| Case | County / Judge | Motion | Ruling | Indexed | Hearing |
|---|
MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
SF Superior Court - Asbestos Law & Motion - CGC23277159 - July 1, 2025 Hearing date: July 1, 2025 Case number: CGC23277159 Case title: GREGORY TODD ET AL VS. GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY ET AL Case Number: | | CGC23277159 | Case Title: | | GREGORY TODD ET AL VS. GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY ET AL | Court Date: | | 2025-07-01 09:00 AM | Calendar Matter: | | MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT | Rulings: | | On Asbestos Law and Motion Calendar for Tuesday, July 1, 2025, in Department 304, Line 1. Defendant Puget Sound Commerce Center f/k/a Todd Shipyards Corporation's ("Defendant") Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED. Opposition filed. Reply filed.
1. Plaintiff's Objections Plaintiffs' objection to Mason Todd's Social Security Statement of Earnings is OVERRULED. The statement was produced by Plaintiffs' counsel, discussed at Mr. Todd's deposition, and it was marked as Exhibit 3 to that deposition. Plaintiffs' objection to Defendant's Memorandum p. 7 footnote 2 is SUSTAINED for lack of foundation. (Evid. Code 403.) Defendant does not make any citation to the source or reference to which government agency, or which union.
2. Defendant's Objections Defendant's objection to the Declaration of Dr. Levy is OVERRULED. Dr. Levy's declaration states that he is a cardiologist-internist physician with a substantial background and training in asbestos-related disease. He reviewed Mr. Todd's medical records, workers' compensation application, social security records, and verified supplemental/amended responses to interrogatories. Dr. Levy's expertise qualifies him to testify as an expert. "[Q]uestions about the depth or scope of his or her knowledge or experience go to the weight, not the admissibility, of the witness's testimony." (People v. Jones (2013) 57 Cal.4th 899, 950.)
B. Motion for Summary Judgement Defendant fails to sustain its initial burden of showing Plaintiffs Gregory and Della Todd ("Plaintiffs") do not possess and cannot reasonably obtain needed evidence of asbestos exposure and causation. (Aguilar v. Atl. Richfield Co. (2001) 25 Cal.4th 826, 855.)
*Complete tentative ruling has been electronically served to Counsel (Transaction ID # 76556043). The moving party shall lodge with the clerk in Department 304 by the time set for this hearing a proposed order repeating verbatim the substantive portion of the tentative ruling. Any party wishing to contest the tentative ruling must email contestasbestostr@sftc.org by 4:00 p.m. on the day before the hearing and state their intention to contest. If a hearing is requested, it will be on July 1, 2025, at 9:00 a.m. Attorneys may appear in person or remotely via zoom: Meeting ID 160 757 8308; Passcode: 485029. Face coverings are optional.
Looking for case law or statutes not cited here? Search published authorities
Examples: “Why did the court rule this way?” · “What were the procedural grounds?” · “Is appearance required?”
The Court no longer provides a court reporter in the Law and Motion department. Parties may retain their own reporter, who may appear in the courtroom or remotely. A retained reporter must be a California certified court reporter (CSR), for only a CSR's transcript may be used in California courts. If a CSR is being retained, include in your email all of the following: Their name, CSR and telephone number, and their individual work email address. There will be only one official record. If the parties cannot agree, the Court will designate a qualified court reporter to provide the official transcript for the matter, and the party or parties will bear the cost. = (EPS/304) | |