arrow left
arrow right
  • BEACON RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION VS. CATELLUS THIRD AND KING LLC et al CONSTRUCTION document preview
  • BEACON RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION VS. CATELLUS THIRD AND KING LLC et al CONSTRUCTION document preview
  • BEACON RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION VS. CATELLUS THIRD AND KING LLC et al CONSTRUCTION document preview
  • BEACON RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION VS. CATELLUS THIRD AND KING LLC et al CONSTRUCTION document preview
  • BEACON RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION VS. CATELLUS THIRD AND KING LLC et al CONSTRUCTION document preview
  • BEACON RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION VS. CATELLUS THIRD AND KING LLC et al CONSTRUCTION document preview
  • BEACON RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION VS. CATELLUS THIRD AND KING LLC et al CONSTRUCTION document preview
  • BEACON RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION VS. CATELLUS THIRD AND KING LLC et al CONSTRUCTION document preview 
						
                                
Preview

                                Gordon & Rees LLP

275 Battery Street, Suite 2000

San Francisco, CA 94111

CO SO tm BN Om

RO RN eat
8B 8SRkaRE BES FS SSEARFAEBGHE KS

SANDY M. KAPLAN (SBN 095065)
GREGORY T. HANSON (SBN 201395)
GORDON & REES LLP

275 Battery Street, Suite 2000

San Francisco, CA 94111

Telephone: (415) 986-5900

Facsimile: (415) 986-8054

Attorneys for Defendants, Cross-Defendants
and Cross-Complainants WEBCOR

CONSTRUCTION, INC.; WEBCOR BUILDERS,

INC.; WEBCOR CONSTRUCTION, INC.
dba WEBCOR BUILDERS on its own behalf

ELECTRONICALLY
FILED

Superior Court of California,
County of San Francisco

JUL 24 2014

Clerk of the Court
BY: MICHAEL RAYRAY
Deputy Clerk

and erroneously sued as WEBCOR CONSTRUCTION

LP dba WEBCOR BUILDERS

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA - COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO

BEACON RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY
ASSOCIATION,

Plaintiff,
vs.
CATELLUS THIRD AND KING LLC, et al.,
Defendants.

AND RELATED CROSS-ACTIONS.

Net Ne” See! te! Se! a Sn! at! See Ne! ee! So! Na!!! Sat a! a! ne! Sat! a ot!

-l-

CASE NO. CGC-08-478453

DECLARATION OF GREGORY T.
HANSON IN SUPPORT OF WEBCOR
CONSTRUCTION, INC.; WEBCOR
BUILDERS, INC.; WEBCOR
CONSTRUCTION, INC. dba WEBCOR
BUILDERS on its own behalf and
erroneously sued as WEBCOR
CONSTRUCTION LP dba WEBCOR
BUILDERS’ OPPOSITION TO MISSION
PLACE’S MOTION TO ENFORCE
COURT'S JANUARY 15, 2014 ORDER
GRANTING MISSION PLACE’S MOTION
FOR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION

ACCOMPANYING DOCUMENTS:
OPPOSITION; REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL
NOTICE; and (PROPOSED) ORDER.

DATE: Aug. 6, 2014

TIME: 10:30am,

DEPT: 303

JUDGE: Honorable Richard A. Kramer

Complaint Filed: Aug. 8, 2009

DECLARATION OF GREGORY T. HANSON IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS’ OPPOSITION TO MISSION
PLACE’S MOTION TO ENFORCE COURT'S JANUARY 15, 2014 ORDERGordon & Rees LLP

275 Battery Street, Suite 2000

San Francisco, CA 94111

DECLARATION OF GREGORY T, HANSON
I, Gregory T. Hanson declare as follows:

L Iam a Senior Counsel at the law firm of Gordon & Rees, LLP, counsel for
Defendants, Cross-Defendants and Cross-Complainants WEBCOR CONSTRUCTION, INC.;
WEBCOR BUILDERS, INC.; WEBCOR CONSTRUCTION, INC. dba WEBCOR BUILDERS
on its own behalf and erroneously sued as WEBCOR CONSTRUCTION LP dba WEBCOR
BUILDERS (hereinafter collectively, “WEBCOR”). I have personal knowledge of the facts set
forth in this Declaration, and if called as a witness, I could and would testify competently to said
facts under oath. I make this Declaration in support of Webcor’s Opposition to Mission Place’s
Motion To Enforce [this] Court’s January 15, 2014 Order Granting Mission Place’s Motion for
Summary Adjudication.

2. In December 2010, Mission Place brought a motion for summary adjudication
seeking a declaratory relief ruling on its Cross-Complaint’s seventh cause of action against
Webcor. The hearing on said motion was delayed to allow further discovery, further
supplemental briefings were filed, and on August 24, 2012, this Court heard extensive oral
arguments concerning the aforementioned issues.

3. Following a ruling in favor of Mission Place on the existence of a duty to defend,
this Court ordered the parties to meet and confer regarding the terms of the proposed Order.
Despite attempts to agree on the proposed Order’s terms, the parties, in or about January 2013,
submitted competing long-form orders. In or about July 2013, both parties were informed by
this Court’s clerk that the proposed orders were too lengthy, and that Judge Kramer was seeking
shortened orders. In or about August 2013, both parties submitted shortened but competing
proposed Orders.

