Motion-Secondary: BEACON RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION VS. CATELLUS THIRD AND KING LLC et al

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

						
                                
Preview
                                TEU

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO

Document Scanning Lead Sheet
Aug-07-2012 2:54 pm

Case Number: CGC-08-478453
Filing Date: Aug-07-2012 2:54
Filed by: RONNIE OTERO
Juke Box: 001 Image: 03715747
SEPARATE STATEMENT OF FACTS

L_

BEACON RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION VS. CATELLUS THIRD
AND KING LLC et al

001C03715747

Instructions:
Please place this sheet on top of the document to be scanned.Steven H. Schwartz, Esq., SBN 94637
Noel E. Macaulay, Esq., SBN 121695
SCHWARTZ & JANZEN, LLP

12100 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 1125
Los Angeles, CA 90025-7117
Telephone: 310/979-4090
Facsimile: 310/207-3344

Attorneys for Defendant, HKS, INC, individually and dba HKS ARCHITECTS, INC.

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA

COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO
BEACON RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY CASE NO. CGC-08-478453
ASSOCIATION,
{Complaint Filed: August 8, 2008}
Plaintiff,
vs.
HKS, INC. INDIVIDUALLY AND DBA
CATELLUS THIRD AND KING LLC; CATELLUS HKS ARCHITECTS, INC.’S AMENDED
DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION; CATELLUS SEPARATE STATEMENT OF

COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT CORP.; CATELLUS | DISPUTED AND UNDISPUTED
OPERATING LIMITED PARTNERSHIP; CATELLUS | MATERIAL FACTS IN OPPOSITION
URBAN DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION; THIRD TO MOTION FOR SUMMARY

AND KING INVESTORS LLC; PROLOGIS; MISSION | ADJUDICATION

PLACE LLC; MISSION PLACE MEZZANINE LLC,
MISSION PLACE MEZZ HOLDINGS LLC; MISSION

PLACE PARTNERS LLC; CENTURION REAL DATE: August 24, 2012
ESTATE INVESTORS IV, LLC; CENTURION REAL

ESTATE PARTNERS, LLC; CENTURION TIME: 9:30 a.m.
PARTNERS LLC; WEBCOR CONSTRUCTION, INC.;

WEBCOR BUILDERS, INC.; WEBCOR DEPT: 304

CONSTRUCTION, INC., individually and doing
business as WEBCOR BUILDERS; WEBCOR
CONSTRUCTION LP individually and doing business BY FAX
as WEBCOR BUILDERS; SKIDMORE OWINGS &
MERRILL LLP; HKS, INC.; HKS ARCHITECTS, INC.;
HKS, INC.., individually and doing business as HKS
ARCHITECTS, INC. and DOES 1 through 200,

Defendants.

-1-
HKS, INC. INDIVIDUALLY AND DBA HKS ARCHITECTS, INC.’S AMENDED SEPARATE STATEMENT OF DISPUTED AND UNDISPUTED}
MATERIAL FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR SUMMARY ADJUDICATIONSUPPORTING MATERIAL FACTS!

HKS'S DISPUTED AND

‘MATERIAL FACTS:

SPUTED. | "SUPPORTING EVIDENCE

1. “HKS, Inc.” is, and at all times relevant was, a Declaration of Jack B. Price, 92
Texas corporation which does business under

the name of HKS Architects, Inc. The issue to which this disputed material fact

relates has been withdrawn and this fact is no

longer at-issue

2. “HKS, inc., a Texas corporation doing business | Declaration of Jack B. Price, [2
in California as HKS Architects, Inc.” is a

California corporation

The issue to which this disputed material fact
relates has been withdrawn and this fact is no
longer at-issue. HKS also would note that this
entity is a Texas corporation.

3. “HKS, Inc., a Texas corporation doing business | Declaration of Jack B. Price, [2-3; Moving Parties’
in California as HKS Architects, Inc.” entered into | Compendium of Exhibits, Ex. 4
a contract, pursuant to which it provided design
and other services in connection with the The issue as to whether the proper HKS entity
Beacon project (hereinafter “Project’) is involved has been withdrawn and this fact is

no longer at-issue as to the same; however, it

is otherwise reasserted without change.

