Khosravan V. Exxon Mobil Corp
No Shepard’s Signal™ As of: April 22, 2021 3:10 PM Z Khosravan v. Exxon Mobil Corp. Court of Appeal of California, Second Appellate District, Division Seven April 20, 2021, Opinion Filed B304346 Reporter 2021 Cal. App. Unpub. LEXIS 2547 * MALEKEH KHOSRAVAN, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. EXXON MOBIL CORPORATION et al., Defendants and Counsel: Weitz & Luxenberg, Benno Ashrafi and Josiah Respondents. Parker for Plaintiff and Appellant. Dentons US, Jayme C. Long, Justin Reade Sarno, Notice: NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL Alexander B. Giraldo; Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher, REPORTS. CALIFORNIA RULES OF COURT, RULE Theodore J. Boutrous, Jr., Joshua S. Lipshutz and 8.1115(a), PROHIBITS COURTS AND PARTIES FROM Joseph R. Rose for Defendants and Respondents CITING OR RELYING ON OPINIONS NOT CERTIFIED Exxon Mobil Corporation and ExxonMobil Oil FOR PUBLICATION OR ORDERED PUBLISHED, Corporation. EXCEPT AS SPECIFIED BY RULE 8.1115(b). THIS OPINION HAS NOT BEEN CERTIFIED FOR King & Spalding, Peter A. Strotz and Anne M. Voigts for PUBLICATION OR ORDERED PUBLISHED FOR THE Defendants and Respondents Chevron Corporation, PURPOSES OF RULE 8.1115. Chevron U.S.A. Inc., and Texaco, Inc. Judges: FEUER, J.; PERLUSS, P. J., McCORMICK, J.* Prior History: [*1] APPEAL from the judgment of the concurred. Superior Court of Los Angeles County, No. 19STCV20678, Maurice A. Leiter, Judge. Opinion by: FEUER, J. Disposition: Affirmed. Opinion Core Terms Malekeh Khosravan1 appeals from a judgment entered refinery, consortium, operating company, oil, predecessors, oil company, defendants', special * Judge of the Orange County Superior Court, assigned by the relationship, employees, duty of care, obligations, Chief Justice pursuant to article VI, section 6 of the California summary judgment, asbestos, facilities, refining, Constitution.
[Show full text]