On May 20, 2009 a Motion-Secondary was filed involving a dispute between Juelch, Joyce, Juelch Sr, Norman, and 3M Company, 84 Lumber Company, 84 Lumber Company, A Limited Partnership, All Asbestos Defendants, Allis-Chalmers Corporation Product Liability Trust, Asbestos Defendants, Cbs Corporation, A Delaware Corporation, F K A, Chevron U.S.A. Inc., Consolidated Insulation, Inc., Csk Auto, Inc., Dillingham Construction N.A., Inc., Does 1-8500, Douglass Insulation Company, Inc., Garlock Sealing Technologies, Llc, General Electric Company, Genuine Parts Company, Hamilton Materials, Inc., J.T. Thorpe & Son, Inc., Kaiser Gypsum Company, Inc., Metalclad Insulation Corporation, Oscar E. Erickson, Inc., Pacific Gas And Electric Company, Pacipic Bell Telephone Company, Parker Hannifin Corporation, Quintec Industries, Inc., Redwood Plumbing Co., Inc., Santa Fe Braun, Inc., Sequoia Ventures Inc., Shell Oil Company, Thomas Dee Engineering Company, Timec Company, Inc., Tosco Refining Company, Inc., Union Carbide Corporation, Union Oil Company Of California, Unocal Corporation, for ASBESTOS 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
BRAYTONSPURCELL ATTORNEYS ATLAW 222 RUSH LANDING ROAD POBOX 6169 NOVATO, CALIFORNIA 94948-6169 (415) 898-1555, oD OM NW AH BW Nm weet BRO me DAVID R. DONADIO, FESO. S.B. #154436 NANCY T. WILLIAMS, E! S.B. #201095 BRAYTON@PURCELL TILED. Attorneys at Law 222 Rush Landing Road Superior Court of California, P.O. BOX 6169 County of San Francisco Novato, California 94948 APR 07 2011 3 1 (415) Clerk of the Court Attomeys for Plaintiff and Petitioner __ BY: VANESSA ‘peputy cle SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO JOYCE JUELCH and } ASBESTOS NORMAN JUELCH, SR., No. CGC-09-275212 Plaintiffs, MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF EX. v8. PARTE APPLICATION FOR ORDER SUBSTITUTING SUCCESSOR-IN- : ASBESTOS DEFENDANTS (B“P) INTEREST FOR DECEASED PLAINTIFF Date: April 7, 2011 Time: 11:00 a.m, Room: 220, Hon. Harold E. Kahn Trial Date: N/A Filing Date: May 20, 2009 On May 20, 2009, JOYCE JUELCH and NORMAN JUELCH filed this asbestos-related personal injury action. Mrs. JUELCH died on December 27, 2010. NORMAN JUELCH isa beneficiary of decedent JOYCE JUELCH’s estate. As such, NORMAN JUELCH is decedent JOYCE JUELCH’s successor-in-interest pursuant to C.C.P. § 377.11. The authority for the continuation of the survival action is found in C.C.P. § 377.20, and § 377.31. Cade of Civil Procedure § 377.20 states: "A cause of action for or against a person is not lost by reason of the person's death...” He Hf itgurehoennyloounxervb Sigs 1 MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES: iM SUPPORT OF EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR ORDER SUBSTITUTING SUCCESSOR-IN-INTEREST FOR DECEASED PLAIN’Oo 8 NM DH A RB WN oS 11 Code of Civil Procedure § 377.31 states: On motion, after death of a person who commenced an action or Broveeding that does not abate to be continued by decedent's : personal representative or successor-in-interest. NORMAN JUELCH’s declaration pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure § 377.32 directly tracks the requirements of the statute and states that he is successor-in-interest to JOYCE JUELCH. A true and correct copy of said declaration, with a copy of JOYCE JUELCH?s death certificate, is attached to the Declaration of Nancy T. Williams as Exhibit A. As successor-in- interest to decedent it is proper for NORMAN JUELCH to be substituted as plaintiff in place and stead of decedent so the surviving elements of this action may proceed as scheduled. California Code of Civil Procedure § 128 provides, in pertinent part: (a) Every court shall have the power to do all of the following: G3) To provide for the orderly conduct of proceedings before it, or its officers. It is proper to allow the requested relief via ex parte application. In fact, this relief is cited as the prime example of the type of relief that should be granted via ex parte. “ ... [E]x parte relief may be allowed where the motion has no effect on the opposing party’s rights or liability. For example, a motion: to substitute parties on death or transfer of interest of one of the original parties.” Weil & Brown, California Practice Guide: Civil Procedure Before Trial (The Rutter Group 2011), Section 9:349.3 : Accordingly, petitioner NORMAN JUELCH, as successor-in-interest to JOYCE JUELCH, requests this Court substitute him as plaintiff for decedent. Such an Order is in the interest of justice. Dated: 7 . Respectfully submitted, cy T. Williams Attorneys for Plaintiff and Petitioner iieas neers a7 Se thot 2 MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND ALITHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR ORDER SUBSTITUTING SUCCESSOR-IN-INTEREST FOR DECEASED PLAINTIFF