Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Complex Case Management Order- 1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FOR THE COUNTY OF SANTA BARBARA
PHILIP LETZO, HANS LINGENS, GLENN BRAATEN individually, on their own behalf, and as a class action representative on behalf of all those similarly situated, and in the interest of the general public,
Plaintiff, vs.
DAVID J. ABRAHAM, an individual; BROWN & BROWN OF CALIFORNIA, a California corporation; MONTGOMERY, FANSLER, CARLSON & VALOIS, a Merged-Out California Corporation; CHAPALA/ALL AMERICAN INSURANCE SERVICES, INC., a Dissolved California Corporation, and DOES 1 through 25, Inclusive,
Defendant.
AND RELATED ACTIONS.
))))))))))))))))))))))))))
Case No.: 1342321Related Case No. 1372147
COMPLEX CASE MANAGEMENT ORDER,
ASSIGNED JUDGE: Hon. Donna D. GeckDEPARTMENT: FourHEARING DATE: June 7, 2013TIME: 1:30 p.m.
On November 3, 2010, the Court designated this matter as complex litigation under
the California Standards of Judicial Administration.
The purpose of this order is to establish a case management plan for this complex
litigation in order to avoid inconsistent or duplicative rulings, reduce the costs of litigation, assist
the parties in resolving their disputes and reduce the costs and difficulties of discovery and trial.
Complex Case Management Order- 2
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
This complex case management order supersedes all prior complex case management orders in
this case.
On any matter about which this order is silent, the Code of Civil Procedure, other
statutes, the California Rules of Court, and the local rules of this Court shall be controlling.
On June 7, 2013 a complex case management conference was conducted in this
matter. An unofficial copy of this Order may be posted on the Court’s web page at
http://www.sbcourts.org/general_info/judicial_officers/dgeck/ as a convenience to Court and
counsel, but the filed order entered by the Court is the only operative order. The parties
stipulate and agree that the posting of the Complex Case Management Conference Order
on the court’s website is equivalent to service as of the date of the posting and further
notice of this Complex Case Management Order is waived.
The Court considered at the conference, pursuant to Appendix to California Rules of
Court, Div I, section 19(e) (Initial Case Management Conference, Complex Litigation), and Rule
212(i) of the California Rules of Court (Case Management Conference, Generally), the following
subjects, and makes the following orders:
1. SEVERANCE, CONSOLIDATION OR COORDINATION (App. to CRC, Div I,
§19(e)(2))
1.1. Severance
1.2. Consolidation
Andrade, et al. v. American Equity Investment Life Insurance Company, et al,,
Case Number 1372147 filed on October 10-14-10, and Phillip Letzo et al vs David Abraham et
al, Case No. 1342321 filed on 03-09-10 are hereby consolidated for purposes of case
management with Phillip Letzo et al vs David Abraham et al, Case No. 1342321 designated as
the lead case.
The Letzo and Andrade actions are hereby consolidated for purposes of discovery,
in order to avoid wasting judicial and party resources on conducting duplicate discovery,
Complex Case Management Order- 3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
including depositions, in both action and may be consolidated for all purposes upon proper
motion at a future Complex Case Management Conference.
The Letzo and Andrade actions are hereby consolidated for purposes of trial, in
order to avoid wasting judicial and party resources. The Letzo and Andrade actions are,
however, not merged and therefore the pleadings in these actions are to remain separate.
1.3. Coordination
Andrade, et al. v. American Equity Investment Life Insurance Company, et al,,
Case Number 1372147, on file with this Court was deemed a related case by Court order on
October 20, 2010 with Phillip Letzo et al vs David Abraham et al, Case No. 1342321 Filed on
03-09-10 designated as the lead case.
2. STATUS OF THE PARTIES AND PLEADINGS
2.1. Current Status
Letzo action:Operative Pleading: 11-10-10 Complaint for Compensatory and Punitive Damages Class Action Second Amended, Filed by Plaintiff. A Motion for Leave to File Third Amended Complaint was granted at the 4/20/11 CCMC and a Third Amended Complaint was filed by Plaintiffs.