1 In accordance with the procedure employed by Mission Place, additions of supplemental or amended material are

bolded.

2-

HKS, INC, INDIVIDUALLY AND DBA HKS ARCHITECTS, INC.’S AMENDED SEPARATE STATEMENT OF DISPUTED AND UNDISPUTED]
MATERIAL FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR SUMMARY ADJUDICATIONHKS’S DISPUTED AND UNDISPUTED
MATERIAL FACTS

“SUPPORTING EVIDENCE

4. “HKS, Inc., a Texas corporation doing business

the contract for the provision of design services
with Catellus Urban Development Group, LLC
(hereinafter “Architectural Agreement’)

in California as HKS Architects, Inc.” entered into

Declaration of Jack B. Price, {[2-3; Moving Parties’
Compendium of Exhibits, Ex. 4

The issue as to whether the proper HKS entity
is involved has been withdrawn and this fact is
no longer at-issue as to the same; however, it
is otherwise reasserted without change.

5. “HKS, Inc., a Texas corporation doing business
in California as HKS Architects, Inc.” and HKS,
Inc. (hereinafter collectively and for ease of
reference, “HKS" or as “the HKS Entities”) did
not contract with Third and King Investors, LLC

Declaration of Jack B. Price, ]2-4; Moving Parties’
Compendium of Exhibits, Ex. 4

The issue as to whether the proper HKS entity
is involved has been withdrawn and this fact is
no longer at-issue as to the same; however, it
is otherwise reasserted. Moreover,
supplemental evidence demonstrates that
Mission Place has no basis to assert that TKI
was a party to the architectural contract or that
any contracting party assigned its rights to
TKI [Supplemental Declaration of Noel E.
Macaulay, 4, Exhibit “A” (Deposition of John
Tashjian, Vol. 1, taken on April 27, 2011), page
88, line 25 to page 90, line 7, page 104, line 11
to page 105, line 5.]

-3-

HKS, INC. INDIVIDUALLY AND DBA HKS ARCHITECTS, INC.’S AMENDED SEPARATE STATEMENT OF DISPUTED AND UNDISPUTED|
MATERIAL FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR SUMMARY ADJUDICATIONHKS’S DISPUTED AND UNDISPUTED
MATERIAL FACTS

SUPPORTING EVIDENCE

6. The HKS Entities dealt with Catellus Urban
Development Group, LLC, not Third and King
Investors, LLC, in providing services on this
Project

Declaration of Jack B. Price, {]2-4; Moving Parties’
Compendium of Exhibits, Ex. 4

HKS agrees that at some point, Third & King
Investors, Inc. became involved with the
project and a change order may have been
executed by one entity, purporting to act on
behalf of another entity, which in turn
purported to be acting on behalf of Third &
King Investors, Inc. None of these entities

were the company with which it contracted.

7. The HKS Entities submitted their invoices to
Catellus Urban Development Group, LLC, not
Third and King Investors, LLC, for their services

on this Project

Declaration of Jack B. Price, 2-4; Moving Parties’
Compendium of Exhibits, Ex. 4

[No Supplemental Evidence]

8. The HKS Entities were paid by Catellus Urban
Development Group, LLC, rather than Third and
King Investors, LLC, for the services they
provided on this Project

Declaration of Jack B. Price, {[2-4; Moving Parties’
Compendium of Exhibits, Ex. 4

[No Supplemental Evidence]

9. Anumber of companies, other than the HKS
Entities, provided design services in connection
with the Project, and under contract with the
developer and/or owner

Declaration of Jack B. Price, 2-4; Moving Parties’
Compendium of Exhibits, Ex. 4

[No Change}

-4-
HKS, INC. INDIVIDUALLY AND DBA HKS ARCHITECTS, INC.’S AMENDED SEPARATE STATEMENT OF DISPUTED AND UNDISPUTED|
MATERIAL FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR SUMMARY ADJUDICATIONHKS’S DISPUTED AND UNDISPUTED
- MATERIAL FACTS:

