Rosas

Rosas v. BASF Corporation

Good Law
187 Cal. Rptr. 3d 354·2015 Cal. App. LEXIS 439·236 Cal. App. 4th 1378
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 21, 2015B257127California8,389 words

Opinion

Opinion

Kriegler, J.

Plaintiff and appellant Ismael Rosas appeals from judgments entered after the trial court granted summary judgment in favor of defendants and respondents BASF Corporation; Berje Inc.; Citrus and Allied Essences Ltd.; Centróme, Inc., doing business as Advanced Biotech; Elan Chemical Company, Inc.; Emoral, Inc.; O’Laughlin Industries, Inc.; O’Laughlin Industries Co., Ltd.; and O’Laughlin Tianjin Industries Co. He also appeals the order denying his postjudgment motion for relief and reconsideration.

The result on appeal turns on whether the evidence is susceptible of only one legitimate inference supporting the conclusion that, as a matter of law, Rosas was aware of his injury and facts that would lead a reasonable person to suspect a wrongful cause for that injury. The trial court concluded that a two-year statute of limitations began to run on Rosas’s claims in 2003, because the undisputed evidence demonstrated he was hospitalized with an unknown disease that he suspected was caused by exposure to a particular chemical at his work in a food flavoring plant. We conclude the evidence is susceptible to more than one legitimate inference, and that it is a question of fact for…

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.