On December 17, 2010 a Motion,Ex Parte was filed involving a dispute between Ross, Jean, Ross, Robert, and Acco Engineered Systems, Inc., Advanced Mechanical, Advance Mechanical Contractors, Inc., Air Systems Mechanical Contractor, A & K Heating Company, Inc., Albay Construction Company, Allen-Simmons Heating & Sheet Metal Company Inc., Allied Fire Protection, Allied Sprinkler Company, Inc., Allsberry Mechanical Corporation, Anderson, Rowe & Buckley, Inc., Associated Insulation Of California, A. Teichert & Son, Inc., Balliet Bros. Construction Corporation, Banner Drywall & Painting Co. Inc., Barnes Construction Co., Bayer Cropscience Inc., Bayer Cropscience, Inc., Successor To Amchem, Bell Products Inc., Beta Mechanical Contractors, L.P., Bragg Investment Company, Inc., Cahill Construction Co., Inc., Cahill Construction Services, Inc., Cahill Contractors, Inc., California Drywall Co., Castro Construction, Inc., C.C. Moore & Co. Engineers, Cincinnati Valve Company, Cjr Plastering, Clausen-Patten, Inc., Clausen-Patten, Inc., A Dissolved Corporation, Climate Air, Inc., Climate Control Co., Inc., Collins Electrical Company, Inc., Commair Mechanical Services, Consolidated Insulation, Inc., Cosco Fire Protection, Inc., Cosco Sprinkler, Critchfield Mechanical, Inc., C & R Plastering, Inc., Csk Auto, Inc., Cupertino Electric, Inc., Delucchi Sheet Metal Works, Dilland Sederberg Plumbing, Does 1-8500, Domco Products Texas Inc., Domco Products Texas, L.P., Donovan Construction, Dorn Refrigeration, Dorn Refrigeration And Air Conditioning, Dpr Construction, Duro Dyne Corporation, D.W. Nicholson Corporation, D. Zelinsky & Sons, Inc., Emil J. Weber Electric Co., Erwin Mechanical Inc., Ex- Fme, Inc. (Fka Fischbach And Moore Electric,, Fairmont Hotel Company, Fluor Corporation, Foley Electric Co., Foley Electric, Inc., Fuller Floors, General Mills, Inc., Giampolini & Co., Graybar Electric Company, Inc., Hanson Permanente Cement, Inc. Formerly Known As, Harold Beasley Plumbing And Heating, Inc., Harry Lee Plumbing & Heating, H & C Investment Associates, Inc., Henry C. Beck Company, Imperial Plastering & Drywall, Insulation Specialties, Inc., James A. Nelson Co., Inc., Johnson Controls, Inc., Jones Plastering Company, Joseph Bruno Sheet Metal Co., Inc., J.T. Thorpe & Son, Inc., J.W. Mcclenahan Company, J.W. Mcclenahan Company, Inc., Kentile Floors, Inc., Laub Sheet Metal Works, Lone Star Industries, Inc., Mack Construction Co., Magee, Robert, Malm Metal Products, Inc., Marine Engineering And Supply Company, Marshco Auto Parts, Inc., Mattock Construction Company, Mcclure Electric, Inc., Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, Michael Brothers, Midstate Mechanical, Inc., Mitchell Bros. Truck Lines, Inc., Monsanto Company, Sued As "Pharmacia Corporation", Oakfabco, Inc., Ortho-Craft, Pacific Fireproofing, Pacific Mechanical Corporation, Parker Insulation Contracting & Supply Co. Inc., Perini Corporation, Pharmacia Corporation, Which Will Do Business In, Pribuss Engineering, Pribuss Engineering, Inc., Raymond Interior Systems-North, Red Top Electric Co. Emeryville, Inc., Robert Magee, Rollie R. French, Inc., Rollins Construction, Rountree Plumbing & Heating Inc., Scott Co. Of California, S F L, Inc., S.J. Amoroso Construction Co., Inc., Slakey Brothers, Inc., Sugden Engineering Co., Swinerton Builders, Temper Insulation, Temporary Plant Cleaners, Inc., Texaco, Inc., The Goodyear Tire & Rubber Company, The W.W. Henry Company, Tuttle And Bailey Corp, Van Mulder Sheetmetal, Van-Mulder Sheet Metal, Inc., Walnut Creek Sheet Metal, Furnace & Air, W.C. Thomason, W.C. Thompson, Webcor Builders, Inc., Westburne Supply, Inc., Willard Electric, Wright Schuchart Harbor, Wright Schuchart Harbor Company, Ross, Jean, Ross, Robert, for civil in the District Court of San Francisco County.