SUPPORTING EVIDENCE

10. To the best of HKS's knowledge, Catellus Urban
Development Group, LLC, never assigned any of
its rights under the Architectural Agreement to

anyone

Declaration of Jack B. Price, 2-4; Moving Parties’
Compendium of Exhibits, Ex. 4

In addition to the evidence previously
submitted, the following additional evidence is
presented: Supplemental Declaration of Noel
E. Macaulay, §] 4, Exhibit “A” (Deposition of
John Tashjian, Vol. 4, taken on April 27, 2011),
page 87, lines 12-25, page 88, lines 7-10;
Supplemental Declaration of Noel E. Macaulay,
416, Exhibit “E” (deposition transcript of Keith
Anderson, taken on March 21, 2012) at page
407, lines 11-17 and page 117, line 15 to page
118 (20).

. HKS never consented to any assignment of
Catellus Urban Development Group, LLC's rights
under the Architectural Agreement to anyone

Declaration of Jack B. Price, 2-4; Moving Parties’
Compendium of Exhibits, Ex. 4

[No Change]

12. HKS understood and believed, when it executed a
“Consent and Agreement’ in or around December
13, 2004, that such did not include any

assignment of indemnity rights

Declaration of Jack B. Price, 5; Moving Parties’
Compendium of Exhibits, Ex. 4

[No Supplemental Evidence]

. HKS understood and believed that the “Consent
and Agreement’ it executed in or around
December 13, 2004 was limited to the specific
representations and assignments enumerated in
that document.

Declaration of Jack B. Price, 5; Moving Parties’
Compendium of Exhibits, Ex. 4

[No Supplemental Evidence]

5

HKS, INC. INDIVIDUALLY AND DBA HKS ARCHITECTS, INC.’S AMENDED SEPARATE STATEMENT OF DISPUTED AND UNDISPUTED}
MATERIAL FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR SUMMARY ADJUDICATIONHKS’S DISPUTED AND UNDISPUTED
MATERIAL FACTS

~~ SUPPORTING EVIDENCE *

14. HKS was unaware at the time of any contention
that Third and King Investors LLC was seeking to
retain any rights that it was purportedly assigning
to Mission Place, LLC

Declaration of Jack B. Price, 115; Moving Parties’
Compendium of Exhibits, Ex. 4

[No Change. HKS would also note that to the
extent that the exhibits attached to the
Supplemental Declaration of John Tashjian are
admissible, they demonstrate that the
Assignment underwent several modifications
over time, and that the iteration purportedly
sent to Jack Price did not state that TKI was
retaining any such rights]

15. HKS, in executing the “Consent and Agreement’
did not intend to, or understand and believe that
signing the document would result in it owing
duties to additional parties, as well as existing

parties

Declaration of Jack B. Price, {[5-6; Moving Parties’
Compendium of Exhibits, Ex. 4

[No Change. HKS would also note that to the
extent that the exhibits attached to the
Supplemental Declaration of John Tashjian are
admissible, they demonstrate that the
Assignment underwent several modifications
over time, and that the iteration purportedly
sent to Jack Price did not state that TKI was

retaining any such rights]

16. HKS did not intend, in executing the “Consent and
Agreement’, or doing anything else, to consent to
the assignment of any rights to anyone other than

Mission Place, LLC,

Declaration of Jack B. Price, §[5-6; Moving Parties’
Compendium of Exhibits, Ex. 4

[No Change. HKS would also note that to the
extent that the exhibits attached to the
Supplemental Declaration of John Tashjian are

admissible, that the

they demonstrate

-6-

HKS, INC. INDIVIDUALLY AND DBA HKS ARCHITECTS, INC.’S AMENDED SEPARATE STATEMENT OF DISPUTED AND UNDISPUTED]
MATERIAL FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR SUMMARY ADJUDICATIONHKS’S DISPUTED AND UNDISPUTED
MATERIAL FACTS

~ SUPPORTING EVIDENCE

Assignment underwent several modifications
over time, and that the iteration purportedly
sent to Jack Price did not state that TKI was
retaining any such rights]