Party Plaintiff Parties DefendantPHILIP LETZO, HANS LINGENS, GLENN BRAATEN individually, on their own behalf, and as a class action representative on behalf of all those similarly situated, and in the interest of the general public
Brown & Brown of California, Inc.; Chapala/All American; Abraham
Party Defendant Served Severed Demurrer Motion to
Strike
Answer Dismissed Judgment
Brown & Brown of California, Inc. 11/3/10 Demurrer to TAC and
set for hearing on
7/20/11
1/22/10 Answer to SAC9/13/11 Answer to TAC
Chapala/All American 11/3/10 Demurrer to TAC and
set for hearing on
7/20/11
1/22/10 Answer to SAC9/13/11 Answer to TAC
Abraham 11/3/10 1/22/10
Complex Case Management Order- 4
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Andrade action: DISMISSEDOperative Pleading: 10-14-10 Complaint for Damages Negligence Negligence Per Se Negligent Misrepresentation Intentional Misrepresenation etc, Filed by Plaintiff. A Motion for Leave to File First Amended Complaint was granted at the 4/20/11 CCMC. and a First Amended Complaint was filed by Plaintiffs
Party Plaintiff Parties DefendantCelina Andrade; William Batelaan; Shirley Batelaan; Beverly Bosche; Bonita Braaten; Mary Alice Cooper; Jack Cote; August Dekker; Gary Durbiano; Marilyn Eissler; Daniel Flesher; Jacqueline Flesher; Gary Geonfriddo; Tamara Gudgeon; William Klingemann; Carolynn Leoppke; Elizabeth Letzo; Philip Letzo; Hans Lingens; Michael Namm; Terry-Mayer Namm; Christopher Odell; Ciano Orca; Lloyd Palmer; Karen Palmer; Robert Porter; Manuel Rios; Bob Rios; Joan Roberston; Jimmie Thaten; Louise Wilson; Robert Zarit; Macey Lee Zarit
Defendant American Equity Investment Life Insurance Company; Defendant Sun Life Assurance Company of Canada US; Defendant North American Company for Life and Health Insurance; Defendant USG Annuity and Life Insurance Company; Defendant ING USA Annuity and Life Insurance Company; Defendant Allianz Life Insurance Company of North America; Defendant Lincoln Benefit Life Company; Defendant Amerius Lilfe Insurance Company; Defendant Transamerica Life Insurance Company; Defendant Liberty Bankers Life Insurance Company; Defendant Great American Life Insurance Company; Defendant Continental Assurance Company; Defendant Designs in Life Insurance Marketing LLC; Defendant: Shawn C Jeanes; Defendant: Susan Rodriguez;
Party Defendant Served Severed Demurrer Motion to
Strike
Answer Dismissed Judgment
Defendant American Equity Investment Life Insurance Company
11/11/10 12/17/10 7/29/11
Defendant Sun Life Assurance Company of Canada US
11/15/10 1/21/11 11/21/12
Defendant North American Company for Life and Health Insurance
11/15/10 1/4/11 5/26/11
Defendant USG Annuity and Life Insurance Company
4/9/12
Defendant ING USA Annuity and Life Insurance Company, individually and as successor-in-interest to USG Annuity and Life Insurance Company.
1/11/118/18/11
Amended Answer
4/9/12
Defendant Allianz Life Insurance Company of North America
1/14/11 2/14/11
5/26/11Answer to
FAC
4/19/12
Defendant Lincoln Benefit Life Company
5/31/11
Defendant Amerus Life Insurance Company (nka Aviva Life and Annuity Company)
1/14/11 2/28/11 6/5/12
Defendant Commercial Union Life Insurance Company of America (nka CGU Life Insurance Company of America)
3/9/11 5/31/11 Answer to
FAC
6/5/12
Defendant Transamerica Life Insurance Company
11/15/10 1/14/115/27/11
11/21/11
Defendant Liberty Bankers Life Insurance Company
4/4/11
Defendant Great American Life Insurance Company
11/10/10 12/30/11 9/14/11
Defendant Continental Assurance Company
11/15/10 MTS1/3/11
1/3/11 11/21/12
Complex Case Management Order- 5
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Party Defendant Served Severed Demurrer Motion to
Strike
Answer Dismissed Judgment
Defendant Fidelity & Guaranty Life Insurance Company
12/18/11
Defendant Designs in Life Insurance Marketing LLC
6/7/11
Defendant: Shawn C Jeanes 6/7/11
Defendant: Susan Rodriguez 12/27/10 9/13/11 Answer to FAC
Settlement Reached – Dismissal to be filed
upon completion
of settlement documents
2.2. Deadline and Orders on the Status of Parties and Pleadings
2.3. Cross-Actions Deemed Filed, Served And Answered
2.4. Pleadings Deemed Filed
2.5. Express Indemnity Claims
3. COUNSEL
3.1. Master Counsel List
The master list of counsel, their e-mail addresses and the parties is: (App. to CRC,
Div I, §19(e)(11)):NAME E-MAIL ADDRESS PARTYLawrence Borys mailto:[email protected] Brown & Brown Insurance Services of
California, Inc.; Susan RodriguezPascale Gagnon mailto:[email protected] Brown & Brown Insurance Services of
California, Inc.; Susan RodriguezAngelina Grego mailto:[email protected] Brown & Brown Insurance Services of
California, Inc.Michael L. Sandford mailto:[email protected] David J. AbrahamPaul K. Schrieffer mailto:[email protected] Chapala/All American Insurance Services,
