SeaRiver Maritime v. Superior Court

Filed 7/28/06 SeaRiver Maritime v. Superior Court CA1/4

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS

California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION FOUR

SeaRiver Maritime, Inc., (SeaRiver) petitions for a writ of mandate seeking reversal of that portion of the trial court's order restricting discovery of claim documents submitted by Richard Taylor to bankruptcy trusts to obtain compensation for the same asbestos-related injuries alleged in Taylor's lawsuit against SeaRiver. We affirm in part and reverse in part.

I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

Taylor filed a complaint for personal injuries suffered as a result of exposure to asbestos. He alleged the exposure occurred from 1969 to 2000 while working for several employers at numerous locations.

SeaRiver is one of the defendants named in Taylor's action. According to its petition, SeaRiver owns and operates vessels engaged in maritime transportation. Taylor claims he was exposed to asbestos while working aboard SeaRiver vessels, presumably while employed by someone else, as SeaRiver does not appear on his list of employers. Taylor asserted SeaRiver was liable for his injuries under the federal Longshore and Harbor Workers' Compensation Act (33 U.S.C. § 901 et seq.).

In the course of discovery, SeaRiver asked Taylor to produce documents he had submitted to entities handling claims for asbestos injuries. Both Taylor and SeaRiver characterize these entities as â€