On June 17, 2013 a
Party Statement
was filed
involving a dispute between
Environmental Research Center,,
and
Does 1 To 100,
First Fitness International, Inc.,
for civil
in the District Court of San Francisco County.
Preview
Michael Freund SBN 99687
Ryan Hoffman SBN 283297
Michael Freund & Associates ELECTRONICALLY
1919 Addison Street, Suite 105 s F I L E D
ele superior Court of Califprnia,
Berkeley, CA 94704 County of San Francisco
Telephone: (510) 540-1992 AUG 08 2014
Facsimile: (510) 540-5543 Clerk of the 2014
. BY: ROMY RISK
Attomeys for Plaintiff Deput} Clerk
ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH CENTER
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO
ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH CENTER, CASE NO. CGC-13-532166
a California non-profit corporation
AFFIDAVIT VERIFYING
Plaintiff, COMPLIANCE WITH PROPOSITION
65 NOTICE REQUIREMENTS
VS.
JUDGE: ERNEST J. GOLDSMITH
FIRST FITNESS INTERNATIONAL, INC., DEPT.: 302
and DOES 1-100 HEARING DATE: 09/23/14
HEARING TIME; 9:30 A.M.
Defendants. RESERVATION NO.: 080714-14
1. Lam an attorney for plaintiff Environmental Research Center in this case. [am
admitted to practice law before all of the courts of this State. I have personal knowledge of the
statements contained herein and would testify competently thereto if called as a witness.
2. The parties have settled this case and the Court will be provided with a [Proposed]
Stipulated Consent Judgment alongside the Motion to Approve Settlement.
3, Pursuant to Health & Safety Code section 25249.7, subdivision (f)(1) and Cal, Code
of Regulations, title 11, section 3008, Plaintiff is responsible to inform the Court through this
Affidavit that the Attorney General has been notified of the results of the settlement in this case.
Plaintiff has submitted the requisite reporting form along with the Stipulated Consent Judgment
in this case to the Attorney General. This was accomplished by uploading the Stipulated
Page 1 of 2
AFFIDAVIT VERIFYING COMPLIANCE WITH PROPOSITION 65 NOTICE REQUIREMENTSConsent Judgment to the Attorney General's website on June 6, 2014.
4. Pursuant to Cal. Code of Regulations, title 11, section 3003, subdivision (a) the
Motion to Approve Settlement and all supporting papers and exhibits shall be served on the
Attorney General no later than forty-five days prior to the date of the hearing on the Motion.
Pursuant to Pursuant to Cal. Code of Regulations, title 11, section 3008, subdivision (a)(2), there
must be at least forty-five days between the service of the Stipulated Consent Judgment on the
Attorney General and the hearing date for the Motion. Both of these requirements have been
satisfied as the Attorney General was served with the Stipulated Consent Judgment on June 6,
2014, and this with this Motion to Approve Settlement on August 8, 2014.
5. Pursuant to Cal. Code of Regulations, title 11, section 3008, plaintiff is responsible to
inform the Court that “the failure of the Attorney General to comment on a settlement shall not
be construed as endorsement of or concurrence in the settlement.”
6. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the
foregoing is true and correct.
DATED: August 8, 2014 JFLP
Ryka | Hoffman
Attomey for Plaintiff
ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH CENTER
Page 2 of 2
AFFIDAVIT VERIFYING COMPLIANCE WITH PROPOSITION 65 NOTICE REQUIREMENTS
Document Filed Date
August 08, 2014
Case Filing Date
June 17, 2013
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
Preview
Michael Freund SBN 99687 Ryan Hoffman SBN 283297 Michael Freund & Associates ELECTRONICALLY 1919 Addison Street, Suite 105 s F I L E D ele superior Court of Califprnia, Berkeley, CA 94704 County of San Francisco Telephone: (510) 540-1992 AUG 08 2014 Facsimile: (510) 540-5543 Clerk of the 2014 . BY: ROMY RISK Attomeys for Plaintiff Deput} Clerk ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH CENTER SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH CENTER, CASE NO. CGC-13-532166 a California non-profit corporation AFFIDAVIT VERIFYING Plaintiff, COMPLIANCE WITH PROPOSITION 65 NOTICE REQUIREMENTS VS. JUDGE: ERNEST J. GOLDSMITH FIRST FITNESS INTERNATIONAL, INC., DEPT.: 302 and DOES 1-100 HEARING DATE: 09/23/14 HEARING TIME; 9:30 A.M. Defendants. RESERVATION NO.: 080714-14 1. Lam an attorney for plaintiff Environmental Research Center in this case. [am admitted to practice law before all of the courts of this State. I have personal knowledge of the statements contained herein and would testify competently thereto if called as a witness. 2. The parties have settled this case and the Court will be provided with a [Proposed] Stipulated Consent Judgment alongside the Motion to Approve Settlement. 3, Pursuant to Health & Safety Code section 25249.7, subdivision (f)(1) and Cal, Code of Regulations, title 11, section 3008, Plaintiff is responsible to inform the Court through this Affidavit that the Attorney General has been notified of the results of the settlement in this case. Plaintiff has submitted the requisite reporting form along with the Stipulated Consent Judgment in this case to the Attorney General. This was accomplished by uploading the Stipulated Page 1 of 2 AFFIDAVIT VERIFYING COMPLIANCE WITH PROPOSITION 65 NOTICE REQUIREMENTSConsent Judgment to the Attorney General's website on June 6, 2014. 4. Pursuant to Cal. Code of Regulations, title 11, section 3003, subdivision (a) the Motion to Approve Settlement and all supporting papers and exhibits shall be served on the Attorney General no later than forty-five days prior to the date of the hearing on the Motion. Pursuant to Pursuant to Cal. Code of Regulations, title 11, section 3008, subdivision (a)(2), there must be at least forty-five days between the service of the Stipulated Consent Judgment on the Attorney General and the hearing date for the Motion. Both of these requirements have been satisfied as the Attorney General was served with the Stipulated Consent Judgment on June 6, 2014, and this with this Motion to Approve Settlement on August 8, 2014. 5. Pursuant to Cal. Code of Regulations, title 11, section 3008, plaintiff is responsible to inform the Court that “the failure of the Attorney General to comment on a settlement shall not be construed as endorsement of or concurrence in the settlement.” 6. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct. DATED: August 8, 2014 JFLP Ryka | Hoffman Attomey for Plaintiff ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH CENTER Page 2 of 2 AFFIDAVIT VERIFYING COMPLIANCE WITH PROPOSITION 65 NOTICE REQUIREMENTS