D.
ATTORNEYS ATLA 27878401 ZELINSKY AND SONS, INC’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
3619-3.2595EXHIBIT F28

Walsworth,
Franklin,
Bevins &

McCall, LLP

ATTONENS Ar Lae

IAN P. DILLON, State Bar No. 203612

idillon@wibm.com
PAMELA E. STEVENS, State Bar No. 232609
pstevens@wibm.com
WALSWORTH FRANKLIN BEVINS & McCALL, LLP
601 Montgomery Street, Ninth Floor
San Francisco, California 94111-2612
Telephone: (415) 781-7072
Facsimile: (415) 391-6258
Attorneys for Defendant
D. ZELINSKY & SONS, INC.
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO
ROBERT ROSS and JEAN ROSS, Case No. CGC-10-275731
Plaintiffs, “| DEFENDANT D. ZELINSKY & SONS,
INC.'S SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES
vs. TO PLAINTIFFS SET TWO

C. MOORE & CO. ENGINEERING, et al.,
Defendants.

PROPOUNDING PARTY: Defendant D. ZELINSKY & SONS, INC.
RESPONDING PARTY: Plaintiffs ROBERT ROSS

SET NUMBER: TWO (2)

SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 20:

State all facts that support your alleged cause of action for strict liability against D. Zelinsky
& Sons, Inc, ("Zelinsky").
SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 21:

Identify all individuals by name, address and telephone number with knowledge of facts
that support your alleged cause of action for strict liability against Zelinsky.
SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 22:

Identify all DOCUMENTS ("DOCUMENT" and "DOCUMENTS" are defined as a

“writing” pursuant to Evidence Code section 250, which includes handwriting, typewriting,

-1-
DEFENDANT D. ZELINSKY & SONS, INC.’S SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES TO PLAINTIFFS SET

21875171
3619-3,2595Oo Oe WM DA RH FF WHY

NR MY NY NY N NR NY N Se Se Be ewe ew
RNRRREBB YE SEB WA KZEBSHK AS

28

Walsworth,
Frankdin,
Bevins &

‘McCall, LLP

ATTORNEYS AT LAF

printing, photostating, photographing and every other means of recording upon any tangible thing
and form of communication or representation, including letters, words, pictures, sounds or
symbols, or combinations of them which support your alleged cause of action for strict liability
against Zelinsky. The terms DOCUMENT and DOCUMENTS also includes any information
contained in the memory of computer systems, on diskettes, or on CD ROMs.) that support your
cause of action for strict liability against Zelinsky.
SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 23:

State all facts that support your alleged cause of action for negligence against Zelinsky.

SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 24:

Identify all individuals by name, address and telephone number with knowledge of facts
that support your alleged cause of action for negligence against Zelinsky.

SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 25:

Identify all DOCUMENTS which support your alleged cause of action for negligence
against Zelinsky.
SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO, 26:

State all facts that support your alleged cause of action for fraud against Zelinsky.
SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 27:

Identify all individuals by name, address and telephone number with knowledge of facts
that support your alleged cause of action for fraud against Zelinsky.
SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 28:

Identify all DOCUMENTS which support your alleged cause of action for fraud against
Zelinsky.
SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO, 29:

State all facts that support your alleged cause of action for misrepresentation against

Zelinsky.
SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 30:

Identify all individuals by name, address and telephone number with knowledge of facts

that support your alleged cause of action for misrepresentation against Zelinsky.
-2-

DEFENDANT D. ZELINSKY & SONS, INC.'S SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES TO PLAINTIFFS SET TWO

21875171
3619-3259528

Walsworth,
Franklin,
Bevins &

McCall, LLP

ARTORNESSAT LOY

SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 31:

Identify DOCUMENTS which support your alleged cause of action for misrepresentation
against Zelinsky.
SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 32:

State all facts that support your alleged cause of action for loss of consortium against
Zelinsky.
SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 33:
Identify all individuals by name, address and telephone number with knowledge of facts
that support your alleged cause of action for loss of consortium against Zelinsky.

SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO, 34:

Identify DOCUMEMTS which support your alleged cause of action for loss of consortium
against Zelinsky.
SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 35:

State all facts that support your alleged cause of action for premises owner/contractor
liability against Zelinsky.
SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 36:
Identify all individuals by name, address and telephone number with knowledge of facts

that support your alleged cause of action for premises owner/contractor liability against Zelinsky.
SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 37:

Identify DOCUMEMTS which support your alleged cause of action for premises
owner/contractor liability against Zelinsky.
SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO, 38:

State all facts that support your alleged cause of action for aiding/abetting battery against
Zelinsky.

SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 39:

Identify all individuals by name, address and telephone number with knowledge of facts

that support your alleged cause of action for aiding/abetting battery against Zelinsky.

-3-
DEFENDANT D. ZELINSKY & SONS, INC.'S SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES TO PLAINTIFFS SET TWOme

SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 40:
Identify DOCUMEMTS which support your alleged cause of action for aiding/abetting

N

battery against Zelinsky.
Dated: November & 0 , 2012 WALSWORTH FRANKLIN BEVINS & McCALL, LLP

IAN P. DILLON

PAMELA E. STEVENS
Attorneys for Defendant

D. ZELINSKY & SONS, INC.

Co ND NH BP Ww

10
1
12
13 wh
14
15
16
17
18

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

Wateworth,
Feanlin, -4-

omit DEFENDANT D. ZELINSKY & SONS, INC'S SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES TO PLAINTIFFS SET TWO

‘McCall, LLP
arvanwersar law

21875171
3619-3.259528

Wauwarth,
‘Franklin,
Bovina &

‘McCall, LLP

ATVORIRYS AT EA

PROOF OF SERVICE

1am employed in the County of San Francisco, State of California. I am over the age of 18
and not a party to the within action. My business address is 601 Montgomery Street, Ninth Floor,
San Francisco, California 94111-2612.

On November2?, 2012, I served the within document(s) described as:

DEFENDANT D. ZELINSKY & SONS, INC.'S SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES TO
PLAINTIFFS SET TWO

on the interested parties in this action as stated below:

Brayton Purcell LLP
222 Rush Landing Road
P.O. Box 6169

Novato, CA 94948

X] (BY MAIL) By placing a true copy of the foregoing document(s) in a sealed envelope
addressed as set forth above. I placed each such envelope for collection and mailing
following ordinary business practices. I am readily familiar with this Firm's practice for
collection and processing of correspondence for mailing. Under that practice, the
correspondence would be deposited with the United States Postal Service on that same day,
with postage thereon fully prepaid at San Francisco, California, 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 date of deposit for
mailing in affidavit.

J declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the
foregoing is true and correct.

Executed on November 272012, at San Francisco, California,
Phyllis Thomas
(Type or print name) (Sigh4ture)

5.
DEFENDANT D. ZELINSKY & SONS, INC.'S SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES TO PLAINTIFFS SET TWOEXHIBIT GP.O, BOX 6169

NOVATO, CALIFORNIA 94948-6169

BRAYIONSPURCELL LLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
222 RUSH LANDING ROAD.
415-898-1555

SCO mI DH BF BW HN =

RM YP RN RN YH RB se ee ee
> wa A RYN | Soe ADH BF WH =

ALAN R. BRAYTON, ESQ,, S.B. #73685
DAVID R.DONADIO, ESG., 8.8. #154436
BRENDA D. POSADA, ESQ,, S.B. #152480
BRAYTON#PURCELL LL

Attorneys at Law

222 Rush Landing Road

P.O. Box 6169

Novato, California 94948-6169

(415) 898-1555

48
78

Attorneys for Plaintiffs
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO

ROBERT ROSS and JEAN ROSS, ASBESTOS

No. CGC-10-275731

Plaintiffs,

PLAINTIFF ROBERT ROSS’S
vs. RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT D.

ZELINSKY & SONS, INC.’S SPECIAL
C.C, MOORE & CO, ENGINEERS; INTERROGATORIES SET TWO

Defendants as Reflected on Exhibit |
atiached fo the Summary Complaint
herein; and DOES 1-8500.

PROPOUNDING PARTY: Defendant D, ZELINSKY & SONS, INC.
(Hereinafter, “D. ZELINSKY”)

RESPONDING PARTY: Plaintiff ROBERT ROSS
SET NUMBER: TWO (2)

RESPONSE TO_INTERROGATORY NO. 20: Plaintiff objects to this Interrogatory on the
rounds that it is contains subparts, is compound, conjunctive and/or disjunctive in violation of
-C.P. § 2030,060 (f). Plaintiff objects to this Interrogatory on the grounds that it seeks
information which is protected attorney work-product in violation of C.C.P. § 2018.030 (a).
Plaintiff objects to this Interrogatory on the grounds that it improperly calls for premature
identification and disclosure of plaintiff's retained consultants, who may or may, not later be
appropriately named as expert witnesses in violation of C.C.P. §§ 2034210, 2034.230, as well
as seeks the premature identification of their writings, conclusions, impressions and/or reports in
violation of C.C.P. § 2034.210, et seq. Without warving the foregoing objections, plainti
responds as follows:
Plaintiff ROBERT ROSS was exposed to asbestos throughout his career as an insulator,
while working at various jobsites wherein asbestos-containing material was disturbed by
defendant, D. ZELINSKY’s employees in his vicinity. Plaintiff knew the painters were
employed by D. ZELINSKY because the name “Zelinsky” was on hats, shirts, tool boxes and
trucks, The asbestos fibers emanating from this products accumulated on plaintiff's clothing. At
each of the below mentioned jobsites, plaintiff worked next to or within the general vicinity of

K.Mnjured\9349\pld\rog-sp-2BLINS-set2.wpd 1 bdCo eI DAR F YN

bom NW NM NM NR BR DE me ee
eA AR OD fF FBO we BDH BR YW NY S

D. ZELINSKY employees, including painters and tapers, who would mix, apply, tape and/or
sand asbestos-containing joint and taping compounds on interior walls to prepare those surfaces
for painting, D. ZELINSKY employees applied, installed, removed, handled, disturbed,
manipulated, made airborne, an Yor otherwise worked with asbestos-containing products in his
close proximity, D, ZELINSKY employees’ disturbances of the asbestos-containing debris
created dust that Mr. ROSS breathed. ‘Said asbestos exposure which was the direct and
proximate cause of his asbestos-related injury.
Specifically, Mr. ROSS was exposed to asbestos fibers emanating from asbestos-
containing products being handled, disturbed, removed, cut, applied, mixed, repaired, sanded by

D, ZELD Y employees at the following jobsites:
Location of Exposure
Employer Exposure Job Title Dates
AC&S Insulation AEC-Lawrence Livermore Insulator 8/1960-7/1961;
P.O. Box 1268 Laboratory (foreman) 10/1961-6/1962;
Lancaster, PA Livermore, CA. Gents on and
0.

Plaintiff installed JOUNS-MANVILLE (MANVILLE TRUST) 301 cement. CAHILL
CONSTRUCTION (CAHILL CONSTRUCTION CO., INC.) was the general contractor which
employed contractor which employed laborers who were sweeping and shoveling insulation,
Gncluding All Purpose insulation cement, Kaylo ipecovering, 85% magnesia pipecovering,
$5% magnesia insulation cements, and styrofoam, drywall debris and fireproofing near
plaintiff. LJ. KRUSE COMPANY fabricated heating piping in proximity to plaintiff. Plaintiff
worked in proximity to asbestos-containing PACO TEXTURES (KELLY M ORE PAINT
COMPA Xlaping compound that was sanded in his presence by em) loyees of GOLDEN
GATE DR LL, INC. Plaintiff observed D. ZELINSKY (D. ZEL SKY & SONS, INC.
painters who were sanding asbestos-containing PACO TEXT) RES (KELLY MOORE PAINT
COMPANY) taping and joint com] ound on interior walls, which also spread visible dust
throughout plaintiff’s work areas, Plaintiff recalls the following supervisor: Bill Pollock
(deceased). Plaintiff recalls the following co-workers: Robert Cantley (c/o Brayton%Puroell

LP), Mike Caylor (c/o Brayton#Purcell LLP); Geoff Millar (c/o Brayton*+Purcell LLP); Larry
Sublett (c/o Brayton%Purcell LLP); Earl Beck (deceased); Arvis Duncan (deceased), Bernie
DeCoss (deceased); Harry Barnes (deceased); Laurance Hagen (c/o Brayton*Purcell LLP).

