12.07.2015 Views

San Francisco Superior Court Seeks Public Comment on Rescission ...

San Francisco Superior Court Seeks Public Comment on Rescission ...

San Francisco Superior Court Seeks Public Comment on Rescission ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Asbestos Hearing/SFSC2-2-2-2in <str<strong>on</strong>g>San</str<strong>on</strong>g> <str<strong>on</strong>g>Francisco</str<strong>on</strong>g>. The <str<strong>on</strong>g>Court</str<strong>on</strong>g> will provide a <str<strong>on</strong>g>Court</str<strong>on</strong>g> Reporter for the hearing.Effective January 1, 2012, the order would rescind “all asbestos general orders andporti<strong>on</strong>s thereof that have not previously been invalidated, deleted or rescinded … except asspecifically set forth herein.” Also effective <strong>on</strong> January 1, 2012, the <str<strong>on</strong>g>Court</str<strong>on</strong>g> would cease thepractice of “grouping” asbestos cases by plaintiffs’ firm, pers<strong>on</strong>al injury or wr<strong>on</strong>gful death, anddisease.The order would exempt all porti<strong>on</strong>s of General Order 158, which requires electr<strong>on</strong>ic filingand service of “all pleadings, moti<strong>on</strong>s, memorandum of law, orders, or other documents filed inan asbestos case other than the first filing.” It also would exempt the first sentence of GeneralOrder 162, which provides for an asbestos case management department.For each asbestos case filed prior to January 1, 2012, all porti<strong>on</strong>s of General Orders 41,129 (except the annual update requirements), 156 and 160 shall remain in effect until December31, 2013.The order would not preclude the asbestos case management Judge, who currently isJudge Teri L. Jacks<strong>on</strong>, from making an order in any particular case or cases to apply the generalorders or any porti<strong>on</strong> of them.In additi<strong>on</strong>, the order would allow the parties to enter into a stipulati<strong>on</strong> in <strong>on</strong>e or morecases that <strong>on</strong>e or more general orders or porti<strong>on</strong>s of them will apply. The order also would allowthe parties to enter into a stipulati<strong>on</strong> that any two or more cases will be treated as a “group” fordiscovery or other purpose.###

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!