Preview
ELECTRONICALLY FILED
LAW OFFICE OF JEFF BENNION Superior Court of California
JEFFREY M. BENNION, SBN 2 75 946 of Santa Barbara
County
2869 INDIA ST
SAN DIEGO, CA 92 103 Darrel E. Parker, Executive Officer
(619) 609-7198 7/6/2016 4:51 :47 PM
JEFF@]BENNIONLAW.COM By: Terri Chavez, Deputy
Attqrneys for Defendants
Chrls Hulme, enmfer Hulme, and
Cleaeew In ustnes, Inc.
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SANTA BARBARA
ANACAPA DIVISION
10
11 Patsy Moler,
Case No. 1417847
12 Plaintiff,
Defendant ClearView Industries
13
v. Inc.’s Motion in Limine to Exclud’e
Plaintiff’s Expert Forensic
Chris Hulme, individually and dba Document Examiner
14
Clearylew Industryes, Inc,
Ienmfer Hulme,_1nd1v1dually and dba Motion of 9 of 9
15 Clearv1ew Industrms, Inc., and Does 1
througt, 1nclus1ve Complaint Filed: 7/ 1/13
16 As§1 ned: Hon. James E Herman
Defendants. Trla Date: 7/13/2016
17
18 And Related Cross Action
19
20
TO: ALL PARTIES AND THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD:
21
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that Defendant, ClearView Industries, Inc.,
22
respectfully moves this Court for an order precluding Plainitff’s expert A. Frank
23
Hicks from testifying.
24
This motion is based upon grounds that it would be unfair and unduly
25
prejudicial to Defendants and would confuse the issues and mislead the jury to
26
permit Plaintiff to introduce such evidence. This motion is made under the
27
provisions of Evidence Code sections 210, 3 50, and the supporting Memorandum
28
Defendant ClearView’s Motion in Limine 9 of 9 re Expert Hicks
of Points and Authorities, the pleadings and papers on file in this action, and upon
such argument and evidence as may be presented prior to or at the hearing of this
matter.
I. The Forensic Document Examiner’s Testimony
is Irrelevant and Would Be a Waste of Time
Plaintiff requested the original wet ink signatures of the corporate minutes
that were converted to tangible form in 2015 and singed in 2015. Those original
documents were sent Via F edEx, per Plaintiff’s request to Mr. A. Frank Hicks. There
10 has been extensive briefing on the issue of the minutes. The Defendants have never
11 denied that the documents were signed in 2015.
12 Plaintiff has now designated Mr. Hicks. The description of Mr. Hicks’s
13 testimony from Plaintiff’s expert designation is as follows: “Patsy Moler has
14 designated A. Frank hicks as an expert who will express an opinion at trial herein.
15 Mr. Hicks will testify as a Forensic Document Examiner.” No further explanation
16 of what this “opinion” will be.
17 “Relevant evidence” means evidence, including evidence relevant to the
18 credibility of a witness or hearsay declarant, having any tendency in reason to prove
19 or disprove any disputed fact that is of consequence to the determination of the
20 action. (Evid. Code 210.) No evidence is admissible except relevant evidence.
21 (Evid. Code 3 50.)
22 Here, it is undisputed that the minutes were signed in 2015, so testimony
23 regarding this issue is irrelevant and therefore inadmissible.
24 Plaintiff should be precluded from having Mr. Hicks testify on any other
25 matters because the expert designation for Mr. hicks was so woefully inadequate.
26 CCP 2034.260(c)(2) states that a party who wishes to designate an expert must
27 provide “[a] brief narrative statement of the general substance of the testimony that
28 the expert is expected to give.” Plaintiff failed to do so.
2
Defendant ClearView’s Motion in Limine 9 of 9 re Expert Hicks
Dated: July 6, 2016 Law Office of Ieff Bennion
By: M M
JeffrgM/ Bennion, Esq.
