Preview
MOU
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO
Document Scanning Lead Sheet
Mar-13-2013 9:54 am
Case Number: CGC-12-520752 |
Filing Date: Mar-13-2013 9:51
Filed by: CAROL BALISTRERI
Juke Box: 001 Image: 03976857
EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR ORDER
SPERO SARIDAKIS VS. PENINSULA YELLOW CAB COMPANY, LLC et al
001003976857
Instructions:
Please place this sheet on top of the document to be scanned.LLP
KNOX RICKSEN
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
1 || Thomas E. Fraysse - SBN (&
Megan W. Wendell — SBN 238423
2 | KNOX RICKSEN LLP Superior Court of Califomia
1300 Clay Street, Suite 500 ounty of San Francisco
3 | Oakland, CA 94612-1427
Telephone: (510) 285-2500 MAR 1 8 2013
4 | Facsimile: (510) 285-2505 SAKE)
5 | Steven B. Stein- SBN 52829
Law Office of Steven B. Stein, APC
6 | 1300 Clay Street, Suite 500
Oakland, CA 94612-1427
7 || Telephone: (510) 285-2500
Facsimile: (510) 285-2505
8
Attorneys for Plaintiff
g || SPERO SARIDAKIS
"0 SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA
" COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO
12
13
44 || SPERO SARIDAKIS, No. CGC-12-520752
15 STIPULATED EX PARTE
Plaintiff, APPLICATION FOR
16 CONTINUANCE OF TRIAL DATE
vs. AND EXTENSION OF DISCOVERY
17 CUT-OFF, MOTION AND EXPERT
PENINSULA YELLOW CAB COMPANY WITNESS DISCLOSURE DATES;
48 | LLC, RAKESH KUMAR, RICHELLE SUPPORTING DECLARATION OF
NAVAL and Does 1 to 100, inclusive MEGAN W. WENDELL
19
Defendants. Date: March 13, 2013
20 Time: 11:00 a.m.
Dept. 206
24 Judge: Hon. Cynthia Ming-mei Lee
22 Complaint Filed: May 14, 2012
Trial Date: June 24, 2013
23
24 Pursuant to Local Rule 6.0B, Plaintiff SPERO SARIDAKIS and Defendants PENINSULA
25 | YELLOW CAB COMPANY, LLC; RAKESH KUMAR; and RICHELLE NAVAL jointly request
26 | 0 order continuing the date of the trial of this case from June 24, 2013 to October 15, 2013. The
o7 trial date in this case has never been continued previously and there is good cause to grant this
request. This request is based on this application, the Declaration of Megan W. Wendell, attached
28
1
STIPULATED EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR CONTINUANCE OF TRIAL; DECLARATION OF MEGAN W. WENDELLLLP
KNOX RICKSEN
27
28
hereto, and the parties’ Stipulation Re: Continuance of the June 24, 2013 Trial Date and Extending
Discovery Cut-Off, Motion and Expert Disclosure Dates.
As more particularly set forth in the Declaration of Megan W. Wendell and the parties’
stipulation submitted in support of the instant application, good cause exists to continue the trial
date and extend the discovery cut-off, motion and expert witness disclosure dates in this case as
follows:
1) Plaintiffs counsel Thomas E. Fraysse was not substituted into the case until February
14, 2013 and thereafter counsel Steven B. Stein was only associated into the case as
counsel for Plaintiff on March 4, 2013.
2) Additional time is needed to complete discovery, including Plaintiff's deposition,
which is presently being re-set due to illness as well as the defense medical
examination, which is also presently being re-set upon the agreement of all parties due
to the recent substitution of counsel.
3) There has been a recent surgical referral and Plaintiff has scheduled an evaluation with
a neurosurgeon which is unlikely to occur prior to May 2013 due to the neurosurgeon’s
schedule. The outcome of this referral will significantly affect the handling and
resolution of the case.
Counsel for all parties have stipulated to the continuance and extensions of time with
respect to the discovery cut-off, motion and expert witness disclosure dates. The parties will not
suffer prejudice from the requested continuance and counsel have agreed to the new trial date of
October 15, 2013. Accordingly, the Court should grant this application and continue the trial date.
Dated: March 12, 2013 KNOX RICKSEN LLP
By: brgte wre
Thomas E. Fraysse
Megan W. Wendell
Attorneys for Plaintiff
SPERO SARIDAKIS
2
STIPULATED EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR CONTINUANCE OF TRIAL; DECLARATION OF MEGAN W. WENDELLLLP
KNOX RICKSEN
27
28
DECLARATION OF MEGAN W. WENDELL
I, Megan W. Wendell, declare as follows:
1. [am an attorney licensed to practice before all courts of the State of California, and
together with Thomas E. Fraysse and the law firm of Knox Ricksen LLP and with Steven B. Stein
and Law Office of Steven B. Stein, APC, am an attorney of record for plaintiff SPERO
SARIDAKIS (“herein plaintiff or Mr. Saridakis”) in this case. I make this declaration based upon
my own personal knowledge, except as to those matters stated on information and belief, and as to
those matters I believe them to be true. If called as a witness, I could and would competently
testify as follows:
2. The June 24, 2013 trial date in this case was set on December 6, 2012, i.e. prior to
plaintiff's counsels’ substitution and association of counsel on February 14, 2013 and March 4,
2013, respectively.
3. The trial of this case has never been continued and no trial continuance has previously been
sought by or on behalf of any of the parties herein.
4. Good cause as set forth in San Francisco Superior Court Local Rule 6.0B exists to continue
the trial of this action from June 24, 2013 to October 15, 2013 or as soon thereafter as is
convenient for the Court as follows:
A. PLAINTIFFS’ ATTORNEYS HAVE RECENTLY SUBSTITUTED IN AS COUNSEL
AND NEED ADDITIONAL TIME TO EVALUATE THE CASE AND PREPARE FOR TRIAL.
§. On or about February 14, 2013, plaintiff's new attorney, Mr. Thomas E. Fraysse substituted
into the case, and then on or about March 4, 2013, attorney Mr. Steven B. Stein was associated
into the case as counsel for plaintiff.
6. On March 4, 2013, Mr. Stein took steps to coordinate a conference with Mr. Hunter Sims,
who represents defendant RICHELLE PUZON NAVAL and Mr. Ronald Mawhinney, who
represents defendants PENINSULA YELLOW CAB COMPANY, LLC, and RAKESH KUMAR.