17. HKS was unaware of any contention that Third
and King Investors LLC was seeking to retain any
tights that it was purportedly assigning to Mission
Place, LLC

Declaration of Jack B. Price, ; Moving Parties’
Compendium of Exhibits, Ex. 4

[No Change. HKS would also note that to the
extent that the exhibits attached to the
Supplemental Declaration of John Tashjian are
admissible, they demonstrate that the
Assignment underwent several modifications
over time, and that the iteration purportedly
sent to Jack Price did not state that TKI was
retaining any such rights]

18. The claims and damages sought by plaintiff were
not the result of actions or omissions of any HKS
Entity

Declaration of Jack B. Price, 6

[No Change]

19. The claims and damages sought by plaintiff were
not the result of misconduct on the part of any
HKS Entity

Declaration of Jack B. Price, §}6

[No Change]

20. The claims and damages sought by plaintiff were
not the result of any negligent acts, errors or
omissions on the part of any HKS entity

Declaration of Jack B. Price, 6

{No Change]

21. The HKS Entities complied with the professional
standard of care in providing design and other
services in connection with the Beacon project

Declaration of Jack B. Price, §[6

[No Change]

-7-

HKS, INC. INDIVIDUALLY AND DBA HKS ARCHITECTS, INC.’S AMENDED SEPARATE STATEMENT OF DISPUTED AND UNDISPUTED}

MATERIAL FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO.

MOTION FOR SUMMARY ADJUDICATIONHKS’S DISPUTED AND UNDISPUTED ~
MATERIAL FACTS

‘SUPPORTING EVIDENCE =

22. The claims and damages sought by plaintiff were
not the result of any unauthorized conduct by any
HKS Entity

Declaration of Jack B. Price, 6

[No Change]

23. The claims and damages sought by plaintiff were Declaration of Jack B. Price, 16
not the result of any breach of the Architectural
Agreement by HKS or any HKS Entity [No Change]

24. To the extent that any matter is alleged to Declaration of Jack B. Price, 6

implicate HKS or the HKS Entities’ work on the
Project, such was due to the active, passive or
concurrent negligence/fault of the
developers/owners and entities (other than HKS)
working for it or them and for whose or which
conduct it or they would be responsible.

In addition to the Declaration of Jack B. Price
previously submitted, plaintiff's own
allegations make the extent to which the
developer/owner’s active, passive or
concurrent negligence is implicated evident.
The gravamen of the action against HKS is
that it engaged, at the request of its client, in
the “value engineering”, which resulted in the
“heat gain” issue which is at the core of this
litigation [See e.g. Third Amended Complaint,
pg. 13 (8-13)] and that the developer
defendants were fully aware of the
consequences of doing so and of the heat gain
issue — before any units were sold to the
owners [See e.g. Third Amended Complaint,
pg. 53-55]. Moreover, there has been
extensive testimony at depositions by
developer and developer related personnel
about heat complaints from tenants (including
the circulations of petitions about the same),
prior to the first sale of the units, as well as

-8-

HKS, INC. INDIVIDUALLY AND DBA HKS ARCHITECTS, INC.’S AMENDED SEPARATE STATEMENT OF DISPUTED AND UNDISPUTED
MATERIAL FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR SUMMARY ADJUDICATIONHKS'S DISPUTED AND UNDISPUTED
MATERIAL FACTS

SUPPORTING EVIDENCE

other evidence which directly implicates and
bears upon the fault of Mission Place and/or
any predecessor developer [See e.g.
Supplemental Declaration of Noel E. Macaulay,
97-9], which would potentially implicate this
issue.

25. Mission Place, LLC and these Cross-
Complainants have produced evidence of millions
of dollars of insurance coverage in their
Statement of Insurance

Declaration of Noel E. Macaulay, {9

Supplemental Evidence: Supplemental
Declaration of Noel E. Macaulay, { 4, Exhibit
“A” (Deposition of John Tashjian, Vol. 1, taken
on April 27, 2011), page 121, line 13 to page
122, line 3 (all of Haight, Brown’s costs paid by
insurance); Supplemental Declaration of Noel
E. Macaulay, {| 4, Exhibit “B” (Deposition of
John Tashjian, Vol. 2, taken on April 24, 2012),
page 208, lines 7-25 (only firm whose defense
costs not being fully covered is Cumis
counsel).

