Preview
28
MANATT, PHELPS &
Puuues, LLP
ATTORNEYS AT Law
Saw FRANEISCO
MANATT, PHELPS & PHILLIPS, LLP
BARRY W. LEE (Bar No. CA 088685)
JORDAN P. ROSE (Bar No, CA 04437)
ELECTRONICALLY
GARY D, ROTHSTEIN (Bar No. CA 143157) FILED
ANDREW A. BASSAK (Bar No. CA 162440) Superior Court of Calffornia,
CHRISTOPHER A. RHEINHEIMER (Bar No. CA 253890) County of San Francisco
One Embarcadero Center, 30th Floor FEB 26 2014
San Francisco, CA 94111
Telephone: (415) 291-7400
Facsimile: (415) 291-7474
Attorneys for Petitioner
Bruce H. Qvale, Family Trustee
Clerk of the Court
BY: LESLIE GOMEZ
Deputy Clerk
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO
In the Matter of the
Kathryn C. Qvale Exempt Marital Trust,
dated January 31, 2006
311507806.1
Case No. PTR-13-297016
PETITIONER BRUCE H. QVALE,
FAMILY TRUSTEE’S REPLY IN
SUPPORT OF MOTION TO STRIKE
MILES JEFFREY QVALE, TRUSTEE’S
CROSS-PETITION FOR APPOINTMENT
OF SUCCESSOR INDEPENDENT
TRUSTEE TO FILL VACANCY
Date: March 5, 2014
Time: 2:30 p.m.
Dept.: 204
Judge: Andrew Cheng
BRUCE QVALE, FAMILY TRUSTEE’S REPLY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO STRIKE CROSS-PETITION28
MaNATT, PHELPS &
PHILLIPS, LLP
Artonwnys Ar Law
SAN PRAKEISCO
1 INTRODUCTION
Mile Jeffrey Qvale, Trustee’s (“Jeff”) Cross-Petition for Appointment of
Successor Independent Trustee to Fill Vacancy (“Cross-Petition) is a thinly-veiled attempt by Jeff
to justify seeking discovery to support his broader challenge to Kjell and Kathryn Qvale’s entire
estate plan (the “Qvale Estate Plan”). Bruce H. Qvale (“Bruce”) brought a Motion to Strike the
Cross-Petition (“Motion”) based on the grounds that the Cross-Petition is a sham pleading. Jeff's
Opposition does nothing to change this fact. Indeed, Jeff admits that he is actively seeking
discovery to bolster a contest to the Qvale Estate Plan—but Jeff has no pleading on file that
would allow him to seek such discovery.
Jeff's Cross-Petition is an attempt by Jeff, as Trustee, to use these proceedings to
launch a risk-free fishing expedition to seek to bolster a potential contest by Jeff, as beneficiary.
The Cross-Petition is improper and a sham and should be stricken in its entirety.
i. ARGUMENT
A. Legal Standard
The court has the authority to dismiss a pleading where a “complaint has been
shown to be ‘fictitious or sham ....’” (Lyons v. Wickhorst (1986) 42 Cal.3d 911, 915; Ricard y.
Grobstein, Goldman, Stevenson, Siegal, LeVine & Mangel (1992) 6 Cal.App.4th 157, 162 [“fa]
trial court has authority to strike sham pleadings”].) Here, Jeff's Cross-Petition is merely an
impermissible attempt to launch a risk-free fishing expedition to attempt to bolster a contest—and
his Opposition implicitly admits as much, It is a sham and should be stricken in its entirety.
B. The Evident Purpose of the Cross-Petition is to Seek Discovery to Bolster a
Contest
Jeff admits that he is seeking documents and information to bolster a trust contest.