7. On March 5, 2013, Mr. Stein, Mr. Sims and Mr. Mawhinney engaged in the meet and
confer process in a collective effort to resolve discovery issues, coordinate a litigation plan and to
discuss methods by which the parties may ultimately get the case evaluated and possibly maneuver
the case into a settlement posture.
B. ADDITIONAL TIME IS NEEDED TO COMPLETE DISCOVERY, INCLUDING
OBTAINING NEW MRI FILMS, TAKING PLAINTIFF’S DEPOSITION AND PERFORMING
3
STIPULATED EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR CONTINUANCE OF TRIAL; DECLARATION OF MEGAN W. WENDELLLLP
KNOX RICKSEN
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
A DEFENSE MEDICAL EXAM.
8. During their meet and confer, Mr. Stein informed Mr. Mawhinney and Mr. Sims that he
was set to meet with Mr. Saridakis on March 6, 2013, and in the immediate wake of the conference
with his client, Mr. Stein informed Mr. Mawhinney via email that Mr. Saridakis had undergone
another MRI which Mr. Saridakis would obtain and that Mr. Stein would provide to defense
counsel.
9. The parties are working together to coordinate Mr. Saridakis’ deposition, which was going
to be taken in February, but was cancelled when Mr. Saridakis came down with the flu. Now that
Mr. Stein is involved in the case, the parties are working to reschedule the deposition.
10. Additionally, the medical examination by defense medical expert, Marco Lee, M.D., had
been rescheduled to March 8, 2013, but with Mr. Fraysee and Mr. Stein recently coming into the
case and because it was essential that Mr. Stein meet with his client before any further litigation
procedures go forward, which is reasonable, Mr. Mawhinney agreed to hold off on the defense
medical examination until Mr. Stein had an opportunity to meet with his client and become
thoroughly acquainted with the case. The parties agree this is not only reasonable but essential to
the effort to coordinate an efficient litigation plan, move this case toward a settlement posture if
possible and to properly prepare for trial if necessary. Mr. Stein’s legal assistant and Mr.
Mawhinney’s legal assistant are in the process of coordinating a new date for the medical
examination by Dr. Lee.
Cc. A RECENT MEDICAL REPORT SHOWS PLAINTIFF WILL REQUIRE SURGERY
AND HE IS AWAITING AN EVALUATION WITH A NEUROSURGEON THAT CANNOT
BE SET UNTIL MAY 2013. THIS EVAULATION WILL AFFECT THE PARTIES”
EVAULATION OF PLAINTIFF’S CASE.
11. A recent medical report by Dr. Light indicated that Mr. Saridakis’ condition necessitates
neck and back surgery, which must be taken very seriously. Mr. Saridakis has scheduled a
medical examination with neurosurgeon Brian Andrews, M.D. in San Francisco, but the earliest
date that Mr. Saridakis was able to set for the medical examination is in May of 2013. Mr.
Saridakis is attempting to coordinate an earlier date for the medical examination, but at this point,
because Dr. Andrews is so booked up, it is likely that the medical examination will have to wait
until May.
12. The parties have been working diligently to move this case forward and have exchanged a
substantial amount of discovery to date. The records from each and every medical care provider
4
STIPULATED EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR CONTINUANCE OF TRIAL: DECLARATION OF MEGAN W. WENDELLLLP
KNOX RICKSEN
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
27
28
that saw Mr. Saridakis have been subpoenaed and it appears that additional subpoenas must be
prepared and processed. There is no doubt from the radiographic evaluations that occurred at
Kaiser and at Seton Medical Center that Mr. Saridakis has significant objectively noted orthopedic
conditions pertaining to his cervical and lumbar regions of his spine warranting careful evaluation,
a second medical opinion by Dr. Andrews, a defense medical examination by Dr. Lee and a review
of all medical records and films pertinent to the neck and back condition. All radiographic films
have been ordered, including CT, MRI and x-rays of Mr. Saridakis’ neck and back, and the films
are expected to arrive soon.
13. All parties agree that the interests of the Mr. Saridakis and each of the defendants will be
best served by continuing the trial date and extending the discovery and motion cut-off dates so
that this matter may be properly prepared for meaningful settlement discussions, which will best
serve the Court and the people of the State of California.
14, All parties to this case are in agreement regarding this request that the Court continue the
trial to October 15, 2013 and hereby jointly request that the Court issue an order continuing the
trial and extending the discovery and motion cut-off dates to be governed by the new trial date.
15. Attached hereto as Exhibit “A” is a true and correct copy of the parties’ stipulation
regarding the continuance.
16. Prior to presenting the instant Ex Parte Application and pursuant to California Rule of
Court 3.1203(b), I spoke via telephone at apx. 4:30 p.m. on Monday, March 11, 2013, with Mr.
Sims and with Mr. Malwhinney, who represent defendants. We agreed that I would present this
Ex Parte Application in Dept. 206 of the San Francisco Superior Court at 11:00 a.m. on
Wednesday, March 13, 2013. Mr. Malwhinney confirmed he would appear at this hearing and Mr.
Sims advised he would not, as he is in trial, but indicated he had no objections to the hearing, as
the request for continuance is stipulated. I subsequently confirmed my intent to appear on
Wednesday, March 13, 2013 at 11:00 a.m. in Dept. 206 with Mr. Malwhinney and Mr. Sims via e-
mail. Attached as Exhibit “B” is a true and correct copy of this e-mail correspondence.
i
It
i
i
i
I
5
STIPULATED EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR CONTINUANCE OF TRIAL; DECLARATION OF MEGAN W. WENDELLLLP
KNOX RICKSEN
17. As set forth in the attached Proof of Service, copies of the instant Ex Parte Application, my
Declaration in support therof and the proposed Order that is being submitted to the Court were
served via fax and e-mail on defense counsel on Tuesday, March 12, 2013.
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the
foregoing is true and correct, except as to those matters stated on information and belief and as to
those matters, I believe them to be true and correct.
Executed this 12" day of March, 2013 in Oakland, California.
PSA WA
Megan W. Wendell
6
STIPULATED EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR CONTINUANCE OF TRIAL; DECLARATION OF MEGAN W. WENDELLCoP QD A HF WN
N Pe Be Be Be Be we ee eK
& RRP BRE BSSERVSaESH IS
27
GILBERT, KELLY, CROWLEY & JENNETT LLP
RONALD MAWHINNEY, Bar No. 181982
44 Montgomery Street, Suite 2080
San Francisco, California 94104-6702
Telephone: (415) 627-9000
Facsimile: (415) 352-6400
Attorneys for Defendants
RAKESH KUMAR, PENINSULA YELLOW CAB CO.