Inc.; Susan RodriguezDonald S. Zalewski mailto:[email protected] Chapala/All American Insurance Services,
Inc.; Susan RodriguezLaQualia Oliver mailto:[email protected] Chapala/All American Insurance Services,
Inc.; Susan RodriguezAdriana Cisneros mailto:[email protected] Chapala/All American Insurance Services,
Inc.; Susan RodriguezNikki Marcos mailto:[email protected] Chapala/All American Insurance Services,
Inc.; Susan RodriguezJames Hudgens mailto:[email protected] PlaintiffRaymond Chandler mailto:[email protected] PlaintiffTheresa Cordero mailto:[email protected] PlaintiffMark E Davis mailto:[email protected] ING USA Annuity and Life Insurance
Complex Case Management Order- 6
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
NAME E-MAIL ADDRESS PARTYCompany
Debbie J. Myers mailto:[email protected] ING USA Annuity and Life Insurance Company
John Peer mailto:[email protected] Continental Assurance CompanyJeff Dollinger mailto:[email protected] Continental Assurance Company
Daphne Subar mailto:[email protected] Continental Assurance Company
Dawn Valentine mailto:[email protected] Sun Life Assurance Company of Canada; Amerus Life Insurance Company (nka Aviva Life and Annuity Company);Commercial Union Life Insurance Company of America (nka CGU Life Insurance Company of America)
Yolanda Nesbitt mailto:[email protected] Sun Life Assurance Company of Canada; Amerus Life Insurance Company (nka Aviva Life and Annuity Company);Commercial Union Life Insurance Company of America (nka CGU Life Insurance Company of America)
Martin Rosen mailto:[email protected] Sun Life Assurance Company of Canada; Amerus Life Insurance Company (nka Aviva Life and Annuity Company);Commercial Union Life Insurance Company of America (nka CGU Life Insurance Company of America)
Margaret Levy mailto:[email protected] Transamerica Life Insurance Co.Becky Belke mailto:[email protected] Transamerica Life Insurance Co.Bart Flood mailto:[email protected] Allianz Life Insurance Company of North
AmericaMichael Bradley mailto:[email protected] Allianz Life Insurance Company of North
AmericaJoel Mark mailto:[email protected] Fidelity & Guaranty Life Insurance Co.Danielle R. Everson mailto:[email protected] Fidelity & Guaranty Life Insurance Co.Jessie Stomski mailto:[email protected] Fidelity & Guaranty Life Insurance Co.
[email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]
3.2. Liaison Counsel
3.3. Liaison Groups
3.4. Pro Hac Vice Admission of Counsel
Complex Case Management Order- 7
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Trial Counsel
The names and addresses of the attorneys who will try the case are (CRC, Rule
212(i)(9)):
Letzo action:COUNSEL E-MAIL ADDRESS PARTY
James Hudgens [email protected] PlaintiffsRaymond Chandler [email protected] PlaintiffsLawrence Borys [email protected] Brown & Brown Insurance Services of
California, Inc.Pascale Gagnon [email protected] Brown & Brown of California, Inc.Michael L. Sandford [email protected] David J. AbrahamPaul K. Schrieffer mailto:[email protected] Chapala/All American Insurance Services,
IncDonald S. Zalewski mailto:[email protected] Chapala/All American Insurance Services,
Inc
Andrade action:COUNSEL E-MAIL ADDRESS PARTY
James Hudgens [email protected] PlaintiffsRaymond Chandler [email protected] Plaintiffs
Lincoln Benefit Life CompanyLaura L. Geist [email protected] American Equity Investment Life Insurance
CompanyMitchell J Popham [email protected] Great American Life Insurance CompanySusan Welde [email protected] Great American Life Insurance CompanyRobert Phillips North American Company for Life and
Health InsuranceMark E Davis [email protected] ING USA Annuity and Life Insurance
CompanyJeff Dollinger [email protected] Continental Assurance CompanyJohn Peer [email protected] Continental Assurance CompanyMartin Rosen [email protected] Sun Life Assurance Company of Canada;
Martin Rosen [email protected] Amerus Life Insurance Company (nka Aviva Life and Annuity Company);
Martin Rosen [email protected] Commercial Union Life Insurance Company of America (nka CGU Life Insurance Company of America)
Margaret Levy [email protected] Transamerica Life Insurance Co.Michael Bradley [email protected] Allianz Life Insurance Company of North
AmericaLawrence Borys [email protected] Susan RodriguezPascale Gagnon [email protected] Susan RodriguezPaul K. Schrieffer [email protected] Susan RodriguezDonald S. Zalewski [email protected] Susan Rodriguez
Complex Case Management Order- 8
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
4. MOTIONS
4.1. Preliminary Legal Question Schedule
4.2. Class Certification Motion
Letzo action:Motion: 06/07/13 - Plaintiffs’ Motion for Class Certification – Hearing 08/09/13 @ 1:30 pm in Dept. 4.
