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

Case 2:03-cv-01555-SRB D0cument157—15 _FiIed O2/27/2006 Page10f3

I ,;_ Matthew R. Freije — ApriI 29, 2005
‘ ’ , 9F02ElC . S
. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT l I
. M _ _ FOR THE STATE OF ARIZONA ‘ I
` MARVIN SAPIRO and GLORIA * · l _ U
SAPIRO, his wife, . * . ‘ . .' ‘
. l I PIaihtiffS,- · *_ _ ._· ._ -
. ,V- R A l .* CASE NO. CIV 03-1555 PHX_SRB
I SUNSTONE HOTELS I 0'* . I - f_
. A INVESTORS nrc, Suwewoma * - ` ‘ __ _.
_ ` . HOTEL INVESTORS L.P., * - _' ` ,
‘ ‘ _ Defehdante.‘ * 5 ‘ 11. _
` I · j I A Daposiwiom oFAMATTHSw_ R; FRSIJS ` , _
_" _ A- . TAKEN AT SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA J I I
- N N A , A SFRIDAY, APRIL 29, 2005 I _S _i U
_-l _1 :ATKINSON—BAKER, INC. U. 1. ‘ S _ ~ 1 A ·
I `-._ _;.`COURTgREPORTERS0 - I . S· ‘ .
` 610-West Ash Street, Suite 901 ‘. `— __ ·‘
‘ _ San Diego, California 92I01'· ‘- 0 ‘_ .i
at '(800) 288—3376_. - . _ . I I
n , .Reported by;` Angela SohuItz—MeSSehger,'CSR NoI lI7A2
I -5 U FILE NO,; 9F02EIC I- _· I-- . -_
0 Case 2:03-cv-01555-SRB Document 157-15 Filed O2/27/2006 Page 2 of 3