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO
SPERO SARIDAKIS, ) Case No. CGC-12-520752
) [Unlimited Jurisdiction]
Plaintiff, )
) STIPULATION RE: CONTINUANCE OF
v. ) THE JUNE 24, 2013, TRIAL DATE AND
) EXTENDING DISCOVERY CUT-OFF,
PENINSULA YELLOW CAB COMPANY, ) MOTION AND EXPERT DISCLOSURE
LLC; RAKESH KUMAR; and DOES 1 to 50, ) DATES
d
Defendants. )
)
TO THE COURT:
All parties to the above captioned legal action agree that the trial of this matter should be
continued to October 15, 2013. On or about February 14, 2013, plaintiff's new attorney, Thomas
E, Fraysse substituted into the case, and then on or about March 4, 2013, attorney Steven B. Stein
was associated into the case as counsel for Mr. Saridakis.
On March 4, 2013, Mr. Stein took steps to coordinate a conference with Mr. Hunter Sims
who represents defendant RICHELLE PUZON NAVAL and Mr. Ronald Mawhinney who
tepresents defendants PENINSULA YELLOW CAB COMPANY, LLC, and RAKESH KUMAR.
On March 5, 2013, Mr. Stein, Mr. Sims and Mr. Mawhinney engaged in the meet and confer
process in a collective effort to resolve discovery issues, coordinate a litigation plan and to discuss
methods by which the parties may ultimately get the case evaluated and possibly maneuver the case
into a settlement posture. Mr. Stein informed Mr. Mawhinney and Mr. Sims that he was set to
STIPULATION RE: CONTINUANCE OF THE TRIAL ASSIGMENT CONFERENCE
2710325.1 85110-00020 RLMom YN DAH FF WN
oa NFS
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
‘anor, Katy
Crowiey & Jannett LLP
‘Atomeya a Law
meet with Mr. Saridakis on March 6, 2013, and in the immediate wake of the conference with his
client, Mr. Stein informed Mr. Mawhinney via email that Mr. Saridakis had another MRI which
Mr. Saridakis will obtain and that Mr. Stein will provide a copy of it to defense counsel.
The parties are working together to coordinate Mr. Saridakis’ deposition, which was about
to be taken in February, but Mr. Saridakis came down with the flu. Now that Mr. Stein is involved
in the case, the parties are working to reschedule the deposition. Additionally, the medical
examination by defense medical expert Marco Lee, MD, had been rescheduled to March 8, 2013,
but with Mr. Fraysee and Mr. Stein recently coming into the case and because it was essential that
Mr. Stein meet with his client before any further litigation procedures go forward, which is
reasonable, Mr. Mawhinney agreed to hold off on the defense medical examination until Mr. Stein
had an opportunity to meet with his client and become thoroughly acquainted with the case, which
is not only reasonable but essential to our effort to coordinate an efficient litigation plan, move this
case toward a settlement posture if possible and to properly prepare for trial if necessary. Mr.
Stein’s legal assistant and Mr. Mawhinney’s legal assistant are in the process of coordinating a new
date for the medical examination by Dr. Lee.
The medical report by Dr. Light indicated that Mr. Saridakis’ condition necessitates neck
and back surgery, which must be taken very seriously. Mr. Saridakis has scheduled a medical
examination by neurosurgeon Brian Andrews, MD, in San Francisco, but the earliest date that Mr.
Saridakis was able to set for the medical examination is in May of 2013. Mr. Saridakis is
attempting to coordinate an earlier date for the medical examination, but at this point, because Dr.
Andrews is so booked up, it is likely that the medical examination will have to wait until May.
| The parties have been working diligently to move this case forward and have exchanged a
substantial amount of discovery to date. The records from each and every medical care provider
that saw Mr. Saridakis have been subpoenaed and it appears that additional subpoenas must be
prepared and processed. There is no doubt from the radiographic evaluations that occurred at
Kaiser and at Seton Medical Center that Mr. Saridakis has significant objectively noted orthopedic
conditions pertaining to his cervical and lumbar regions of his spine, warranting careful evaluation,
a second medical opinion by Dr. Andrews, a defense medical examination by Dr. Lee and a review
-2-
STIPULATION RE: CONTINUANCE OF THE TRIAL ASSIGMENT CONFERENCE
]/2710325.1 85110-000201 | of all medical records and films pertinent to the neck and back condition. All radiographic films
have been ordered, including CT, MRI and x-rays of Mr. Saridakis’ neck and back, and the films
are expected to arrive soon.
All parties agree that the interests of the Mr. Saridakis and each of the defendants will be
best served by continuing the trial date and extending the discovery and motion cut-off dates so that
2
3
4
5
6 | this matter may be properly prepared for meaningful settlement discussions, which will best serve
7 | the court and the people of the State of California.
8 The parties agreed that Mr. Stein will prepare the Ex Parte Application and that Mr.
9 | Mawhinney would prepare this stipulation for submission to the court with the ex parte motion.
10 | All parties to this case are in agreement regarding this request that the court continue the trial to
11 | October 15, 2013 and hereby jointly request that the court issue an order continuing the trial and
12 | extending the discovery and motion cut-off dates to be governed by the new trial date.
‘Ateneo La
13 | Dated: March [ { , 2013 GILBERT, KELLY,@ROWLEY & JENNETT LLP
y
14 “
ao ———————
15] By: ly
16 R@MALD MAWHINNEY
Attorneys for Defendants
17 RAKESH KUMAR, PENINSULA YELLOW
CAB CO.
18
9 Dated: March t , 2013 STRATMAN, PATTERSON & HUNTER
1
” (te
By:
21 | R SIMS
Attorneys for Defendant
22 RICHELLE PUZON NAVAL
23 1d
34 Dated: March » 2013 LAW OFFICE OF STEVEN B. STEIN
25] By: Peeper o/ Knox Ricken Lup
26 STEVEN B. STEIN -(qy~
Attomeys for Plaintiff 239412
27 SPERO SARIDAKIS
28
Glee, Kody -3-
mmm ecn STIPULATION RE: CONTINUANCE OF THE TRIAL ASSIGMENT CONFERENCE
2710325.1 85110-00020Megan W. Wendell
From: Megan W. Wendell
Sent: Monday, March 11, 2013 4:41 PM
To: ‘Hunter Sims’
Cc: ‘Ronald Mawhinney’; 'Steve@sbslawsf.com'
Subject: RE: Spero Saridakis vs. Peninsula Yellow Cab Company - Status on Stip for Trial
Continuance [IWOV-GKCJIMANAGE.FID397186]
Hi again Hunter,
This will just confirm we spoke in the last 15 minutes and you confirmed you were agreeable to the XP proceeding on
Wed, 3/13 at 11:00 a.m. in D-206 and did not plan to attend.