Location of Exposure
Employer Exposure Job Title Dates
AC&S Insulation San Francisco International Insulator 5/1965-12/1966
P.O, Box 1268 Airport (i and % weeks)
Lancaster, PA San Francisco, CA

Plaintiff worked on multiple projects. Plaintiff observed D. ZELINSKY (D. ZELINSKY
& SONS, INC.) bainlers sanding asbestos-containing PACO TEXTURES (KELLY MOORE
PAINT COMPANY) taping and joint compound on interior walls, which also spread visible
dust throughout plaintiff's work areas, Robert Cantley (c/o BraytonPurcell LLP) was a co-

worker and supervisor on several of these projects.

Location of Exposure
Employer Exposure Job Title Dates
AC&S§ Insulation San Francisco State Insulator 8/1960-6/1962;
P.O. Box 1268 University 5/1965-12/1966
Lancaster, PA San Francisco, CA (8 days)

KMnjured\19349\pla\rog-4sp-ZELINS-set. wpd 2 ipom NW A A RB WN

be Ss

13

Plaintiff applied asbestos-containing insulation during new construction and remodel
projects throughout the campus. Robert Cantley (c/o Brayton**Purcell LLP) was a co-worker
and supervisor on these projects. Plaintiff observed D, ZELINSKY (D. ZELINSKY & SONS,
INC.) painters sanding asbestos-containin; taping and joint compound on interior walls, which
also spread visible dust throughout plaintiff's work areas.

Location of Exposure
Employer Exposure Job Title Dates
AC&S Insulation Fairmont Hotel Insulator 8/1960-6/1962;
P.O. Box 1268 San Francisco, CA (10 man days)
Lancaster, PA 5/1965-12/1966;
(several weeks)

Plaintiff applied asbestos-containing insulation during multiple remodel projects.
Plaintiff observed D. ZELINSKY (D. ZELINSKY & SONS, INC.) painters sanding asbestos-
containing PACO TEXTURES (KELLY MOORE PAINT COMPANY) tay ing and joint
compound on interior walls, within 20 foet of plaintiff, which spread visible dust throughout
plaintiff's work areas. Robert Cantley (c/o Brayton*Purcell LLP) was one of plaintiff's co-
workers, Jack McParland and Milt Skolnick (both deceased) were members of the DOUGLASS
INSULATION crew,

Location of Exposure
Employer Exposure Job Title Dates
AC&S Insulation Chabot College Insulator 8/1960-6/1962;
P.O. Box 1268 Hayward, CA 5/1965-12/1966
Lancaster, PA (100 days)

Plaintiff applicd asbestos-containing insulation during new construction of the college,
and during renovation work. Plaintiff observed D. ZELINSKY (D. ZELINSKY & SONS, INC.)
painters sanding asbestos-containing PACO TEXTURES (KELLY MOORE PAINT
COMPANY) taping and joint compound on interior walls, which also spread visible dust
throughout plaintiffs work areas. Jaintiff’s co-workers included Earl Beck, Judd Fleming, Sal
Morales, and Bill Pollock (all deceased), Plaintiff's supervisor was Robert Cantley (c/o
Brayton*Purcell LLP).

Location of Exposure
Employer Exposure Job Title Dates
AC&S Insulation San Francisco General Insulator 8/1960-6/1962;
P.O. Box 1268 Hospital 5/1965-12/1966
Lancaster, PA San Francisco, CA

Plaintiff applied asbestos-containing insulation to iping, valves, fittings, duct work, and
equipment during various remodel projects. Plaintiff used asbestos-containing thermal
insulation products, During a ten to eleven day Period, plaintiff observed D. ZELINSE'Y .
ZELINSKY & SONS, ING) ) painters sanding asbestos-containing PACO TEXTURES (KELLY
MOORE PAINT COMPANY) taping and joint compound on interior walls, which also spread
visible dust throughout plaintiff's work areas. Robert Cantley (c/o Brayton%*Purcell LLP) was
plaintiff's supervisor and co-worker.

ut
MW

K Ainjused\19349\pld\rop-rap-ZELINS-se12,.wpd 3 bdpCe IN DA HY B WN

Location of Exposure

Employer Exposure Job Tite Dates
AC&S Insulation Lockheed. Insulator 1960-1962;
P.O. Box 1268 Sunnyvale, CA 1965-1966

Lancaster, PA

Plaintiff applied asbestos-containing insulation to iping, fittings, valves and duct work.
Plaintiff observed D, ZELINSKY (D. ZELINSKY & SONS, INC.) painters sanding asbestos-
containing PACO TEXTURES (KELLY MOORE PAINT COMPANY) taping and joint
compound on interior walls, which also spread visible dust throughout plaintiffs work areas.
Robert Cantley (c/o Brayton¢*Purcell LLP) was plaintiff’s supervisor.

Location of Exposure
Employer Exposure Job Title Jates
AC&S Insulation Stanford University Insulator 8/1960-6/1962;
P.O. Box 1268 Engineering Bldg.; 5/1965-12/1966
Laneaster, PA School Business;

other buildings

Palo Alto, C,

Plaintiff worked on several projects on the university’s campus. Plaintiff applied
asbestos-containing ipecovering to piping, valves, and fittings. During an approximate 4 day
long period, plaintiff observed D. ZELINSRY (D. ZELINSKY & SONS, IN i ainters sanding
asbestos-containing PACO TEXTURES (KELLY MOORE PAINT COMPAI taping and
joint compound on interior walls, which also § read visible dust throughout plaintiff's work
areas. Robert Cantley (c/o Brayton*-Purcell LLP) was plaintiffs supervisor and co-worker on

some of these projects.

Location of Exposure
Employer Exposure Job Title Dates
AC&S Insulation Kaiser Hospital Insulator 1960-1962;
120 North Lime St. Geary Street 1965-1966
Lancaster, PA San Francisco, CA

Plaintiff applied asbestos-containing to piping and fiberglass to duct work during various
remodels. Plaintiff observed D. ZELINSKY (D. ZELINSKY & SONS, INC.) painters mixing
PACO (KELLY-MOORE PAINT COMPANY, we taping mud and sanding asbestos-
containing PACO TEXTURES (KELLY MOORE PAINT COMPANY) taping and joint

s work areas, during

compound on interior walls, which spread visible dust throughout plainti

a7 to 8 day time frame. Plaintiff's supervisor was Robert Cantley (c/o Brayton¢Purcell LLP),
Location of Exposure

Employer Exposure Job Title Dates

AC&S Insulation 1BM Insulator 1960-1962;

P.O. Box 1268 Cottle Road 1965-1966

Lancaster, PA San Jose, CA

Plaintiff applied asbestos-containing insulation to piping and ductwork. Plaintiff worked
in close proximity to JOHNSON CONTROLS technicians who were disturbing asbestos-
containing overhead fireproofin, while setting controls tubing. Plaintiff observed D.