Attorneys for Defendants
GRANTED DENIED MODIFIED
~ ~ ~ ~
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3
Defendant ClearView’s Motion in Limine 9 of 9 re Expert Hicks
PCS-040
WORNEY 0R PARTY WITHOUT ATTORNEY (Name, State Bar numbel. and address): FOR COURT USE ONLY
Jeffrey M. Bennion, SBN 275946
_2869 India St
San Diego, CA 92103
TELEPHONE N07
619-609-7198 F»: No. {0mm
emu. ADDRESS (ammo- jeff@jbennion|aw.com
ATTORNEY FOR mama). Defendants
SUPERIOR counr or CALIFORNIA, counrv or Santa Barbara
STREET ADDRESS:1 100 Anacapa St
MAILINGADDRESS‘
CITY AND ZIP CODE?
Santa Barbara
BRANCH "AME
Anacapa Division
PLAINTIFF/PETITIONER; Patsy Moler
DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT: Clearview Industries, Inc. and Chris Hulme CASE NUMBER;
PROOF OF SERVICE—CIVIL 1417847
Check method of service (only one):
D By Personal Service 1:] By Mail By Overnight Delivery Hon. James E Herman
g
JUDGE:
I:] By Messenger Service [:I By Fax By Electronic Service
DEPT‘$31
(Do not use this proof of service to show service 0! a Summons and complaint)
1. At the time of service I was over 18 years of age and not a party to lh is action.
2. My residence or business address is:
2869 India St., San Diego, CA 92103
3.[j if service was by fax or
The fax number or electronic service address from which I served the documents is (complete
electronic service):
mpr@ringlaw.net, findley@janmulligan.com
4. On (date): My 6 2016 Iserved the following documents (specify):
Motions in Limine 1-9, Defendants' witness list Jury instruction list
I: The documents are listed in the Attachment to Proof of ServiwCivi/ (Documents Served) (form PCS-040(0)).
5. Iserved the documents on the person or persons below, as follows:
a‘ Name of person served:
b. [:J (Complete if service was by personal service,
mail, ovemightdelivery,ormessenger service.)
Business or residential address where person was served:
c. E] (Complete if service was by fax or electronic service.)
(1) Fax number or electronic service address where person was sewed:
(2) Time of service:
I:] The names, addresses. and other applicable information about persons sewed is on the Attachment to Proof of
Service—Civil (Persons Served) (form POS—O40(P)).
6. The documents were sewed by the following means (specify):
a. [:I By personal service. I personalIy delivered the documents to the persons at the addresses listed in item 5. (1) For a
party represented by an attorney, delivery was made to the attorney or at the attorney's office by leaving the documents,
in an envelope or package clearly labeled to identify the attorney being sewed, with a receptionist or an individual in
charge of the office, between the hours of nine in the morning and five in the evening‘ (2) For a party, delivery was made
to the party or by leaving the documents at the pany‘s residence with some person not younger than 18 years of age
between the hours ofeight in the morning and six in the evening
Page1ol 3
mm“
Fm A (a! Iional Use
POSMIRW M12011]
PROOF OF SERVICE—CIVIL
(Proof of Service)
''
WSsflgpmrzfizLeg-,sxg‘zzazfsé
wwwoounscavoav
PCS-040
CASE NAME: CASE NUMBER:
Moler v. Clearview Industries. Inc. 1417847
~ ~ ~
[:|
6. b. By United States mail. |
addresses in item 5 and$c
enclosed the documents in a sealed envelope or package addressed to the persons a1 the
one):
(I) I:I deposited the sealed envelope with the United States Postal Service, with the pos1age fully prepaid.
(2)[:1 placed the envelope for collection and mailing, following our ordinary business practices
I am readily familiar
0n the same day thai
wi1h1his business's practice for collecting and processing con’espondence for mailing.
correspondence is placed for colledion and mailing.
i1 is deposiied in the ordinary course of business with the
United States Postal Service. in a sealed envelope with postage fully prepaid.
Iam a resident or employed in the county where the mailing Downed. The envelope or package was placed inthe mail at
(city and state}:
(:7
[:| By overnight delivery. I enclosed the documents in an envelope or package provided by an overnight delivery
I placed the envelope or package for collection
carrier and addressed to Ihe persons at the addresses in item 5.
and ovemighl delivery at an office or a regulafly utilized drop box of the overnight delivery carrier.
d. I: By messenger service. I served the documents by placing {hem in an envelope or package addtessed to me persons
at the addresses listed in item 5 and providing them to a professional messenger service for service.