Thanks,
Megan W. Wendell
1300 Clay Street, Suite 500
Oakland, CA 94612-1427
TEL: 510.285.2500
FAX: 510.285.2505
www.knoxricksen.com
From: Megan W. Wendell
Sent: Monday, March 11, 2013 4:28 PM
To: 'Hunter Sims!
Cc: Ronald Mawhinney; Steve@sbslawsf.com
Subject: RE: Spero Saridakis vs. Peninsula Yellow Cab Company - Status on Stip for Trial Continuance [IWOV-
GKCJIMANAGE.FID397 186]
Hunter,
Thanks for the response. | just spoke with Ron Malwhinney (who received the stipulation). We agreed Wednesday at
11:00 a.m. works well for us to appear on the ex parte, so please accept this as notice that we'll be appearing on
Wednesday, March 13, 2013 at 11:00 a.m. in D-206 at San Francisco Superior to get the trial date continued. I'll also
leave a message with your assistant to advise of same. Thanks,
Megan W. Wendell
1300 Clay Street, Suite 500
Oakland, CA 94612-1427
TEL: 510.285.2500
FAX: 510.285.2505
www.knoxricksen.com
-----Original Message--
From: Hunter Sims [mailto:hunter.sims@farmersinsurance.com]
Sent: Monday, March 11, 2013 12:15 PMLLP
KNOX RICKSEN
ATTORNEYS AT Law
a7
28
Re: Saridakis v. Peninsula Yellow Cab Co., et al.
San Francisco County Superior Court No.: CGC-12-520752
Our File No.: 60591
PROOF OF SERVICE - CIVIL
[Code of Civ. Proc. §§ 1013, 1013a, 2015.5]
1. At the time of service I was over 18 years of age and not a party to this action.
2. My business address is: 1300 Clay Street, Suite 500, Oakland, CA 94612-1427.
3. On the date set forth below, I caused to be served a true and correct copy of the following
document(s):
STIPULATED EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR CONTINUANCE OF TRIAL;
DECLARATION OF MEGAN W. WENDELL
[PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING TRIAL DATE AND EXTENDING DISCOVERY
CUT-OFF, MOTION AND EXPERT WITNESS DISCLOSURE DATES
4. The envelope was addressed and mailed as follows:
Hunter W. Sims, III, Esq.
STRATMAN, PATTERSON & HUNTER
505 14" Street, Suite 400
Ronald Mawhinney, Esq.
Gilbert, Kelly, Crowley & Jennett LLP
44 Montgomery Street, Suite 2080
San Francisco, CA 94104 Oakland, CA 94612
T: (415) 627-9000 T: 510- 457-3468
F: (415) 352-6400 F: 510-238-8968
Attorneys for Defendants, Attorneys for Defendant,
Peninsula Yellow Cab Company, LLC and Richelle Naval
Rakesh Kumar
Steven B. Stein - SBN 52829
Law Office of Steven B. Stein, APC
1300 Clay Street, Suite 500
Oakland, CA 94612-1427
Telephone: (510) 285-2500
Facsimile: (510) 285-2505
The document was served by the following means (specify):
a. a BY PERSONAL SERVICE (See above). I personally delivered the
documents to the persons at the addresses listed in item 4. (1) For a party
represented by an attorney, delivery was made to the attorney or at the
attomney’s office by leaving the documents in an envelope or package clearly
labeled to identify the attorney being served with a receptionist or an
individual in charge of the office. (2) For a party, delivery was made to the
party or by leaving the documents at the party’s residence with some person
not less than 18 years of age between the hours of eight in the morning and
six in the evening.
b. BY UNITED STATES MAIL (See above). I enclosed the documents in a
sealed envelope or package addressed to the persons at the addresses in item
4 and (specify one):
PROOF OF SERVICE
Saridakis v. Peninsula Yellow Cab Co., et al./San Francisco County Superior Court No.: CGC-12-520752LLP
KNOX RICKSEN
ATTORNEYS AT Law
24
25
26
27
28
(1) Oo deposited the sealed envelope with the United States Postal Services,
with the postage fully prepaid.
(2) placed the envelope for collection and mailing, following our
ordinary business practices. I am readily familiar with this business’s
practice for collecting and processing correspondence for mailing.
On the same day that correspondence is placed for collection and
mailing, it is deposited in the ordinary course of business with the
United States Postal Service, in a sealed envelope with postage fully
prepaid.
c. o BY MESSENGER SERVICE. | served the documents by placing them in
an envelope or package addressed to the persons at the addresses listed in
item 4 and providing them to a professional messenger service for service.
| d. BY FAX TRANSMISSION. Based on an agreement of the parties to accept
service by fax transmission, I faxed the documents to the persons at the fax
numbers listed in item 4. No error was reported by the fax machine that I
| used. A copy of the record of the fax transmission, which I printed out, is
attached.
e. BY E-MAIL OR ELECTRONIC TRANSMISSION. i
”) Based on a court order or an agreement of the parties to accept
service by e-mail or electronic transmission, I caused the documents to be
sent to the persons at the email addresses listed in item 4. I did not receive,
with a reasonable time after the transmission, any electronic message or other
indication that the transmission was unsuccessful.
f. Oo BY CERTIFIED MAIL/RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED. | enclosed
the documents in a sealed envelope or package addressed to the persons at
the addresses in item 4 and (specify one):
(1) Oo placed the envelope for collection and mailing, following our
ordinary business practices. I am readily familiar with this business’s
practice for collecting and processing correspondence for mailing.
On the same day that correspondence is placed for collection and
mailing, it is deposited in the ordinary course of business with the
United States Postal Service, in a sealed envelope with postage fully
prepaid for said certified mail/return receipt number .
& (State) I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the
foregoing is true and correct.
