Nelson et al v. Crane Company et al

Filing 64

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT CRANE CO.'S 29 MOTION TO STAY PROCEEDINGS IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF HAWAII PENDING TRANSFER TO MDL-875: "After careful consideration of the motions, supporting and opposing memoran da, and the arguments of counsel, Crane's Motion to Stay is HEREBY GRANTED for the reasons set forth in this Court's Order Granting Defendant's Motion to Stay All Proceedings Pending a Decision on Transfer by the Judicial Panel on Mult idistrict Litigation, filed in CV 11-00400 LEK-KSC on September 26, 2011 (dkt. no. 95). The instant case, including Plaintiffs' Motion for Remand, is HEREBY STAYED until November 8, 2011. IT IS SO ORDERED." Signed by District JUDGE LESL IE E. KOBAYASHI on September 26, 2011. (bbb, )CERTIFICATE OF SERVICEParticipants registered to receive electronic notifications received this document electronically at the e-mail address listed on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF). Participants not registered to receive electronic notifications were served by first class mail on the date of this docket entry

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF HAWAII
IN RE: HAWAII STATE ASBESTOS
CASES

)
)
)
)
This Document Applies To:
)
ROGER E. NELSON and ROSALIE
)
)
J. NELSON,
)
)
Plaintiffs,
)
)
vs.
)
CRANE COMPANY, etc., et al., )
)
)
Defendants.
_____________________________ )

CIVIL NO. 11-00402 LEK-KSC

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT CRANE CO.’S MOTION TO STAY
PROCEEDINGS IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF HAWAII PENDING TRANSFER TO MDL-875
Before the Court are: Plaintiffs Roger E. Nelson and
Rosalie J. Nelson’s (“Plaintiffs”) Motion to Remand, filed
June 30, 2011 (dkt. no. 9); and Defendant Crane Co.’s (“Crane”)
Motion to Stay Proceedings in the United States District Court
for the District of Hawaii Pending Transfer to MDL-875 (“Motion
to Stay”), filed July 11, 2011 (dkt. no. 29).

Crane filed its

memorandum in opposition to the Motion to Remand on August 8,
2011, (dkt. no. 51), and Defendant Air & Liquid Systems
Corporation, successor-by-merger to Buffalo Pumps, Inc.
(“Buffalo”) filed a joinder in Crane’s memorandum in opposition
on August 24, 2011 (dkt. no. 57).

Plaintiffs filed their reply

on August 15, 2011 (dkt. no. 54).

Plaintiffs filed their

memorandum in opposition to the Motion to Stay on August 8, 2011
(dkt. no. 50), and Crane filed its reply on August 15, 2011 (dkt.
no. 54).1
These matters came on for hearing on August 29, 2011.
Appearing on behalf of Plaintiffs were Gary Galiher, Esq., L.
Richard DeRobertis, Esq., Diane Ono, Esq., Ilana Waxman, Esq.,
Todd Eddins, Esq., Michael Ragsdale, Esq., Scott Saiki, Esq., and
Clarisse Kobashigawa, Esq.

Appearing on behalf of Crane were

Lee Nakamura, Esq., and Joseph Kotowski, III, Esq.

Appearing on

behalf of Buffalo were Steven Hisaka, Esq., and James Scadden,
Esq.

Appearing on behalf of Ingersoll were John Lacy, Esq., and

Corlis Chang, Esq.

Appearing on behalf of Goulds was

Christopher Goodwin, Esq.2

After careful consideration of the

1

On August 8, 2011 and August 16, 2011, Defendant Ingersoll
Rand Co. (“Ingersoll”) and Defendant Goulds Pumps, Inc.
(“Goulds”), respectively, each filed a statement of no opposition
to the Motion to Stay. [Dkt. nos. 52, 56.]
2

Counsel for the following parties, which did not respond
to either motion, also appeared at the hearing: Ewing Martin,
III, Esq., and Bradford Chun, Esq., for Defendants Aurora Pump
Company, IMO Industries, Inc., individually and as successor-ininterest to Delaval Turbine, Inc., and formerly known as IMO
Delaval, Inc., Transamerica Delaval, Inc., and Delaval Steam
Turbine Company, and Warren Pumps, LLC; Gail Kang, Esq., for
Defendants Bayer Cropscience, Inc., successor in interest to
Rhone-Poulenc AG Company, formerly known as Amchem Products Inc.,
formerly known as Benjamin Foster Products Company, and Union
Carbide Corporation; Craig Kugisaki, Esq., for Defendant
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company; Michael O’Connor, Esq., for
Defendant the William Powell Company; Erica Mullen Chee, Esq.,
for Defendant Georgia-Pacific Corporation; Cathy Gee Kong, Esq.,
for Defendant Kaiser Gypsum Company, Inc.; Aimee Oyasato, Esq.,
(continued...)
2

motions, supporting and opposing memoranda, and the arguments of
counsel, Crane’s Motion to Stay is HEREBY GRANTED for the reasons
set forth in this Court’s Order Granting Defendant’s Motion to
Stay All Proceedings Pending a Decision on Transfer by the
Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation, filed in CV 11-00400
LEK-KSC on September 26, 2011 (dkt. no. 95).

The instant case,

including Plaintiffs’ Motion for Remand, is HEREBY STAYED until
November 8, 2011.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
DATED AT HONOLULU, HAWAII, September 26, 2011.

/S/ Leslie E. Kobayashi
Leslie E. Kobayashi
United States District Judge

IN RE: HAWAII STATE ASBESTOS CASES; ROGER E. NELSON, ET AL. V.
CRANE COMPANY, ETC., ET AL; CIVIL NO. 11-00402 LEK-KSC; ORDER
GRANTING DEFENDANT CRANE CO.’S MOTION TO STAY PROCEEDINGS IN THE
UNITED DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF HAWAII PENDING TRANSFER
TO MDL-875

2

(...continued)
for Defendants John Crane, Incorporated, Cleaver-Brooks, Inc.,
and the Lynch Co., Inc.; and John Montalbano, Esq., for Defendant
Kelly-Moore Paint Company, Inc.
3