26. There is additional discovery which is relevant to
the opposition to the motion for summary
adjudication, which HKS would seek to take if the

motion is continued

Declaration of Noel E. Macaulay, 9

Supplemental Evidence: Supplemental
Declaration of Noel E. Macaulay, {J 2-3

27. The circumstances of this case, including stays
imposed on discovery, have previously impeded
the taking of depositions and other discovery

Declaration of Noel E. Macaulay, 1-8

[No Longer Applicable]

-9-
HKS, INC. INDIVIDUALLY AND DBA HKS ARCHITECTS, INC.’S AMENDED SEPARATE STATEMENT OF DISPUTED AND UNDISPUTED|
MATERIAL FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR SUMMARY ADJUDICATIONHKS’S DISPUTED AND UNDISPUTED
MATERIAL FACTS

© SUPPORTING EVIDENCE

28. The Retention of Rights by TKI and Under the
Architectural Agreement was a Material Issue
in the Sale of the Project to Mission Place and
its Related Entities

Supplemental Declaration of Noel E Macaulay,
(6, Exhibit “E” (deposition transcript of Keith
Anderson, taken on March 21, 2012) at page
123, lines 12-23, page 125, line 24 to page 126
(5), and page 146, line 21 to page 148, line 17
(retention of rights by TKI a “critical deal
point” and necessary to transaction); See also
Supplemental Declaration of Noel E. Macaulay,
95, Exhibit “C” (deposition transcript of Jeffery
Worthe, Vol. 1, taken on May 2, 2012 at page
220, line 15 to page 221, line 7.

\20. Moving Parties Have Suffered No Recoverable

Damages

Supplemental Declaration of Noel E. Macaulay,
7.4, Exhibit “A” (Deposition of John Tashjian,
Vol. 1, taken on April 27, 2011), page 121, line
13 to page 122, line 3 (all of Haight, Brown’s
costs paid by insurance); Supplemental
Declaration of Noel E. Macaulay, {| 4, Exhibit
“B” (Deposition of John Tashjian, Vol. 2, taken
on April 24, 2012), page 208, lines 7-25 (firm
whose defense costs not being fully covered
is Cumis counsel),

30. Moving Parties Defense Costs Are Being Paid
by Insurance

Supplemental Declaration of Noel E. Macaulay,
94, Exhibit “A” (Deposition of John Tashjian,
Vol. 1, taken on April 27, 2011), page 121, line
13 to page 122, line 3 (all of Haight, Brown’s
costs paid by insurance); Supplemental
Declaration of Noel E. Macaulay, {| 4, Exhibit
“B” (Deposition of John Tashjian, Vol. 2, taken
on April 24, 2012), page 208, lines 7-25 (firm

-10-

HKS, INC. INDIVIDUALLY AND DBA HKS ARCHITECTS, INC.’S AMENDED SEPARATE STATEMENT OF DISPUTED AND UNDISPUTED}
MATERIAL FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR SUMMARY ADJUDICATIONL HKS’S DISPUTED AND UNDISPUTED

SUPPORTING EVIDENCE:
MATERIAL FACTS See : a
whose defense costs not being fully covered
is Cumis counsel).
DATED: August 6, 2012 SCHWARTZ & JANZEN, LLP

STEVEN ARTZ
NOEL E. MACAULAY
Attorneys for Defendant, HKS, INC.

