Nelson et al v. Crane Company et al

Filing 63

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT IMO INDUSTRIES INC.'S 41 MOTION TO STAY ALL PROCEEDINGS PENDING DECISION ON TRANSFER BY THE JUDICIAL PANEL ON MULTIDISTRICT LITIGATION: "After careful consideration of the motions, supporting and opposing memor anda, and the arguments of counsel, IMO'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. 11-00405 LEK-KSC

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT IMO INDUSTRIES INC.’S
MOTION TO STAY ALL PROCEEDINGS PENDING DECISION ON
TRANSFER BY THE JUDICIAL PANEL ON MULTIDISTRICT LITIGATION
Before the Court are: Plaintiffs Roger E. Nelson and
Rosalie J. Nelson’s (“Plaintiffs”) Motion to Remand, filed
June 30, 2011 (dkt. no. 7); and Defendant IMO Industries Inc.’s
(“IMO”) Motion to Stay All Proceedings Pending Decision on
Transfer by the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation
(“Motion to Stay”), filed July 28, 2011 (dkt. no. 41).

On

August 8, 2011, IMO and Defendant Crane Company (“Crane”) each
filed a memorandum in opposition to the Motion to Remand (dkt.
nos. 49, 47).

On August 15, 2011, Crane filed a joinder in IMO’s

memorandum in opposition (dkt. no. 50), and Plaintiffs filed
their reply (dkt. no. 52).

On August 24, 2011, Defendant Air &

Liquid Systems Corporation, successor-by-merger to Buffalo Pumps,

Inc. (“Buffalo”) filed a joinder in Warren Pumps, LLC’s
memorandum in opposition (dkt. no. 55).

Plaintiffs filed their

memorandum in opposition to the Motion to Stay on August 8, 2011
(dkt. no. 45), and IMO filed its reply on August 15, 2011 (dkt.
no. 51).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 IMO were

Ewing Martin, III, Esq., and Bradford Chun, Esq.2

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.
of Goulds was Christopher Goodwin, Esq.3

Appearing on behalf

After careful

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. 46, 54.]
2

Mr. Martin and Mr. Chun also appeared on behalf of
Defendants Aurora Pump Company, and Warren Pumps, LLC.
3

Counsel for the following parties, which did not respond
to either motion, also appeared at the hearing: 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
(continued...)
2

consideration of the motions, supporting and opposing memoranda,
and the arguments of counsel, IMO’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. 11-00405 LEK-KSC; ORDER
GRANTING DEFENDANT IMO INDUSTRIES INC.’S MOTION TO STAY ALL
PROCEEDINGS PENDING DECISION ON TRANSFER BY THE JUDICIAL PANEL ON
MULTIDISTRICT LITIGATION

3

(...continued)
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.,
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