Document Lj5q0KDakex4EJNOy4JL33e5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OP MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION ..u- l*,` . #. ^^ 'oT? ;* wc ' ,r $ V URL 11108 PRISCILLA LEE, Personal Representative of the Estate of JERRY LEE, Deceased, Plaintiff v. UNION CARBIDE CORPORATION, a FOREIGN CORPORATION, DIAMOND SHAMROCK CORPORATION, a foreign corporation, STAUFFER CHEMICAL COMPANY, a foreign corporation, TENNECO RESINS, INC., a foreign corporation, UNIROYAL, INC., a foreign corporation, ALLIED CHEMICAL CORPORATION, a foreign corporation, OCCIDENTAL CHEMICAL CORPORATION, a foreign corpora tion, FIRESTONE TIRE & RUBBER COMPANY, a foreign corporation, B. F. GOODRICH COMPANY, a foreign corporation, GOODYEAR TIRE 6 RUBBER COMPANY, a foreign corporation. Defendant / ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANTS1 MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT At a session of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan in the United Statesrficy^thousEC in Detroit, Michigan on ______ iQIC PRESIDING: JUUAS ABBS COOK. HONORABLE JULIAN ABELE COOK, JR. United States District Judge On April 18, 1985, Plaintiff, Priscilla Lee, the personal representative of the Estate of Jerry Lee (the Decedent), filed a Complaint in this Court, seeking to recover damages for the un timely demise of the Decedent from granulocytic leukemia. She UHL 11109 maintains that the Decedent contracted the disease while working at the Ford Motor Company Mount Clemens Vinyl Plant. Specifical ly, she asserts that the Decedent's death was caused by his expo sure to polyvinyl chloride products which the Defendants supplied to the Plant. On April 25, 1985, April 30, 1985 and May 9, 1985, the De fendants, Goodyear Tire 6 Rubber Company, B. F. Goodrich Company and Diamond Shamrock Corporation, respectively, filed Motions for Summary Judgment. In essence, they contend that the Plaintiff's claim is barred by the three year statute of limitations for pro duct liability actions, M.C.L.A. 5600.6805(9); M.S.A. S27A.5805 (9). On May 22, 1985, this Court entered a summary judgment in favor of Defendants, Union Carbide Corporation, Tenneco Resins, Inc., Uniroyal, Inc., Allied Corporation, Occidental Chemical Corporation and the Firestone Tire & Rubber Company on the basis of an oral ruling which was rendered at the conclusion of a hear ing on April 18, 1985. The Court opined, inter alia, that Plain tiff's claims were barred by the three year statute of limita tions . This Court believes that the opinion, which was offered at that hearing, must control as to those litigants who are pre sently before the Court. There are no substantive differences between the claims, defenses and/or the law which were asserted during the earlier proceeding, and the claims, defenses and/or the law that have been set forth by the parties in conjunction with the current motion. In essence, the positions of the re- 2 ovvvv spective parties in the two proceedings are the same. Thus, the Court will (1) incorporate the opinion which was stated on the record at the April 18, 1985 hearing, and (2) grant the Defen dants' Motions for Summary Judgment.^ IT IS SO ORDERED. $$$ IS Dated: Detroit, Michigan 1/ On April 25, 1985, Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company filed a "Motion to Amend Pleadings to Plead Affirmative Defense of Statute of Limtations." The ruling by the by the Court to day makes the consideration of this Motion unnecessary. Thus, it will not be resolved. 3 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OP MICHIGAN V SOUTHERN DIVISION /t URL 11111 PRISCILLA LEE, Personal Representative of the Estate of JERRY LEE, Deceased, Plaintiff v. UNION CARBIDE CORPORATION, a FOREIGN CORPORATION, DIAMOND SHAMROCK CORPORATION, a foreign corporation, STAUFFER CHEMICAL COMPANY, a foreign corporation, TENNECO RESINS, INC., a foreign corporation, UNIROYAL, INC., a foreign corporation, ALLIED CHEMICAL CORPORATION, a foreign corporation, OCCIDENTAL CHEMICAL CORPORATION, a foreign corpora tion, FIRESTONE TIRE 6 RUBBER COMPANY, a foreign corporation, B. F. GOODRICH COMPANY, a foreign corporation, GOODYEAR TIRE a RUBBER COMPANY, a foreign corporation. BON. JULIAN ABELE COOK, JR. Defendant / ORDER At a session of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan in the United States Courthouse in Detroit, 2Michigan on ------------ JUN S - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - PRESIDING: __________ JUUAH ABBj CO.. _________ HONORABLE JULIAN ABELE COOK, JR. United states District Judge On June 6, 1985, the Defendants filed a " . . Brief in Opposition to [the] Plaintiff's Motion for Rehearing." In es sence, they reassert all of the arguments that were set forth in their initial brief. This Court is of the opinion that the Plaintiff's Motion for Rehearing must be denied. Local Rule 17(k) provides as follows: Any motion . . . for rehearing . . . shall be served not later than 10 days after entry of such judgment or order. In this matter. Plaintiff filed the motions on May 23, 1965, more than ten days after the entry of the Order. Thus, this Court is without jurisdiction to evaluate the pending motion. However, even if the motion had been timely filed, the Plaintiff's request would have been denied because this Court be lieves that its earlier ruling was correct. Thus, since the Plaintiff has not complied with Local Rule 17<k)(3) in that she has failed to * . . . demonstrate a palpable defect by which the Court and the parties have been misled Cor] show that a different disposition of the case must result from a correction thereof." Thereforer for these reasons, Plaintiff's Motion is denied. IT IS SO ORDERED. URL11H2 Dated: Detroit, Michigan 2 Judge