Motion,Ex Parte: KENNETH MOSES SR. VS. KAISER GYPSUM COMPANY, INC. et al

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

						
                                
Preview
                                Oakland, CA 94607

Gordon & Rees LLP
1111 Broadway, Suite 1700

MICHAEL J. PIETRYKOWSKI (SBN: 118677)
mpietrykowski@gordonrees.com
ROBERT A. RICH (SBN: 141883)
rrich@gordonrees.com

DANIEL H. DRESSMAN (SBN: 290426)
ddressman@gordonrees.com

GORDON & REES LLP

1111 Broadway, Suite 1700

Oakland, CA 94607

Telephone: (510) 463-8600

Facsimile: (510) 984-1721

Attorneys for Defendant
UNION CARBIDE CORPORATION

ELECTRONICALLY
FILED

Supertor Court of Caiffornia,
County of San Francisco

10/16/2015
Clerk of the Court
BY:ROMY RISK

Deputy Clerk

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA

COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO

KENNETH MOSES, SR.,
Plaintiff,
v.

KAISER GYPSUM COMPANY, INC., et al.,

Defendants.

Eee

CASE NO. CGC-13-276180

DECLARATION OF DANIEL H.
DRESSMAN REQUESTING
PERMISSION TO FILE AND SERVE
ADDITIONAL MOTIONS IN
LIMINE ON BEHALF OF
DEFENDANT UNION CARBIDE
CORPORATION

Date: October 16, 2015
Dept.: 306
Judge: Hon. Richard B. Ulmer

Complaint Filed: August 21, 2013
Trial Date: October 13, 2015

DECLARATION OF DANIEL H. DRESSMAN REQUESTING PERMISSION TO FILE AND SERVE
ADDITIONAL MOTIONS IN LIMINE ON BEHALF OF DEFENDANT UNION CARBIDE CORPORATIONGordon & Rees LLP
1111 Broadway, Suite 1700

Oakland, CA 94607

oD em IY Dw

I, DANIEL H. DRESSMAN, declare as follows:

1. I am an attorney duly licensed to practice before all the courts in the State of
California and am an attorney with the law firm Gordon & Rees, LLP, attorneys of record
herein for Defendant UNION CARBIDE CORPORATION (hereinafter referred to as “Union
Carbide”).

2. I am personally familiar with the facts set forth herein to competently testify to
them if required to do so.

3. Pursuant to the Asbestos Trial Management Order, dated May 7, 2014 (“Order”),
this Court has limited Plaintiff and Defendants to five (5) motions in limine each. This Court has
indicated that any party wishing to file and serve additional motions in limine should file and
serve a declaration of good cause, not to exceed three pages, with a brief description of the
evidence sought to be precluded or limited and an explanation why the motion is required.
Pursuant to this Order, Union Carbide respectfully requests that it be granted leave to file (4)
additional motions in limine.

4, Plaintiff Kenneth Moses Sr. (“Mr. Moses”) alleges that his colon cancer was
caused by his occupational exposure to Union Carbide’s “Calidria” asbestos. Mr. Moses
testified he worked as a Drywall Finisher from 1973 to 1977. He alleges he mixed, applied, and
sanded various brands of joint taping compound, some of which he contends contained Calidria
asbestos.

5. To establish his claims, Plaintiff must prove, among other things, that Mr. Moses’
illness or medical conditions were asbestos-related, that he was exposed to Calidria asbestos, that
any Calidria asbestos! to which he was exposed was a substantial factor in causing his illness or

medical conditions or damages suffered. Although Mr. Moses never worked at a Union Carbide

' The type of asbestos Union Carbide sold was called “Calidria,” which refers to the fact it was mined from the New
Idria serpentine deposit in California.

1

DECLARATION OF DANIEL H, DRESSMAN REQUESTING PERMISSION TO FILE AND SERVE
ADDITIONAL MOTIONS IN LIMINE ON BEHALF OF DEFENDANT UNION CARBIDE CORPORATIONGordon & Rees LLP
1111 Broadway, Suite 1700
Oakland, CA 94607

ya nw

facility, Union Carbide anticipates that Plaintiff may attempt to introduce irrelevant evidence
related to Union Carbide facilities and employees and its related company Dow Chemical.

Union Carbide believes that by considering and ruling upon the admissibility of these disputed
matters before trial, it will serve to streamline the case and avoid wasting the Jury’s valuable
time. Therefore, Union Carbide submits that good cause exists to request that the Court address
the four (4) additional motions in limine intended to limit the issues and evidence to that which is
potentially admissible.

