On August 14, 2020 a
Party Discovery
was filed
involving a dispute between
Stephens, Donnetta,
and
Crown Ace Hardware,
Does 1 Through 100 Inclusive,
Monsato Company,
Wilbur-Ellis Company, Llc,
Wilbur-Ellis Nutrition, Llc,
for Product Liability Unlimited
in the District Court of San Bernardino County.
Preview
OR'rGlNAL
Er a.
E
SUPERIOR OF CALIFORNIA
CICL'RT
(CA SBN 119854)
Paul R. Kiesel COUNT? QF SAN BERNARDINO
Melanie Meneses Palmer (CA SBN 286752) SAN PEFENARDWO DISTRICT
KIESEL LAW LLP
8648 Wilshire Boulevard JUL .IZ 2 2021
Beverly Hills, California 9021 1-2910
Tel: 3 [0-854-4444
av Ml'j/xwgm
Fax: 310-854-0812
kieselflkiesellaw DEPUTY
galmer@kiesel.law
Fletcher V. Trammell, Esq. Alexander G. Dwyer
Melissa Binstock Ephron, Esq. Andrew F. Kirkendall
FAX
TRAMMELL, PC Erin M. Wood
3262 Westheimer Rd., Ste. 423 KIRKENDALL DWYER LLP
Houston, TX 77098 4343 Sigma Rd, Suite 200
Tel: (800) 405-1740 Dallas, TX 75244
BY Fax: (800) 532-0992 Tel: 214-271 -4027
fletchQDtrammellpc30m Fax: 214-253-0629
10 1nelissa@trammellpc.com ad@kirkendalldwyer.com
ak@kirkendalldwyer.com
11 Attorneysfor Plaintiff ewood@kirkendalldwyer.com
DONNETTA STEPHENS
12
LLP
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
California
Law 13
at
LAW
14
Hills,
Attorneys
COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO
15
KIESEL
Beverly DONNETTA STEPHENS, Case No. CIVSBZIO4801
16
Plaintiff, Assignedfor All Purposes t0 the Hon. Gilbert
17 G. Ochoa, Dept. 524
v.
18 PLAINTIFF’S OPPOSITION TO
MONSANTO COMPANY, ET AL., DEFENDANTS’ MOTION IN LIMINE NO.
19 8 TO EXCLUDE EVIDENCE,
Defendant. ARGUMENT, AND TESTIMONY
20 REFERENCING 10265 COUNTRY LANE;
DECLARATION OF FLETCHER
21 TRAMMELL
22 Department: $24
Judge: Hon. Gilbert G. Ochoa
23
Hearing Date: July 15, 2021
24 Hearing Time: 9:00 AM
25 Complaint Filed: August 14, 2020
Trial Date: July 19, 2021
26
27
28
00594397-3 Case No. CIVSB2104801
PLAINTIFF’S OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS’ MOTION IN LIMINE NO. 8 TO EXCLUDE EVIDENCE,
ARGUMENT, AND TESTIMONY REFERENCING 10265 COUNTRY LANE
MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES
I. INTRODUCTION
This case centers around Plaintiff Donnetta Stephens’ (“Plaintiff") allegations of injury due
t0 exposure t0 Roundup and the carcinogenic properties 0f Roundup. Despite this, Defendants
Monsanto Company and Crown Ace Hardware (collectively, “Defendants”) seek t0 inappropriately
limit evidence at trial of Plaintiff’s exposure to Roundup by excluding evidence of Plaintiff’s
exposure to Roundup at 10265 Country Lane, where Plaintiff picked weeds treated with Roundup.
This cannot stand.
Although Plaintiff did not spray Roundup at 10265 Country Lane, she picked weeds 0n the
10 property that were treated with Roundup, on a near daily basis for approximately three years before
11 she was diagnosed with non-Hodgkin lymphoma (“NHL”). That Plaintiff suffered bystander
12 exposure at this property does not diminish its relevance t0 this proceeding. This evidence shows a
LLP
California
Law 13 fuller picture 0f Plaintiff’s exposure t0 Roundup, which is highly relevant evidence in this matter
at
LAW
14 and no prejudicial. Ultimately, Plaintiff should be allowed to present a complete narrative 0f her
Hills,
Attorneys
15 exposure to Roundup, including the use 0f Roundup she was exposed to at 10265 Country Lane.
KIESEL
Beverly
16 Therefore, the Court should deny Defendants’ Motion in Limine N0. 8 t0 exclude evidence,
17 argument, and testimony referening 10265 Country Lane and permit the jury t0 consider the full
18 picture of Plaintiff’s Roundup exposure.
19 II. RELEVANT FACTS
20 Plaintiff picked weeds and helped maintain a chicken coop at 10265 Country Lane, a
21 property owned by Mr. and Mrs. Patrick and Pamela Sheeler, from approximately 2014-20111 See
22 Deposition of Donnetta Stephens (“Stephens Dep.”) 8523-8711, 169:14-17227, attached as Exhibit
23 A to Trammell Decl. The property was sprayed with Roundup t0 manage the weeds. Deposition 0f
24 Patrick Sheeler (“Patrick Sheeler Dep.”) 42:17-24 ,
attached as Exhibit B to Trammell Decl. Mr.
