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

Preview

co CU GF SD TR DW Re m oO PN De FF WwW N BRyYDON Huco & PARKER 135 MAIN SpREDT 20" FLO Sart Francisco, CA 94108 Edward R. Hugo [Bar No. 124839] P.M. Bessette [Bar No. 127588] Josette D. Johnson [Bar No. 195977] BRYDON HUGO & PARKER 135 Main Street, 20th Floor San Francisco, CA 94105 Telephone: (415) 808-0300 Facsimile: (415) 808-0333 Email: service@bhplaw.com Attorneys for Defendant A. TEICHERT & SON, INC. ELECTRONICALLY FILED Superior Court of California, County of San Francisco FEB 20 2013 Clerk of the Court BY: JUANITA MURPHY Deputy Clerk SUPERIOR COURT - STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO - UNLIMITED JURISDICTION ROBERT ROSS and JEAN ROSS, Plaintiffs, vs. C.C. MOORE & CO. ENGINEERS, et al, Defendants. (ASBESTOS) Case No. CGC-10-275731 A. TEICHERT & SON, INC.’s NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE, SUMMARY ADJUDICATION [Filed Concurrently With Memorandum of Points and Authorities; Separate Statement; Request for Judicial Notice and Declaration of Josette D. Johnson] Date: May 9, 2013 Time: 9:30 a.m. Dept: 503 Judge: Hon. Teri L. Jackson December 17, 2010 June 10, 2013 Complaint Filed: Trial Date: TO ALL PARTIES AND THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD: Defendant A. TEICHERT & SON, INC. (“Teichert”), on May 9, 2013, at 9:30 a.m. in Department 503 of the above-entitled court located at 400 McAllister Street, San Francisco, California, will and hereby does move this Court for an order granting summary judgment pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure §437¢, or in the alternative summary adjudication, in 1 A. TEICHERT & SON, INC.’s NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE, SUMMARY ADJUDICATIONco CU GF SD TR DW Re m oO PN De FF WwW N 21 BRyYDON Huco & PARKER 135 MAIN SpREDT 20" FLO Sart Francisco, CA 94108 its favor and against Plaintiffs: This Motion for Summary Judgment is made ground that Teichert did not owe a duty to plaintiff Robert Ross based. upon the sophisticated user defense, pursuant to Johnson v. American Standard, Inc. (2008) 43 Cal.4th 56. This Motion for Summary Judgment is also made on the separate and distinct ground that there is insufficient evidence to create a triable issue of material fact whether Plaintiff was exposed to any asbestos-containing product for which defendant Teichert is responsible and no triable issue of material fact as to causation in this asbestos-related. personal injury action. If for any reason this Court is unable to grant summary judgment, Teichert moves, in the alternative, for summary adjudication pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure § 437c(f). In that instance, Teichert respectfully requests this Court to issue an order adjudicating that the following issues and facts are established against Plaintiffs: Adjudication Issue No. 1 — Plaintiffs’ Second cause of action for products liability has no merit because there is no evidence that Plaintiff was exposed to asbestos from a product sold by, or put into the stream of commerce by Teichert. This motion is based upon this Notice of Motion, the attached Memorandum of Points and Authorities, the Request For Judicial Notice and supporting Declaration of Josette D. Johnson with exhibits filed concurrently herewith, and the pleadings and other records on file in this action and upon such other documentary and oral evidence or argument as may be presented at or before the hearing of this matter. Dated: February 20, 2013 BRYDON HUGO & PARKER By: _/s/ Josette D. Johnson. Josette D. Johnson Attorneys for Defendants A. TEICHERT & SON, INC. 2 A. TEICHERT & SON, INC.’s NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE, SUMMARY ADJUDICATION