.Q " - . Matthew R. Freije + Apxi1·29, 2005 · Q ‘_
_ ._ ` A I 9F02E1C. Q Q I It ` .
_ · Q . _11 8 Q _- 12 O l QI
` ` · 1 if you looktlrroughl the list, there are ones that mention 1 Q. Have they shared that with you?
l ‘ Q 2 systems that hotels have in them. Q ` - 2 l A. They have not said that. Q _
`V ‘ - 3 Q. Well, but the question, from your perspective of i 3 l Q. You recognize that there may very well be people I
` Q 4 a person who wants to get his perspective of what people 4 out there that areconsulting as you do but consulting ‘ I `
. 5 or industries should do, though, is you‘ve got to try to 5 more with the hotel and hospitality industry that don't I . Q . .
` ` · ‘ Q 6 get it to them somehow. ` You can‘t keep it in your head. . 5 agree with what you suggest is reasonable for a hotel to ‘
. Q . 7 You have to try to communicate itto them, right? A j ` 7 achieve in satisfying its duty of care to its hotel Q Q I i ` I Q
_ 8 A. .Yes.· ` . I i _ I . I 8 guests managing the risk presented by Legionella. True?
I Q 9 I · Q. Vifhat you want to be able to do is touch these l ` ` 9 A. I don't know. A _ Q Q ` Q l
I Q ` - 1 0 people that are involved in making the decision, correct? 1 0 .. Q. Okay. You've not tried to conduct any inquiry Q. _
. 11 A. Yes. In l ‘ I 11 in that regard, have you? ` · .
Q ` 12 Q. md one ofthe things that you've done in that Q 12 . A. No. That was a long question. But the Q Q
13 respect is you've sent articles to be published in health Q 13 Legionella experts who do work in buildings of this type, I
* Q I l 14 facilities nranagenrent multiple times as a publication. " 14 ‘I don't know of any who would disagree with the need for ` - l .
· 1 5 `You've published a book dealing with healthcare Q 15 preventive measures in a hotel. l'm sure that they ` Q
‘ ‘ 1 6 facilitiQes. You have published articles in healthcare 1 6 wouldn't agree with everything I recommend just as none _ `
. 1 7 risk management, hospital infection control. Am I iight 17 ofthe experts agreewith everything of ——` `
_ 1 8 on that? - I 15 Q. And you're making —- I‘m sony. ‘ Q l `
I . 19 Q A. Yes. Among others; . ] - _ Q 1 9' ` I MR. DAVIS: Let him finish. ` . Q I i
I i 2 O . Q. You‘ve not turned to the hotel or hospitality 2 0 TI-IE WITNESS: Of the others, isthe last three ‘ ·
. ‘ 2 1 industry and the publications that it has in its industry 2Ql ‘ wcrdsi Q Q- ` Q _ l ‘ i
l I 22 that go to its people in the industry to get your ‘ l 2 2 BY MR. KLEIFIELD: . . A I Q`
Q Q 2 3 articles published there to reach out and send your .- 23 Q. Your making recommendations Qin this case based
l 2 4 nressage to the people in the hotel and the hospitalityn 2 4 upon your perspective without any continuation that that
I 2 5 industry, have you? ‘ l 2 5Q is a perspective that is endorsed or adopted within the I
* I ` ` I iis . I Q . . · 121
‘ I . an Q I 1 A. Actually, I have had discussions with thenr, but Y 1 hotel or hospitality industry, no'? J
. 2 .lraven't published them. 2 A. True.. That's —— well, you know, what you're I ‘ ` l
· 3 Q. Discussions are great and fine, but in terms of 3 implying in that question, or what I'nrQhearing, is that I
4 getting the message published and out to the people that 4 what you think Irecomnrend should be based on what the i
` - ‘ 5 read those journals, the discussions don't achieve that, 5 - hotel industry thinks. That's not who knows Legionella.
I . 6 do they'? ` · _ 6 My recommendations are based on scientific information
I 7 A. It's up to the editor of those magazines. ` 7 l provided about Legionella control in buildings, not on _ `
B Q. So have they been rejecting what you‘ve been -` B ` what the hotel or hospitality industry thinks is best for
9 submitting for their publication? 9 the hotels. They ndonlt know; tlratls not their expertise. l
-- 1 O . A. .They‘ve been rejecting the idea of publishing ‘ Q 10 Q. But what you're suggesting is that they‘re
Q 11 anything on it. I have had discussions. They are very ` 11 I devoid of expertise in that respect. And, in fact, what U ‘
· 12 . interested in the topic, apparently, until they talk with l 12 you suggest is the standard whichtlrey should apply to,
Q I 1 3 someone that advises them against publishing it. So they 1 3 or in failing to apply to it, they are failing to satisfy I .i
Q K. 14 don't apparently want to —- I don't want to address what- 1 4 their- duty of care to the hotel guests. True? . Q ` l
` 1 5 their motives are, but they have decided against it. 1 5 Q MR, DAVIS: Object to the form. There's three A
. 1 6 Q. Have they shared with you what their motives l 6 questions in that questioir. If you can understand it,
` 1 7 are'? t 17 Qyou can answer. It‘s a conrpound question.
` 1 8 A. No. That's why I don't want to guess what they 1 8 THE WITNESS: I think that it's reasonable to
1 9 are. I · n . · 19 make recommendations that they take measures that are at I i
‘ 2 O I Q. Have they shared with you that perhaps they‘ve - 2 D a very reasonable cost to protect their health —— to l . _-
2 1 consulted with sonrebody that does not agree that your 2 1. protect their hotel guests from disease.
2 2 ` perspective of what is appropriate in nrarr aging the risk 2 2 BY MR. KLEIFIELD:
2 3 is the appropriate perspective? Q . 2 3 i Q. And you believe that the recommendations you're
24 MR. DAVIS: Object to the form ofthe question. 2 4 making as part of this litigation are recommendations -—
‘ 2 5 BY MR. KLEIFIELD: Q 2 5 I'm sorry —— are things that they should have done before l
A 31 {Pages 113 to 121)
Case 2:O3—cv-01555-SRB Document 157-15 Filed O2/27/2006 Page 3 of 3

Case 2:03-cv-01555-SRB

Document 157-15

Filed 02/27/2006

Page 1 of 3

Case 2:03-cv-01555-SRB

Document 157-15

Filed 02/27/2006

Page 2 of 3

Case 2:03-cv-01555-SRB

Document 157-15

Filed 02/27/2006

Page 3 of 3