--

HKS, INC. INDIVIDUALLY AND DBA HKS ARCHITECTS, INC.’S AMENDED SEPARATE STATEMENT OF DISPUTED AND UNDISPUTED}
MATERIAL FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR SUMMARY ADJUDICATIONSCHWARTZ & JANZEN

1 PROOF OF SERVICE

Beacon vs. Catellus, et al.
San Francisco County Superior Court Case No. CGC 08-478453

| STATE OF CALIFORNIA \
Ss.
COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO

|, Annette Tucker, declare: | am a resident of the State of California and over the age of eighteen
years, and not a party to the within action; my business address is 12100 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 1125,
Los Angeles, CA 90025-7117. On August 7, 2012, | served the within documents:

e HKS, INC. INDIVIDUALLY AND DBA HKS ARCHITECTS, INC.’S AMENDED SEPARATE
STATEMENT OF DISPUTED AND UNDISPUTED MATERIAL FACTS IN OPPOSITION TO
MOTION FOR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION

by transmitting via facsimile a true copy of said document from facsimile machine whose
number is 310/207-3344, pursuant to California Rules of Court, Rule 2.306. The facsimile
machine | used complied with Rule 2.301(3) and no error was reported by the machine.

kK BY E-MAIL OR ELECTRONIC TRANSMISSION: Based on a court order or an
agreement of the parties to accept service by e-mail or electronic transmission, | caused
the document(s) to be sent from e-mail address atucker@sj-law.com to the persons at the
e-mail addresses listed in the Service List. | did not receive, within a reasonable time after
the transmission, any electronic message or other indication that the transmission was
unsuccessful.

by placing the document(s) listed above in a sealed envelope with postage thereon fully
prepaid, in the United States mail at Los Angeles, California addressed as set forth below.

| by placing the document(s) listed above in a sealed Overnite Express envelope and
affixing a pre-paid air bill, and causing the envelope to be delivered to a Overnite Express
agent for overnight delivery to

by personally delivering the document(s) listed above to the person(s) at the address(es)
set forth below.

| | am readily familiar with the firm's practice of collection and processing correspondence for mailing.

Under that practice it would be deposited with the U.S. Postal Service on that same day with postage
thereon fully prepaid in the ordinary course of business. | am aware that on motion of the party served,
service is presumed invalid if postal cancellation date or postage meter date is more than one day after date
of deposit for mailing in affidavit.

| declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the above is true and
correct. Executed on August 7, 2012 at Los Angel lifornia.

pattlo Joher.

jette Tucker

1 1162.006

1 PROOF OF SERVICESERVICE LIST
Ann Rankin, Esq. Kenneth Katzoff
Terry Wilkens, Esq. KATZOFF & RIGGS
LAW OFFICES OF ANN RANKIN 1500 Park Ave #300

3911 Harrison St

Oakland, CA 94611-4536
Phone Number (510) 653-8886
Fax Number (510) 653-8889
arankin@annrankin.com
twilkens@annrankin.com

Attorneys for Plaintiff BEACON RESIDENTIAL
COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION

Emeryville, CA 94608

Phone Number (510) 597-1990
Fax Number (510) 597-0295
kkatzoff@katzoffrigas.com
sshim@katzoffrigas.com

Attomeys for Plaintiff BEACON RESIDENTIAL
COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION

Peter J. Laufenberg, Esq.

Gregory Jung, Esq.

WENDEL, ROSEN, BLACK & DEAN
1111 Broadway, 24% Floor
Oakland, CA 94607-4036

(510) 834-6600/FAX (510) 834-1928
laufenberg@wendel.com
GJung@wendel.com
Chansen@wendel.com

Attorneys for Defendants MISSION PLACE LLC;
CENTURION REAL ESTATE PARTNERS, LLC;
MISSION PLACE MEZZ HOLDINGS LLC,
erroneously named as MISSION PLACE
HOLDINGS LLC; MISSION PLACE MEZZANINE,
LLC; and MISSION PLACE PARTNERS, LLC.

Steven M. Cvitanovic, Esq.
HAIGHT, BROWN & BONESTEEL
71 Stevenson Street, 20th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94105-2984
(415) 546-7500/FAX (415) 546-7505
scvitanovic@hbblaw.com

Co-Counsel for Defendants MISSION PLACE LLC;
CENTURION REAL ESTATE PARTNERS, LLC;
MISSION PLACE MEZZ HOLDINGS LLC,
erroneously named as MISSION PLACE
HOLDINGS LLC; MISSION PLACE MEZZANINE,
LLC; and MISSION PLACE PARTNERS, LLC.

