Free Response in Opposition to Motion - District Court of Arizona - Arizona

l ` -Case 2:03-cv-01555-SRB D0cument157-3‘ Filed O2/27/2006 PaQe10f3

I he 2 I Matthew R. Ffeije — Apri1 29, 2005 I
‘ ‘ I 9F02E1C .
_ - , - UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT -·
_ FOR THE STATE OF ARIZONA l ‘ _
` l MARVIN SAPIRO and GLORIA * __
. SAPIRO, his wife, I * I ‘ I · I
· . w ‘
I l Plaintiffs,. ‘* _ _ I I
_ _V. ` ‘ e ` -_ * CASE NO. CIV O3·I555 PHX SRB
~ SUNSTONE HOTELS -- N * . H .
_ I Ixwaszroas mic, suwswom. -* O _ - _‘ I _
_ ` A HOTEL INVESTORS L.P.,i -* _ .
_ . I Defendants.t * I “ I ‘,
l `__. S DEPOSITION OF MATTHEW RL EREIJE_E ‘ ,
__ _ , {O · _ ·_TAKEN AT SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA UC Y E
e E , .. ~FRiDAY, AQRIL 29, 2005 ‘ . _i ,a `
_ i · O- .RTKINSON¥BAKER, INC. lll. · nr i I_ · l _
I _,1iCOURT,REPORTERS2 I ` _ ·' _ I I
610 West Ash Street, Suite·901 ‘ _ -` -- S
__ - -‘San Diego, Ca1ifoxnia 92101`a · n _ _ I I
. `(800) 288—3376 - I _i I I I
` Reported by: IAngela.SchuItz—Me$senger, CSR NoQ 11742 ,
- I U I FILE NO,: SFOZEIC l _ S ·
. - Case 2:03-cv-01555-SRB Document 157-3 Filed O2/27/2006 Page 2 of 3 ‘ .

