Motion-Secondary: IDA CHRISTINA FUA CRUZ VS. JOEL ENRIQUE ANDINO SANCHEZ et al

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

						
                                
Preview
                                ROBERT S. AARON (SBN 138903)
TIMOTHY C. WILSON (SBN 173928)

AARON & WILSON, LLP ELECTRONICALLY
150 Post Street, Suite 400 FILED

San Francisco, California 94108 Superior Court of Caitfornia,
Telephone: (415) 438-7800 County of San Francisco
Facsimile: (415) 438-7808 02/25/2015
Email: rsaaron@aaron-wilson.com Clerk of the Court
Email: tewilson@aaron-wilson.com ewer ca

Attorneys for Defendants/Cross-Defendants
TAXI EQUIPMENT LEASING LLC,
YELLOW CAB COOPERATIVE, INC., TAXI
PROPERTY COMPANY, INC., WOLLEY,
LLC, JAMES GILLESPIE, HAL
MELLEGARD, NICK OLSEN, PAMELA
MARTINEZ, RICHARD WIENER, STEVEN
REIMERS

ROBERT M. PETERSON (Bar No.: 100084)
COLIN C. MUNRO (Bar No.: 195520)
CARLSON, CALLADINE & PETERSON LLP
353 Sacramento Street, 16th Floor

San Francisco, CA 94111

Telephone: (415) 391-3911

Facsimile: (415) 391-3898

Attorneys for Defendants
TAXI EQUIPMENT LEASING LLC
and YELLOW CAB COOPERATIVE, INC.
SUPERIOR COURT - STATE OF CALIFORNIA.

COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO - UNLIMITED JURISDICTION

IDA CRISTINA CRUZ FUA, ) Case No. CGC 11 515542
) Consolidated with
Plaintiff, ) CGC-12-519794 and CGC-13-529705
)
v. ) REPLY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO
) BIFURCATE TRIAL AND/OR
JOEL ENRIQUE ANDINO SANCHEZ, et ) ESTABLISH THE ORDER OF PROOF
al., ) AND DECISION
)
Defendants. ) RESERVATION NO. 010715-08
)
) Date: February 26, 2015
AND RELATED CROSS-COMPLAINT. ) Time: 9:30 a.m
) Dept.: 302

Complaint Filed: October 31, 2011
X-Complaint Filed: May 13, 2014
Trial Date: March 9, 2015

1
Reply in Support of Motion To Bifurcate Trial and/or Establish the Order of Proof and Decisionom N DA nH

XY DA FB WN

I. PLAINTIFF AND CROSS-COMPLAINANT DO
NOT OPPOSE BIFURCATION OF ALTER EGO

Neither plaintiff, nor cross-complaint oppose defendants’ request to bifurcate the alter
ego issue and try it separately to the court prior to empanelling a jury. (See Plaintiffs
Opposition...at 3:10-16 and 4:2-16; see also cross-defendant Sanchez’s Opposition at 1:24-
2:2). Therefore, this portion of defendants’ motion should be granted.

Il. YELLOW CAB WOULD BE HIGHLY

PREJUDICED IF THE JURY HEARS

PLAINTIFF’S DAMAGE CLAIMS PRIOR TO
DECIDING RESPONDEAT SUPERIOR

Defendant YELLOW CAB COOPERATIVE will be highly prejudiced if the traditional
order of proof is followed. First and foremost is the issue of plaintiff's damage claims.
Contrary to the arguments of plaintiff and Sanchez, there is a significant difference in the
minds of the jurors between seeing a disabled individual in court and listening to literally days
of testimony complete with “day in the life” videos, claims of $30,000,000 in economic losses,

etc. Obviously, plaintiff and Sanchez want the jury to hear this evidence before the jury

decides the issue of respondeat superior because they are convinced that no jury is going to let

Yellow Cab Cooperative, Inc. out of the case upon learning the true nature of plaintiffs

injuries. Obviously, this is the very reason the issue needs to bifurcated, i.e., the jury will be
unable to fairly and objectively evaluate respondeat superior if they are first inundated with

plaintiffs $30,000,000 damage claim coupled with a well-produced day-in-the-life video.

TI.BIFURCATING LIABILITY, INCLUDING

RESPONDEAT SUPERIOR, FROM DAMAGES

IS AN ACCEPTABLE COMPROMISE TO

ADDRESSING CONCERNS ABOUT WITNESS

DUPLICATION, UNDUE TIME

CONSUMPTION, ETC.

Plaintiff and cross-complainant also claim that a duplication of witnesses, evidence,
etc. will be necessary. While the undersigned believes that aspect of the opposition is quite
exaggerated for purposes of getting this court to deny the bifurcation request, Yellow cab
would certainly agree, as an accommodation to address this issue, to bifurcate not just
respondeat superior, but all of liability from damages. This would essentially eliminate the
duplication of testimony and evidence, yet preserve Yellow Cab’s right to have the issue
2

Reply in Support of Motion To Bifurcate Trial and/or Establish the Order of Proof and Decision

eedecided by a fair and unbiased jury.
IV.CONCLUSION
For all the foregoing reasons, and those set forth in the moving papers, defendant
YELLOW CAB COOPERATIVE, et. al. respectfully request that their motion to bifurcate be
granted. Alternatively, the motion to bifurcate should be granted with respect to alter ego, and
granted relative to bifurcating liability, including respondeat superior, from damages.