(A (federation by
the messenger must accompany this Proafof Service or be mnlained In the Deciaralrbn of Messenger bemw)
e. D By fax transmission. Based on an agreement of the parties to accept service by fax transmission.
No error was reponed by the fax machine that
to the persons at the fax numbers listed in item 5. I
1 faxed the documents
used A copy of the
record of the fax transmission. which I printed out. is attached.
I. {:] By electronic servlce.
documents to be sent
Based an a court order or an agreement of the parties to accept electronic service. I caused the
to the persons 3! the electronic service addresses listed in item 5‘
Ideclare under penalty of periury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correCl.
Dam; July
July 6, 2016
6,2016
Jeffrey M. Bennion
(TYPE DR PRINT NAME OF DECLARANTJ
} M
W‘Wfig OF DECLARANT}
(If item
60‘above is checked. the decimation below must be completed or a separate dedararion from a messenger mus! be attached.)
DECLARATION OF MESSENGER
I:] By petsonal service. I personally delivered the envelope or package received from the declatant abuve to the persons at the
addresses Eisted in item 5. (1) For a pariy represented by an attorney, delivery was made 10 the attorney or at the aflomey's
office by ieaving the documents in an envelope or padage. which was clearly labeled to identity the attorney being served.
with a receptionist or an individual in charge of the office.
between the hours of nine in the morning and five in the evening.
(2)
Fora party. delivery was made to the party or by leaving the documents at the pany's residence with some person not younger
than 18 years of age between the hours ofeight in the morning and six in the evening.
A! the time of service, I was over 18 years of age. I am not a parly to the above-referenced legal proceeding.
Iserved the envelope or package. as stated above. on (date):
Ideclare under penalty of peljury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct.
Dale:
(NAME 0!: DECLARANT) (SIGNATURE OF DECLAFUANT]
Plea 2M1
Pos-oaomw.ml.2m1| PROOF OF SERVICE—CIVIL
(Proof of Service)
Preview
ELECTRONICALLY FILED LAW OFFICE OF JEFF BENNION Superior Court of California JEFFREY M. BENNION, SBN 2 75 946 of Santa Barbara County 2869 INDIA ST SAN DIEGO, CA 92 103 Darrel E. Parker, Executive Officer (619) 609-7198 7/6/2016 4:51 :47 PM JEFF@]BENNIONLAW.COM By: Terri Chavez, Deputy Attqrneys for Defendants Chrls Hulme, enmfer Hulme, and Cleaeew In ustnes, Inc. SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SANTA BARBARA ANACAPA DIVISION 10 11 Patsy Moler, Case No. 1417847 12 Plaintiff, Defendant ClearView Industries 13 v. Inc.’s Motion in Limine to Exclud’e Plaintiff’s Expert Forensic Chris Hulme, individually and dba Document Examiner 14 Clearylew Industryes, Inc, Ienmfer Hulme,_1nd1v1dually and dba Motion of 9 of 9 15 Clearv1ew Industrms, Inc., and Does 1 througt, 1nclus1ve Complaint Filed: 7/ 1/13 16 As§1 ned: Hon. James E Herman Defendants. Trla Date: 7/13/2016 17 18 And Related Cross Action 19 20 TO: ALL PARTIES AND THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD: 21 PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that Defendant, ClearView Industries, Inc., 22 respectfully moves this Court for an order precluding Plainitff’s expert A. Frank 23 Hicks from testifying. 24 This motion is based upon grounds that it would be unfair and unduly 25 prejudicial to Defendants and would confuse the issues and mislead the jury to 26 permit Plaintiff to introduce such evidence. This motion is made under the 27 provisions of Evidence Code sections 210, 3 50, and the supporting Memorandum 28 Defendant ClearView’s Motion in Limine 9 of 9 re Expert Hicks of Points and Authorities, the pleadings and papers on file in this action, and upon such argument and evidence as may be presented prior to or at the hearing of this matter. I. The Forensic Document Examiner’s Testimony is Irrelevant and Would Be a Waste of Time Plaintiff requested the original wet ink signatures of the corporate minutes that were converted to tangible form in 2015 and singed in 2015. Those original documents were sent Via F edEx, per Plaintiff’s request to Mr. A. Frank Hicks. There 10 has been extensive briefing on the issue of the minutes. The Defendants have never 11 denied that the documents were signed in 2015. 