Cook v. Gallade Chemical
Filed 11/20/09 Cook v. Gallade Chemical CA2/5
NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS
California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION FIVE
DANIELLE COOK, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. GALLADE CHEMICAL, INC., et al., Defendants and Respondents. | B213955 (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BC388113) ORDER MODIFYING OPINION [NO CHANGE IN JUDGMENT] |
THE COURT:
It is ordered that the opinion filed herein on October 27, 2009, be modified as follows:
On page 2, third paragraph, line 4, "CITGO" should replace "CITGI";
On page 2, third paragraph, line 8, ", CITGO Petroleum Corporation," should be
added after "PPG Industries, Inc.";
On page 3, second full paragraph, line 8, ", CITGO Petroleum Corporation,"
should be added after "PPG Industries, Inc.";
On page 12, the first paragraph under the heading "4. Relation back doctrine"
should be deleted and the following paragraph should be inserted in its place: "PPG Industries, Inc. ("PPG") and CITGO Petroleum Corporation ("CITGO") were not named as defendants until March 28, 2008, when Cook III was filed. Thus, PPG and CITGO were first put on notice of plaintiff's claims after the statute of limitations had expired in September of 2007. Consequently, the allegations of the amended complaint concerning equitable tolling do not apply to these defendants. Plaintiff nevertheless maintains that the survival claims against PPG and CITGO are timely due to the relationship back doctrine. We do not agree.";
On page 13, second full paragraph, the last sentence should be deleted and the
following sentence should be inserted in its place: "Rather, the survival claims against PPG and CITGO are stale, and these defendants are entitled to the repose afforded by application of the statute of limitations.";
On page 14, the paragraph under the heading "DISPOSITION" should be deleted
and the following paragraph should be inserted in its place: "The judgment is reversed as to all defendants except PPG, CITGO, and Sherwin-Williams, as to whom the judgment is affirmed. All defendants save PPG, CITGO, and Sherwin-Williams are to bear plaintiff's costs on appeal. Plaintiff is to bear the costs on appeal of PPG, CITGO, and Sherwin-Williams."
There is no change in the judgment.
________________________________________________________________________
ARMSTRONG, Acting P. J. MOSK, J. KRIEGLER, J.
Publication courtesy of California pro bono lawyer directory.
Analysis and review provided by Chula Vista Property line attorney.