(Opp. at 8:8-15.) His Opposition states: “..Jeffs Petition acknowledges that Jeff is investigating
whether to claim that the Statement of Intention was procured by undue influence or is otherwise
unreliable...” (Opp. At 9:22-23) What could be more obvious? When viewed with this admitted
motive, the purpose of the Cross-Petition becomes transparent. The list of documents set forth in
paragraph 7 of the Cross-Petition (and discovery documents recently served) goes far beyond
3115078061 ]
BRUCE QVALE, FAMILY TRUSTEE’S REPLY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO STRIKE CROSS-PETITION28
MANATT, PHELPS &
PHILLIPS, LLP
AvTOMHYS AT Law
Ban FRANCISCO
what might be relevant to the appointment of Ms. Hiura as a trustee, and goes directly to issues
that would be raised in a contest. For example, Jeff secks “copies of earlier amendments or
exercises of the Limited Powers with respect to the Kathryn Qvale Exempt and Nonexempt
Trusts ....” (Cross-Petition 7; see also id. [communications “with respect to the January 30,
2103 changes to the estate plan” and “documents explaining various plans which were provided
to the psychologist evaluating Kjell for capacity and ability resist undue influence”};
Supplemental RIN, Exs. 1, 2, and 3.) Jeff does not even attempt to explain how this would relate
to the issues raised in the Cross-Petition; it clearly addresses issues that would arise in a trust
contest,!
Cc Jeffs Cross-Petition Ignores the Intent of the Settlors As Expressed in the
Trust Documents and the Statement of Intention
Jeff asserts that he has probable cause to claim that the terms of the trust
documents control—-but Bruce is not claiming otherwise. The Statement of Intention is
consistent with the terms of the trust documents, as well as Kjell and Kathryn’s stated intent.
Section 17.3(b) of the 2002 Restatement of the Trust Agreement for the Kjell and Kathryn Qvale
Family Trust Dated June 2, 1983 provides the specific rules for the Independent Trustee: “It is
the Trustors’ intent that the office of Independent Trustee shall not be occupied by any issue of
the Trustors, or by the spouse of any such issue.” Indeed, Kjell and Kathryn demonstrated their
contemporaneous understanding of the office of Independent Trustee by designating (and
subsequently reaffirming on two separate occasions) as the initial Independent Trustee Don Endo,
an employee of QAG who was intimately familiar with Kjell and Kathryn’s financial affairs.
When Mr, Endo ceased to be employed by QAG, at Kjell’s request Mr. Endo declined to accept
his position as trustee upon such position becoming vacant, and Kjell demonstrated that the
setilors’ intent remained unchanged by executing the Statement of Intention designating Ms.
Hiura, who occupied substantially the same position with respect to their financial affairs that Mr.
Endo had occupied, as the Independent Trustee for the Exempt Marital Trust.
' Thus, for example, Jeff is seeking discovery after the March 10 hearing date on the Petition and Cross-Petition.
(Supplemental RIN, Exs. 1 and 2.) By logical necessity, such discovery cannot be relevant to the hearing on the
Petition and Cross-Petition.
341507806.1 2
BRUCE QVALE, FAMILY TRUSTEE’S REPLY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO STRIKE CROSS-PETITIONOo WDA A BR BH NY
9
10
i
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Memins ELE
AvToRNeys AT Law
San Feawersco
D. The Cross-Petition is a Contest
Kjell’s January 30, 2013 Exercise of Power of Appointment for the Exempt
Marital Trust contains a broad no contest clause, consistent with the provisions of Probate Code
sections 21310, ef seg. Jeff asserts that he has not violated the no contest clause because (1) the
Statement of Intention is not a protected document; and (2) the Cross-Petition “does not allege
that the Statement of Intention is ‘invalid{] ... based on . . . undue influence”—but only that he is
investigating whether it is invalid. (Opp. at 9.) Jeff's arguments miss the mark.
First, the no contest clause identifies as protected documents any “other document
executed by the Surviving Spouse .. . that is part of the Surviving Spouse’s integrated estate
plan.” The Statement of Intention was executed with the express purpose “to promote efficient
administration of the Exempt Marital Trust, the Nonexempt Marital Trust, and the Survivor’s
Trust... .” Because the Statement of Intention is expressly related to the administration of a
trust, it is mandatorily integrated into the estate plan and within the scope of the no-contest
clause. (See Estate of Collias (1951) 37 Cal.2d 587, 589-590 [“Words of request,
recommendation, and the like will be interpreted as mandatory when they are addressed to an
executor, but only as a request—i.e., in their actual precatory sense—if addressed to a devisee.”].)