John A. Koeppel, Esq.

Todd J. Wenzel, Esq.

ROPERS, MAJESKI, KOHN & BENTLEY PC
201 Spear Street, Suite 1000

San Francisco * CA * 94105-1667

Office: (415) 543-4800

Fax: (415) 972-6301

TWenzel@rmkb.com

JKoeppel@rmkb.com

Attomeys for Defendants PROLOGIS;THIRD AND
KING INVESTORS LLC; CATELLUS URBAN
DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION;

CATELLUS DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION,
CATELLUS THIRD AND KING INVESTORS LLC;
CATELLUS COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT
CORPORATION; CATELLUS OPERATING
LIMITED PARTNERSHIP

David S. Webster, Esq.

Mark J. D’Argenio, Esq.

WOOD, SMITH, HENNING & BERMAN LLP
1401 Willow Pass Road, Suite 700
Concord, CA 94520-7982

(925) 356-8200/FAX (925) 356-8250
dwebster@wshblaw.com
mdargenio@wshblaw.com

Attorneys for Defendants PROLOGIS; THIRD AND
KING INVESTORS LLC; CATELLUS URBAN
DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION; CATELLUS
DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, CATELLUS
AND KING INVESTORS LLC; CATELLUS
COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION;
CATELLUS OPERATING LIMITED
PARTNERSHIP

SERVICE LISToD OND HW FB WN

RW NN N NY NN NY NY eee He me oe ee SS
eA A & oN fF SGC MIR DH BF WN

S. Mitchell Kaplan, Esq.
Gregory Hanson, Esq.
GORDON & REES LLP

275 Battery Street, Suite 2000
San Francisco, CA 94111
Main Phone: (415) 986-5900
Fax: (415) 986-8054
SKaplan@gordonrees.com

qhanson@gordonrees.com

Attorneys for WEBCOR Builders, INC.; WEBCOR
CONSTRUCTION, INC., individually and dba
WEBCOR BUILDERS; WEBCOR
CONSTRUCTION LP, individually and dba
WEBCOR BUILDERS

Samuel J. Muir, Esq.

Erin R. Dunkerly, Esq.

COLLINS COLLINS MUIR + STEWART LLP
1100 El Centro Street

South Pasadena, CA 91030
smuir@ccmslaw.com

edunkerly@ccmslaw.com

Tel: 626/243-1100
Fax: 626/243-1111
Attomeys for Defendant

WEBCOR CONSTRUCTION, INC. dba WEBCOR
BUILDERS

Kevin P. McCarthy, Esq.

Fred Trudeau, Esq.

MCCARTHY & MCCARTHY, LLP.
492 Ninth St, Suite 220

Oakland, CA 94607

Telephone: 510-839-8100
Facsimile: 510-839-8108
kmecarthy@mecarthyllp.com

FTnideau@MeCarthy.. Foon
Attorneys for WINDOW SOLUTIONS.

William H. Staples

ARCHER NORRIS

2033 North Main Street, Suite 800
Walnut Creek, CA 94596

main 925.930.6600

fax 925.930.6620
wstaples@archernorris.com
dduncan@archemorris.com

Attorneys for ANNING-JOHNSON COMPANY

Adam Brezine, Esq.

Julien E. Capers, Esq.

BRYAN CAVE LLP

560 Mission Street, 25th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94105-2994
Tel: 415-268-2000

Fax: 415-268-1999
adam.brezine@bryancave.com
julien.capers@bryancave.com

Attomeys for Cross-Defendants
SOLUTIA, INC.

Randell J. Campbell, Esq.
LYNCH, GILARDI & GRUMMER
170 Columbus Avenue, 5th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94133

Tek: (415) 397-2800

Fax: (415) 397-0937
rcampbell@lgglaw.com

Attorneys for ARCHITECTURAL GLASS &
ALUMINIUM CO. INC

Christian Lucia, Esq.

Denae M. Olivieri, Esq.

Bruce Basilico, Esq.

