On March 15, 2022 a
Party Statement
was filed
involving a dispute between
Arntsen Family Partnership, Lp,
Arntsen, Robert,
Brian Christopher Dunn Custodianship,
Ho, John,
Huang, Quanyu,
Lee, Mary,
and
Black Horse Holdings, Llc,
Bragg, David M,
Caproc Iii, Llc,
Davis, Gregory J,
Huang, Quanyu,
Huish, Dale,
Justesen, Jason,
Kludt, Kurtis Stuart,
Mclan Trust,
Monks Family Trust,
Oneil, Scott,
Paramont Capital, Llc,
Paramont Woodside, Llc,
Silicon Valley Real Ventures, Llc,
Stoker, Diane,
Stoker, Phil,
Svrv 385 Moore, Llc,
Svrv 387 Moore, Llc,
Teh Capital, Llc,
Wild Rose Irrevocable Trust,
Wolfe, Kevin,
Wz Partners Llc,
for (16) Unlimited Fraud
in the District Court of San Mateo County.
Preview
CM-110
ATTORNEY OR PARTY WITHOUT ATTORNEY (Name, State Bar number, and address): FOR COURT USE ONLY
Collin James Vierra (SBN 322720)
99 S. Almaden Blvd., Ste. 641
San Jose, CA 95113
831-917-8266
TELEPHONE NO.: FAX NO. (Optional):
cvierra@eimerstahl.com
E-MAIL ADDRESS (Optional):
ATTORNEY FOR (Name): Plaintiffs (Robert Arntsen et al.)
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF San Mateo 6/28/2022
STREET ADDRESS: 400 County Center
MAILING ADDRESS:400 County Center
Redwood City, CA 94063
CITY AND ZIP CODE:
BRANCH NAME: Civil
PLAINTIFF/PETITIONER: Robert Arntsen et al.
DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT: Gregory J. Davis et al.
CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT CASE NUMBER:
(Check one): X UNLIMITED CASE LIMITED CASE 22-CIV-01148
(Amount demanded (Amount demanded is $25,000
exceeds $25,000) or less)
A CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE is scheduled as follows:
Date: July 13, 2022 11/02/2022 Time: 9:00 AM Dept.: 21 34 Div.: Civil Room: A
Address of court (if different from the address above):
X Notice of Intent to Appear by Telephone, by (name): Per Notice of Assignment and CMC, CMC to occur over Zoom
INSTRUCTIONS: All applicable boxes must be checked, and the specified information must be provided.
1. Party or parties (answer one):
a. This statement is submitted by party (name):
b. X This statement is submitted jointly by parties (names): All Plaintiffs
(Robert Arntsen, Arntesn Family Partnership, LP, Mary Lee, Brian Christopher Dunn Custodianship)
2. Complaint and cross-complaint (to be answered by plaintiffs and cross-complainants only)
a. The complaint was filed on (date): March 15, 2022
b. The cross-complaint, if any, was filed on (date):
3. Service (to be answered by plaintiffs and cross-complainants only)
a. X All parties named in the complaint and cross-complaint have been served, or have appeared, or have been dismissed.
b. X The following parties named in the complaint or cross-complaint
(1) have not been served (specify names and explain why not):
(2) X have been served but have not appeared and have not been dismissed (specify names):
David M. Bragg, Silicon Valley Real Ventures, LLC
(3) have had a default entered against them (specify names):
c. The following additional parties may be added (specify names, nature of involvement in case, and the date by which
they may be served):
4. Description of case
a. Type of case in X complaint cross-complaint (Describe, including causes of action):
Real estate fraud, breach of fiduciary duty, breach of contract, conversion, unjust enrichment, fraudulent transfer, violation of
California Unfair Competition Law
Page 1 of 4
Form Adopted for Mandatory Use
Judicial Council of California CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT Cal. Rules of Court,
rules 3.720–3.730
CM-110 [Rev. January 1, 2009] www.courtinfo.ca.gov
American LegalNet, Inc.
www.FormsWorkflow.com
CM-110
CASE NUMBER:
PLAINTIFF/PETITIONER:
DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT:
4. b. Provide a brief statement of the case, including any damages. (If personal injury damages are sought, specify the injury and
damages claimed, including medical expenses to date [indicate source and amount], estimated future medical expenses, lost
earnings to date, and estimated future lost earnings. If equitable relief is sought, describe the nature of the relief.)
