arrow left
arrow right
  • JOYCE JUELCH, ET AL VS. ASBESTOS DEFENDANTS (B/P)AS REFLECTED ON EXHIBITS et al ASBESTOS document preview
  • JOYCE JUELCH, ET AL VS. ASBESTOS DEFENDANTS (B/P)AS REFLECTED ON EXHIBITS et al ASBESTOS document preview
  • JOYCE JUELCH, ET AL VS. ASBESTOS DEFENDANTS (B/P)AS REFLECTED ON EXHIBITS et al ASBESTOS document preview
  • JOYCE JUELCH, ET AL VS. ASBESTOS DEFENDANTS (B/P)AS REFLECTED ON EXHIBITS et al ASBESTOS document preview
  • JOYCE JUELCH, ET AL VS. ASBESTOS DEFENDANTS (B/P)AS REFLECTED ON EXHIBITS et al ASBESTOS document preview
  • JOYCE JUELCH, ET AL VS. ASBESTOS DEFENDANTS (B/P)AS REFLECTED ON EXHIBITS et al ASBESTOS document preview 
						
                                
Preview

                                i
|
1 | EUGENE BROWN, JR. (SBN: 079824) :
DAVID A, PEREDA (SBN: 237982) |
2) FELICE BROWN EASSA & MCLEOD LLP :
1999 Harrison Street, Suite 1800 ELECTRONICALLY —
3 | Oakland, California 94612-3520 FILED
Telephone: G 10) 444-3 13] Superior Court of California,
4) Facsimile: (510) 839-7940 County of San Francisco
5 | Attorneys for Defendant FEB 24 20 10
TOSCO. REFINING COMPANY, INC. BY: CHRISTLE ARRIOLA
6 Deputy Clerk
7 |
8 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
9 COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO
10 |
Hi) JOYCE JUELCH AND NORMAN. CASE NO. CGC09-275212
JUELCH, SR.
12 SEPARATE STATEMENT OF
Plaintiffs, UNDISPUTED MATERIAL FACTS IN
13 SUPPORT OF TOSCO REFINING
v. COMPANY, INC’S MOTION FOR
14 | SUMMARY JUDGMENT |
ASBESTOS DEFENDANTS (BP),
1§ Date: March 18, 2010 /
Defendant. Timer 9:30 a.m. |
16 Dept; 220 i
Judge: Hon. Harold E. Kahn j
7 Trial: April 5, 2010,
1g eee /
3 |
20 COMES NOW, TOSCO REFINING COMPANY, and hereby submits this Separate
21 | Statement of Undisputed Material Facts in support of its Motion for Summary Judgment. i
22 UNDISPUTED MATERIAL FACTS OPPOSING PARTY'S i$ CAND |
SUPPORTING EVIDENCE AND SUPPORTING EVIDENT i
23
x (ha
24 plaintiff was dispatched on behalf of Plant
45 Insulation to Tosco’s Avon Refinery in

| Martinez, California. This is the only occasion
26 || on which plaintiff worked at a premises owned,
operated, or controlled by Tosca.

Deposition of Joyce Juelch, 169:20-21; 179:1-

A077 DAP G2:

EMENT OF UNDISPUTED MATERIAL FACT!
COMPANY, INC'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUBGM af4, 314:18-25, attached as Exhibit A to the
Declaration of David A, Pereda.

ig
at the Refin anery, and as such, she assisted Plant
Insulation journeymen who were removing and

slaging and cleaning the journeymien’s work
areas, She did not remove of install insulation.

Deposition of Joyce Iueich, 174:4- .
attached as Exhibit A to the Declaration of
i

David A. Pereda.

ie
plaintiff observed-Plant Insulation. journeymen
removing paiches of insulation, The insulators
handed the insulation they removed to plaintiff
| who-prepared it to be discarded, Plaintiff did
i not know when-or by whom the insulation was
installed. She did not know if it contained {
asbestos, if tt had been tested for asbestos
content, or where it can be-obtained now to be
| tested,
| Deposition of Joyee Juelch, 191: 21-25; 192-1
| thee 205.11; 207:12 thru 208:25; 200:12-15;
attached as Exhibit A to the Declaration of |
| David A. Pereda.

asbestos-containing materials i in her presence.

Deposition of Joyee Juelch, 222:15-25; 223:1,
attached as Exhibit A to the Declaration of
David A. Pereda.

Plaintiff observed Tosco personnel
sweeping pea gravel in Plant Insulation work.
areas after the areas had already been cleaned
by Plant Insulation workers. She did not know

| if the pea gravel contained asbestos, fithad |

| been fested for asbestos content, or where it can |
| be oblained now to be. tested. |

| Besson of Joyee Iuelch, 211: 2-25: 215:20- :

SEPARATE MENT OF UNDISPUTED MATERIAL

COMPANY, INC’S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT ite

3

aiiached as Exhibit AtotheDeclarationof =~) ttst—<“