Home

Find Transcripts
Search Transcripts
Browse by Case Name
Browse by Expert Name
Browse by Expert Type
Product Pricing
Legal Topics
FAQ

Demo

REGISTER!

About Us
HELP!
Links
Privacy Policy

 


By clicking the "BUY NOW" button, you agree to our Transcript License Agreement
Cost: $363.00
Case: West v. Jones, et al
Testimony Date: May 08, 1997
Expert Witness: James Schockley PhD
Expert Type: Hazardous Materials
Court: State: Pennsylvania County: Philadelphia
Pages: 121

	 




                    IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF PHILADELPHIA COUNTY

                          FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

                                    CIVIL TRIAL DIVISION

                                           - - -

                  ZAIRE WEST, A MINOR, BY AND THROUGH :  DEC TERM 1995
                  HIS PARENT AND NATURAL GUARDIAN,
                  ANGELA WEST

                             VS

                  STEPHANIE AND GILLIS JONES, AND     : NO 1278
                  THE PHILADELPHIA HOUSING AUTHORITY

                                           - - -

                          COURTROOM "G," COMPLEX LITIGATION CENTER
                                     WANAMAKER BUILDING
                                 PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA

                                           - - -

                                        MAY 8, 1997

                                           - - -

                  BEFORE:  THE HONORABLE VICTOR J DI NUBILE, JR

                                           - - -


                       TESTIMONY OF JUANITA MC COY AND JAMES SHOCKLEY


                                           - - -




                       GEORGE D'ANGELIS, RPR, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
                                1321 ARCH STREET - SUITE 302
                                  PHILADELPHIA, PA 19107
                                       (215) 686-4240
 






                  APPEARANCES:




                               LAW FIRM: HERBERT MONHEIT, PC
                               BY:  PETE KOHN, ESQUIRE
                               COUNSEL FOR THE PLAINTIFF


                               LAW FIRM:  KOLBER AND FREIMAN
                               BY:  JANICE KOLBER, ESQUIRE
                                    EDITH A PEARCE, ESQUIRE
                               COUNSEL FOR PHA



                               PEPPER, HAMILTON, AND SCHEETZ
                               BY:  GERALD B SULLIVAN, ESQUIRE
                               COUNSEL FOR STEPHANIE JONES


                               ALSO PRESENT:  GILLIS JONES (PRO SE)


















                       GEORGE D'ANGELIS, RPR, OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER
                                1321 ARCH STREET - SUITE 302
                                  PHILADELPHIA, PA 19107
                                       (215) 686-4240
 









                                          I N D E X
                                          _ _ _ _ _







                  WITNESSES               DIRECT  CROSS  REDIRECT  RECROSS
                  _________               ______  _____  ________  _______







                  JUANITA MC COY                    7       37        41

                                                   30





                  JAMES SHOCKLEY           42      50      118       119

                                           54      89

                                                  115
 
                                                                             4




         1

         2                         MORNING_SESSION
                                   _______ _______

         3

         4

         5                     (THE FOLLOWING TOOK PLACE IN OPEN

         6               COURT, JURY NOT PRESENT:)

         7                           THE COURT:  NOW, DO YOU HAVE A

         8               MOTION AS WELL?

         9                           MS KOLBER:  YES  AS THIS

        10               COURT KNOWS, ABOUT A YEAR AGO JUDGE MOSS

        11               GRANTED A MOTION EXCLUDING THE CLEARVIEW --

        12               FROM THE LIABILITY IN THIS CASE, DISMISSING

        13               THE -- SPECIFICALLY THE OWNER --

        14                           THE COURT:  WHAT WAS THE REASON

        15               FOR THAT?  I AM STILL NOT SURE

        16                           MR KOHN:  JUDGE, THE REASON

        17               WAS THAT JUDGE MOSS FELT THAT IN ORDER FOR

        18               A REASONABLE JURY TO CONCLUDE THAT A CHILD

        19               SUFFERED LEAD POISONING BECAUSE OF A

        20               LIABILITY PRODUCING CONDUCT, THERE WOULD

        21               HAVE TO BE A SPECIFIC DIAGNOSIS OF LEAD

        22               POISONING, NOT MERE SYMPTOMS, NOT MERE

        23               OTHER CONDITIONS

        24                           MS KOLBER:  IN OTHER WORDS,
 
                                                                             5




         1               BLOOD LEAD LEVEL  THERE WAS NO BLOOD LEAD

         2               LEVEL TAKEN

         3                           THE COURT:  WHEN THE CHILD WAS

         4               IN CLEARVIEW
	 

 


      Copyright 2004 - 2008 CrossExam LLC
      All rights reserved.
dmca