Second, Jeffs Cross-Petition seeks to nullify the intent of Kjell and Kathryn, as
expressed in the trust documents and as restated by Kjell in the Statement of Intention. His new
claim that he is not actually challenging the validity of the Statement of Intention, but merely
considering whether to challenge it, is belied by the fact that he is challenging the appointment of
Ms. Hiura, whose appointment is the very purpose of the Statement of Intention. Jeff has chosen
to deny the validity of the Statement of Intention. Although it is not entirely clear whether he is
challenging the validity based solely on undue influence or also on some other theory, he cannot
unring that bell—a bell that he has rung in direct contravention of his duty, as a trustee, to defend
the trust, not to challenge it.
311507806.1 3
BRUCE QVALE, FAMILY TRUSTEE’S REPLY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO STRIKE CROSS-PETITION28
MANATT, PHELPS &
PHILLIPS, LEP
ATroRWNS AT LAW
SAN PRANCHCO
Ii. CONCLUSION
Therefore, for the foregoing reasons Bruce respectfully requests that the Court
gtant this Motion and strike the Cross-Petition in its entirety.
Dated: February 26, 2014 MANATT, PHELPS & PHILLIPS, LLP
oy Long, lee Los
Barry W. Lee
Attorneys for Petitioner
Bruce H. Qvale, Family Trustee
311507806.1 4
BRUCE QVALE, FAMILY TRUSTEF’S REPLY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO STRIKE CROSS-PETITION28
MANATT, PHELPS &
PHILLIPS, LLP.
ATTORNEYS AT Law
Saw Prawcisco
PROOF OF SERVICE
I, Elaine Maestro, declare as follows:
Jam employed in San Francisco County, San Francisco, California. | am over the
age of eighteen years and not a party to this action. My business address is MANATT, PHELPS
& PHILLIPS, LLP, One Embarcadero Center, 30th Floor, San Francisco, California 94111. On
February 26, 2014, I served the within:
PETITIONER BRUCE H. QVALE, FAMILY TRUSTEE’S
REPLY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO STRIKE MILES
JEFFREY QVALE, TRUSTEE’S CROSS-PETITION FOR
APPOINTMENT OF SUCCESSOR INDEPENDENT
TRUSTEE TO FILL VACANCY
on the interested parties in this action addressed as follows:
SEE ATTACHED SERVICE LIST
(BY MAIL) By placing such document(s) in a sealed envelope, with postage
thereon fully prepaid for first class mail, for collection and mailing at Manatt,
Phelps & Phillips, LLP, San Francisco, California following ordinary business
practice. | am readily familiar with the practice at Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP
for collection and processing of correspondence for mailing with the United States
Postal Service, said practice being that in the ordinary course of business,
correspondence is deposited in the United States Postal Service the same day as it
is placed for collection.
(BY ELECTRONIC MAIL) By transmitting such document(s) electronically at
[time] from my e-mail address, emaestro@manatt.com at Manatt, Phelps &
Phillips, LLP, San Francisco, California, to the person(s) at the electronic mail
addresses listed above. The transmission was reported as complete and without
error.
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the
foregoing i is true and correct and that this declaration was executed on February 26, 2014, at San
Francisco, California.
{Elaine Maestro
3E1S07806.t 5
BRUCE QVALE, FAMILY TRUSTEE’S REPLY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO STRIKE CROSS-PETITION28
MANATT, PHELPS &
PHILLIPS, LLP
Arroawirs At Law
SAW Feaneitce,
Norma Hepworth
P.O. Box 871
Hailey, ID 83333
Nancy Bong
23 Kingston Place
Walnut Creek, CA 94596
Roger Hansen
868 East 2830 South
Hagerman, ID 83332
Don Endo
21000 Glenwood Drive
Castro Valley, CA 94552
Raymonde Gely
3532 Sacramento St., #2
San Francisco, CA 94118
Kendel Hailey Qvale
3500 Scott St.
San Francisco, CA. 94123
Connor Hammond Qvale
98 Via Poinciana Lane
Boca Raton, FL 33487
Caroline Paige Qvale
461 - 2" Street, C227
San Francisco, CA 94107
Max Keaton Qvale
147 Lagunitas Road
Ross, CA 94957
Peter L, Muhs
(Counsel for Miles Jeffrey Qvale)
Cooper, White & Cooper, LLP
201 California Street, 17th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94111-5002
email: pmuhs@ewclaw.com
Dominic J. Campisi
(Counsel for Miles Jeffrey Qvale)
Evans, Latham & Campisi
One Post Street, Suite 600
San Francisco, CA 94104
email: deampisi@ele-law.com
311807806.