Plaintiffs invested several hundred thousand dollars, and loaned an additional several hundred thousand dollars, to a project to develop and sell
real estate at two lots in Woodside, California. Defendants retained Plaintiffs' investments and loans and refused to return to Plaintiffs their
principal, interest, or profits. Accordingly, Plaintiffs have been damaged in the amount of over $700,000 exclusive of interest. Defendants also
have refused to provide Plaintiffs with documentation to which Plaintiffs, as investors and lenders, are entitled, regarding management of the
project and the distribution of funds.
(If more space is needed, check this box and attach a page designated as Attachment 4b.)
5. Jury or nonjury trial
The party or parties request X a jury triaI a nonjury trial. (If more than one party, provide the name of each party
All Plaintiffs request a jury trial. Defendants Gregory J. Davis, SVRV 385 Moore, LLC, SVRV 385 Moore, LLC,
requesting a jury trial):
Paramont Woodside, LLC, and Paramont Capital, LLC request a jury trial. The remaining defendants have refused
to meet and confer regarding this or other issues.
6. Trial date
a. The trial has been set for (date):
b. X No trial date has been set. This case will be ready for trial within 12 months of the date of the filing of the complaint (if
not, explain):
c. Dates on which parties or attorneys will not be available for trial (specify dates and explain reasons for unavailability):
Plaintiffsand Plaintiffs' counsel do not currently anticipate any unavailability for trial.
7. Estimated length of trial
The party or parties estimate that the trial will take (check one):
a. X days (specify number): 5
b. hours (short causes) (specify):
8. Trial representation (to be answered for each party)
The party or parties will be represented at trial X by the attorney or party listed in the caption by the following:
a. Attorney:
b. Firm:
c. Address:
d. Telephone number:
e. Fax number:
f. E-mail address:
g. Party represented:
Additional representation is described in Attachment 8.
9. Preference
This case is entitled to preference (specify code section):
10. Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)
a. Counsel X has has not provided the ADR information package identified in rule 3.221 to the client and has
reviewed ADR options with the client.
b. All parties have agreed to a form of ADR. ADR will be completed by (date):
c. The case has gone to an ADR process (indicate status):
CM-110 [Rev. January 1, 2009] Page 2 of 4
CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT
CM-110
CASE NUMBER:
PLAINTIFF/PETITIONER:
DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT:
10. d. The party or parties are willing to participate in (check all that apply):
(1) Mediation
(2) Nonbinding judicial arbitration under Code of Civil Procedure section 1141.12 (discovery to close 15 days before
arbitration under Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.822)
(3) Nonbinding judicial arbitration under Code of Civil Procedure section 1141.12 (discovery to remain open until 30 days
before trial; order required under Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.822)
(4) Binding judicial arbitration
(5) Binding private arbitration
(6) Neutral case evaluation
(7) Other (specify):
e. This matter is subject to mandatory judicial arbitration because the amount in controversy does not exceed
the statutory limit.
f. Plaintiff elects to refer this case to judicial arbitration and agrees to limit recovery to the amount specified in Code of Civil
Procedure section 1141.11.
g. X This case is exempt from judicial arbitration under rule 3.811 of the California Rules of Court (specify exemption):
(1) The case includes a request for equitable relief in the form of an accounting
(8) The case involves multiple causes of action with amounts in controversy exceeding $50,000 for various such causes
11. Settlement conference
X The party or parties are willing to participate in an early settlement conference (specify when):
Plaintiffs are willing to participate in a settlement conference after the close of discovery
12. Insurance
a. Insurance carrier, if any, for party filing this statement (name):
b. Reservation of rights: Yes No
c. Coverage issues will significantly affect resolution of this case (explain):
13. Jurisdiction
Indicate any matters that may affect the court's jurisdiction or processing of this case, and describe the status.