Moving Party Responding Parties Plaintiffs Defendants David Abraham, Chapala/All American Insurance Services, Inc.
and Brown & Brown Insurance Services of California, Inc.
Responding Parties Hearing Submitted Disposition
Brown & Brown Insurance Services of California, Inc. Chapala/All American Insurance Services, Inc.David Abraham
Motion: 10/17/12 – Motion Requesting Hearing on Class Certification Motion Be Held December 12, 2012, and Order to Provide Notice of Action to Putative Class Member. Filed but withdrawn.*
Moving Party Responding Parties Plaintiffs Abraham, Chapala, Brown & Brown
Responding Parties Hearing Submitted Disposition
Precertification communication with potential class members is constitutionally protected
speech. Court approval is not required for written pre-certification communication to putative
class members and any such limitation amounts to prior restraint. Parris v. Sup. Ct. (2003) 109
Cal.App.4th 285, 298-299.
Motion: 11/15/12 – Brown & Brown’s Ex Parte Application for an Order Allowing Memorandum of Points And Authority in Opposition to Plaintiffs’ Motion for Class Certification to Exceed 20 Pages
Moving Party Responding Parties Brown & Brown Plaintiffs
Responding Parties Hearing Submitted Disposition
Plaintiffs 11/15/12 Granted.
Complex Case Management Order- 9
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Motion: 11/20/12 – Brown & Brown’s Ex Parte Application for an Order Continuing Hearing on Plaintiffs’ Motion for Class Certification for 45 Days
Moving Party Responding Parties Brown & Brown Plaintiffs
Responding Parties Hearing Submitted Disposition
Plaintiffs 11/20/12 Granted.
Motion: 12/05/12 – Brown & Brown ‘s Motion to Strike Declaration of June Arago Submitted in support of Plaintiffs’ Motion for Class Certification
Moving Party Responding Parties Brown & Brown Plaintiffs
Responding Parties Hearing Submitted Disposition
Plaintiffs 12/05/12 Granted in part.
Motion: 12/19/12 – Brown & Brown ‘s Motion for Protective Order re Plaintiffs Sending of Notice of Class Action Without Court Pre-Approval
Moving Party Responding Parties Brown & Brown Plaintiffs
Responding Parties Hearing Submitted Disposition
Plaintiffs Denied.
Motion: 01/08/13 Plaintiffs’ Ex Parte Application for an Order Allowing Two Pages to be Added to the Motion for Class Certification
Moving Party Responding Parties Plaintiffs Chapala and Brown & Brown
Responding Parties Hearing Submitted Disposition
Chapala and Brown & Brown 11/20/12 Granted.
Complex Case Management Order- 10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
4.3. Demurrers, Motions to Strike and Summary Adjudication Motions (App. to
CRC, Div I, §19(e)(7))
Letzo action:Motion: 06-01-11 Defendant Brown & Brown of California Inc's Demurrer to Third Amended Complaint; HRG: 7/20/11 @ 1:30 pm in Dept. 4
Moving Party Responding Parties Brown & Brown of California, Inc. Plaintiffs
Responding Parties Hearing Submitted Disposition
7/20/11 The court overrules the demurrers of Brown & Brown of California, Inc., to the fourth and sixth causes of action in the third amended complaint of plaintiffs Philip Letzo, Hans Lingens, and Glenn Braaten.
Motion: 06-01-11 Defendant Chapala/All American Insurance Services, Inc.’s Demurrer to Third Amended Complaint; HRG 7-20-11 1:30 pm SB4
Moving Party Responding Parties Chapala/All American Insurance Services, Inc
Plaintiffs
Responding Parties Hearing Submitted Disposition
7/20/11 The court overrules the demurrers of Chapala/All American Insurance Services, Inc. to the fourth and sixth causes of action in the third amended complaint of plaintiffs Philip Letzo, Hans Lingens, and Glenn Braaten.
Andrade action:Motion: 02-10-11 Notice of Demurrer Defendant Susan Rodriquez’ Demurrer to Complaint and Memorandum of Ps and As in Support Thereof Hrg 4/06/11 9:30am Dept 4, Filed by Susan Rodriguez
Moving Party Responding Parties Defendant Susan Rodriguez Plaintiffs
Responding Parties Hearing Submitted Disposition
4/20/11* The court sustains defendant Susan Rodriguez’s demurrer to the first (negligence), second (negligent misrepresentation), third (intentional misrepresentation), and ninth (B&P Code § 17200, et seq.) causes of action in plaintiffs’ complaint without leave to amend. The court sustains defendant Susan Rodriguez’s demurrer to the sixth (aiding and abetting a breach of fiduciary duty), seventh (colluding with a disloyal fiduciary), tenth (conversion and aiding and abetting conversion) and eleventh (elder abuse) causes of action in plaintiffs’ complaint with leave to amend on or before May 2, 2011.