Oo (Federal) I declare that I am employed in the offices of a member of the bar of this court at
| whose direction this service was made. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the
United States that the foregoing is true and correct.
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the
foregoing is true and correct.
Dated: March 12, 2013
PROOF OF SERVICE
q Saridakis v. Peninsula Yellow Cab Co., et al./San Francisco County Superior Court No.: CGC-12-520752
Preview
MOU SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO Document Scanning Lead Sheet Mar-13-2013 9:54 am Case Number: CGC-12-520752 | Filing Date: Mar-13-2013 9:51 Filed by: CAROL BALISTRERI Juke Box: 001 Image: 03976857 EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR ORDER SPERO SARIDAKIS VS. PENINSULA YELLOW CAB COMPANY, LLC et al 001003976857 Instructions: Please place this sheet on top of the document to be scanned.LLP KNOX RICKSEN ATTORNEYS AT LAW 1 || Thomas E. Fraysse - SBN (& Megan W. Wendell — SBN 238423 2 | KNOX RICKSEN LLP Superior Court of Califomia 1300 Clay Street, Suite 500 ounty of San Francisco 3 | Oakland, CA 94612-1427 Telephone: (510) 285-2500 MAR 1 8 2013 4 | Facsimile: (510) 285-2505 SAKE) 5 | Steven B. Stein- SBN 52829 Law Office of Steven B. Stein, APC 6 | 1300 Clay Street, Suite 500 Oakland, CA 94612-1427 7 || Telephone: (510) 285-2500 Facsimile: (510) 285-2505 8 Attorneys for Plaintiff g || SPERO SARIDAKIS "0 SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA " COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO 12 13 44 || SPERO SARIDAKIS, No. CGC-12-520752 15 STIPULATED EX PARTE Plaintiff, APPLICATION FOR 16 CONTINUANCE OF TRIAL DATE vs. AND EXTENSION OF DISCOVERY 17 CUT-OFF, MOTION AND EXPERT PENINSULA YELLOW CAB COMPANY WITNESS DISCLOSURE DATES; 48 | LLC, RAKESH KUMAR, RICHELLE SUPPORTING DECLARATION OF NAVAL and Does 1 to 100, inclusive MEGAN W. WENDELL 19 Defendants. Date: March 13, 2013 20 Time: 11:00 a.m. Dept. 206 24 Judge: Hon. Cynthia Ming-mei Lee 22 Complaint Filed: May 14, 2012 Trial Date: June 24, 2013 23 24 Pursuant to Local Rule 6.0B, Plaintiff SPERO SARIDAKIS and Defendants PENINSULA 25 | YELLOW CAB COMPANY, LLC; RAKESH KUMAR; and RICHELLE NAVAL jointly request 26 | 0 order continuing the date of the trial of this case from June 24, 2013 to October 15, 2013. The o7 trial date in this case has never been continued previously and there is good cause to grant this request. This request is based on this application, the Declaration of Megan W. Wendell, attached 28 1 STIPULATED EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR CONTINUANCE OF TRIAL; DECLARATION OF MEGAN W. WENDELLLLP KNOX RICKSEN 27 28 hereto, and the parties’ Stipulation Re: Continuance of the June 24, 2013 Trial Date and Extending Discovery Cut-Off, Motion and Expert Disclosure Dates. As more particularly set forth in the Declaration of Megan W. Wendell and the parties’ stipulation submitted in support of the instant application, good cause exists to continue the trial date and extend the discovery cut-off, motion and expert witness disclosure dates in this case as follows: 1) Plaintiffs counsel Thomas E. Fraysse was not substituted into the case until February 14, 2013 and thereafter counsel Steven B. Stein was only associated into the case as counsel for Plaintiff on March 4, 2013. 2) Additional time is needed to complete discovery, including Plaintiff's deposition, which is presently being re-set due to illness as well as the defense medical examination, which is also presently being re-set upon the agreement of all parties due to the recent substitution of counsel. 3) There has been a recent surgical referral and Plaintiff has scheduled an evaluation with a neurosurgeon which is unlikely to occur prior to May 2013 due to the neurosurgeon’s schedule. The outcome of this referral will significantly affect the handling and resolution of the case. Counsel for all parties have stipulated to the continuance and extensions of time with respect to the discovery cut-off, motion and expert witness disclosure dates. The parties will not suffer prejudice from the requested continuance and counsel have agreed to the new trial date of October 15, 2013. Accordingly, the Court should grant this application and continue the trial date. Dated: March 12, 2013 KNOX RICKSEN LLP By: brgte wre Thomas E. Fraysse Megan W. Wendell Attorneys for Plaintiff SPERO SARIDAKIS 2 STIPULATED EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR CONTINUANCE OF TRIAL; DECLARATION OF MEGAN W. WENDELLLLP KNOX RICKSEN 27 28 DECLARATION OF MEGAN W. WENDELL I, Megan W. Wendell, declare as follows: 1. [am an attorney licensed to practice before all courts of the State of California, and together with Thomas E. Fraysse and the law firm of Knox Ricksen LLP and with Steven B. Stein and Law Office of Steven B. Stein, APC, am an attorney of record for plaintiff SPERO SARIDAKIS (“herein plaintiff or Mr. Saridakis”) in this case. I make this declaration based upon my own personal knowledge, except as to those matters stated on information and belief, and as to those matters I believe them to be true. If called as a witness, I could and would competently testify as follows: 2. The June 24, 2013 trial date in this case was set on December 6, 2012, i.e. prior to plaintiff's counsels’ substitution and association of counsel on February 14, 2013 and March 4, 2013, respectively. 3. The trial of this case has never been continued and no trial continuance has previously been sought by or on behalf of any of the parties herein. 4. Good cause as set forth in San Francisco Superior Court Local Rule 6.0B exists to continue the trial of this action from June 24, 2013 to October 15, 2013 or as soon thereafter as is convenient for the Court as follows: A. PLAINTIFFS’ ATTORNEYS HAVE RECENTLY SUBSTITUTED IN AS COUNSEL AND NEED ADDITIONAL TIME TO EVALUATE THE CASE AND PREPARE FOR TRIAL. §. On or about February 14, 2013, plaintiff's new attorney, Mr. Thomas E. Fraysse substituted into the case, and then on or about March 4, 2013, attorney Mr. Steven B. Stein was associated into the case as counsel for plaintiff. 6. On March 4, 2013, Mr. Stein took steps to coordinate a conference with Mr. Hunter Sims, who represents defendant RICHELLE PUZON NAVAL and Mr. Ronald Mawhinney, who represents defendants PENINSULA YELLOW CAB COMPANY, LLC, and RAKESH KUMAR. 