Order: NACE REYNOLDS VS. ROBIN AMELIA SHEEHAN ET AL

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

						
                                
Preview
                                Ce NIQ AH WN

NNNNNN See ee ee eee
YSesBsBRBnw—RBRPRBRRESVERWIRADERAHES

 

 

Jean Cha (SBN: 228137)

jean@chalawethics.com .

Ed Sasaki (SBN: 158930) r E
ed@chalawethics.com San Francisco County Superior Court
CHA LAW ETHICS

1100 W. Town & Country Rd., Suite 1250 DEC - 2 2021

Orange, California 92868 5,
Telephone: (714) 242-8588 aren
Fax: (657) 235-8588 BY: uty Clerk
Alexander A. Graft (State Bar No. 239647)

LEWIS BRISBOIS BISGAARD & SMITH LLP

333 Bush Street, Ste. 1100

San Francisco, CA 94104

Tel: (415) 362-2580

Fax: (415) 434-0882
Email: alex.graft@lewisbrisbois.com

Attorneys for Defendant ROBIN AMELIA SHEEHAN

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO (UNLIMITED JURISDICTION)

NACE REYNOLDS; ) CaseNo.:  CGC-21-594238
) CGC-21-594246
Plaintiff, )
v. ) STIPULATION TO CONSQUIDATE
) CASES AND ORDER
ROBIN AMELIA SHEEHAN, et al; )

) Code Civ. Proc. § 1048(a)
Defendants. )
NACE REYNOLDS;

Plaintiff,
v.

BRIAN MORGAN HEIT, et al;

Defendants. )

eevee

I. BACKGROUND / BRIEF PROCEDURAL HISTORY
Plaintiff Nace Reynolds (“Reynolds”) recently filed two separate Actions in San

Francisco County alleging different causes of action against the same six defendants: Robin

1

 

STIPULATION TO CONSOLIDATE CASES AND [PROPOSED] ORDEROo mXI AH FF WN

ww YNY NNN NNN Fe Be Be Be eB Be Be
SSBv_ReBV_RERBERRESGCRSEVWIABDREBSAS

Amelia Sheehan, Matthew Jacob Feaver, Sheehan Law Group PC, Sheehan & Feaver PC, Brian
Heit, and Heit Law Group PC. Those Actions are: Reynolds v. Sheehan (CGC-21-594238) and
Reynolds v. Heit (CGC-21-594246).

Defendant Robin Amelia Sheehan (the “Stipulating Defendant”) proposed filing a
demurrer on the ground that the two Actions split causes of action. Although Reynolds disagrees|
that the two Actions split causes of action, he agrees that the two Actions involve common
questions of fact. :

Il. LEGAL STANDARD

Code of Civil Procedure § 1048 allows a court to order pending actions consolidated, and
to make procedural orders to avoid unnecessary costs and delay, where the actions involve
common questions of law or fact.

Here, the two Actions involve common questions of fact.

Til. STIPULATION

Reynolds and the Stipulating Defendant agree to complete consolidation of the Reynolds

v. Sheehan and Reynolds v. Heit Actions for all purposes.

THE LAW OFFICES OF DANIEL BALSAM

blauit L Belem.

Daniel Balsam
Attorney for Plaintiff Nace Reynolds

Dated: Oct. 29, 2021

CHA LAW ETHICS

Dated: October 29, 2021 Edo VW, Sods

Ed Sasaki
Attorney for Stipulating Defendant Robin Sheehan
In Case No. CGC-21-594238

LEWIS BRISBOIS BISGAARD & SMITH LLP
Dated: October 29, 2021 /s/ Alexander Graft
Alexander Graft

Attorney for Stipulating Defendant Robin Sheehan
In Case No. CGC-21-594246

2

 

 

 

STIPULATION TO CONSOLIDATE CASES AND [PROPOSED] ORDERoO I AHA FF WN

» NN NN ]— | Be Be Be Be Be Be eB
SFSRSRBNRRRRBRNSC RS WIREBDESHEAS

ORDER
THE FOREGOING STIPULATION IS APPROVED.
© The two Actions Reynolds v. Sheehan (CGC-21-594238) and Reynolds v. Heit (CGC-
21-594246) are consolidated for all purposes.
© Reynolds v. Sheehan (CGC-21-594238) is the lead case and all further filings shall be
in this case only.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED: Dea. Z MY hun Pa

Fudge of the Superior Court
ETHAN P. SCHULMAN

3

 

 

 

STIPULATION TO CONSOLIDATE CASES AND [PROPOSED] ORDER