12 Plaintiff has now designated Mr. Hicks. The description of Mr. Hicks’s 13 testimony from Plaintiff’s expert designation is as follows: “Patsy Moler has 14 designated A. Frank hicks as an expert who will express an opinion at trial herein. 15 Mr. Hicks will testify as a Forensic Document Examiner.” No further explanation 16 of what this “opinion” will be. 17 “Relevant evidence” means evidence, including evidence relevant to the 18 credibility of a witness or hearsay declarant, having any tendency in reason to prove 19 or disprove any disputed fact that is of consequence to the determination of the 20 action. (Evid. Code 210.) No evidence is admissible except relevant evidence. 21 (Evid. Code 3 50.) 22 Here, it is undisputed that the minutes were signed in 2015, so testimony 23 regarding this issue is irrelevant and therefore inadmissible. 24 Plaintiff should be precluded from having Mr. Hicks testify on any other 25 matters because the expert designation for Mr. hicks was so woefully inadequate. 26 CCP 2034.260(c)(2) states that a party who wishes to designate an expert must 27 provide “[a] brief narrative statement of the general substance of the testimony that 28 the expert is expected to give.” Plaintiff failed to do so. 2 Defendant ClearView’s Motion in Limine 9 of 9 re Expert Hicks Dated: July 6, 2016 Law Office of Ieff Bennion By: M M JeffrgM/ Bennion, Esq. Attorneys for Defendants GRANTED DENIED MODIFIED ~ ~ ~ ~ 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3 Defendant ClearView’s Motion in Limine 9 of 9 re Expert Hicks PCS-040 WORNEY 0R PARTY WITHOUT ATTORNEY (Name, State Bar numbel. and address): FOR COURT USE ONLY Jeffrey M. Bennion, SBN 275946 _2869 India St San Diego, CA 92103 TELEPHONE N07 619-609-7198 F»: No. {0mm emu. ADDRESS (ammo- jeff@jbennion|aw.com ATTORNEY FOR mama). Defendants SUPERIOR counr or CALIFORNIA, counrv or Santa Barbara STREET ADDRESS:1 100 Anacapa St MAILINGADDRESS‘ CITY AND ZIP CODE? Santa Barbara BRANCH "AME Anacapa Division PLAINTIFF/PETITIONER; Patsy Moler DEFENDANT/RESPONDENT: Clearview Industries, Inc. and Chris Hulme CASE NUMBER; PROOF OF SERVICE—CIVIL 1417847 Check method of service (only one): D By Personal Service 1:] By Mail By Overnight Delivery Hon. James E Herman g JUDGE: I:] By Messenger Service [:I By Fax By Electronic Service DEPT‘$31 (Do not use this proof of service to show service 0! a Summons and complaint) 1. At the time of service I was over 18 years of age and not a party to lh is action. 2. My residence or business address is: 2869 India St., San Diego, CA 92103 3.[j if service was by fax or The fax number or electronic service address from which I served the documents is (complete electronic service): mpr@ringlaw.net, findley@janmulligan.com 4. On (date): My 6 2016 Iserved the following documents (specify): Motions in Limine 1-9, Defendants' witness list Jury instruction list I: The documents are listed in the Attachment to Proof of ServiwCivi/ (Documents Served) (form PCS-040(0)). 5. Iserved the documents on the person or persons below, as follows: a‘ Name of person served: b. [:J (Complete if service was by personal service, mail, ovemightdelivery,ormessenger service.) Business or residential address where person was served: c. E] (Complete if service was by fax or electronic service.) (1) Fax number or electronic service address where person was sewed: (2) Time of service: I:] The names, addresses. and other applicable information about persons sewed is on the Attachment to Proof of Service—Civil (Persons Served) (form POS—O40(P)). 