6. The proposed Union Carbide-specific motions in limine are:

A) “To Exclude All References to Union Carbide-Related Industrial Chemical

Accidents” on the grounds that evidence of (1) an incident in the 1930s at Gauley Bridge,

West Virginia, in which workers died while tunneling through Hawk’s Nest Mountain,

(2) a 1981 incident in which propylene oxide was released into the Kanawha River in

West Virginia, and (3) a 1984 incident at Bhopal, India, in which a chemical plant leaked

isocyanate gas, are all irrelevant to Mr. Moses’ case, and are more inflammatory and

prejudicial than probative.

B) To Preclude Certain Evidence Regarding Alleged Health Conditions of Union

Carbide King City Asbestos Workers on the grounds that the health of former workers at

this facility (3 in particular who were deposed many years ago) where Plaintiff never set

foot is not relevant, and is more inflammatory, misleading, and prejudicial than probative.

C) “To Preclude Reference To Union Carbide's Facilities” on the grounds that evidence

of the working conditions at facilities where Plaintiff never set foot are not relevant, and

are more inflammatory and prejudicial than probative.

D) “To Preclude Evidence Regarding Union Carbide ’s Corporate Structure or Its

Relationship to The Down Chemical Company” on the grounds that Dow, the parent

company of Union Carbide since 2001, is not a party, and any reference to Dow would be

more inflammatory and prejudicial than probative.

7. Because of the legal claims being made by Plaintiff, the number of defendants,
the complicated factual allegations and the fact that Plaintiff is alleging a causation scenario
where numerous products are at issue, it would unduly prejudice Union Carbide’s interests and
its defense of this case by not allowing it to file “defendant-specific’” motions in limine. These

motions address anticipated submissions from Plaintiff that, if not excluded, would result in the

admission of irrelevant evidence, creating an undue consumption of time, substantial danger of

DECLARATION OF DANIEL H. DRESSMAN REQUESTING PERMISSION TO FILE AND SERVE
ADDITIONAL MOTIONS IN LIMINE ON BEHALF OF DEFENDANT UNION CARBIDE CORPORATIONGordon & Rees LLP
1111 Broadway, Suite 1700

Oakland, CA 94607

co Om IN aD

confusing the issues and undue prejudice to Union Carbide. Accordingly, Union Carbide must
submit motions in limine that deal with the above enumerated issues and the documents and
issues that it is believed that Plaintiff will attempt to present to the Jury at the trial of this case.
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the
foregoing is true and correct and that this declaration was executed on this 16th day of October

2015, at Oakland, California.

SO
si | > —
DANIEL H. DRESSMAN

3

DECLARATION OF DANIEL H, DRESSMAN REQUESTING PERMISSION TO FILE AND SERVE
ADDITIONAL MOTIONS IN LIMINE ON BEHALF OF DEFENDANT UNION CARBIDE CORPORATIONOakland, CA 94607

Gordon & Rees LLP
1111 Broadway, Suite 1700

1099296/28397177V, 1

Com XN A

PROOF OF SERVICE

lam a resident of the State of California, over the age of eighteen years, and not a party
to the within action. My business address is: Gordon & Rees LLP 1111 Broadway, Suite 1700,
Oakland, CA 94607. On October 16, 2015, I served the within documents:

DECLARATION OF DANIEL H. DRESSMAN REQUESTING PERMISSION TO FILE
AND SERVE ADDITIONAL MOTIONS IN LIMINE ON BEHALF OF DEFENDANT
UNION CARBIDE CORPORATION

oO by transmitting via facsimile the document(s) listed above to the fax number(s) set
forth below on this date before 5:00 p.m.

oO by personally delivering the document(s) listed above to the person(s) at the
address(es) set forth below.

oO by placing the document(s) listed above in a sealed envelope with postage thereon
fully prepaid, in United States mail in the State of California at Oakland, addressed as
set forth below.

By electronically serving the document(s) describe above via File & Serve Xpress on
the recipients designated on the Transaction Receipt that is located on the File &
ServeXpress website and as set forth:

BRAYTON PURCELL LLP AND SEE LEXIS NEXIS SERVICE LIST

222 Rush Landing Road

Novato, CA 94945

Plaintiffs’ Counsel

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the above
is true and correct.

Executed on October 16, 2015, at Oakland, California.

\ A
livelier k Bloor

ANDREA K. BEAN,

PROOF OF SERVICE