SERVICE LIST
Lillian Fredriksson
1318 Hale Drive
Concord, CA 94518
Laura Hiura
901 Van Ness Ave.
San Francisco, CA 94109
Karen Duarteau
2600 Nicasio Valley Road
Nicasio, CA 94946
Rita Jelincic
25385 Palomares Road
Castro Valley, CA 94552
Hubert Gely
3532 Sacramento St., #2
San Francisco, CA 94118
Blake Henry Qvale
336 E. 18th St., Apt. E-2
New York, NY 10003
Christopher Kjell Qvale
2945 Pacific Ave., Unit 6
San Francisco, CA 94115
Miles Colin Qvale
147 Lagunitas Road
Ross, CA 94957
Miles Jeffrey Qvale
P.O. Box 667
Ross, CA 94957
Richard J. Collier
(Counsel for Miles Jeffrey Qvale)
Cooper, White & Cooper, LLP
201 California Street, 17th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94111-5002
email: rcollier@cwclaw.com
Andrew Zabronsky
(Counsel for Miles Jeffrey Qvale)
Evans, Latham & Campisi
One Post Street, Suite 600
San Francisco, CA 94104
email: azabronsky@elc-law.com
6
BRUCE QVALE, FAMILY TRUSTEE’S REPLY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO STRIKE CROSS-PETITIONaA wis
28
MANATT, PHELPS &
Priturs, LLP
Artonvevs AT Law
San Faancasco
Monica Dell’Osso
(Guardian Ad Litem for Minors Miles Colin
Qvale and Max Keaton Qvale)
Burnham Brown
A Professional Corporation
P.O. Box 119
Oakland, CA 94604
email: mdellosso@burnhambrown.com
344507806.1 7
BRUCE QVALE, FAMILY TRUSTEE’S REPLY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO STRIKE CROSS-PETITION
Preview
28 MANATT, PHELPS & Puuues, LLP ATTORNEYS AT Law Saw FRANEISCO MANATT, PHELPS & PHILLIPS, LLP BARRY W. LEE (Bar No. CA 088685) JORDAN P. ROSE (Bar No, CA 04437) ELECTRONICALLY GARY D, ROTHSTEIN (Bar No. CA 143157) FILED ANDREW A. BASSAK (Bar No. CA 162440) Superior Court of Calffornia, CHRISTOPHER A. RHEINHEIMER (Bar No. CA 253890) County of San Francisco One Embarcadero Center, 30th Floor FEB 26 2014 San Francisco, CA 94111 Telephone: (415) 291-7400 Facsimile: (415) 291-7474 Attorneys for Petitioner Bruce H. Qvale, Family Trustee Clerk of the Court BY: LESLIE GOMEZ Deputy Clerk SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO In the Matter of the Kathryn C. Qvale Exempt Marital Trust, dated January 31, 2006 311507806.1 Case No. PTR-13-297016 PETITIONER BRUCE H. QVALE, FAMILY TRUSTEE’S REPLY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO STRIKE MILES JEFFREY QVALE, TRUSTEE’S CROSS-PETITION FOR APPOINTMENT OF SUCCESSOR INDEPENDENT TRUSTEE TO FILL VACANCY Date: March 5, 2014 Time: 2:30 p.m. Dept.: 204 Judge: Andrew Cheng BRUCE QVALE, FAMILY TRUSTEE’S REPLY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO STRIKE CROSS-PETITION28 MaNATT, PHELPS & PHILLIPS, LLP Artonwnys Ar Law SAN PRAKEISCO 1 INTRODUCTION Mile Jeffrey Qvale, Trustee’s (“Jeff”) Cross-Petition for Appointment of Successor Independent Trustee to Fill Vacancy (“Cross-Petition) is a thinly-veiled attempt by Jeff to justify seeking discovery to support his broader challenge to Kjell and Kathryn Qvale’s entire estate plan (the “Qvale Estate Plan”). Bruce H. Qvale (“Bruce”) brought a Motion to Strike the Cross-Petition (“Motion”) based on the grounds that the Cross-Petition is a sham pleading. Jeff's Opposition does nothing to change this fact. Indeed, Jeff admits that he is actively seeking discovery to bolster a contest to the Qvale Estate Plan—but Jeff has no pleading on file that would allow him to seek such discovery. Jeff's Cross-Petition is an attempt by Jeff, as Trustee, to use these proceedings to launch a risk-free fishing expedition to seek to bolster a potential contest by Jeff, as beneficiary. The Cross-Petition is improper and a sham and should be stricken in its entirety. i. ARGUMENT A. Legal Standard The court has the authority to dismiss a pleading where a “complaint has been shown to be ‘fictitious or sham ....’” (Lyons v. Wickhorst (1986) 42 Cal.3d 911, 915; Ricard y. Grobstein, Goldman, Stevenson, Siegal, LeVine & Mangel (1992) 6 Cal.App.4th 157, 162 [“fa] trial court has authority to strike sham pleadings”].) Here, Jeff's Cross-Petition is merely an impermissible attempt to launch a risk-free fishing expedition to attempt to bolster a contest—and his Opposition implicitly admits as much, It is a sham and should be stricken in its entirety. B. The Evident Purpose of the Cross-Petition is to Seek Discovery to Bolster a Contest Jeff admits that he is seeking documents and information to bolster a trust contest. (Opp. at 8:8-15.) His Opposition states: “..Jeffs Petition acknowledges that Jeff is investigating whether to claim that the Statement of Intention was procured by undue influence or is otherwise unreliable...” (Opp. At 9:22-23) What could be more obvious? When viewed with this admitted motive, the purpose of the Cross-Petition becomes transparent. The list of documents set forth in paragraph 7 of the Cross-Petition (and discovery documents recently served) goes far beyond 3115078061 ] BRUCE QVALE, FAMILY TRUSTEE’S REPLY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO STRIKE CROSS-PETITION28 MANATT, PHELPS & PHILLIPS, LLP AvTOMHYS AT Law Ban FRANCISCO what might be relevant to the appointment of Ms. Hiura as a trustee, and goes directly to issues that would be raised in a contest. For example, Jeff secks “copies of earlier amendments or exercises of the Limited Powers with respect to the Kathryn Qvale Exempt and Nonexempt Trusts ....” (Cross-Petition 7; see also id. [communications “with respect to the January 30, 2103 changes to the estate plan” and “documents explaining various plans which were provided to the psychologist evaluating Kjell for capacity and ability resist undue influence”}; Supplemental RIN, Exs. 1, 2, and 3.) Jeff does not even attempt to explain how this would relate to the issues raised in the Cross-Petition; it clearly addresses issues that would arise in a trust contest,! Cc Jeffs Cross-Petition Ignores the Intent of the Settlors As Expressed in the Trust Documents and the Statement of Intention Jeff asserts that he has probable cause to claim that the terms of the trust documents control—-but Bruce is not claiming otherwise. The Statement of Intention is consistent with the terms of the trust documents, as well as Kjell and Kathryn’s stated intent. Section 17.3(b) of the 2002 Restatement of the Trust Agreement for the Kjell and Kathryn Qvale Family Trust Dated June 2, 1983 provides the specific rules for the Independent Trustee: “It is the Trustors’ intent that the office of Independent Trustee shall not be occupied by any issue of the Trustors, or by the spouse of any such issue.” Indeed, Kjell and Kathryn demonstrated their contemporaneous understanding of the office of Independent Trustee by designating (and subsequently reaffirming on two separate occasions) as the initial Independent Trustee Don Endo, an employee of QAG who was intimately familiar with Kjell and Kathryn’s financial affairs. When Mr, Endo ceased to be employed by QAG, at Kjell’s request Mr. Endo declined to accept his position as trustee upon such position becoming vacant, and Kjell demonstrated that the setilors’ intent remained unchanged by executing the Statement of Intention designating Ms. Hiura, who occupied substantially the same position with respect to their financial affairs that Mr. Endo had occupied, as the Independent Trustee for the Exempt Marital Trust. ' Thus, for example, Jeff is seeking discovery after the March 10 hearing date on the Petition and Cross-Petition. (Supplemental RIN, Exs. 1 and 2.) By logical necessity, such discovery cannot be relevant to the hearing on the Petition and Cross-Petition. 