7. On March 5, 2013, Mr. Stein, Mr. Sims and Mr. Mawhinney engaged in the meet and confer process in a collective effort to resolve discovery issues, coordinate a litigation plan and to discuss methods by which the parties may ultimately get the case evaluated and possibly maneuver the case into a settlement posture. B. ADDITIONAL TIME IS NEEDED TO COMPLETE DISCOVERY, INCLUDING OBTAINING NEW MRI FILMS, TAKING PLAINTIFF’S DEPOSITION AND PERFORMING 3 STIPULATED EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR CONTINUANCE OF TRIAL; DECLARATION OF MEGAN W. WENDELLLLP KNOX RICKSEN ATTORNEYS AT LAW A DEFENSE MEDICAL EXAM. 8. During their meet and confer, Mr. Stein informed Mr. Mawhinney and Mr. Sims that he was set to meet with Mr. Saridakis on March 6, 2013, and in the immediate wake of the conference with his client, Mr. Stein informed Mr. Mawhinney via email that Mr. Saridakis had undergone another MRI which Mr. Saridakis would obtain and that Mr. Stein would provide to defense counsel. 9. The parties are working together to coordinate Mr. Saridakis’ deposition, which was going to be taken in February, but was cancelled when Mr. Saridakis came down with the flu. Now that Mr. Stein is involved in the case, the parties are working to reschedule the deposition. 10. Additionally, the medical examination by defense medical expert, Marco Lee, M.D., had been rescheduled to March 8, 2013, but with Mr. Fraysee and Mr. Stein recently coming into the case and because it was essential that Mr. Stein meet with his client before any further litigation procedures go forward, which is reasonable, Mr. Mawhinney agreed to hold off on the defense medical examination until Mr. Stein had an opportunity to meet with his client and become thoroughly acquainted with the case. The parties agree this is not only reasonable but essential to the effort to coordinate an efficient litigation plan, move this case toward a settlement posture if possible and to properly prepare for trial if necessary. Mr. Stein’s legal assistant and Mr. Mawhinney’s legal assistant are in the process of coordinating a new date for the medical examination by Dr. Lee. Cc. A RECENT MEDICAL REPORT SHOWS PLAINTIFF WILL REQUIRE SURGERY AND HE IS AWAITING AN EVALUATION WITH A NEUROSURGEON THAT CANNOT BE SET UNTIL MAY 2013. THIS EVAULATION WILL AFFECT THE PARTIES” EVAULATION OF PLAINTIFF’S CASE. 11. A recent medical report by Dr. Light indicated that Mr. Saridakis’ condition necessitates neck and back surgery, which must be taken very seriously. Mr. Saridakis has scheduled a medical examination with neurosurgeon Brian Andrews, M.D. in San Francisco, but the earliest date that Mr. Saridakis was able to set for the medical examination is in May of 2013. Mr. Saridakis is attempting to coordinate an earlier date for the medical examination, but at this point, because Dr. Andrews is so booked up, it is likely that the medical examination will have to wait until May. 12. The parties have been working diligently to move this case forward and have exchanged a substantial amount of discovery to date. The records from each and every medical care provider 4 STIPULATED EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR CONTINUANCE OF TRIAL: DECLARATION OF MEGAN W. WENDELLLLP KNOX RICKSEN ATTORNEYS AT LAW 27 28 that saw Mr. Saridakis have been subpoenaed and it appears that additional subpoenas must be prepared and processed. There is no doubt from the radiographic evaluations that occurred at Kaiser and at Seton Medical Center that Mr. Saridakis has significant objectively noted orthopedic conditions pertaining to his cervical and lumbar regions of his spine warranting careful evaluation, a second medical opinion by Dr. Andrews, a defense medical examination by Dr. Lee and a review of all medical records and films pertinent to the neck and back condition. All radiographic films have been ordered, including CT, MRI and x-rays of Mr. Saridakis’ neck and back, and the films are expected to arrive soon. 13. All parties agree that the interests of the Mr. Saridakis and each of the defendants will be best served by continuing the trial date and extending the discovery and motion cut-off dates so that this matter may be properly prepared for meaningful settlement discussions, which will best serve the Court and the people of the State of California. 14, All parties to this case are in agreement regarding this request that the Court continue the trial to October 15, 2013 and hereby jointly request that the Court issue an order continuing the trial and extending the discovery and motion cut-off dates to be governed by the new trial date. 15. Attached hereto as Exhibit “A” is a true and correct copy of the parties’ stipulation regarding the continuance. 16. Prior to presenting the instant Ex Parte Application and pursuant to California Rule of Court 3.1203(b), I spoke via telephone at apx. 4:30 p.m. on Monday, March 11, 2013, with Mr. Sims and with Mr. Malwhinney, who represent defendants. We agreed that I would present this Ex Parte Application in Dept. 206 of the San Francisco Superior Court at 11:00 a.m. on Wednesday, March 13, 2013. Mr. Malwhinney confirmed he would appear at this hearing and Mr. Sims advised he would not, as he is in trial, but indicated he had no objections to the hearing, as the request for continuance is stipulated. I subsequently confirmed my intent to appear on Wednesday, March 13, 2013 at 11:00 a.m. in Dept. 206 with Mr. Malwhinney and Mr. Sims via e- mail. Attached as Exhibit “B” is a true and correct copy of this e-mail correspondence. i It i i i I 5 STIPULATED EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR CONTINUANCE OF TRIAL; DECLARATION OF MEGAN W. WENDELLLLP KNOX RICKSEN 17. As set forth in the attached Proof of Service, copies of the instant Ex Parte Application, my Declaration in support therof and the proposed Order that is being submitted to the Court were served via fax and e-mail on defense counsel on Tuesday, March 12, 2013. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct, except as to those matters stated on information and belief and as to those matters, I believe them to be true and correct. Executed this 12" day of March, 2013 in Oakland, California. PSA WA Megan W. Wendell 6 STIPULATED EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR CONTINUANCE OF TRIAL; DECLARATION OF MEGAN W. WENDELLCoP QD A HF WN N Pe Be Be Be Be we ee eK & RRP BRE BSSERVSaESH IS 27 GILBERT, KELLY, CROWLEY & JENNETT LLP RONALD MAWHINNEY, Bar No. 181982 44 Montgomery Street, Suite 2080 San Francisco, California 94104-6702 Telephone: (415) 627-9000 Facsimile: (415) 352-6400 Attorneys for Defendants RAKESH KUMAR, PENINSULA YELLOW CAB CO. SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO SPERO SARIDAKIS, ) Case No. CGC-12-520752 ) [Unlimited Jurisdiction] Plaintiff, ) ) STIPULATION RE: CONTINUANCE OF v. ) THE JUNE 24, 2013, TRIAL DATE AND ) EXTENDING DISCOVERY CUT-OFF, PENINSULA YELLOW CAB COMPANY, ) MOTION AND EXPERT DISCLOSURE LLC; RAKESH KUMAR; and DOES 1 to 50, ) DATES d Defendants. ) ) TO THE COURT: All parties to the above captioned legal action agree that the trial of this matter should be continued to October 15, 2013. On or about February 14, 2013, plaintiff's new attorney, Thomas E, Fraysse substituted into the case, and then on or about March 4, 2013, attorney Steven B. Stein was associated into the case as counsel for Mr. Saridakis. On March 4, 2013, Mr. Stein took steps to coordinate a conference with Mr. Hunter Sims who represents defendant RICHELLE PUZON NAVAL and Mr. Ronald Mawhinney who tepresents defendants PENINSULA YELLOW CAB COMPANY, LLC, and RAKESH KUMAR. On March 5, 2013, Mr. Stein, Mr. Sims and Mr. Mawhinney engaged in the meet and confer process in a collective effort to resolve discovery issues, coordinate a litigation plan and to discuss methods by which the parties may ultimately get the case evaluated and possibly maneuver the case into a settlement posture. Mr. Stein informed Mr. Mawhinney and Mr. Sims that he was set to STIPULATION RE: CONTINUANCE OF THE TRIAL ASSIGMENT CONFERENCE 2710325.1 85110-00020 RLMom YN DAH FF WN oa NFS 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 ‘anor, Katy Crowiey & Jannett LLP ‘Atomeya a Law meet with Mr. Saridakis on March 6, 2013, and in the immediate wake of the conference with his client, Mr. Stein informed Mr. Mawhinney via email that Mr. Saridakis had another MRI which Mr. Saridakis will obtain and that Mr. Stein will provide a copy of it to defense counsel. The parties are working together to coordinate Mr. Saridakis’ deposition, which was about to be taken in February, but Mr. Saridakis came down with the flu. Now that Mr. Stein is involved in the case, the parties are working to reschedule the deposition. Additionally, the medical examination by defense medical expert Marco Lee, MD, had been rescheduled to March 8, 2013, but with Mr. Fraysee and Mr. Stein recently coming into the case and because it was essential that Mr. Stein meet with his client before any further litigation procedures go forward, which is reasonable, Mr. Mawhinney agreed to hold off on the defense medical examination until Mr. Stein had an opportunity to meet with his client and become thoroughly acquainted with the case, which is not only reasonable but essential to our effort to coordinate an efficient litigation plan, move this case toward a settlement posture if possible and to properly prepare for trial if necessary. Mr. Stein’s legal assistant and Mr. Mawhinney’s legal assistant are in the process of coordinating a new date for the medical examination by Dr. Lee. The medical report by Dr. Light indicated that Mr. Saridakis’ condition necessitates neck and back surgery, which must be taken very seriously. Mr. Saridakis has scheduled a medical examination by neurosurgeon Brian Andrews, MD, in San Francisco, but the earliest date that Mr. Saridakis was able to set for the medical examination is in May of 2013. Mr. Saridakis is attempting to coordinate an earlier date for the medical examination, but at this point, because Dr. Andrews is so booked up, it is likely that the medical examination will have to wait until May. | The parties have been working diligently to move this case forward and have exchanged a substantial amount of discovery to date. The records from each and every medical care provider that saw Mr. Saridakis have been subpoenaed and it appears that additional subpoenas must be prepared and processed. There is no doubt from the radiographic evaluations that occurred at Kaiser and at Seton Medical Center that Mr. Saridakis has significant objectively noted orthopedic conditions pertaining to his cervical and lumbar regions of his spine, warranting careful evaluation, a second medical opinion by Dr. Andrews, a defense medical examination by Dr. Lee and a review -2- STIPULATION RE: CONTINUANCE OF THE TRIAL ASSIGMENT CONFERENCE ]/2710325.1 85110-000201 | of all medical records and films pertinent to the neck and back condition. All radiographic films have been ordered, including CT, MRI and x-rays of Mr. Saridakis’ neck and back, and the films are expected to arrive soon. All parties agree that the interests of the Mr. Saridakis and each of the defendants will be best served by continuing the trial date and extending the discovery and motion cut-off dates so that 2 3 4 5 6 | this matter may be properly prepared for meaningful settlement discussions, which will best serve 7 | the court and the people of the State of California. 8 The parties agreed that Mr. Stein will prepare the Ex Parte Application and that Mr. 9 | Mawhinney would prepare this stipulation for submission to the court with the ex parte motion. 10 | All parties to this case are in agreement regarding this request that the court continue the trial to 11 | October 15, 2013 and hereby jointly request that the court issue an order continuing the trial and 12 | extending the discovery and motion cut-off dates to be governed by the new trial date. ‘Ateneo La 13 | Dated: March [ { , 2013 GILBERT, KELLY,@ROWLEY & JENNETT LLP y 14 “ ao ——————— 15] By: ly 16 R@MALD MAWHINNEY Attorneys for Defendants 17 RAKESH KUMAR, PENINSULA YELLOW CAB CO. 18 9 Dated: March t , 2013 STRATMAN, PATTERSON & HUNTER 1 ” (te By: 21 | R SIMS Attorneys for Defendant 22 RICHELLE PUZON NAVAL 23 1d 34 Dated: March » 2013 LAW OFFICE OF STEVEN B. STEIN 25] By: Peeper o/ Knox Ricken Lup 26 STEVEN B. STEIN -(qy~ Attomeys for Plaintiff 239412 27 SPERO SARIDAKIS 28 Glee, Kody -3- mmm ecn STIPULATION RE: CONTINUANCE OF THE TRIAL ASSIGMENT CONFERENCE 2710325.1 85110-00020Megan W. Wendell From: Megan W. Wendell Sent: Monday, March 11, 2013 4:41 PM To: ‘Hunter Sims’ Cc: ‘Ronald