Complex Case Management Order- 11
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
For purposes of clarity, the court rules that the fourth (breach of fiduciary duty), fifth (violation of Ins. Code § 10509.4) and eighth (negligent supervision and retention) causes of action are not asserted against defendant Susan Rodriguez.Defendant Susan Rodriguez’s motion to strike is moot
Motion: 06-01-11 Defendant Susan Rodriguez's Demurrer to FAC; HRG: 7/20/11 @ 1:30 pm in Dept. 4Moving Party Responding Parties
Defendant Susan Rodriguez PlaintiffsResponding Parties Hearing Submitted Disposition
7/20/11 The court overrules Susan Rodriguez’s demurrer to the sixth, seventh, tenth and eleventh causes of action in the first amended complaint of Celina Andrade, et al.
Motion: 06-01-11 Defendant Susan Rodriguez's Motion to Strike Portions of FAC; HRG: 7/20/11 @ 1:30 pm in Dept. 4
Moving Party Responding Parties Defendant Susan Rodriguez Plaintiffs
Responding Parties Hearing Submitted Disposition
7/20/11 The court denies Susan Rodriguez’s motion to strike allegations regarding and the prayer for punitive damages in the first amended complaint of Celina Andrade, et al.
4.4. Discovery Motions
Letzo action: Motion: Motion: TBD – Plaintiffs intend to file a motion no later than by September 14, 2012, seeking to be allowed to begin Stage Two Discovery. Not Filed
Moving Party Responding Parties Plaintiffs
Responding Parties Hearing Submitted Disposition
Motion: 10/31/12 – Motion to Compel Compliance with Subpoena for Records Served Upon California Department of Insurance and Subpoena for Personal Appearance and Records Served Upon June Arago
Moving Party Responding Parties Brown & Brown of California, Inc. Third Party – DOI
Plaintiffs
Complex Case Management Order- 12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Responding Parties Hearing Submitted Disposition
Third Party – DOI and Plaintiffs Denied.
Motion: 02/20/13 – Motion to Compel Further Responses and Production by Chapala and Request for Sanctions – Hearing 02/20/13 at 9:30 a.m. Dept. 4
Moving Party Responding Parties Plaintiffs Chapala
Responding Parties Hearing Submitted Disposition
Motion: 02/20/13 – Motion to Compel Further Responses and Production by Brown & Brown and Request for Sanctions – Hearing 02/20/13 at 9:30 a.m. Dept. 4
Moving Party Responding Parties Plaintiffs Brown & Brown
Responding Parties Hearing Submitted Disposition
Andrade action: Motion: 08-12-11 Notice of Motion and Motion for an Order Quashing or Modifying Subpoena Duces Tecum Declaration of Raymond Chandler Hrg 9/21/11 1:30pm Dept 4, Filed by Plaintiff
Moving Party Responding Parties Plaintiffs Susan Rodriguez
Responding Parties Hearing Submitted Disposition
Susan Rodriguez 9/21/11 Plaintiffs’ motion to modify the subpoena duces tecum issued by defendant Susan Rodriguez to West Coast Life Insurance Company is GRANTED. No documents shall be produced by West Coast Life Insurance Company unless and until all personal medical information for each plaintiff has been redacted and/or removed from the records.
Motion: -11 Notice of Motion and Motion for Compliance with Amended Subpoena for Documents Served on American Equity; Memorandum of Points & Authorities; Declaration of Donald Zalewski; Request for Monetary Sanctions of $1,870 - Hrg 12/7/11 1:30pm Dept 4, Filed by Plaintiff
Moving Party Responding Parties Susan Rodriguez American Equity
Responding Parties Hearing Submitted Disposition
Complex Case Management Order- 13
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
American Equity 12/7/11 Susan Rodriguez’s motion is GRANTED. American Equity to comply with subpoena.
4.5. Other Motions
Letzo action:Motion: Motion for an Order Compelling Joinder of Omitted Parties, or in the Alternative for Consolidation - Intent to File for hearing at 3/2/11 CMC.
Moving Party Responding Parties Brown & Brown of California, Inc. Plaintiffs
Responding Parties Hearing Submitted Disposition
3/2/11 The defendants’ motion to compel joinder of the insurers as defendants is denied.
