IN RE: PET FOOD PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION

Filing 311

STATEMENT OF THE ISSUES by Donald R. Earl. (lc)

IN RE: PET FOOD PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION

Doc. 311

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY
IN RE: Pet Food Products Liability Litigations ) Civil Action No. 07-2867 (NLH) ) MDL DOCKET NO. 1850 ) ) The Honorable Noel L. Hillman ) ________________________________) STATEMENT OF THE ISSUES

STATEMENT OF THE ISSUES The Appellant, Donald R. Earl, filed a product liability action in Washington State Superior Court against Menu Foods Income Fund and The Kroger Company for damages related to unrecalled pet food. Menu Foods Income Fund held two bodies of evidence which it designated `unorganized inventory' and `organized inventory'. The `organized inventory' was made up of recalled pet food relevant to the instant case. The `unorganized inventory' contained

22

unrecalled pet food evidence material to the action pending
23

in Washington State. Defendant manufacturers in the instant
24

case filed a motion, which in part asked the court for
25 26 27 28

permission to destroy all evidence material to Earl's Washington State action (unorganized inventory), which the court granted. Washington courts subsequently denied Earl's right to conduct discovery of the `unorganized inventory'

Dockets.Justia.com

1

based on the principal of comity. Earl moved the court to
2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

intervene and vacate the order permitting destruction of evidence, which the trial court denied. ISSUE 1: Does an attorney, in filing a motion to destroy evidence, violate 3.4(a) of the Rules of Professional Conduct? ISSUE 2: Did the trial court have subject matter jurisdiction to consider a motion to destroy evidence? ISSUE 3: Did the trial court, contrary to criminal statutes designed to preserve evidence, have legal authority to grant defendant manufacturers permission to destroy evidence? ISSUE 4: Did the trial court err in denying the motions to intervene and to vacate the order permitting destruction of evidence, which was material to cases over which the court does not have jurisdiction?

Dated: March 4, 2009 Respectfully submitted by:

Donald R. Earl (pro se) 3090 Discovery Road Port Townsend, WA 98368 [phone]

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I certify that on the 4th day of March, 2009, I placed in the US mail, a court copy of the `Statement of the Issues' and a CD with PDF files of the same for upload and distribution through the Court's electronic filing system to parties of record.

Dated: March 4, 2009 Respectfully submitted by:

Donald R. Earl (pro se) 3090 Discovery Road Port Townsend, WA 98368 [phone]