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
Please wait a moment while we load this page.
Preview
KNAEMMA SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO Document Scanning Lead Sheet Jul-30-2012 4:22 pm Case Number: CGC-10-275731 Filing Date: Jul-30-2012 4:21 Filed by: AUDREY HUIE Juke Box: 001 Image: 03705788 ORDER ROBERT ROSS et al VS. C.C. MOORE & CO. ENGINEERS 001003705788 Instructions: Please place this sheet on top of the document to be scanned.GABRIEL A. JACKSON, State Bar No. 98119 ANTHONY C. CHIOSSO, State Bar No, 209014 achiosso@jjr-law.com TODD M. THACKER, State Bar No. 199506 tthacker@jjr-law.com JACKSON JENKINS RENSTROM LLP 55 Francisco Street, 6th Floor San Francisco, CA 94133 Tel: 415.982.3600 Fax: 415.982.3700 Attorneys for Defendant COSCO FIRE PROTECTION, INC. FILED Superior Court of Catfomia One "ESCO JUL 3 0 2012 CLERK OF THE COURT BY: lth IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO ROBERT ROSS AND JEAN ROSS, Plaintiffs, ve C.C. MOORE & CO. ENGINEERS; Defendants as Reflected on Exhibit 1 attached to the Summary Complaint herein; and DOES 1- 8500., et al. Defendants. MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT DATE: July 24, 2012 TIME: 9:30 a.m. DEPT: 503 JUDGE: Hon. Teri L. Jackson TRIAL: TBD COMPLAINT FILED: 12/17/10 COSCO FIRE PROTECTION, INC.’s Motion for Suramary Judgment or; alternatively, Summary Adjudication came on regularly for hearing on July 24, 2012, at 9:30 am in Department 503 of the San Francisco Superior Court, the H jonorable Teri L. Jackson presiding. After full consideration of the authority and evidence submitted in the papers in support of and in Opposition to Cosco’s motion and after full consideration of oral argument of counsel, the Court hereby finds that: Mt Mf ORDER RE: COSCO’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT/ADJUDICATION1 2 | materials as a result of Cosco employees’ sprinklerfitting activities was a substantial factor in the 1. This case turns on: (1) whether Mr. Ross’ exposure to any asbestos-containing development of his illness; (2) if so, whether Cosco knew or should have known that the fireproofing it disturbed contained asbestos; and (3) if so, whether Cosco knew or should have known that shooting studs into that fireproofing would be hazardous to a masked insulator | working 20 feet away. | 2. Defendant Cosco shifted the burden of proof under California Code of Civil Procedure section 437c, subdivision (p)(2) to Plaintiffs on each of these issues, 3. The declaration of Dr. Herman Bruch, attached to Plaintiffs’ Opposition, creates a triable issue of fact on the “substantial factor” issue. 4. While it is the province of the jury to determine whether an unreasonable risk of / harm was foreseeable under the particular facts of a given case, the trial court must still decide as a matter of law whether there was duty in the first place, even if that determination includes | a consideration of foreseeability.” (Romero v. Superior Court (2001) 89 Cal.App.4th 1068, 1078. See also Scott v. Chevron U.S.A. (1992) 5 Cal.App.4th 510, 515-516 (holding that a landowner’s duty of care to third parties is a question of law for the Court].}) This Court must therefore determine, as a matter of law, whether Cosco owed Mr. Ross a duty of care under the factual circumstances presented in this case. | 5. Plaintiffs failed to present evidence showing a triable issue of material fact on the issue of whether Cosco knew or should -have known that the fireproofing into which they fired studs contained asbestos. (Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (2001) 25 Cal. 4th 826, 851; Hunter v. | Pacific Mechanical (1995) 37 Cal. App. 4th 1282; Andrews v. Foster Wheeler (2006) 138 Cal. App. 4th 96; UMF Nos. 17, 20.) 6. Plaintiffs also failed to present evidence showing a triable issue of material fact on the issue of whether Cosco knew or should have known that implanting studs into fireproofing could cause a hazard to a masked insulator working 20 feet away. 7. As a result, this Court finds that Cosco did not owe a duty to Mr. Ross as a matter of law. 2 ORDER RE: COSCO’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT/ADJUDICATIONIT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that COSCO FIRE PROTECTION, INC.’s Motion for Summary Judgment be and hereby is GRANTED and that judgment, including costs of this lawsuit, shail be entered in favor of defendant COSCO FIRE PROTECTION INC. and against the plaintiffs herein. | Dated: July Brow 3 ORDER RE: COSCO’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT/ADJUDICATION