Bankruptcy Other (specify):
Status:
14. Related cases, consolidation, and coordination
a. There are companion, underlying, or related cases.
(1) Name of case:
(2) Name of court:
(3) Case number:
(4) Status:
Additional cases are described in Attachment 14a.
b. A motion to consolidate coordinate wiII be filed by (name party):
15. Bifurcation
The party or parties intend to file a motion for an order bifurcating, severing, or coordinating the following issues or causes of
action (specify moving party, type of motion, and reasons):
16. Other motions
X The party or parties expect to file the following motions before trial (specify moving party, type of motion, and issues):
Plaintiffs will respond to the demurrer on file. Plaintiffs intend to file motions to compel and for sanctions due to all Defendants' refusal to timely
respond to discovery requests, and in some cases engagement in spoliation and/or refusal to appear in the action. Plaintiffs intend to file a motion for
summary judgment as to each of the causes of action. Plaintiffs may file a motion for default judgment against certain non-responsive Defendants.
CM-110 [Rev. January 1, 2009] Page 3 of 4
CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT
CM-110
CASE NUMBER:
PLAINTIFF/PETITIONER:
DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT:
17. Discovery
a. The party or parties have completed all discovery.
b. X The following discovery will be completed by the date specified (describe all anticipated discovery):
Party Description Date
All third parties All discovery November 30, 2022
Defendants Gregory J. Davis, SVRV 385 Moore, LLC
SVRV 387 Moore, LLC, Paramont Woodside, LLC, All discovery November 30, 2022
Paramont Capital, LLC
Kurtis S. Kludt All discovery November 30, 2022
All Plaintiffs All discovery November 30, 2022
c. X The following discovery issues are anticipated (specify):
Defendants David M. Bragg and Silicon Valley Real Ventures, LLC have refused outright to respect this litigation, including all discovery requests.
The remaining Defendants have all missed their initial discovery deadlines and delayed or avoided responding to Plaintiffs' requests for discovery
updates. Plaintiffs also have reason to believe certain Defendants have spoliated evidence. Plaintiffs anticipate a significant possibility that they will
be unable to obtain essential documents to their case from Defendants, materially prejudicing their ability to prosecute this case.
18. Economic litigation
a. This is a limited civil case (i.e., the amount demanded is $25,000 or less) and the economic litigation procedures in Code
of Civil Procedure sections 90 through 98 will apply to this case.
b. This is a limited civil case and a motion to withdraw the case from the economic litigation procedures or for additional
discovery will be filed (if checked, explain specifically why economic litigation procedures relating to discovery or trial
should not apply to this case):
19. Other issues
X The party or parties request that the following additional matters be considered or determined at the case management
conference (specify): Whether a default judgment and/or substantial sanctions in the amount of Plaintiffs' asserted damages may be
entered against Defendants David M. Bragg and Silicon Valley Real Ventures, LLC for their refusal outright to
respect this litigation.
20. Meet and confer
a. The party or parties have met and conferred with all parties on all subjects required by rule 3.724 of the California Rules
of Court (if not, explain): Plaintiffs met and conferred with Defendants Gregory J. Davis, SVRV 385 Moore, LLC, SVRV 387
Moore, LLC, Paramont Woodside, LLC, and Paramont Capital, LLC, and subsequently with Defendant Kurtis S. Kludt. David M. Bragg and Silicon
Valley Real Ventures, LLC never responded to Plaintiffs' request for a meet and confer.
b. After meeting and conferring as required by rule 3.724 of the California Rules of Court, the parties agree on the following
(specify): Plaintiffs and Defendants Gregory J. Davis, SVRV 385 Moore, LLC, SVRV 387 Moore, LLC, Paramont Woodside, LLC, and Paramont
Capital, LLC generally agree about the issues in dispute and the procedure for their resolution. They disagree primarily as to timing, with Defendants wishing for a
21. Total number of pages attached (if any): more protracted schedule of approximately 16 months to trial as of this filing, as opposed to
Plaintiffs' desired 8 months. Defendant Kludt defers on timing.