. Mettblrewlt. Fireftje — ApIj.fl.I_29, 2005 .
S I QFOZEIC . I
S _ _ . I B 6 I I T 88
1 IMR. DAVIS: Okay. S _ I 1 T regarding howto manage the risk created by Legionella ——
I I _2 . I THE WITNESS: There were some - there was some 2 presented by Legionella in a hotel setting; Not a . S T
S S 3 direct mail for the book and for seminars, and I don't T TS 3 I hospital setting, but in a hotel setting. p S _ I I T .
4 recall the lists that were used for those. I would I 4 _ A. You‘re not including seminars where hotel _ S S
- _ 5 assumethat it did includ_e some hotels, because some 5- officials would attend? _ T I .
- T 6 hotel employees haveattended seminars, for example, and S6 Q. Yes. _ I T _ S
S 7 I‘m sure many of them have bought the book. But I don‘t_ 7 · SA. Most ofthe risk assessments I have done have . i
8 remember there being a list of hotel chains as far as II I _ 8 been for hospitals, and so I don't recall -- I recall one S
S S _ I 9 remember. _ * _ S 9 hotel where I did tha; that was just last year. T _S
_ S 1 0 BY MR. KLEIFIELD: I- - _ S 1 0 _- Q. Okay. I I I I S I S
S I I· . - I S11 I -Q. You don't lrave`Sany specific recollection of S T T 1 1 A. But the others where I went to inspect -— I‘ve _` T_
i 12 I 'direct mailing any hotels or hotel chains about the book? I 12 done others as part of litigation investigations, I _ -
I S S 1 3 A._ Well, just since you asked the last question, 1 3 Q. Just trying to iigure out the first time you T
. T 14 now I do think of one that was directed toSsomeIIarge I 14 were involved in providing recommendations regarding
S S 15 hotels, I don't recall if it was about the book or if it S T 15 procedures that could be followed in managing the risk T
I 1 6 was abouSt Sa seminar or something else. _T 1 6 , presented by Legionella in a hotel setting. . T I`
I I17 Q, When was that done? I I S T S 17 A. Based on an investigation ofthe building, you I T
I 18 S A. Idon‘t know for sure. My guess is that it S 18 mean'? _ _ _ _ S I
S _ 1 9 would be 2002. But that's the best I can do is give that 1 9 Q. We can start with that. Then we'll expand,. S ,
- 2 O I estimate. . S I S T 2S0 Lets say based on an investigation ofthe building. ·
I _ T S 21 _ Q. You don't recall the hotel or hotel chains that S 2 1 A. Yeah. You know, I'll probably leave here and
2 2 would have been the subjects of that? - I S 2 2 remember one. Iremember the one last year. That seems
2 3 _ I A. Not by name, no. S I I I 2 3 Ito be the only one Ican remember. It was not a part of S
I 2 4 Q. Do you still have that mail list or that mailer I 2 4 litigation. T_ _` . S `
S ` 2 5 in your possession? _ S I S 2 5 Q. Okay. So let's expand nowS. How about instances
I T p 1 A. I doubt it. S 1 involved in litigation? I
2 Q. You have no krlowledge or information that, first 2 A. The first one I recall was 1999. I I
3 of all, the San Marcos was on that list, do you? S _ 3 Q. What was the next one? S S IS
S 4 A. SI have no knowledge that it was. S4 A. Well, where] actually went to the site, l
5 Q. You have no knowledge or information that the S _ 5 probably 2002 or 2003. _ S p _ .
SI 6 Sheraton chain was on that list, do you? I I I _ 6 S Q. Which property was that? J I S T
Q 7 A. I don't specifically remember, no. . I `I 7 _ A. Well, there was the Best Westem in Denver, and
SI B Q. You have no knowledge or information that the S 8 I don't remember exactly when I inspected it. You know,
S 9 Sunstone or any of the related entities were- on that . 9 I did just think of another hotel, and that was -— I T I Y _ S
I 10 list, do you'? ‘‘I` . I I 10 believe it was 2000. A hotel in Atlanta, but I didn't I p
11 A. I can‘t give you the name of any one that was on 11 actually inspect thebuilding. It was -— but I was
, _ I 12 the list. I don't have the list. 12 involved in litigation. T I S , T T
13 Q. Okay. Getting back to the original question, I 13 Q. Okay._ Let‘s` go about it this way. Recount all T
14 though, the question didn't deal with your book; The S 1 4 the hotel properties involved where you made p
. 1 5 question dealt with ifyou could recall the tirst time - 1 5 Srecomtnendaticns, whether it's in litigation or otherwise I
S 1 6 that you were involved in providing services in a hotel I 1 6 for the —- regarding the means by which procedures be
1 7 setting where you made recommendations regarding 1 7 implemented to tnanage the risk presented by Legionella.
S 1 8 procedures that could be followed to manage the risk S 1 B So we've talked about the Best Western in Denver.
1 9 created by Legionella. Q 1 9 We've talked about Atlanta. What other hotel I .
I 2 O A. So you're not talking about books or reports 2 0 properties —- I'm talking about the entire time frame,
_ 2 1 I‘ve written, but about actually going to a site and T 2 1 up to this present day -— can you recall being involved
2 2 doing a risk assessment? T 22 with where you made recommendations regarding howto
_ 2 3 Q. Sure. Where you go to the site, someone talkSs 2 3 manage Legionella risk. _
` 24 to you, whether you're at the site or not, someone 24 A. 'l`lrere’s one in Antigua. That was actually for a T
I 2 5 consults with you and you provide them recommendations x 2 5 number of hotels that were meeting there to receive
_S 23 (Pages 86 t0 89)
Case 2:03-cv-01555-SRB Document 157-3 Filed O2/27/2006 Page 3 of 3

Case 2:03-cv-01555-SRB

Document 157-3

Filed 02/27/2006

Page 1 of 3

Case 2:03-cv-01555-SRB

Document 157-3

Filed 02/27/2006

Page 2 of 3

Case 2:03-cv-01555-SRB

Document 157-3

Filed 02/27/2006

Page 3 of 3