ZELINSKY (D. ZELINSKY & 5ONS, INC painters sanding asbestos-containing PACO
TEXTURES (KELLY MOORE PAINT COMPANY) taping and joint compound on interior

K Mlnjurad\19349\pld\vog-rsp-ZELINS-set2. wot 4 bapCe TAA PB YW we

NN NN YN NNR DH Re ee eee
eI AA FB OU SF So we a DH BW DN = ST

walls, which also spread visible dust throughout plaintiff's work areas, Robert Cantley c/o
Brayton*-Purcell LLP, was plaintiff's supervisor at this site.

Location of Exposure
Employer Expesure Job Title Dates
AC&S Insulation Hewlett Packard Insulator 1960-1962;
P.O. Box 1268 Palo Alto, CA 1965-1966

Lancaster, PA

Plaintiff applied asbestos-containing insulation to ping and duct work during various
remodel work at this facility. Plaintiff observed D, ZEL! D. ZELINSKY & SONS,
ING.) painters sanding asbestos-containing PACO TEXTURES (KELLY MOORE PAINT
COMPANY) taping and joint compound on interior walls, which also spread visible dust
throughout plaintiffs work areas. LP, was plaintiff's
supervisor at this site.

obert Cantley c/o Brayton¢Purcell

Location of Exposure
Employer Exposure Job Title Dates
AC&S Insulation St. Luke’s Hospital Insulator 1960-1962;
P.O. Box 1268 San Francisco, CA 1965-1966

Lancaster, PA

Plaintiff eppliod asbestos-containing insulation to piping and ductwork. Plaintiff
observed D. ZELINSKY (D. ZELINSKY é& SONS, INC.) painters sanding asbestos-containing
PACO TEXTURES (KELLY MOORE PAINT COMPANY) taping and joint compound on
interior walls, which also spread visible dust throughout plaintiff's work areas. Plaintiff's
supervisor at this site was Robert Cantley c/o Brayton%Purcell LLP.

Location of Exposure
Employer Exposure Job Title Dates
Consolidated Insulation Hewlett Packard Insulator 1967-1972,
5]7-D Marine View Ave. Palo Alto, CA

Belmont, CA

Plaintiff applied asbestos-containing insulation to sping ae duct work during remodel
work, During a three day period, plaintiff observed D. ZELINSKY (D. ZBLINSKY SONS,
INC.) painters sanding asbestos-containing PACO TEXTURES (KELLY MOORE PAINT
COMPANY) taping and joint compound on interior walls, which spread visible dust
throughout plaintiff's work areas, Robert Cantley c/o Brayton¢Purcell LLP, was plaintiff's

supervisor on this site.

Location of Exposure
Employer Exposure Job Title Dates
Consolidated Insulation Chabot College Insulator 1967-1972
517-D Marine View Ave. Hayward, CA (10 days)

Belmont, CA

Plaintiff applied asbestos-containing insulation to Pining and equipment during a college
remodel project. Plaintiff observed D. ZELINSKY (D. ZELINSK'Y & SONS, INC. painters
sanding asbestos-containing HAMILTON MATERIALS faping and joint compound on interior
walls, which also spread visible dust throughout plaintiff's work areas. Robert Cantley c/o
Brayton*-Purcell LLP, was plaintiff's on site supervisor.

KAlnjured\19349\pldogersp>-ZELINSset2. wpd $ bapSwe NU A Hm BY HN =

wo RN RNY NKR Re Se Be eB ee ee er
ea AA RB ONS SF SF ODO wm BE DHF BY =

Employer

Consolidated Insulation
517-D Marine View Ave.
Belmont, CA

Plaintiff applied asbestos-containing i
duct work during multiple remodel projects. During

Location of
Exposure

San Francisco General

Hospital
San Francisco, CA

Exposure
Dates

1/1967-3/1972

Job Title

Insulator

insulation to piping, valves, fittings, equipment and
one six hour period, plaintiff observed D.

ZELINSKY (D. ZELINSKY & SONS, INC.) painters sanding asbestos-containing HAMILTON

MATERIALS “Red Dot” taping and
from plaintiff, which also spread visi
currently contends that he was expos:

Employer

Consolidated Insulation
517-D Marine View Ave.
Belmont, CA

Plaintiff applied asbestos-containing insulati
applied fiberglass to duct work during multiple remo
oD. ZELINSKY & SON!

ILINSR'Y

Location of
Exposure

Atomic Energy
Commission
Lawrence Livermore
Laboratory
Livermore, CA

oint compound on interior walls, between 4 and 15 feet
le dust throughout plaintiff's work areas. Plaintiff
ed to asbestos during this employment.

Exposure
Job Title Dates
Insulator 1/1967-3/1972,

(1 to 3 weeks)

ion on piping, valves, and fittings, and
del projects. Plaintiff observed D.
, INC.) painters sanding asbestos-containing taping and

joint compound on interior walls, which also spicad visible dust throughout plaintiffs work

areas, Rol

Employer

Consolidated Insulation
517-D Marine View Ave.
Belmont, CA

ert Cantley (c/o Brayton%-Purcell L
Ear] Beck (deceased) were two of plaintiff's co-workers.

Location of

Ex posure

San Francisco State
University
San Francisco, CA

P) was plaintiff’s supervisor. Bill Pollock and

Exposure
Job Title Dates
Insulator 1/1967-3/1972
(8 man days)

Plaintiff applied asbestos-containing insulation fo piping, valves, and fittings, equipment
fn Oey INSKY

and duct work during remo

del projects in various buildings. P. aintiff observed D,

(D. ZELINSKY & SONS, INC.) painters sanding asbestos-containing HAMILTON

MATERIALS taping and joint compound on interior walls, which also spread visible dust
throughout plaintiff's work areas. Robert Cantley (c/o Brayton¢Purcell LLP) was plaintiff's
on-site supervisor.

Location of Exposure
Employer Exposure Job Ti Dates
Consolidated Insulation Ice House Insulator 1/1967-3/1972
517-D Marine View Ave. San Francisco, CA (Foreman)

Belmont, CA

Plaintiff insulated pipes. Plaintiff recalls disturbing

(2 months, on and
ol

MONOKOTE (W.R. GRACE &

CO.) fireproofing. Plaintiff recalls having to remove and replace ceiling tiles to insulate pipes.