341507806.1 2 BRUCE QVALE, FAMILY TRUSTEE’S REPLY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO STRIKE CROSS-PETITIONOo WDA A BR BH NY 9 10 i 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Memins ELE AvToRNeys AT Law San Feawersco D. The Cross-Petition is a Contest Kjell’s January 30, 2013 Exercise of Power of Appointment for the Exempt Marital Trust contains a broad no contest clause, consistent with the provisions of Probate Code sections 21310, ef seg. Jeff asserts that he has not violated the no contest clause because (1) the Statement of Intention is not a protected document; and (2) the Cross-Petition “does not allege that the Statement of Intention is ‘invalid{] ... based on . . . undue influence”—but only that he is investigating whether it is invalid. (Opp. at 9.) Jeff's arguments miss the mark. First, the no contest clause identifies as protected documents any “other document executed by the Surviving Spouse .. . that is part of the Surviving Spouse’s integrated estate plan.” The Statement of Intention was executed with the express purpose “to promote efficient administration of the Exempt Marital Trust, the Nonexempt Marital Trust, and the Survivor’s Trust... .” Because the Statement of Intention is expressly related to the administration of a trust, it is mandatorily integrated into the estate plan and within the scope of the no-contest clause. (See Estate of Collias (1951) 37 Cal.2d 587, 589-590 [“Words of request, recommendation, and the like will be interpreted as mandatory when they are addressed to an executor, but only as a request—i.e., in their actual precatory sense—if addressed to a devisee.”].) Second, Jeffs Cross-Petition seeks to nullify the intent of Kjell and Kathryn, as expressed in the trust documents and as restated by Kjell in the Statement of Intention. His new claim that he is not actually challenging the validity of the Statement of Intention, but merely considering whether to challenge it, is belied by the fact that he is challenging the appointment of Ms. Hiura, whose appointment is the very purpose of the Statement of Intention. Jeff has chosen to deny the validity of the Statement of Intention. Although it is not entirely clear whether he is challenging the validity based solely on undue influence or also on some other theory, he cannot unring that bell—a bell that he has rung in direct contravention of his duty, as a trustee, to defend the trust, not to challenge it. 311507806.1 3 BRUCE QVALE, FAMILY TRUSTEE’S REPLY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO STRIKE CROSS-PETITION28 MANATT, PHELPS & PHILLIPS, LEP ATroRWNS AT LAW SAN PRANCHCO Ii. CONCLUSION Therefore, for the foregoing reasons Bruce respectfully requests that the Court gtant this Motion and strike the Cross-Petition in its entirety. Dated: February 26, 2014 MANATT, PHELPS & PHILLIPS, LLP oy Long, lee Los Barry W. Lee Attorneys for Petitioner Bruce H. Qvale, Family Trustee 311507806.1 4 BRUCE QVALE, FAMILY TRUSTEF’S REPLY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO STRIKE CROSS-PETITION28 MANATT, PHELPS & PHILLIPS, LLP. ATTORNEYS AT Law Saw Prawcisco PROOF OF SERVICE I, Elaine Maestro, declare as follows: Jam employed in San Francisco County, San Francisco, California. | am over the age of eighteen years and not a party to this action. My business address is MANATT, PHELPS & PHILLIPS, LLP, One Embarcadero Center, 30th Floor, San Francisco, California 94111. On February 26, 2014, I served the within: PETITIONER BRUCE H. QVALE, FAMILY TRUSTEE’S REPLY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO STRIKE MILES JEFFREY