Dated: February 19, 2015 AARON & WILSON, LLP

EQUIPMENT LEASING LLC, YELLOW
COOPERATIVE, INC., TAX] PROPERTY
OMPANY, INC., WOLLEY, LLC, JAMES
‘GJKLESPIE, HAL MELLEGARD, NICK
SEN, PAMELA MARTINEZ, RICHARD
WIENER, STEVEN REIMERS

3

oye

Reply in Support of Motion To Bifurcate Trial and/or Establish the Order of Proof and DecisionBw N =

wn

Fua v, Sanchez

San Francisco County Superior Court Case No. CGC 11 515542 Consolidated with
San Francisco County Superior Court Case No. CGC 12 519794 and

San Francisco County Superior Court Case No. CGC 13 529705

Our File No. 0845

AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA, CITY AND COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO
I, Cristina Mitchell, declare:
Iam a citizen of the United States, over 18 years of age and not a party to the within
action. I am self-employed in the City and County of San Francisco; my business address is 150
Post Street, Suite 400, San Francisco, California, 94108.
On February 19, 2015, I served the attached and/or enclosed:

REPLY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO BIFURCATE TRIAL AND/OR ESTABLISH
THE ORDER OF PROOF AND DECISION

on all parties in this action, at the following address(es):

Todd P. Emanuel, Esq. Mitchell E. Green, Esq.
Mark D. Rosenberg, Esq. Law Office of Mitchell E. Green
Emanuel Law Group Post Office Box 630550
702 Marshall Street, Suite 400 Simi Valley, CA 93063
Redwood City, CA 94063 Fax: (805) 823-0916
Fax: (650) 369-8999 Tel: (805) 823-0915
Tel: (650) 369-8900 Email: MitchGreenLaw@aol.com
Email: Todd@TEinjurylaw.com Counsel for Plaintiff, Allstate Insurance Co.

Email: Mark@TEinjurylaw.com
Counsel for Plaintiff, Ida Cristina Cruz Fua

D. Douglas Shureen, Esq. Gregory H. McCormick, Esq.
McMillan & Shureen LLP Burnham Brown
50 Santa Rosa Avenue, Suite 200 1901 Harrison Street, 14th Floor
Santa Rosa, CA 95404 Oakland, CA 94612
Fax: (707) 576-7955 Fax: (510) 835-6666
Tel: (707) 525-5400 Tel: (510) 444-6800
Email: doug.shureen@memillanshureen.com. Email: gmecormick@burnhambrown.com
Counsel for Defendant/Cross-Complainant, Counsel for Defendant, Alan DaSilva & SF
Joel Enrique Andino Sanchez Independent Taxi Association.

Colin C. Munro, Esq.

Carlson, Calladine & Peterson LLP

353 Sacramento Street, 16th Floor

San Francisco, CA 94111
Fax: (415) 391-3898
Tel: (415) 391-3911
Email: emunro@ccplaw.com
Co-Counsel for Defendants, Taxi Equipment Leasing LLC, Yellow Cab Cooperative, Inc.

1

Proof of ServiceFua v. Sanchez

San Francisco County Superior Court Case No. CGC 11 515542 Consolidated with
San Francisco County Superior Court Case No. CGC 12 519794 and

San Francisco County Superior Court Case No. CGC 13 529705

Our File No. 0845

Service was accomplished by causing either an original or a true copy of the above-
referenced document(s) to be distributed as follows:

oO BY MAIL: I caused such document(s) to be placed in a sealed envelope, addressed as
indicated above, with prepaid first-class postage thereon, and then placed the envelope(s) for
collection and mailing, in accordance with the firm’s ordinary business practice. I am readily
familiar with the firm's ordinary business practice for collection and processing of
correspondence for mailing with the United States Postal Service. Under that practice
correspondence for mailing is deposited with United States Postal Service on the date indicated
for service, with prepaid first-class postage thereon.

BY EMAIL: I caused such documents to be transmitted via email to the parties indicated
above, at their respective email addresses.

BY HAND DELIVERY: I caused such documents to be hand delivered to the addresses
indicated above.

VIA FACSIMILE: I caused such documents to be transmitted via facsimile to the parties
indicated above, at their respective facsimile numbers.

VIA EXPRESS CARRIER: I caused such documents to be collected by an agent for the
United States Postal Service, United Parcel Service, Federal Express or other overnight carrier,
to be delivered by way of overnight mail to the addresses indicated above.

mR BY E-SERVICE: I caused such documents to be transmitted via email to the parties
indicated above, at their respective email addresses through the court’s e-filing website.

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California, that the
foregoing is true and correct.

Executed on February 19, 2015, at San Francisco, California.

CUrticta LL
Cristina Mitchell

2

Proof of Service