Plaintiff worked near laborers who swept up debris i
Plaintiff observed wall texturers and painters emplo

ZELINSKY & SONS, INC.) who mixed and spraye

KAlnjuredi19349\pidirog-sp-ZELINS-set2. wpe

6

eluding

fire roofing and insulation debris.
. ZELINSKY & SONS (D.

asbestos-containing wall texture. Plaintiff

bdpa0 eID HW RW NY

currently recalls the following co-workers: Robert Cantle: (c/o BraytonPurcell LLP); Earl
Beck, deceased; Bob Wildoner (c/o Brayton*Purcell LLP: Gene Thompson (address

unknown).

Location of Exposure
Employer Exposure Job Title Dates
Consolidated Insulation Fairmont Hotel Insulator 1967-1972
517-D Marine View Ave. San Francisco, CA (9 days)
Belmont, CA

Plaintiff had to crawl in the crawl space above the ceiling to insulate p es and wrap
ducts. Plaintiff recalls that there was loose asbestos on the existing pipes and there was also
debris from the fireproofing. Plaintiff recalls that it was wary dus and his skin and clothes
were covered with dust, Plaintiff recalls W.R. GRACE MONOKOTE fir roofing had been
sprayed in his work area, Plaintiff worked in proximity of D. ZELINSKY & SONS, INC., and
D. ZELINSKY (D. ZELINSKY & SONS, INC.) personnel who were taping and sandin;
HAMILTON MATERIALS joint compounds at this site. D. ZELINSKY (D. ZELINSKY &
SONS, INC.) employees also applied wall texture at the site. Plaintiff recalls the following co-
worker: Robert Cantley (c/o Brayton*Purcell LLP).

Location of Exposure
Employer Exposure Job Title Bates
Consolidated Insulation Kaiser Hospital Insulator 1967-1972
517-D Marine View Ave. 2425 Geary Blvd. (3 weeks)
Belmont, CA San Francisco, CA.

Plaintift applied asbestos-containing insulation to piping and ductwork during hospital
renovations, D. ZELINSKY (D. ZELINSKY & SONS, INC.) painters also sanded the
previously mudded, taped and sanded interior walls in order to prepare those surfaces for
paintings ‘which spread dust from the previously applied PACO TEXTURES (KELLY MOORE

AINT COMPANY) joint and taping muds. Robert Cantley c/o Brayton’Purcell LLP, was
plaintiff's supervisor at this site.

Location of Exposure
Employer Exposure Job Title Dates
Consolidated Insulation St. Mary’s Church Insulator 1/1967-3/1972
517-D Marine View Ave. San Francisco, CA (6 weeks, on and
Belmont, CA off)

installing pipes, gaskets and valves, and using packing. Plaintiff worked near drywall hangers
cutting and inst ing drywall. Plaintiff worked near tapers applying and sanding joint
compound. Plaintiff recalls working near sheet metal workers who shot studs into the beams,
knocking off the fireproofing. The D, ZELINSK'Y (D. ZELINSKY & SONS, INC.) crew was
taping and sanding asbestos-containing taping compounds 5 to 20 feet from plaintiff, and was
painting thereafter, Plaintiff recalls the following supervisor: Richard Saiya (Belmont,
California). Plaintiff recalls the following co-workers: Sal Morales (deceased); Joseph O’Balle
(cfo Brayton*Purcell LLP).

ul
Mt

Plaintiff insulated pipes and ducts. Plaintiff worked near plumbers and pipefitters

KNinjured\19349plelrog-rsp-ZELINS-set2.wpd 7 bdpSoc eo UR A A FR WN

10

Location of Exposure

Employer Exposure Job Title Dates

Consolidated Insulation 111 Pine Street Insulator 1/1967-3/1972;

517-D Marine View Ave. San Francisco, CA S/77-1/81

Belmont, CA. G reeks on and
0

Plaintiff insulated domestic water pipes and ducts, Plaintiff worked near pipefitters
installing pipes, gaskets and valves, and using acking, Plaintiff recalls working near sheet
metal workers who shot studs into the beams, knocking off the fireproofing. Plaintiff identifies
D. ZELINSKY (D. ZELINSKY & SONS, INC.), swee ing asbestos-containing debris in
plaintiff's presence, Plaintiffsaw ZELINSKY (D. ZELINSKY & SONS, INC. personnel
mixing, taping and sanding asbestos-containing taping compounds and then painting in
plainnfr, s presence, Plaintiff recalls the following supervisor: Robert Cantley (c/o

raytonsPurcell LLP). Plaintiff's co-workers on this project included Joseph O’Balle (c/o
Brayton%Purcell LLP

Location of Exposure
Employer Exposure lob Title Dates
Consolidated Insulation IBM Insulator 1967-1972,
517-D Marine View Ave. San Jose, CA, 1977-1981

Belmont, CA

Plaintiff applied Bberglass duct wrap to duct work and applied fiberglass and calcium
silicate pipecovering and insulation cements to piping valves and fittings during new
construction and during, multiple remodel projects. During one day, plaintiff worked next to D,
ZELINSKY (D. ZELINSKY & SONS, INC.) painters sanding asbestos-containing joint and
taping compounds on interior walls, in order to prepare those surfaces for Painting, Earl Beck
(deceased) was a jobsite co-worker. Plaintiff's supervisor was Robert Cantley (

Brayton% Purcell LLP).

Location of Exposure
Employer Exposure Job Tide Dates
Consolidated Insulation Lockheed. Insulator 1967-1972,
517-D Marine View Ave. Sunnyvale, CA 1977-1981

Belmont, CA

Plaintiff performed intermittent “fill-in” work. Plaintiff worked on new construction and
on repair and maintenance crews, Plaintiff applied fiberglass duct wrap to duct work and
applied fiberglass and calcium silicate pipecovering and insulation cements to piping, valves,
and fittings. Plaintiff worked in proximity to a range of trades, including pipefitters, shectmetal
workers, electricians, drywall hangers, tapers, and sanders, cement masons, tile setters,
maintenance personnel, and laborers. Plaintiff also worked next to D, ZELINSKY (D.
ZELINSKY & SONS, INC.) painters sanding, joint and taping compounds on interior walls, in
order to prepare those surfaces for painting. Plaintiff's supervisor was Robert Cantley (c/o

Brayton¢Purcell LLP).

