My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
COMPLIANCE INFO
EnvironmentalHealth
>
EHD Program Facility Records by Street Name
>
E
>
EL DORADO
>
1419
>
1900 - Hazardous Materials Program
>
PR0513434
>
COMPLIANCE INFO
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/23/2019 2:23:41 PM
Creation date
10/23/2019 2:11:48 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
EHD - Public
ProgramCode
1900 - Hazardous Materials Program
File Section
COMPLIANCE INFO
RECORD_ID
PR0513434
PE
1919
FACILITY_ID
FA0001507
FACILITY_NAME
EDDIES PIZZA CAFE
STREET_NUMBER
1419
Direction
S
STREET_NAME
EL DORADO
STREET_TYPE
ST
City
STOCKTON
Zip
95206
APN
16702103
CURRENT_STATUS
01
SITE_LOCATION
1419 S EL DORADO ST
P_LOCATION
01
P_DISTRICT
001
QC Status
Approved
Scanner
FRuiz
Tags
EHD - Public
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
218
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
May-16-00 03 : 23P P _ 03 <br /> LAW OFFICES O� <br /> WILLIAM A. SCHiJCKMAN <br /> Page 2 <br /> David J. Irey <br /> May 16, 2000 <br /> Your pleading alleges three iac, iStent quantities of carbon dioxide which you claim give <br /> rise to various requirements. <br /> As I am sure you are aware,H&S Code § 6382(a)requires that a substance is not hazardous <br /> (and thus will not trigger a safety-plan requirement) unless it is in a physical state, volume or <br /> concentration effecting health. Thus, without knowing what quantity you are alleging, I cannot <br /> ascertain whether Carbon Dioxide is a hazardous substance as allegedly handled by the defendants. <br /> Without your specifying what quantity is alleged, <br /> the defendant cannot relate your allegation <br /> to the quantity that by law or regulation triggers a safety-plan requirement. <br /> The defendants raise this issue for good reason as the notices provided to them by the <br /> Government prior to your lawsuit quantified the Carbon Dioxide in pounds and alleged that <br /> defendants' handling of quantities far less than 500 pounds triggered the requirement. Your <br /> complaint alleges that the quantity handled by the defendants exceeded 500 pounds and is <br /> inconsistent with the facts as previously alleged by the Government. <br /> Compounding the deficiency of your pleading is your failure to allege that whatever quantity <br /> you claim the defendants handled met the § 6382 threshold,thus failing to allege a violation of lav <br /> and causing the complaint to be demurrable under CCP § 430.1(e). <br /> This entire matter may simply and easily be resolved by your stating which quantity you are <br /> alleging and that such a quantity was in such a physical state, volume or quantity that it meets the <br /> § 6382 threshold. If you are alleging that handling any of the three quantities triggers the <br /> requirement regardless of whether that quantity effects health,just tell me that in writing and we can <br /> proceed accordingly. <br /> Separately, my client denies that he reneged on any settlement. The offer as he understood <br /> it was to settle a disputed claim on a <br /> walkaway to the contrary (such as asis. Apparently you then attempteda written offer <br /> e the <br /> deal by requiring a judgment. If you have documentation <br /> including the proposal for a judgment) please provide it to me immediately. <br /> Yours very truly, – — <br /> WILLIAM A. SCHUCKMAN <br /> WAS/if <br /> CC: Mr. George Badway <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.