4. On August 19, 2013, Judge Kramer signed the proposed Order submitted by
Mission Place. Webcor, strongly believing that the signed Order did not accurately reflect Judge
Kramer’s rulings at oral argument, filed a “Motion for Clarification/Amendment/Reconsideration
of Order Granting Mission Place’s Motion for Summary Adjudication,” and that motion was
heard on October 9, 2013. While Judge Kramer technically denied the motion, he ordered the

-2e

DECLARATION OF GREGORY T. HANSON IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS’ OPPOSITION TO MISSION
PLACE’S MOTION TO ENFORCE COURT’S JANUARY 15, 2014 ORDERGordon & Rees LLP
275 Battery Street, Suite 2000

San Francisco, CA 94111

parties to go back to the drawing board and attempt to agree upon a revised proposed Order
which more accurately reflected the comments made by Judge Kramer on the record during the
August 24, 2012 oral arguments. The parties once again met and conferred, and as a result, filed
a joint, stipulated, proposed Order. On January 15, 2014, Judge Kramer executed that Order.
(Cvitanovic Declaration, “Exhibit B”)

5, On January 29, 2014, Mr. Cvitanovic sent a letter to counsel for Webcor
(Cvitanovic Declaration, “Exhibit C”) noting that Mission Place was compiling documentation
supporting fees and costs claimed by Mission Place, and requesting Webcor’s position on what,
if any, fees and/or costs Webcor intended to pay. In response, verbal communications were
exchanged between Mr. Cvitanovic and I, wherein I once again clearly communicated to Mr.
Cvitanovic Webcor’s position relative to the express terms of the Contract at issue.

6. On April 15, 2014, Mr. Cvitanovic sent an e-mail attaching an April 14, 2014
letter and a copy of the January 15, 2014 Order. (Cvitanovie Declaration, “Exhibit D*). While
the letter also attached summaries of the claimed costs and fees to the tune of $1,605,126.51, no
backup was provided.

7. Contrary to Mission Place’s assertions that Webcor never responded to its letter of
January 29, 2014, on April 21, 2014, Webcor provided a formal response to both that letter, and,
Mr. Cvitanovic’s subsequent e-mail and letter of April 14/15, 2014. (See Cvitanovic
Declaration, “Exhibit E”). In that letter, | made imminently clear Webcor’s position relative to
the parameters of any claimed duty to defend. Further, I requested that pursuant to the express
terms of the Contract, Mr. Cvitanovic provide evidence that any claimed Mission Place costs
and/or fees had not been (or would not be) “covered or compensated by insurance”, and, that to
the extent those costs and/or fees existed, that said costs and/or fees were reasonable. Instead of
providing the requested evidence, Mr. Cvitanovic filed the instant motion.

8. The January 15, 2014 Order encompassed declared duties for both Webcor and
HES Architects, and thus, the pluralized “respective contracts” refers to both the Webcor and
HES’ contracts. For purposes of this motion, however, 1 am only opposing Mission Place’s
Motion to Enforce Court’s January 15, 2014 Order as to Webcor.

3.

DECLARATION OF GREGORY T. HANSON IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS’ OPPOSITION TO MISSION
PLACE’S MOTION TO ENFORCE COURT’S JANUARY 15, 2014 ORDERGordon & Rees LLP

275 Battery Street, Suite 2000

San Francisco, CA 94111

0 Oo MB ON mB WB Ne

me
BRE BER ESLER BTR AESHR ES

9. At the October 9, 2013 oral arguments on Webcor’s Motion for
Clarification/Amendment/Reconsideration of Order Granting Mission Place’s Motion for
Summary Adjudication, Judge Kramer instructed that any subsequent revised Order submitted by
the parties was to include language which incorporated by reference the record of the
August 24, 2012 hearing on the Mission Place Motion for Summary Adjudication.

10. At the August 24, 2012 hours-long oral arguments on the Mission Place Motion
for Summary Adjudication, resulting in an 87 page transcript, (“Exhibit 2” to this Declaration)
Judge Kramer repeatedly reiterated that if he were to rule that the Webcor and HKS contracts
were validly assigned to Mission Place, and, that there was thus an ensuing duty to defend, the
parameters of that duty were not being ruled upon, nor was money being ordered to be paid, but
rather, any duty to pay would be governed by the terms of the “respective contracts.”

11. Subject to the terms of the Contract, I formally asked Mission Place to provide
evidence of costs and/or fees NOT paid by their insurance company in my letter of
April 21, 2014 (Cvitanovic Declaration, “Exhibit E”). [received no response nor evidence.

12. To date, Mission Place has not provided Webcor with an assignment of its
defense costs from any of its carriers.

13. Attached to this Declaration as “Exhibit 1” is a true and correct copy of Article XI
of the Webcor Contract at issue.

id. Attached to this Declaration as “Exhibit 2” is a true and correct copy of the
transcript from the August 24, 2012 hearing on Mission Place’s Motion for Summary
Adjudication.

15. Attached to this Declaration as “Exhibit 3” is a true and correct copy of the
Statement of Insurance By Mission Place LLC and Affiliated Entities which was served to the
parties in this matter by e-mail on or about January 31, 2011. On July 10, 2014, my assistant,
Roseann Minafo, requested a copy of the Proof of Service from Catherine Schmitz, assistant to

Steven M. Cvitanovic, however, no Proof of Service was provided.

A.

DECLARATION OF GREGORY T. HANSON IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS’ OPPOSITION TO MISSION
PLACE’S MOTION TO ENFORCE COURT’S JANUARY 15, 2014 ORDERGordon & Rees LLP
275 Battery Street, Suite 2000

San Francisco,CA 9411L

eo & RDN NH

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the

foregoing is true and correct. Executed this 23" day of July, 2014 at San Francisco, California.

5.

DECLARATION OF GREGORY T. HANSON IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS’ OPPOSITION TO MISSION
PLACE’S MOTION TO ENFORCE COURT'S JANUARY 15, 2014 ORDER