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
  • 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

MMC SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO Document Scanning Lead Sheet Mar-20-2012 3:20 pm Case Number: CGC-10-275731 Filing Date: Mar-20-2012 3:19 Juke Box: 001 Image: 03542371 ORDER ROBERT ROSS et al VS. C.C. MOORE & CO. ENGINEERS 001C03542371 instructions: Please place this sheet on top of the document to be scanned.io ON DA HW BP YN Soe ea ea ea UB WN & ATTORNEYS AT LAW 222 RUSH LANDING ROAD PO BOX 6169 ‘NOVATO, CALIFORNIA 94948-6169 (415) 898-1555 BRAYTON@PURCELL LLP a oon Be N YP MY YY NY NN YW = oN AA FF Oo YP KF So ALAN R. BRAYTON, ESQ., 8.B. #73685 DAVID R. DONADIO, ESQ,, S.B. #154436 4 £ JAMES P. NEVIN, ESQ., SB. #220816 ca BRAYTON*#PURCELL LLP Attormeys at Law 222 Rush Landing Road P.O. Box 6169 Novato, California 94948-6169 (415) 898-1555 Attomeys for Plaintiffs SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO ROBERT ROSS and JEAN ROSS, } ASBESTO 0. sy Plaintiffs, ) [ vs. } Ol iG DEFENDANT COSCO ) FIRE PROTECTION, INC.’S MOTION C.C. MOORE & CO. ENGINEERS, ) FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT OR, IN Defendants as Reflected on Exhibit | } THE ALTERNATIVE, SUMMARY attached to the Summary Complaint ADJUDICATION herein; and DOES 1-8500. ) Date: March 20, 2012 Time: 9:30 a.m Dept: 503, Hon. Teri L. Jackson Trial Date: n/a Action Filed: December 17, 2010 Defendant COSCO FIRE PROTECTION, INC.’s Motion for Summary Judgment or, in . eg. larly for heari . the Alternative, Summary Adjudication, came on regularly for AEN, on Margh, 20,2012, in Department 503, of the above-captioned Court. print ha defendant, COSCO FI e , INC., appeared-by-their-eounse-ef record ar lp Ce PROTECTION, INC., a Ohd 20k appr So ved a Having considered all papers and evidence submitted, and inferences reasonably deducible therefrom, the Court determines that defendant COSCO FIRE PROTECTION, INC.’s| Motion for Summary Judgment or, in the Alternative, Summary Adjudication is DENIED as untimely. Defendant failed to provide proper notice as required by C.C.P. 437c(a). The proof of service filed with defendant's moving papers demonstrates that defendant did not serve the K Alnjuresh19349%pldtord-COSFIR ms. wad 1 Kea ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT COSCO FIRE PROTECTION, INC.*S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT OR, IN THE. ALTERNATIVE, SUMMARY ADJUDICATION >SCD wm NI DR BF WN moving papers until February 6, 2012, which did not provide proper notice with a March 20, 2012 hearing date. Plaintiffs' objection based on untimeliness is sustained. IT 1S HEREBY ORDERED that defendant COSCO FIRE PROTECTION, INC.’s Motio: for Summary Judgment or, in the Alternative, Summary Adjudication, is DENIED: Dated: 2 0 | t a [Meds ‘ourt TERI L. JACKSON K Minjured\19349\pid\ord-COSFIR ons 2 Keg ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT COSCO FIRE PROTECTION, INC.” RETERNATIVE SUMMARY ADIODICA Lee 'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT OR, IN THE