I am completely familiar with this case and will be fully prepared to discuss the status of discovery and ADR, as well as other issues
raised by this statement, and will possess the authority to enter into stipulations on these issues at the time of the case management
conference, including the written authority of the party where required.
Date: 6/28/2022
Collin James Vierra
(TYPE OR PRINT NAME) (SIGNATURE OF PARTY OR ATTORNEY)
(TYPE OR PRINT NAME) (SIGNATURE OF PARTY OR ATTORNEY)
Additional signatures are attached.
CM-110 [Rev. January 1, 2009] Page 4 of 4
CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT
Preview
CM-110 ATTORNEY OR PARTY WITHOUT ATTORNEY (Name, State Bar number, and address): FOR COURT USE ONLY Collin James Vierra (SBN 322720) 99 S. Almaden Blvd., Ste. 641 San Jose, CA 95113 831-917-8266 TELEPHONE NO.: FAX NO. (Optional): cvierra@eimerstahl.com E-MAIL ADDRESS (Optional): ATTORNEY FOR (Name): Plaintiffs (Robert Arntsen et al.) SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF San Mateo 6/28/2022 STREET ADDRESS: 400 County Center MAILING ADDRESS:400 County Center Redwood City, CA 94063 CITY AND ZIP CODE: BRANCH NAME: Civil PLAINTIFF/PETITIONER: Robert Arntsen et al. DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT: Gregory J. Davis et al. CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT CASE NUMBER: (Check one): X UNLIMITED CASE LIMITED CASE 22-CIV-01148 (Amount demanded (Amount demanded is $25,000 exceeds $25,000) or less) A CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE is scheduled as follows: Date: July 13, 2022 11/02/2022 Time: 9:00 AM Dept.: 21 34 Div.: Civil Room: A Address of court (if different from the address above): X Notice of Intent to Appear by Telephone, by (name): Per Notice of Assignment and CMC, CMC to occur over Zoom INSTRUCTIONS: All applicable boxes must be checked, and the specified information must be provided. 1. Party or parties (answer one): a. This statement is submitted by party (name): b. X This statement is submitted jointly by parties (names): All Plaintiffs (Robert Arntsen, Arntesn Family Partnership, LP, Mary Lee, Brian Christopher Dunn Custodianship) 2. Complaint and cross-complaint (to be answered by plaintiffs and cross-complainants only) a. The complaint was filed on (date): March 15, 2022 b. The cross-complaint, if any, was filed on (date): 3. Service (to be answered by plaintiffs and cross-complainants only) a. X All parties named in the complaint and cross-complaint have been served, or have appeared, or have been dismissed. b. X The following parties named in the complaint or cross-complaint (1) have not been served (specify names and explain why not): (2) X have been served but have not appeared and have not been dismissed (specify names): David M. Bragg, Silicon Valley Real Ventures, LLC (3) have had a default entered against them (specify names): c. The following additional parties may be added (specify names, nature of involvement in case, and the date by which they may be served): 4. Description of case a. Type of case in X complaint cross-complaint (Describe, including causes of action): Real estate fraud, breach of fiduciary duty, breach of contract, conversion, unjust enrichment, fraudulent transfer, violation of California Unfair Competition Law Page 1 of 4 Form Adopted for Mandatory Use Judicial Council of California CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT Cal. Rules of Court, rules 3.720–3.730 CM-110 [Rev. January 1, 2009] www.courtinfo.ca.gov American LegalNet, Inc. www.FormsWorkflow.com CM-110 CASE NUMBER: PLAINTIFF/PETITIONER: DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT: 4. b. Provide a brief statement of the case, including any damages. (If personal injury damages are sought, specify the injury and damages claimed, including medical expenses to date [indicate source and amount], estimated future medical expenses, lost earnings to date, and estimated future lost earnings. If equitable relief is sought, describe the nature of the relief.) Plaintiffs invested several hundred thousand dollars, and loaned an additional several hundred thousand dollars, to a project to develop and sell real estate at two lots in Woodside, California. Defendants retained Plaintiffs' investments and loans and refused to return to Plaintiffs their principal, interest, or profits. Accordingly, Plaintiffs have been damaged in the amount of over $700,000 exclusive of interest. Defendants also have refused to provide Plaintiffs with documentation to which Plaintiffs, as investors and lenders, are entitled, regarding management of the project and the distribution of funds. (If more space is needed, check this box and attach a page designated as Attachment 4b.) 5. Jury or nonjury trial The party or parties request X a jury triaI a nonjury trial. (If more than one party, provide the name of each party All Plaintiffs request a jury trial. Defendants Gregory J. Davis, SVRV 385 Moore, LLC, SVRV 385 Moore, LLC, requesting a jury trial): Paramont Woodside, LLC, and Paramont Capital, LLC request a jury trial. The remaining defendants have refused to meet and confer regarding this or other issues. 