Motion: Motion to Compel Bel Air Notice – Plaintiffs have agreed to postpone the determination of this issue
Moving Party Responding Parties Plaintiffs Abraham, Chapala, Brown & Brown
Responding Parties Hearing Submitted Disposition
Andrade action:Motion: 03-28-11 Notice of Motion for Leave to File First Amended Complaint to Add New Plaintiffs and Amend Prayer; Memorandum of P's and A's; Declaration of Raymond Chandler; Proposed FAC; HRG: 4/20/11 @ 3 pm in Dept. 4, Filed by Celina Andrade
Moving Party Responding Parties Andrade Plaintiffs Andrade Defendants
Responding Parties Hearing Submitted Disposition
4/20/11 The court grants plaintiffs motion for leave to file a first amended complaint for the limited purposes of adding six new plaintiffs, adding a new Exhibit C listing insurance products issued by defendants to plaintiffs prior to 2000, adding a prayer for attorney fees pursuant to the Elder Abuse statute – W&I Code § 15657.5, and adding allegations to the sixth, seventh, tenth and eleventh causes of action regarding defendant Susan Rodriguez as permitted by the ruling on the demurrer. Plaintiffs shall make no other amendments to the complaint. The court
Complex Case Management Order- 14
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
further orders that plaintiffs shall clearly state in the first amended complaint that defendant Susan Rodriguez is not a defendant in the first, second, third and eighth causes of action, either by listing all the defendants to which those causes of action do apply or by stating it applies to all defendants except Susan Rodriguez. Plaintiffs shall file the first amended complaint on or before May 2, 2011
Motion: Motion for Determination of Good Faith Settlement
Moving Party Responding Parties North American Company for Life and Health Insurance
Susan Rodriguez
Responding Parties Hearing Submitted Disposition
5/25/11 Granted.
Motion: 05-06-11 Notice of Motion and Motion for Consolidation of Actions for All Purposes Hrg 6/01/11 1:30pm Dept 4, Filed by Brown & Brown of California
Moving Party Responding Parties Brown & Brown of California, Inc. Plaintiffs, certain insurer defendants in Andrade action
Responding Parties Hearing Submitted Disposition
6/1/11 Brown & Brown’s motion to consolidate the Letzo and Andrade actions for trial purposes is granted. This order is in addition to the previous orders consolidating the actions for discovery and case management purposes. However, the court is not ordering that the cases be merged as the pleadings in the two cases are to be kept separate. This means that the defendants in the Andrade action are not defendants in the Letzo action and will not be affected by the class action issues. Pursuant to California Rules of Court, Rule 3.350(b), the lead case shall be Case No. 1342321, the Letzo action, as it is the “lowest numbered case in the consolidated case.”
Motion: 06-27-11 American Equity Investment Life Insurance Company’s Motion to Determine Good Faith Settlement; HRG: 07/20/2011 at 1:30pm in Dept 4
Moving Party Responding Parties American Equity Investment Life Insurance Company
Susan Rodriguez
Responding Parties Hearing Submitted Disposition
7/20/11 The court grants defendant American Equity Investment Life Insurance Company’s motion for determination of good faith settlement with plaintiffs Daniel Flescher, Jacqueline Flescher, Philip Letzo, Robert Porter, Margaret Porter, Manuel Rios, Joan Robertson and Robert Zarit.
Complex Case Management Order- 15
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Claims against defendant American Equity Investment Life Insurance Company for contribution or indemnity are barred as provided in CCP §§ 877 and 877.6(c).
Motion: 07-26-11 Notice of Motion Great American Life Insurance Companys Motion for Determination of Good Faith Settlement Pursuant to CCP Sections 877 and 87706a2 Declaration of Susan J Welde Hrg 8/31/11 9:30am Dept 4, Filed by Great American Life Insurance
Moving Party Responding Parties Great American Life Insurance Company
Susan Rodriguez
Responding Parties Hearing Submitted Disposition
Susan Rodriguez 8/31/11 Great American’s motion for determination that the settlements between Great American and the settling plaintiffs were made in good faith within the meaning of Code of Civil Procedure Sections 877 and 877.6 is granted. Any current or future claims against Great American for equitable indemnity or contribution based upon the principles of comparative fault are barred..
Motion: 11-09-11 Transamerica Life Insurance Company’s Motion for Determination of Good Faith Settlement
Moving Party Responding Parties Transamerica Life Insurance Company
Responding Parties Hearing Submitted Disposition
11/9/11 Granted.
Motion: 11-09-11 Fidelity & Guaranty Life Insurance Company’s Motion for Determination of Good Faith Settlement
Moving Party Responding Parties Fidelity & Guaranty Life Insurance Company
Responding Parties Hearing Submitted Disposition
11/9/11 Granted.