Location of Exposure
Employer Exposure Job Title Dates
Plant Insulation Standard Oil Building Insulator 3/1974-3/1976
2271 California Street San Francisco, CA (1 year)
San Francisco, CA (555 Market Street)

KAbnjured\19349%pkdwog-rsp-ZELINS-set2. 0d 8 bdpow me NOR FR YN

Plaintiff wrapped piping and ducts, using fiberglass duct wray and JOHNS MANVILLE
(MANVILLE TRUST) and KAYLO OWENS CORNING FIBERGLASS COMPANY)
asbestos-containing pipecoverings. Plaintiff worked between the ceiling bars. Plaintiff recalls
asbestos-containing W.R. GRACE MONOKOTE fireproofing had been sprayed in his work
area, Plaintiff recalls D. ZELINSKY & SONS, INC. Plaintiff worked next to D. ZELINSKY

'D. ZELINSKY & SONS, INC.) painters sanding asbestos-containing PACO TEXTURES
ELLY MOORE PAINT COMPANY) and HAMILTON MATERIALS joint and taping
compounds on interior walls, in order to prepare those surfaces for painting. Plaintiff recalls the
following supervisor: Glenn Schimmelphenig (address unknown), Plaintiff recalls the
following co-worker: Bud Drose (deceased).
‘itnesses identified in this Response who are listed as “c/o BraytonPurcell” are clients
of Brayton¢-Purcell LLP. Under Planned Parenthood Golden Gate v. Superior Court (2000) 83
Cal. App.4th 347, 359, “compelling disclosure ‘of residential addresses and telephone numbers”
impinges on the witnesses’ privacy rights. “Courts have frequently recognized that individuals
have a substantial interest in the privacy of their home.” ad) To protect the privacy of its
clients, Brayton’Purcell LLP will accept deposition subpoenas on their behalf served after
defense counsel has met and conferred with plaintiff’s counsel regarding a mutually agreeable
date and place for the deposition, In addition, witnesses who are deceased may have
given sworn testimony; however, plaintiff is currently unaware of specific information relating
thereto at this time, Discovery and investigation are ongoing and continuing.

‘There may be additional occasions when Mr. Ri S$ was exposed to asbestos, at a jobsite
for which D. ZELINSKY is liable; however, such additional locations are not known to
plaintiff at this time. Plaintiff believes that D. ZELINSKY knows all of the jobsites where it
was present and is able to determine if there are any additional jobsites through which plaintiff
was exposed to asbestos fibers for which defendant is liable that are not listed above.

At the above times, plaintiff was exposed to asbestos-containing materials including,
but not limited to, PACO joint compound, by defendant D, ZELINSKY. Kelly-Moore purchased
Paco Texture Corporation in December 1960 and manufactured drywall finishing compounds,
including joint compounds and wall texture products, These drywall finishing compounds,
including joint com pounds and wall texture “produets, contained asbestos at al] times relevant to
this action and unti] at least 1978. Plaintiff further identifies facts stated in Union Carbide
Corporation’s purchase order, shipping and invoice forms dating from 1964 to 1977, which state
that Kelly-Moore repeatedly purchased asbestos fibers from Union Carbide Corporation for use
in its PACO drywall accessory materials, D. ZELINSKY employees applied, installed, removed,
handled, disturbed, manipulated, made airborne, and/or otherwise worked with asbestos-
containing products in close proximity to plaintiff, including but not limited to, KELLY-
MOORE asbestos-containing pre-mixed joint compounds or mud and PACO asbestos-
containing joint compound, This spread visible dust throughout plaintiff's work areas.
Defendant knew or should have known that its employees would perform these acts with respect
to asbestos-containing materials in such a manner as to result in the release of airborne asbestos

ibers.

Defendant was the general contractor at the jobsites identified above. As general
contractor, defendant controlled the work sites by coordinating, managing and overseeing the
installation and removal of asbestos and ashestos-containing products, Defendant cause
asbestos and/or asbestos-containing materials to be supplied, delivered, installed, maintained,
used, replaced and/or repaired at plaintiff's jobsite as set forth above. Defendant failed to
exercise due/ordinary care in order to avoid injuring plaintiff.

Defendant did not isolate work involving asbestos and asbestos-containing products.
Defendant did not provide a change room with adequate storage facilities for clothing, shower
baths, and lavatories having hot and cold running water, Defendant did not control, reduce, or
eliminate dust or provide adequate ventilation. Defendant did not provide respiratory safety
equipment or educate plaintiff regarding the use of respiratory safety equipment. Further,
defendant managed the work site by coordinating and overseeing the installation and/or removal
of asbestos and asbestos-containing products to which plaintiff was ex, osed. Defendant
contracted for the installation and/or removal, and otherwise caused asbestos-containing
products to be present on facilities and recommended, specified, and executed the use of

XK Mnjured\9349\pld\rog-rsp-ZELINS-set2. wpa 9 bopBON = Seo mY DAH BW HN

_
an

16

asbestos-containing products at facilities plaintiff was present, By the acts and/or omissions of
itself, its subcontractors and other workers at the. sites under defendant’s control, defendant
caused the release of dangerous quantities of toxic asbestos fibers into the ambient air, creating
a hazardous and unsafe condition to plaintiff and other persons exposed to said asbestos fibers
while present at the above-identified jobsites.

Defendant knew or should have known that the foregoing conditions and activities
created a dangerous, hazardous and unsafe condition and unreasonable risk of harm and
personal injury to plaintiff and other ersans so exposed, and failed to take adequate safety
precautions to ensure that the plaintiff and others were not ex) osed to asbestos-containing
products installed, maintained, used, replaced and/or repaired at plaintiff's jobsites, Defendant
dictated that workers at the site would use asbestos and asbestos-containing products.
Defendant knew or should have known that its employees and/or others they hired would be
generating asbestos-containing dust which plaintiff would then breathe, Defendant permitted
the job to continue with no precautions or warnings. Defendant controlled the work site
conditions through the hiring of other contractors and scheduling of work, Defendant did not
warn the plaintiff that toxic levels of asbestos-laden dust would be released into the ambient air.
Aga result of defendant’s conduct, plaintiff was exposed to asbestos fibers and dust released
into the ambient air from asbestos-containing products being used, and plaintiff consequently
developed an asbestos-related injury.

‘As a proximate result of defendant's breach of its duties, plaintiff was exposed to
respirable asbestos fibers, which plaintiff inhaled, leading to plaintiff's asbestos-related illness.