QVALE, TRUSTEE’S CROSS-PETITION FOR APPOINTMENT OF SUCCESSOR INDEPENDENT TRUSTEE TO FILL VACANCY on the interested parties in this action addressed as follows: SEE ATTACHED SERVICE LIST (BY MAIL) By placing such document(s) in a sealed envelope, with postage thereon fully prepaid for first class mail, for collection and mailing at Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP, San Francisco, California following ordinary business practice. | am readily familiar with the practice at Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP for collection and processing of correspondence for mailing with the United States Postal Service, said practice being that in the ordinary course of business, correspondence is deposited in the United States Postal Service the same day as it is placed for collection. (BY ELECTRONIC MAIL) By transmitting such document(s) electronically at [time] from my e-mail address, emaestro@manatt.com at Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP, San Francisco, California, to the person(s) at the electronic mail addresses listed above. The transmission was reported as complete and without error. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing i is true and correct and that this declaration was executed on February 26, 2014, at San Francisco, California. {Elaine Maestro 3E1S07806.t 5 BRUCE QVALE, FAMILY TRUSTEE’S REPLY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO STRIKE CROSS-PETITION28 MANATT, PHELPS & PHILLIPS, LLP Arroawirs At Law SAW Feaneitce, Norma Hepworth P.O. Box 871 Hailey, ID 83333 Nancy Bong 23 Kingston Place Walnut Creek, CA 94596 Roger Hansen 868 East 2830 South Hagerman, ID 83332 Don Endo 21000 Glenwood Drive Castro Valley, CA 94552 Raymonde Gely 3532 Sacramento St., #2 San Francisco, CA 94118 Kendel Hailey Qvale 3500 Scott St. San Francisco, CA. 94123 Connor Hammond Qvale 98 Via Poinciana Lane Boca Raton, FL 33487 Caroline Paige Qvale 461 - 2" Street, C227 San Francisco, CA 94107 Max Keaton Qvale 147 Lagunitas Road Ross, CA 94957 Peter L, Muhs (Counsel for Miles Jeffrey Qvale) Cooper, White & Cooper, LLP 201 California Street, 17th Floor San Francisco, CA 94111-5002 email: pmuhs@ewclaw.com Dominic J. Campisi (Counsel for Miles Jeffrey Qvale) Evans, Latham & Campisi One Post Street, Suite 600 San Francisco, CA 94104 email: deampisi@ele-law.com 311807806. SERVICE LIST Lillian Fredriksson 1318 Hale Drive Concord, CA 94518 Laura Hiura 901 Van Ness Ave. San Francisco, CA 94109 Karen Duarteau 2600 Nicasio Valley Road Nicasio, CA 94946 Rita Jelincic 25385 Palomares Road Castro Valley, CA 94552 Hubert Gely 3532 Sacramento St., #2 San Francisco, CA 94118 Blake Henry Qvale 336 E. 18th St., Apt. E-2 New York, NY 10003 Christopher Kjell Qvale 2945 Pacific Ave., Unit 6 San Francisco, CA 94115 Miles Colin Qvale 147 Lagunitas Road Ross, CA 94957 Miles Jeffrey Qvale P.O. Box 667 Ross, CA 94957 Richard J. Collier (Counsel for Miles Jeffrey Qvale) Cooper, White & Cooper, LLP 201 California Street, 17th Floor San Francisco, CA 94111-5002 email: rcollier@cwclaw.com Andrew Zabronsky (Counsel for Miles Jeffrey Qvale) Evans, Latham & Campisi One Post Street, Suite 600 San Francisco, CA 94104 email: azabronsky@elc-law.com 6 BRUCE QVALE, FAMILY TRUSTEE’S REPLY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO STRIKE CROSS-PETITIONaA wis 28 MANATT, PHELPS & Priturs, LLP Artonvevs AT Law San Faancasco Monica Dell’Osso (Guardian Ad Litem for Minors Miles Colin Qvale and Max Keaton Qvale) Burnham Brown A Professional Corporation P.O. Box 119 Oakland, CA 94604 email: mdellosso@burnhambrown.com 344507806.1 7 BRUCE QVALE, FAMILY TRUSTEE’S REPLY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO STRIKE CROSS-PETITION