Motion: 12-14-11 Susan Rodriguez’s Motion to Compel Compliance with Subpoena by American Equity Moving Party Responding Parties
Susan Rodriguez American Equity
Responding Parties Hearing Submitted Disposition
American Equity 12/14/11 Granted
Complex Case Management Order- 16
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Motion: 03/14/12 Allianz Life Insurance Company of North America’s Motion for Determination of Good Faith Settlement
Moving Party Responding Parties Allianz Life Insurance Company of North America
Responding Parties Hearing Submitted Disposition
3/14/12 Granted.Motion: 04/04/12 ING USA Annuity and Life Insurance Company’s Motion for Determination of Good Faith Settlement
Moving Party Responding Parties ING USA Annuity and Life Insurance Company
Responding Parties Hearing Submitted Disposition
04/04/12 Granted.
Motion: 04/25/12 Commercial Union Life Insurance Company’s Motion for Determination of Good Faith Settlement
Moving Party Responding Parties Commercial Union Life Insurance Company
Responding Parties Hearing Submitted Disposition
04/25/12 Granted.
Motion: 10-17-12 - Motion for Determination of Good Faith Settlement by Continental Assurance Company and Valley Forge Life Insurance Company,
Moving Party Responding Parties Continental Assurance Company and Valley Forge Life Insurance Company
Susan Rodriguez
Responding Parties Hearing Submitted Disposition
Complex Case Management Order- 17
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
4.6. Special Discovery (App. to CRC, Div I, §19(e)(3))
4.6.1. List of Undisputed Facts
4.6.2. Defect List
4.6.3. Required Statements
4.6.4. Inspection and Testing
4.6.5. Expert Information Exchange
4.7. Stages of Discovery
Discovery shall proceed in stages, until further Order of the Court.
4.7.1. Stage One
The scope of discovery the Parties will be entitled to conduct in Stage One will be
limited to the following:
1. Issues related to the named Plaintiffs, i.e., Letzo, Lingens and
Braaten, in their individual capacity;
2. Records pertaining to individuals having executed written
authorization relating to the release of records relating to insurance products transactions;
3. Issues relating to class certification, i.e., matters going to
commonality, typicality, and numerosity.
Stage One discovery to be completed by April 19, 2013.
4.7.2. Stage Two
The scope of discovery the Parties will be entitled to conduct in Stage Two will
include merit discovery, including items 1 and 2 of Stage One.
Stage Two discovery to be completed by December 31, 2013.
4.7.3. Stage Three
Stage Three discovery will consists of Expert Discovery to be completed per
code.
Complex Case Management Order- 18
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
4.8. Protective Orders (App. to CRC, Div I, §19(e)(4))
The Parties are subject to the terms of the Protective Order attached to the
Complex Case Management Order of April 20, 2011 as Exhibit A, including the stipulated
Addendum thereto approved by the Court on April 29, 2013.
4.9. Document Depository (App. to CRC, Div I, §19(e)(9))
4.10. Interrogatories
4.11. Depositions (App. to CRC, Div I, §19(e)(8))Deponent General Purpose Date
Plaintiff Letzo, Plaintiff Lingens Plaintiff Braaten
Party Per Stages
Celina Andrade; William Batelaan; Shirley Batelaan; Beverly Bosche; Bonita Braaten, Mary Alice Cooper; Jack Cote; Jody Cote; August Dekker; Margaret Dekker; James Durbiano; Martha Durbiano; Marilyn Eissler; Daniel Flesher; Jacqueline Flesher; Barbara C. Forester; Carol A. Giofriddo; Gary Gionfriddo; Tamara Gudgeon; Frank Johnson; Bill Klingemann; Elizabeth Letzo; Philip Letzo; Barbara Jean Lingens; Hans Lingens; Carolynn Loeppke; Carlo J. Logan; Guadalupe Lopez;Daniel O. Marron; Terry Mayer-Namm; Thomas Mills; Michael Namm; Christopher Odell; Ciano Orca; Rosa M. Orca; Lloyd Palmer; Karen Palmer; Robert Porter; Margaret Porter; Bob Rios;
Percipient - Party Per Stages
Complex Case Management Order- 19
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Deponent General Purpose DateGeraldine Rios; Manuel Rios; Joan Robertson; Jim Thaten; Marta Weston; David Wilson; Louise Wilson; Robert Zarit; Macey Zarit; Susan Zarit; Steven ZaritAbraham Party Per Stages Susan Rodriguez Percipient and PMK Per Stages Catalina Martinez Percipient Per Stages Experts - TBD Experts Per Stages Certain insurer defendants in Andrade action re production of records only
Party/Percipient/PMK Per Stages
4.12. Discovery Referee (CCP §639(a)(5))
4.12.1. Appointment
It is not necessary for the Court to appoint a referee to hear and determine all or
some discovery motions and disputes relevant to discovery in the action and to report findings
and make a recommendation thereon.
The procedure to appoint the discovery referee shall be included in any future
order wherein the issue is considered.
