Hunter

Hunter v. Pacific Mechanical Corp.

Caution
1995 Cal. App. LEXIS 822·37 Cal. App. 4th 1282·44 Cal. Rptr. 2d 335·44 Cal. Rptr. 335·95 Daily Journal DAR 11442
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 23, 1995A066817California2,560 words

Opinion

Opinion

King, J.

In this case we hold that recent statutory amendments adopted the burden-shifting characteristics of federal law for California summary judgment motions.

William Hunter has sued multiple defendants, including asbestos manufacturers, asbestos installers, premises owners and others, alleging injuries resulting from his occupational exposure to asbestos. The court granted summary judgment for one of the defendants, Pacific Mechanical Corporation (PMC), based on an absence of evidence supporting Hunter’s allegation that he was exposed to asbestos-related activities engaged in by PMC at various jobsites. The principal issue is whether the trial court applied an improper standard in granting PMC’s motion for summary judgment. We conclude that under the recent amendments to Code of Civil Procedure section 437c , the trial court correctly analyzed the issues and properly awarded PMC summary judgment.

Facts and Procedural History

This case arises out of alleged asbestos-related injuries sustained by Hunter as a result of his coming into contact with asbestos from 1950 through 1992. During this time frame, Hunter worked as a bricklayer at various jobsites, including refineries,…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.