In addition to medical expenses, hospital expenses, plaintiff has incurred prescription
medication, nursing, travel and lodging expenses, while seeking consultation/treatment with his
doctors. The total amount of these expenses is unknown at the present time. These expenses
began accruing shortly before and continue after plaintiff's diagnosis of colon cancer, and are
ongoing, continuing to accrue and will be subject to proof at trial, Plaintiff refers this defendant,
and incorporates herein by reference, all of plaintiff's medical records, medical billing, medical
jorts which have previously been made available through designated defense counsel, Berry

erry.

hn addition to economic damages, plaintiff has sustained and will continue to experience
severe Physica! pain and emotional suffering directly resulting from, but not limited to: his past
medical procedures and treatments, chemotherapy, future medical therapy and procedures,
anxiety and frustration with being unable to catch his breath; apprehension in knowing that he is
suffering from a life threatening disease; impaired enjoyment 0 life, including being unable to
partake in routine daily activities; the inability to engage in social recreational activities and
most importantly, the inability to engage in normal family activities, Plaintiff also suffers from
the inability to spend quality time with his family, Plaintiff daily faces the certainty ofa
painfully and fatal disease, knowing that his pain and discomfort will increase and suffers
anxiety and apprehension over his worsening condition.

In addition, plaintiff ROBERT ROSS has suffered loss of consortium damages, Plaintiff
identifies JEAN ROSS as a witness to her damages and refers to any future deposition testimony
she may give in this action. Mr. ROBERT ROS: and JEAN ROSS were married on December
15, 1973 and have been living as husband and wife for these past 39 years. Plaintiff ROBERT
ROSS is unable to perform his necessary duties as a spouse in that the work and service he
usually performed in the care, maintenance and management of the family home. Moreover,
plaintiff ROBERT ROSS will be unable to perform such work, service and duties in the future.
As a proximate result thereof, plaintiff JEAN ROSS has been permanently deprived and will be
deprived of the consortium of her spouse, including the performance of duties, all to her
damages, in an amount presently unknown,

Pursuant to C.C.P. § 2030.230 plaintiff refers ZELINSKY to the following documents
from which it can derive and/or ascertain further information responsive to this interrogatory:

Plaintiff identifies plaintiff’ s Complaint for Personal Injury, all exhibits attached thereto
and all documents incorporated therein by reference. Plaintiff believes defendant is in
possession of these documents.

Plaintiff identifies plaintiff's Responses to Standard Asbestos Case Interrogatories, in
this case and all exhibits attached thereto.

KAinjured\ 934 9iplc\vog-s5p-ZELINS-set2.wpd 10 bapoe ND DH & YB ND

In addition, plaintiff Robert Ross identifies his deposition testimony taken in this action.
Plaintiff identifies his TVD testimony which commenced on By 12, 2011, and all subsequent
dates, as well as any and all exhibits attached thereto. Plaintiff Robert Ross further identities his
Discovery Deposition which commenced on July 12, 2011, and all subsequent dates, as well as
any and exhibits attached thereto. Plaintiff Jean Ross identifies her deposition testimony taken
on August 12, 2011, as well as any and all exhibits attached thereto.

Plaintiff also identifies plaintiff's medical records, employment records, union records,
as wel as his Social Security records previously released to coordinating defense counsel, Berry

erry,
‘Plaintiff further identifies all of defendant D. ZELINSKY‘s Responses to General Order
Nos. 17 and 129 Interrogatories, including annual, amended and su plemental responses.
Plaintiff further identifies all of KELLY-MOORE’s Responses to General Order Nos. 17 and
129 Interrogatories. Plaintiff further identifies all of KELLY. -~MOORE’s Responses to General
Order Nos. 17 and 129 Interrogatories. Plaintiff further identifies all of KAISER GYPSUM
COMPANY, INC.’s Responses to General Order Nos. 17 and 129 Interrogatories, Plaintiff
believes defendant is in possession of these documents.

Plaintiff further identifies HAMILTON MATERIALS, INC.’s Responses to General
Order Nos, 17 and 129 Interrogatories, including annual, amended and supplemental responses,
and incorporates all information contained there herein by reference, pursuant to C.C.P,

230,

; Plaintiff further identifies GEORGIA-PACIFIC LLC (FKA GEORGIA-PACIFIC
CORPORATION)’s Responses to General Order Nos, 17 an 129 Interrogatories, including
annual, amended and supplemental responses, and incorporates all information contained
therein herein by reference, pursuant to C.C.P. § 2030,230.

Plaintiff further identifies KELLY-MOORE PAINT COMPANY, INC.’s Responses to
General Order Nos. 17 and 129 Interrogatories, including annual, amended and supplemental
responses, and Ancorporates all information contained therein herein by reference, pursuant to

Jaintiff further identifies KAISER GYPSUM COMPANY, INC.’s Responses to
General Order Nos. 17 and 129 Interrogatories, including annual, amended and supplemental
responses, and incorporates all information contained therein herein by reference, pursuant to
C.CP. § 3030.230.

Plaintiff further identifies W.R. GRACE & CO.’S Responses to General Order Nos. 17
and 129 Interrogatories, including annual, amended and supplemental responses, and
ne porates all information contained therein herein by reference, pursuant to C.C.P,

230.

Additionally, plaintiff identifies the following deposition transcripts:

Plaintiff identifies Michael Zelinsky, former employee and estimator for approximately
23 years, for D. ZELINSKY, Mr. Michael elinsky was familiar with the products D,
ZELINSKY used at the jobsites. Deposition Transcript of Michael Zelinsky taken on February
14, 2006 in Betti v. American Biltrite, No. CGC 05-4418 19 before Rebecca L. Romano.

