In Re: Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether ("MTBE") Products Liability Litigation

Filing 4463

DECLARATION of Matthew T. Heartney in Opposition re: 4460 MOTION to Remand Phase 1 Claims Against Shell and BP Defendants.. Document filed by Atlantic Richfield Company, BP Products North America, Inc.(formerly known as Amoco Oil Company), BP West Coast LLC. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1, # 2 Exhibit 2, # 3 Exhibit 3, # 4 Exhibit 4, # 5 Exhibit 5, # 6 Exhibit 6, # 7 Exhibit 7, # 8 Exhibit 8)(Heartney, Matthew)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK In re: Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether (“MTBE”) Products Liability Litigation x : : This Document Relates To: Orange County Water District v. Unocal Corporation, et al., Case No. 04 Civ. 4968 (VSB) : Master File No. 1:00-1898 MDL No. 1358 (VSB) M21-88 The Honorable Vernon S. Broderick : : : x CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER NO. ____ (Further Proceedings on the BP and Shell Claims) WHEREAS, the claims of plaintiff Orange County Water District (the “District”) against defendants Atlantic Richfield Company, BP Products North America Inc., and BP West Coast Products LLC (the “BP Defendants”), and Shell Oil Company, Equilon Enterprises LLC, and Texaco Refining and Marketing Inc. (the “Shell Defendants”), have been remanded to this Court by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit for further proceedings; IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT 1. Within fifteen (15) days of the issuance of this Case Management Order, the BP and Shell Defendants and the District shall “meet and confer” to identify what additional documents or information is needed to address whether the District and the Orange County District Attorney (the “OCDA”) are in privity for purposes of the District’s claims in this action, and to discuss what discovery requests, including requests for admissions, interrogatories, and/or document requests, may be needed to obtain this information. The parties are encouraged to cooperate with respect to stipulations regarding authenticity and admissibility of documents. 2. Within twenty-one (21) days after the parties’ “meet and confer” discussions are completed, the BP and Shell Defendants and the District shall serve any additional discovery requests needed to address the issue of privity between the District and the OCDA. The parties shall provide substantive responses to all discovery requests served pursuant to this paragraph not later than forty-five (45) days after such discovery requests are served. 3. If the parties are unable to agree on the authenticity and admissibility of documents, the party seeking to use such documents may take a deposition pursuant to Rule 30(b)(6) of a person knowledgeable regarding the documents and/or their subject matter. 4. Within thirty (30) days after the conclusion of any discovery contemplated by paragraphs 1 through 3 of this Case Management Order, the BP and Shell Defendants may file and serve a renewed motion for summary judgment on res judicata grounds. The District’s opposition to that motion must be filed and served within __ days after the motion is filed and served, and any reply shall be filed within __ after the opposition is filed and served. Dated: _________________________________ Hon. Vernon S. Broderick U.S.D.J. 2

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.

Why Is My Information Online?