25
26 1
That Defendants learned about Plaintiff’ s exposure to Roundup at 10265 Country Lane in
Plaintiff’s Fouth Amended Interrogator Responses is a red herring. The timing resulted in no
27
prejudice as thoroughly discussed in Plaintiff‘s Opposition to Defendants’ Motion t0 Bind. This
28 Court has already ruled on Defedants’ Motion to Bind.
00594397-3 2 Case No. CIVSB2104801
PLAINTIFF’S OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS’ MOTION INLIMINE NO. 8 TO EXCLUDE EVIDENCE,
ARGUMENT, AND TESTIMONY REFERENCING 10265 COUNTRY LANE
Document Filed Date
July 12, 2021
Case Filing Date
August 14, 2020
Category
Product Liability Unlimited
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
Preview
OR'rGlNAL Er a. E SUPERIOR OF CALIFORNIA CICL'RT (CA SBN 119854) Paul R. Kiesel COUNT? QF SAN BERNARDINO Melanie Meneses Palmer (CA SBN 286752) SAN PEFENARDWO DISTRICT KIESEL LAW LLP 8648 Wilshire Boulevard JUL .IZ 2 2021 Beverly Hills, California 9021 1-2910 Tel: 3 [0-854-4444 av Ml'j/xwgm Fax: 310-854-0812 kieselflkiesellaw DEPUTY galmer@kiesel.law Fletcher V. Trammell, Esq. Alexander G. Dwyer Melissa Binstock Ephron, Esq. Andrew F. Kirkendall FAX TRAMMELL, PC Erin M. Wood 3262 Westheimer Rd., Ste. 423 KIRKENDALL DWYER LLP Houston, TX 77098 4343 Sigma Rd, Suite 200 Tel: (800) 405-1740 Dallas, TX 75244 BY Fax: (800) 532-0992 Tel: 214-271 -4027 fletchQDtrammellpc30m Fax: 214-253-0629 10 1nelissa@trammellpc.com ad@kirkendalldwyer.com ak@kirkendalldwyer.com 11 Attorneysfor Plaintiff ewood@kirkendalldwyer.com DONNETTA STEPHENS 12 LLP SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA California Law 13 at LAW 14 Hills, Attorneys COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO 15 KIESEL Beverly DONNETTA STEPHENS, Case No. CIVSBZIO4801 16 Plaintiff, Assignedfor All Purposes t0 the Hon. Gilbert 17 G. Ochoa, Dept. 524 v. 18 PLAINTIFF’S OPPOSITION TO MONSANTO COMPANY, ET AL., DEFENDANTS’ MOTION IN LIMINE NO. 19 8 TO EXCLUDE EVIDENCE, Defendant. ARGUMENT, AND TESTIMONY 20 REFERENCING 10265 COUNTRY LANE; DECLARATION OF FLETCHER 21 TRAMMELL 22 Department: $24 Judge: Hon. Gilbert G. Ochoa 23 Hearing Date: July 15, 2021 24 Hearing Time: 9:00 AM 25 Complaint Filed: August 14, 2020 Trial Date: July 19, 2021 26 27 28 00594397-3 Case No. CIVSB2104801 PLAINTIFF’S OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS’ MOTION IN LIMINE NO. 8 TO EXCLUDE EVIDENCE, ARGUMENT, AND TESTIMONY REFERENCING 10265 COUNTRY LANE MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES I. INTRODUCTION This case centers around Plaintiff Donnetta Stephens’ (“Plaintiff") allegations of injury due t0 exposure t0 Roundup and the carcinogenic properties 0f Roundup. Despite this, Defendants Monsanto Company and Crown Ace Hardware (collectively, “Defendants”) seek t0 inappropriately limit evidence at trial of Plaintiff’s exposure to Roundup by excluding evidence of Plaintiff’s exposure to Roundup at 10265 Country Lane, where Plaintiff picked weeds treated with Roundup. This cannot stand. Although Plaintiff did not spray Roundup at 10265 Country Lane, she picked weeds 0n the 10 property that were treated with Roundup, on a near daily basis for approximately three years before 11 she was diagnosed with non-Hodgkin lymphoma (“NHL”). That Plaintiff suffered bystander 12 exposure at this property does not diminish its relevance t0 this proceeding. This evidence shows a LLP California Law 13 fuller picture 0f Plaintiff’s exposure t0 Roundup, which is highly relevant evidence in this matter at LAW 14 and no prejudicial. Ultimately, Plaintiff should be allowed to present a complete narrative 0f her Hills, Attorneys 15 exposure to Roundup, including the use 0f Roundup she was exposed to at 10265 Country Lane. KIESEL Beverly 16 Therefore, the Court should deny Defendants’ Motion in Limine N0. 8 t0 exclude evidence, 17 argument, and testimony referening 10265 Country Lane and permit the jury t0 consider the full 18 picture of Plaintiff’s Roundup exposure. 19 II. RELEVANT FACTS 20 Plaintiff picked weeds and helped maintain a chicken coop at 10265 Country Lane, a 21 property owned by Mr. and Mrs. Patrick and Pamela Sheeler, from approximately 2014-20111 See 22 Deposition of Donnetta Stephens (“Stephens Dep.”) 8523-8711, 169:14-17227, attached as Exhibit 23 A to Trammell Decl. The property was sprayed with Roundup t0 manage the weeds. Deposition 0f 24 Patrick Sheeler (“Patrick Sheeler Dep.”) 42:17-24 , attached as Exhibit B to Trammell Decl. Mr. 25 26 1 That Defendants learned about Plaintiff’ s exposure to Roundup at 10265 Country Lane in Plaintiff’s Fouth Amended Interrogator Responses is a red herring. The timing resulted in no 27 prejudice as thoroughly discussed in Plaintiff‘s Opposition to Defendants’ Motion t0 Bind. This 28 Court has already ruled on Defedants’ Motion to Bind. 00594397-3 2 Case No. CIVSB2104801 PLAINTIFF’S OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS’ MOTION INLIMINE NO. 8 TO EXCLUDE EVIDENCE, ARGUMENT, AND TESTIMONY REFERENCING 10265 COUNTRY LANE