Mr. Michael Zelinsky recalled that D. ZELINSKY performed work at the BANK OF
AMERICA building located at 555 Market Street in San Francisco from 1967 to 1973, Tbid, at
p.26, 28, 52.
pl According to Michael Zelinsky, D. ZELINSKY had the IBM contract from the date of its
first construction in the 1950s up and through the 1980s, Ibid. D. ZELINSKY had the painting
contract during the original construction of the BANK OF AMERICA building, Ibid. at p. 53.
Mr, Zelinsky also testified that while working as an estimator for D, ZELINSKY it used PACO
joint compound for sealing the joints between the drywall, as applied on by D. ZELINSKY’s
tapers, Ibid. Michael Zelinsky also identifies that three types of Kelly Moore pre-mixed joint
compounds or mud and PACO. bedding and finishing for use at the Bank of America jobsite.
Ibid. at p.59. Mr. Michael Zelinksy recalls that D. Z LINSKY worked on every floor of the 54
floor Bank of America building. Ibid. at P53. Mr, Zelinsky recails that the PACO taping mud
or joint compound came dry in sacks. Ibid. at p.31. The PACO joint compounds did not
contain any warning regarding asbestos. Ibid, at p.31. Mr. Zelinsky also identified Howard
Rist, [sic], General Superintendant for D. ZELINSKY, who purchased materials, including but

KAinjaredil9349\pid\eog-rsp-ZELINS-set2,.wpd il bdpCow ID nH PB WN

yoNM PN YN
BRRBRBREBBRES

not limited to Kelly Moore pre-mixed joint compounds and mud and PACO for use at the IBM,
San Jose job where Mr, Beck worked in his capacity as an insulator. Ibid. at p.56. Mr. Zelinsky
also testitied that D. ZELINSKY “bought mostly Kelly-Moore” mud. Ibid at p.30. In fact,

Mr. Zelinsky admitted that Kelly Moore was the mud “used most of all” by D, ZELINSK'Y
because “it was the cheapest.” Ibid.

Plaintiff identifies Billy Jetton Jones, c/o Brayton*Purcell LLP. Billy Jetton Jones’
verified discovery responses served in Billy Jones v. ‘Abex Corporation, et al, No. 967116,
identify the LOCKHEED in Sunnyvale as one of the jobsites w. ereby he performed work as an
employee of D. ZELINSKY in the early 1960s. Plaintiff believes defendant is in possession of
these documents, Mr. Billy Jetton Jones, recalls that while working in his capacity as a
journeyman for D. ZELINSKY, he performed work at Lockheed in Sunnyvale. Deposition

ranscript of Billy Jetton Jones taken July 9, 2002 in John Purcell, et al. v.A.P. Green
Industries, Inc,, et.al. Case No. 323892, taken before Susan N. Martin. Mr. Jones worked there
approximately two months, during two phases, during brand-new construction at Lockheed,
Sunnyvale. At this location, Mr, Jones recalls that D. ZELINSKY put up big walls to section
off areas, and did the offices, foyer and bathroom, Mr, Jones recalls that Mr. Bob Johnson and
John Tackett was there with him working at that jobsite. Ibid, at p. 32. Mr. Jones recalls that D,
ZELINSKY was the only one that did the taping during that job.

Mr, Billy Jetton Jones also testified that while working for D. ZELINSKY in the fall of
1961 for approximately 4-6 weeks he performed taping work at the IBM in San Jose jobsite.
During that job, Mr. Jones recalls that Bob Johnson and James T. Jones, Jr., his brother, other

D. ZELINSKY employees, were also present at IBM, San Jose fopsite Suing this same period
july 9, 1n John Purcell, et

of time, See Deposition Transcript of Billy Jetton Jones taken
al. v. AP. Green Industries, Inc,, et.al. Case No. 323892.

‘Plaintiff identifies Richard Brice McCloskey, designated Person Most Knowledgeable
for D, ZELINSKY. He indicated in his testimony hat while working as a painter’s helper for D.
ZELINSKY, he worked at GENERAL MOTORS, Fremont jobsite in the early 1960s for an
entire summer, See Deposition Transcript of Richard B. McCloskey taken January 21, 2010 in
Goforth v. Asbestos Defendants, No. 45 849, before Claudia J. Knap. Also see Deposition
Transcript of Richard B. MeCloskey, taken July 29, 2011 in Murphy v. Asbestos Defendants,
No, CGS-08-274695 before Diana L, Gonzalez.

Plaintiff identifies all deposition transcripts of Mr. Richard McCloskey, designated
PERSON MOST KNOWLEDGEABLE for D. ZELINSKY, including but not limited to
deposition of Richard Brice McCloskey taken April 20, 1998 in Montez v. Asbestos
Defendants, Case No. 983707, et al. before Patricia Steele of Tooker and Antz, Certified
Shorthand Reporters, 350 Sansome Street, #700, San Francisco, California 94104, (415) 392-
0650. Mr. Richard MoCloskey recalls that D, ZELINSKY was the prime painting contractor at
the GENERAL MOTORS, FREMONT job in the mid -1960s when it was first constructed,
Mr, Richard McCloskey believes the job lasted more than 2 years. Mr. Richard McCloskey
identifies Lou Saunders and Carroll Fuller as two of the foremen at this job during the time
period he worked there, Further, he recalls that his father, Burtis McCloskey, was the
superintendent. Jbid. at pp.91-92. These persons may have additional knowledge responsive to
this Tnterrogatory. ‘Additionally, Mr. Richard McCloskey also identified co-workers Ernie
Donaldson and Jimmy Aston (deceased) also present with him during that job. Ibid.

Also see Deposition Transcript of Richard B. McCloskey taken January 21, 2010 in
Goforth v. Asbestos Defendants, No. 451849, before Claudia J. Knap. Also see Deposition.
Transcript of Richard B. MeCloskew, taken July 29, 2011 in Murphy v. Asbestos Defendants,
No, CG§-08-274695 before Diana L. Gonzalez. Also see Deposition Transcript of Richard 13.
McCloskey taken January 21, 2010 in Goforth v. Asbestos Defendants, No. 451849, before
Claudia J. Knap at p. 325. Also see Deposition Transcript of Richard Brice McCloskey taken
April 20, 1998 in Montez v. Asbestos Defendants, No. 983707, before Patricia Steele of Tooker
and Antz, Certified Shorthand Reporters, 350 Sansome Street, #700, San Francisco, California
94104, (Hs 392-0650, at p. 184. Telephone number gis 392-0650,

1 addition, James McCloskey testified that D. ZELINSKY performed work at the Bank
of America headquarters building, during the new construction, which involved painting and
wall covering, as well as taping work. Mr. James McCloskey recalls that DINWIDDIE was the

K:Ainjuredi 9349\pldrog-tsp-ZELINS-set2.wpd 12 bdpoe Oe ND A eR WN

veneral contractor at the BANK OF AMERICA job. See Deposition Transcript of James

icCloskey taken June 2, 1998 in Montez v. Asbestos Defendants, No. 983707, et al. before
‘Ann T, Erwin of T