November 4, 2014
By:
The meeting was well attended, there were roughly 100 attendees comprised of defense counsel and client representatives. Pang Ly also attended. Judge Jackson announced that there will be a new asbestos supervising judge appointed in 2015; she intends to maintain that role through June. Judge Jackson was hopeful that these town hall meetings would provide a foundation for asbestos case management going forward.
Trial Assignment
Judge Jackson indicated that the current San Francisco inventory of asbestos cases is approximately 500. This is second in the state to the combined Los Angeles/San Diego venue. Despite the heavy volume, a backlog of 200 cases with trial dates, and a shortage of judges (with several eligible for retirement in 2015), Judge Jackson indicated some optimism getting cases out to trial indicating that she now has two courtrooms available. Judge Jackson also described her thought process in how she assigns cases out to trial:
1. Preference cases and 5-year statute of limitations cases obviously get priority.
2. Judge Jackson chooses non-preference cases to assign to trial on the Thursday before their Monday scheduled trial date based on the settlement posture and whether or not the cases are ready to go. Jackson also noted that a factor she considers is whether or not the cases up for trial can be consolidated with preference or 5-year statute of limitations cases.
3. Although Judge Jackson did not express this specifically at the meeting, it has been her practice to refer similar disease cases to a trial judge like Judge O’Malley-Taylor and essentially invite a Brayton motion to consolidate. For example, Jackson has referred several living lung cancer cases to Judge O’Malley-Taylor where she would be likely to grant a Brayton motion to consolidate despite aggressive opposition from defense counsel.
4. Defense counsel at the meeting indicated their frustration with opposing Brayton’s consolidation motions. Some counsel complained about a lack of information provided in moving papers as well as a limited timeframe (often 2 days) to file an opposition. Defense counsel also noted that it was difficult to oppose a motion to consolidate especially when it involved other cases where they had limited or no information on the medical expert opinions.
Bankruptcy Issues
Judge Jackson also indicated that she was awaiting a Los Angeles Superior Court order regarding bankruptcy disclosures. She deferred much discussion at the town hall meeting and expressed a preference to wait on the Los Angeles Superior Court order which would provide a model regarding what facts and documents must be disclosed pursuant to a bankruptcy. She felt that this could be developed in committee meetings once the LA order is made public.
Settlement Conferences
Judge Jackson and Settlement Officer Pang Ly also discussed the handling of settlement conferences. Defense counsel indicated that at least a week’s notice was needed if Judge Jackson was to require an out-of-town defendant representative to be in attendance at the conference with settlement authority. Judge Jackson did essentially agree to provide adequate notice to out-of-town defendants in non-preference cases where she wants them to personally attend a Mandatory Settlement Conference.
Judge Jackson indicated that Tuesday/Thursday Settlement Conferences involving Brayton cases with Ms. Ly would continue. Judge Jackson uses Pang Ly’s report on the progress of negotiations at the settlement conferences as a means of determining which non-preference cases she will assign out to trial (e.g. cases where negotiations have stalled, or are at an impasse, are more likely to go out). But both Jackson and Ms. Ly indicated that they will excuse attorneys from attending the conferences if a representation is made by defendants that their authority is exhausted.
Discovery Disputes
Finally, Judge Jackson touched on discovery disputes and related motions to compel. She will continue to entertain informal meet and confer sessions with counsel where she will communicate her tentative thoughts on the dispute. She noted that these future informal meetings could be regularly scheduled (perhaps on every Friday) so that the need for formal hearings would decrease. She indicated that that issue would be further worked up in committee so that a formal process could be finalized.
The Town Hall adjourned with the general consensus that an asbestos department, with a dedicated Presiding Judge, should be maintained in San Francisco Superior Court.