4.12.2. Additional Discovery By Leave Of Discovery Referee
5. ELECTRONIC CASE MANAGEMENT
The Court does not order that documents filed electronically in a central electronic
depository available to all parties are deemed served on all parties. (Rule 1830, CRC.)
The parties stipulate and agree to electronic service of pleadings (CCP §1010.6(a)
(6)) In that regard, the Parties shall use the service list specified in Section 3.1 of the current
Complex Case Management Order.
The procedure for electronic case management shall be included in any future
order wherein the issue is considered.
Complex Case Management Order- 20
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
6. ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION AND MANDATORY
SETTLEMENT CONFERENCES (App. to CRC, Div I, §19(e)(5))
6.1. Alternate Dispute Resolution (CRC, Rule 212(i)(1)-(2))
The procedure for ADR shall be included in any future order wherein the issue is
considered.
6.2. Mandatory Settlement Conferences (App. to CRC, Div I, §19(e)(5); CRC, Rule
212(i)(10))
A Mandatory Settlement Conference shall be as set at a future CCMC in
DEPARTMENT FIVE. Settlement conference statements are to be filed by each party at least 5
days prior. ALL PARTIES NECESSARY TO EFFECT A SETTLEMENT MUST BE
PRESENT AT THIS CONFERENCE IN-PERSON.
7. TRIAL
This matter shall be set for Trial at a future CCMC at which time the Trial Date
procedure shall be set forth.
The preliminary estimated length of trial, including pre-trial motions and jury
selection is still at a very preliminary stage but would appear to be around 40 days (CRC, Rule
212(i)(6)).
8. SCHEDULE OF CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCES
The Court will conduct further complex case management conferences approximately
every seven (7) weeks on Wednesday afternoons in this department. (CRC, Rule 212(i)(11)-(12);
App. to CRC, Div I, §19(e)(12)).
In order to reduce file congestion:
(1) No Courtesy copies shall be delivered to the Court;
(2) Where the Court’s orders require only service of a document the parties shall not
also file copies of that document.
All law and motion matters shall be set for hearing at a complex case management
conference. If a matter is not set for a scheduled complex case management conference hearing,
Complex Case Management Order- 21
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
the notice of motion shall contain a certificate by counsel for the moving party why special
setting is required.
The parties shall not lodge cases, statutes, rules or other authorities that are
readily available through LEXIS legal research. If a party cites to authority that is not
readily available, the court’s preference is that the party provide a URL address where the
court can access the authority. As a last resort, the party can lodge a paper copy with the
court.
On or before the Friday before a scheduled complex case management
conference, the parties shall submit to the Court by e-mail at [email protected] an
electronic copy of the previous complex case management order with any changes or
additions inserted into the order in a contrasting colored font. The parties shall meet and
confer and, if possible, e-mail a single proposed complex case management conference
order to the court with the suggested changes of different parties inserted in different
colored fonts. If the parties are unable to so meet and confer and prepare a single
proposed case management conference, each party may submit to the Court by e-mail at
[email protected] an electronic copy of the previous complex case management order
with any changes or additions inserted into the order in a contrasting colored font.
Microsoft Word is the preferred format and proposals limited to proposed findings and orders
with very limited surplusage or argumentative material are strongly encouraged. The Court
considers transmittal letters or e-mails to the Court concerning Proposed Case Management
Orders or amendments thereto as ex parte communications and does not read or review them.
The Court has authorized only submission of a statement of proposed amendments to or
modifications of the then current complex case management order on the Friday before a
scheduled CCMC. Supplemental briefs and letters are not authorized. Circumvention by
submitting argumentative material in the proposed modifications is discouraged.
Complex case management conferences in this case are set in Department Four as
follows:
Complex Case Management Order- 22
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Wednesday, December 01, 2010 at 3:00 PM
Wednesday, January 19, 2011 at 3:00 PM
Wednesday, March 2, 2011 at 1:30 PM
Wednesday, April 20, 2011 at 3:00 PM
Wednesday, June 1, 2011 at 1:30 PM
Wednesday, July 20, 2011 at 1:30 PM
Wednesday, September 21, 2011 at 1:30 PM
Wednesday, November 30, 2011 at 1:30 PM
Wednesday, January 11, 2012 at 1:30 PM
Wednesday, April 11, 2012 at 1:30 PM
Wednesday, July 11, 2012 at 1:30 PM
Wednesday, October 17, 2012 at 1:30 PM
Wednesday, December 12, 2012 at 1:30 PM Continued
Wednesday, January 30, 2013, at 3:00 Continued
Wednesday, March 13, 2013 at 1:30 PM – Vacated
Wednesday, April 17, 2013 Continued
Friday, June 7, 2013 at 1:30 PM
August 9, 2013 at 1:30 PM
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: June 7, 2013________________________________DONNA D. GECKJudge of the Superior Court
Exhibit “A”- 1
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