SELLAR HAZARD MANNING FICENEC & LUCIA
1800 Sutter Street, Suite 460

Concord, CA 94520

clucia@sellarlaw.com

dolivieri@sellariaw.com

bbasilico@sellarlaw.com

Tel (925) 938-1430
Fax (925) 256-7508

Attorneys for

ALLIED FIRE PROTECTION, BLUE'S ROOFING
COMPANY, CAREFREE TOLAND POOLS, INC.,
CREATIVE MASONRY, CRITCHFIELD
MECHANICAL, INC., CUPERTINO ELECTRIC, F.

2

SERVICE LISToOo Oem NY DW eB BW NY

NoN Rw RN NN De Be we we ee ee eee
BNRRRBBRBS Se WRBDEBHRE

RODGERS CORPORATION, J.W. MCCLENAHAN
CO., N.V. HEATHORN, INC., VAN-MULDER
SHEET METAL, INC., WEST COAST
PROTECTIVE COATINGS, INC., and WESTERN

ROOFING SERVICE
James P. Castles, Esq. Steven E. McDonald, Esq.
Richard C. Young, Esq. smedonald@pbledsoelaw.com
ROBLES, CASTLES & MEREDITH James L. Shea
492 Ninth Street, Suite 200 BLEDSOE, CATHCART, DIESTEL, PEDERSEN &
Oakland, California 94607 TREPPA, LLP
TE L (415) 632-1586 601 California Street - 16" Floor
FAX 415/743-9305 San Francisco, CA 94108

Jim@rcmlawgroup.com Tel: 415/981-5411
tick@rcmlawgroup.com Fax: 415/981-0352

DEFENDANTS SKIDMORE OWINGS &

MERRILL LLP Attorneys for Defendant and Cross-Complainant
SHOOTER & BUTTS, INC
seotic@cloudolsen.com

Christopher T. Olsen, Esq. CLOUD-&-OLSEN

CLINTON & CLINTON 400-Oceangate, Seventh Floor

100 Oceangate - Suite 1400 Long-Beash CA 90802

Long Beach, CA 90802 Fel——_562/904-4402

Direct: 562/216-5078 Fax_562/004-4472

Tel; 562-16-5078 Substitution dated 01.19.12

Fax: 562/216-5001 Attorneys for THYSSENKRUPP ELEVATOR

Email: jsmith@clinton-clinton.com CORPORATION

cc: mbrueggemann@clinton-clinton.com
Attomeys for THYSSENKRUPP ELEVATOR

CORPORATION

Clerk of the Court of Appeal ‘Superior Court of California
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL County of San Francisco
350 McAllister Street 400 McAllister Street

San Francisco, CA 94102 San Francisco, CA 94102

3

SERVICE LISToO QV DH WH BS

Email List:

arankin@annrankin.com; twilkens@annrankin.com; kkatzoff@katzoffriggs.com;
sshim@katzoffriges.com; rriggs@katzoffriggs.com; plaufenberg@wendel.com;
GJung@wendel.com; scvitanovic@hbblaw.com; TWenzel@rmkb.com; JKoeppel@rmkb.com;
dwebster@wshblaw.com; mdargenio@wshblaw.com; kmccarthy@mcecarthyllp.com;
sschwartz@sj-law.com: tmatteson@sj-law.com; nmacaulay(@)sj-law.com;
SKaplan@gordonrees.com; ghanson@gordonrees.com; wstaples@archernorris.com;
kmecarthy@mccarthyllp.com; FTrudeau@McCarthyLLP.com; adam.brezine@bryancave.com;
julien.capers@bryancave.com, clucia@sellarlaw.com; dolivieri@sellarlaw.com;
rcampbell@igglaw.com; rick@remlawgroup.com; smedonald@bledsoelaw.com;
scottc@cloudolsen.com; mbrueggemann@clinton-clinton.com; jsmith@clinton-clinton.com;
Chansen@wendel.com; Jim@rcmlawgroup.com; bbasilico@sellarlaw.com;
dduncan@archernorris.com; colsen@clinton-clinton.com; orobinson@hbblaw.com;
smuir@ccmslaw.com; mwilso@gorgonrees.com; edunkerly@ccmslaw.com

4

SERVICE LIST