Mawhinney’; 'Steve@sbslawsf.com' Subject: RE: Spero Saridakis vs. Peninsula Yellow Cab Company - Status on Stip for Trial Continuance [IWOV-GKCJIMANAGE.FID397186] Hi again Hunter, This will just confirm we spoke in the last 15 minutes and you confirmed you were agreeable to the XP proceeding on Wed, 3/13 at 11:00 a.m. in D-206 and did not plan to attend. Thanks, Megan W. Wendell 1300 Clay Street, Suite 500 Oakland, CA 94612-1427 TEL: 510.285.2500 FAX: 510.285.2505 www.knoxricksen.com From: Megan W. Wendell Sent: Monday, March 11, 2013 4:28 PM To: 'Hunter Sims! Cc: Ronald Mawhinney; Steve@sbslawsf.com Subject: RE: Spero Saridakis vs. Peninsula Yellow Cab Company - Status on Stip for Trial Continuance [IWOV- GKCJIMANAGE.FID397 186] Hunter, Thanks for the response. | just spoke with Ron Malwhinney (who received the stipulation). We agreed Wednesday at 11:00 a.m. works well for us to appear on the ex parte, so please accept this as notice that we'll be appearing on Wednesday, March 13, 2013 at 11:00 a.m. in D-206 at San Francisco Superior to get the trial date continued. I'll also leave a message with your assistant to advise of same. Thanks, Megan W. Wendell 1300 Clay Street, Suite 500 Oakland, CA 94612-1427 TEL: 510.285.2500 FAX: 510.285.2505 www.knoxricksen.com -----Original Message-- From: Hunter Sims [mailto:hunter.sims@farmersinsurance.com] Sent: Monday, March 11, 2013 12:15 PMLLP KNOX RICKSEN ATTORNEYS AT Law a7 28 Re: Saridakis v. Peninsula Yellow Cab Co., et al. San Francisco County Superior Court No.: CGC-12-520752 Our File No.: 60591 PROOF OF SERVICE - CIVIL [Code of Civ. Proc. §§ 1013, 1013a, 2015.5] 1. At the time of service I was over 18 years of age and not a party to this action. 2. My business address is: 1300 Clay Street, Suite 500, Oakland, CA 94612-1427. 3. On the date set forth below, I caused to be served a true and correct copy of the following document(s): STIPULATED EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR CONTINUANCE OF TRIAL; DECLARATION OF MEGAN W. WENDELL [PROPOSED] ORDER CONTINUING TRIAL DATE AND EXTENDING DISCOVERY CUT-OFF, MOTION AND EXPERT WITNESS DISCLOSURE DATES 4. The envelope was addressed and mailed as follows: Hunter W. Sims, III, Esq. STRATMAN, PATTERSON & HUNTER 505 14" Street, Suite 400 Ronald Mawhinney, Esq. Gilbert, Kelly, Crowley & Jennett LLP 44 Montgomery Street, Suite 2080 San Francisco, CA 94104 Oakland, CA 94612 T: (415) 627-9000 T: 510- 457-3468 F: (415) 352-6400 F: 510-238-8968 Attorneys for Defendants, Attorneys for Defendant, Peninsula Yellow Cab Company, LLC and Richelle Naval Rakesh Kumar Steven B. Stein - SBN 52829 Law Office of Steven B. Stein, APC 1300 Clay Street, Suite 500 Oakland, CA 94612-1427 Telephone: (510) 285-2500 Facsimile: (510) 285-2505 The document was served by the following means (specify): a. a BY PERSONAL SERVICE (See above). I personally delivered the documents to the persons at the addresses listed in item 4. (1) For a party represented by an attorney, delivery was made to the attorney or at the attomney’s office by leaving the documents in an envelope or package clearly labeled to identify the attorney being served with a receptionist or an individual in charge of the office. (2) For a party, delivery was made to the party or by leaving the documents at the party’s residence with some person not less than 18 years of age between the hours of eight in the morning and six in the evening. b. BY UNITED STATES MAIL (See above). I enclosed the documents in a sealed envelope or package addressed to the persons at the addresses in item 4 and (specify one): PROOF OF SERVICE Saridakis v. Peninsula Yellow Cab Co., et al./San Francisco County Superior Court No.: CGC-12-520752LLP KNOX RICKSEN ATTORNEYS AT Law 24 25 26 27 28 (1) Oo deposited the sealed envelope with the United States Postal Services, with the postage fully prepaid. (2) placed the envelope for collection and mailing, following our ordinary business practices. I am readily familiar with this business’s practice for collecting and processing correspondence for mailing. On the same day that correspondence is placed for collection and mailing, it is deposited in the ordinary course of business with the United States Postal Service, in a sealed envelope with postage fully prepaid. c. o BY MESSENGER SERVICE. | served the documents by placing them in an envelope or package addressed to the persons at the addresses listed in item 4 and providing them to a professional messenger service for service. | d. BY FAX TRANSMISSION. Based on an agreement of the parties to accept service by fax transmission, I faxed the documents to the persons at the fax numbers listed in item 4. No error was reported by the fax machine that I | used. A copy of the record of the fax transmission, which I printed out, is attached. e. BY E-MAIL OR ELECTRONIC TRANSMISSION. i ”) Based on a court order or an agreement of the parties to accept service by e-mail or electronic transmission, I caused the documents to be sent to the persons at the email addresses listed in item 4. I did not receive, with a reasonable time after the transmission, any electronic message or other indication that the transmission was unsuccessful. f. Oo BY CERTIFIED MAIL/RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED. | enclosed the documents in a sealed envelope or package addressed to the persons at the addresses in item 4 and (specify one): (1) Oo placed the envelope for collection and mailing, following our ordinary business practices. I am readily familiar with this business’s practice for collecting and processing correspondence for mailing. On the same day that correspondence is placed for collection and mailing, it is deposited in the ordinary course of business with the United States Postal Service, in a sealed envelope with postage fully prepaid for said certified mail/return receipt number . & (State) I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct. Oo (Federal) I declare that I am employed in the offices of a member of the bar of this court at | whose direction this service was made. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States that the foregoing is true and correct. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct. Dated: March 12, 2013 PROOF OF SERVICE q Saridakis v. Peninsula Yellow Cab Co., et al./San Francisco County Superior Court No.: CGC-12-520752