6. The documents were sewed by the following means (specify): a. [:I By personal service. I personalIy delivered the documents to the persons at the addresses listed in item 5. (1) For a party represented by an attorney, delivery was made to the attorney or at the attorney's office by leaving the documents, in an envelope or package clearly labeled to identify the attorney being sewed, with a receptionist or an individual in charge of the office, between the hours of nine in the morning and five in the evening‘ (2) For a party, delivery was made to the party or by leaving the documents at the pany‘s residence with some person not younger than 18 years of age between the hours ofeight in the morning and six in the evening Page1ol 3 mm“ Fm A (a! Iional Use POSMIRW M12011] PROOF OF SERVICE—CIVIL (Proof of Service) '' WSsflgpmrzfizLeg-,sxg‘zzazfsé wwwoounscavoav PCS-040 CASE NAME: CASE NUMBER: Moler v. Clearview Industries. Inc. 1417847 ~ ~ ~ [:| 6. b. By United States mail. | addresses in item 5 and$c enclosed the documents in a sealed envelope or package addressed to the persons a1 the one): (I) I:I deposited the sealed envelope with the United States Postal Service, with the pos1age fully prepaid. (2)[:1 placed the envelope for collection and mailing, following our ordinary business practices I am readily familiar 0n the same day thai wi1h1his business's practice for collecting and processing con’espondence for mailing. correspondence is placed for colledion and mailing. i1 is deposiied in the ordinary course of business with the United States Postal Service. in a sealed envelope with postage fully prepaid. Iam a resident or employed in the county where the mailing Downed. The envelope or package was placed inthe mail at (city and state}: (:7 [:| By overnight delivery. I enclosed the documents in an envelope or package provided by an overnight delivery I placed the envelope or package for collection carrier and addressed to Ihe persons at the addresses in item 5. and ovemighl delivery at an office or a regulafly utilized drop box of the overnight delivery carrier. d. I: By messenger service. I served the documents by placing {hem in an envelope or package addtessed to me persons at the addresses listed in item 5 and providing them to a professional messenger service for service. (A (federation by the messenger must accompany this Proafof Service or be mnlained In the Deciaralrbn of Messenger bemw) e. D By fax transmission. Based on an agreement of the parties to accept service by fax transmission. No error was reponed by the fax machine that to the persons at the fax numbers listed in item 5. I 1 faxed the documents used A copy of the record of the fax transmission. which I printed out. is attached. I. {:] By electronic servlce. documents to be sent Based an a court order or an agreement of the parties to accept electronic service. I caused the to the persons 3! the electronic service addresses listed in item 5‘ Ideclare under penalty of periury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correCl. Dam; July July 6, 2016 6,2016 Jeffrey M. Bennion (TYPE DR PRINT NAME OF DECLARANTJ } M W‘Wfig OF DECLARANT} (If item 60‘above is checked. the decimation below must be completed or a separate dedararion from a messenger mus! be attached.) DECLARATION OF MESSENGER I:] By petsonal service. I personally delivered the envelope or package received from the declatant abuve to the persons at the addresses Eisted in item 5. (1) For a pariy represented by an attorney, delivery was made 10 the attorney or at the aflomey's office by ieaving the documents in an envelope or padage. which was clearly labeled to identity the attorney being served. with a receptionist or an individual in charge of the office. between the hours of nine in the morning and five in the evening. (2) Fora party. delivery was made to the party or by leaving the documents at the pany's residence with some person not younger than 18 years of age between the hours ofeight in the morning and six in the evening. A! the time of service, I was over 18 years of age. I am not a parly to the above-referenced legal proceeding. Iserved the envelope or package. as stated above. on (date): Ideclare under penalty of peljury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct. Dale: (NAME 0!: DECLARANT) (SIGNATURE OF DECLAFUANT] Plea 2M1 Pos-oaomw.ml.2m1| PROOF OF SERVICE—CIVIL (Proof of Service)