6. Trial date a. The trial has been set for (date): b. X No trial date has been set. This case will be ready for trial within 12 months of the date of the filing of the complaint (if not, explain): c. Dates on which parties or attorneys will not be available for trial (specify dates and explain reasons for unavailability): Plaintiffsand Plaintiffs' counsel do not currently anticipate any unavailability for trial. 7. Estimated length of trial The party or parties estimate that the trial will take (check one): a. X days (specify number): 5 b. hours (short causes) (specify): 8. Trial representation (to be answered for each party) The party or parties will be represented at trial X by the attorney or party listed in the caption by the following: a. Attorney: b. Firm: c. Address: d. Telephone number: e. Fax number: f. E-mail address: g. Party represented: Additional representation is described in Attachment 8. 9. Preference This case is entitled to preference (specify code section): 10. Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) a. Counsel X has has not provided the ADR information package identified in rule 3.221 to the client and has reviewed ADR options with the client. b. All parties have agreed to a form of ADR. ADR will be completed by (date): c. The case has gone to an ADR process (indicate status): CM-110 [Rev. January 1, 2009] Page 2 of 4 CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT CM-110 CASE NUMBER: PLAINTIFF/PETITIONER: DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT: 10. d. The party or parties are willing to participate in (check all that apply): (1) Mediation (2) Nonbinding judicial arbitration under Code of Civil Procedure section 1141.12 (discovery to close 15 days before arbitration under Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.822) (3) Nonbinding judicial arbitration under Code of Civil Procedure section 1141.12 (discovery to remain open until 30 days before trial; order required under Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.822) (4) Binding judicial arbitration (5) Binding private arbitration (6) Neutral case evaluation (7) Other (specify): e. This matter is subject to mandatory judicial arbitration because the amount in controversy does not exceed the statutory limit. f. Plaintiff elects to refer this case to judicial arbitration and agrees to limit recovery to the amount specified in Code of Civil Procedure section 1141.11. g. X This case is exempt from judicial arbitration under rule 3.811 of the California Rules of Court (specify exemption): (1) The case includes a request for equitable relief in the form of an accounting (8) The case involves multiple causes of action with amounts in controversy exceeding $50,000 for various such causes 11. Settlement conference X The party or parties are willing to participate in an early settlement conference (specify when): Plaintiffs are willing to participate in a settlement conference after the close of discovery 12. Insurance a. Insurance carrier, if any, for party filing this statement (name): b. Reservation of rights: Yes No c. Coverage issues will significantly affect resolution of this case (explain): 13. Jurisdiction Indicate any matters that may affect the court's jurisdiction or processing of this case, and describe the status. Bankruptcy Other (specify): Status: 14. Related cases, consolidation, and coordination a. There are companion, underlying, or related cases. (1) Name of case: (2) Name of court: (3) Case number: (4) Status: Additional cases are described in Attachment 14a. b. A motion to consolidate coordinate wiII be filed by (name party): 15. Bifurcation The party or parties intend to file a motion for an order bifurcating, severing, or coordinating the following issues or causes of action (specify moving party, type of motion, and reasons): 16. Other motions X The party or parties expect to file the following motions before trial (specify moving party, type of motion, and issues): Plaintiffs will respond to the demurrer on file. Plaintiffs intend to file motions to compel and for sanctions due to all Defendants' refusal to timely respond to discovery requests, and in some cases engagement in spoliation and/or refusal to appear in the action. Plaintiffs intend to file a motion for summary judgment as to each of the causes of action. Plaintiffs may file a motion for default judgment against certain non-responsive Defendants. CM-110 [Rev. January 1, 2009] Page 3 of 4 CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT CM-110 CASE NUMBER: PLAINTIFF/PETITIONER: DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT: 17. Discovery a. The party or parties have completed all discovery. b. X The following discovery will be completed by the date specified (describe all anticipated discovery): Party Description Date All third parties All discovery November 30, 2022 Defendants Gregory J. Davis, SVRV 385 Moore, LLC SVRV 387 Moore, LLC, Paramont Woodside, LLC, All discovery November 30, 2022 Paramont Capital, LLC Kurtis S. Kludt All discovery November 30, 2022 All Plaintiffs All discovery November 30, 2022 c. X The following discovery issues are anticipated (specify): Defendants David M. Bragg and Silicon Valley Real Ventures, LLC have refused outright to respect this litigation, including all discovery requests. The remaining Defendants have all missed their initial discovery deadlines and delayed or avoided responding to Plaintiffs' requests for discovery updates. Plaintiffs also have reason to believe certain Defendants have spoliated evidence. Plaintiffs anticipate a significant possibility that they will be unable to obtain essential documents to their case from Defendants, materially prejudicing their ability to prosecute this case. 18. Economic litigation a. This is a limited civil case (i.e., the amount demanded is $25,000 or less) and the economic litigation procedures in Code of Civil Procedure sections 90 through 98 will apply to this case. b. This is a limited civil case and a motion to withdraw the case from the economic litigation procedures or for additional discovery will be filed (if checked, explain specifically why economic litigation procedures relating to discovery or trial should not apply to this case): 19. Other issues X The party or parties request that the following additional matters be considered or determined at the case management conference (specify): Whether a default judgment and/or substantial sanctions in the amount of Plaintiffs' asserted damages may be entered against Defendants David M. Bragg and Silicon Valley Real Ventures, LLC for their refusal outright to respect this litigation. 20. Meet and confer a. The party or parties have met and conferred with all parties on all subjects required by rule 3.724 of the California Rules of Court (if not, explain): Plaintiffs met and conferred with Defendants Gregory J. Davis, SVRV 385 Moore, LLC, SVRV 387 Moore, LLC, Paramont Woodside, LLC, and Paramont Capital, LLC, and subsequently with Defendant Kurtis S. Kludt. David M. Bragg and Silicon Valley Real Ventures, LLC never responded to Plaintiffs' request for a meet and confer. b. After meeting and conferring as required by rule 3.724 of the California Rules of Court, the parties agree on the following (specify): Plaintiffs and Defendants Gregory J. Davis, SVRV 385 Moore, LLC, SVRV 387 Moore, LLC, Paramont Woodside, LLC, and Paramont Capital, LLC generally agree about the issues in dispute and the procedure for their resolution. They disagree primarily as to timing, with Defendants wishing for a 21. Total number of pages attached (if any): more protracted schedule of approximately 16 months to trial as of this filing, as opposed to Plaintiffs' desired 8 months. Defendant Kludt defers on timing. I am completely familiar with this case and will be fully prepared to discuss the status of discovery and ADR, as well as other issues raised by this statement, and will possess the authority to enter into stipulations on these issues at the time of the case management conference, including the written authority of the party where required. Date: 6/28/2022 Collin James Vierra (TYPE OR PRINT NAME) (SIGNATURE OF PARTY OR ATTORNEY) (TYPE OR PRINT NAME) (SIGNATURE OF PARTY OR ATTORNEY) Additional signatures are attached. CM-110 [Rev. January 1, 2009] Page 4 of 4 CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT