Preview
UC
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO
Document Scanning Lead Sheet
Oct-14-2010 4:04 pm
Case Number: PES-10-293505
Filing Date: Oct-14-2010 4:03
Juke Box: 001 Image: 03003159
PROBATE RESPONSE/ANSWER
IN RE: STAN KWONG IRREVOCABLE TRUST II
001P03003159
Instructions:
Please place this sheet on top of the document to be scanned.Edward S. Zusman (State Bar No. 154366)
Benjamin W. Lutgen (State Bar No. 265026)
MARKUN ZUSMAN & COMPTON LLP
465 California Street, Suite 500
San Francisco, CA 94104
Telephone: (415) 438-4515
Facsimile: (415) 434-4505
Attorneys for Cross-Respondent Gary Wong
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO
PROBATE DIVISION
JENNIFER SHUK-HAN KWOK,
Petitioner,
vs.
JEANNE KWONG, individually and as a former
trustee of the Stan Kwong Irrevocable Trust II,
Respondent.
AND RELATED CROSS-PETITIONS
) Case No.: PES-10-293505
RESPONSE TO CROSS-PETITION BY
JENNIFER SHUK-HAN KWOK FOR
NEGLIGENCE, BREACH OF TRUST,
INDEMNITY AND CONTRIBUTION
)
Date: November 10, 2010
Time: 2 p.m.
Place: Department 204
BY FAX
Cross Respondent Gary Wong (“Wong”) hereby responds to the Cross-Petition by Jennifer
Shuk-Han Kwok for Negligence, Breach of Trust, Indemnity, and Contribution, by admitting, denying
and alleging as follows:
L RESPONSE TO AMENDED CROSS-PETITION
1. Wong admits the information in Paragraph 1.
PF YN
Wong denies the information in Paragraph 2.
Wong admits the information in Paragraph 3.
Wong admits the information in Paragraph 4.
1
RESPONSE TO CROSS-PETITION BY JENNIFER SHUK-HAN KWOK-_
we
5. Wong lacks information and belief to sufficiently answer the allegations in Paragraph 5,
and basing his denial on that ground, denies each and every allegation thereof.
6. Wong lacks information and belief to sufficiently answer the allegations in Paragraph 6,
and basing his denial on that ground, denies each and every allegation thereof.
7. Wong denies the allegations in Paragraph 7 as to himself, and lacks information and
belief to sufficiently answer the allegations as to the other cross-respondents and basing his denial on
that ground, denies each and every allegation thereof.
8. Wong denies the allegations in Paragraph 8.
9. Wong denies the allegations in Paragraph 9.
10. | Wong denies the allegations in Paragraph 10.
11. Wong denies the allegations in Paragraph 11.
12. Wong denies the allegations in Paragraph 12.
13. | Wong denies the allegations in Paragraph 13 as to himself, and lacks information and
belief to sufficiently answer the allegations as to the other cross-respondents and basing his denial on
that ground, denies each and every allegation thereof.
14. Wong denies the allegations in Paragraph 14.
15. | Wong denies the allegations in Paragraph 15 as to himself, and lacks information and
belief to sufficiently answer the allegations as to the other cross-respondents and basing his denial on
that ground, denies each and every allegation thereof.
16. | Wong denies the allegations in Paragraph 16.
17. Wong denies the allegations in Paragraph 17.
18. | Wong denies the allegations in Paragraph 18.
19. | Wong denies the allegations in Paragraph 19.
20. Wong denies the allegations in Paragraph 20.
21. Wong denies the allegations in Paragraph 21.
Mt
Mt
2
RESPONSE TO CROSS-PETITION BY JENNIFER SHUK-HAN KWOKTl. AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES
FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
The purported claims of Jennifer Shuk-Han Kwok fail to state a cause of action.
SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
Gary Wong acted in good faith, and did not know of and in the exercise of reasonable care could
not have known of the facts from which liability is alleged to arise.
THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
The purported claims of Jennifer Shuk-Han Kwok are barred by the applicable statute of
limitations.
FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
Gary Wong did not sell the policy at issue and was never the agent of record for the policy from
which liability is alleged to arise.
FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
‘The purported claims of Jennifer Shuk-Han Kwok are barred because of her failure to mitigate
any alleged damages.
SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
The purported claims of Jennifer Shuk-Han Kwok and alleged damages resulted from her own
acts and omissions.
SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
The purported claims of Jennifer Shuk-Han Kwok should be barred by her delay in pursuing
relief, which caused irreparable harm to Wong. Thus, under the doctrine of Laches, Jennifer Shuk-Han
Kwok’s claims should be barred.
EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
The purported claims of Jennifer Shuk-Han Kwok should be barred by reason of her acts,
omissions, representations and course of conduct, which Wong relied on to his detriment. Thus, under
the doctrine of Equitable Estoppel, Jennifer Shuk-Han Kwok’s claims should be barred.
My
3
RESPONSE TO CROSS-PETITION BY JENNIFER SHUK-HAN KWOKQ)
NINTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
Gary Wong alleges that Jennifer Shuk-Han Kwok’s inequitable conduct constitutes unclean
hands, thereby barring her causes of action.
TENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE
The damages, if any, allegedly suffered by Cross-Petitioner were proximately caused, or were
the consequence of the conduct, actions, omissions, negligence or intentional acts of parties other than
Gary Wong. Cross-Petitioner’s damages, if any, should be reduced by the amount that these other
parties were at fault.
IH. RELIEF REQUESTED
Cross-Respondent Gary Wong respectfully requests:
1. That this matter be compelled to arbitration before the Financial Industry Regulatory
Authority (“FINRA”) Dispute Resolution forum;
2. Gary Wong’s costs and attorneys fees as allowed by law;
2. Jennifer Shuk-Han Kwok take nothing by way of the Petition; and
3. Any other relief that the Court deems just and proper.
Dated: October 14, 2010 Respectfully submitted,
MARKUN ZUSMAN & COMPTON LLP
Edward Zi
Benjamin Lutgen
Attorneys for Cross-Respondent Gary Wong
4
RESPONSE TO CROSS-PETITION BY JENNIFER SHUK-HAN KWOKoo tT DAH PR WN &
ea ea ae es
oN DH A FF BY NHN &
19
PROOF OF SERVICE
Jennifer Shuk-Han Kwok v. Jeanne Kwong, and Related Cross-Action
Superior Court of California, County of San Francisco — Probate Division
Case No. PES-10-293505
1, the undersigned, declare that I am employed in the City and County of San Francisco, State of
California; that 1 am over the age of eighteen years; and not a party to the within action. My business address is
Markun Zusman & Compton LLP, 465 California Street, 5th floor, San Francisco, California 94104.
On October 14, 2010, I served the within document:
RESPONSE TO CROSS-PETITION BY JENNIFER SHUK-HAN KWOK FOR NEGLIGENCE,
BREACH OF TRUST, INDEMNITY AND CONTRIBUTION
on the interested party(ies) in this action, by placing a true copy thereof enclosed in a sealed envelope addressed
as follows:
(By U.S. Mail) by placing true and correct copies thereof in sealed envelopes, addressed to the person(s)
listed below, for collection and mailing pursuant to the ordinary business practice of this office. [am
readily familiar with Markun Zusman & Compton LLP’s practice for collecting and processing
correspondence for mailing with the United States Postal Service, which is that correspondence is
deposited with the United States Postal Service that same day in the ordinary course of business.
Danie! T. Bernhard, Esq. Paul Tour-Sarkissian, Esq.
FREELAND COOPER & FOREMAN LLP Michael Griffin, Esq.
150 Spear Street, Suite 1800 Phil Foster, Esq.
San Francisco, CA 94105 TOUR-SARKISSIAN LAW OFFICES
Telephone: (415) 541-0200 211 Gough Street, Third Floor
Facsimile: (415) 495-4332 San Francisco, CA 94102
Email: Bernhard@freelandlaw.com Telephone: (415) 626-7744
Attorneys for Petitioner Jennifer Shuk-Han Kwok Facsimile: (415) 626-8189
Email: paul@tslo.com
Attorneys for Respondent Jeanne Kwong
Richard M. Bryan, Esq.
BRYAN HINSHAW, P.C.
425 California Street, Suite 900
San Francisco, CA 94104
Telephone: (415) 269-0800
Facsimile: (415) 296-0812
Email: rbryan@bryanhinshaw.com
Attorneys for Cross-Respondent Feng Ouyang
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and
correct.
Executed on October 14, 2010, at San Francisco, California.
Erika Calderon
PROOF OF SERVICE Case No. PES-10-293505
Preview
UC SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO Document Scanning Lead Sheet Oct-14-2010 4:04 pm Case Number: PES-10-293505 Filing Date: Oct-14-2010 4:03 Juke Box: 001 Image: 03003159 PROBATE RESPONSE/ANSWER IN RE: STAN KWONG IRREVOCABLE TRUST II 001P03003159 Instructions: Please place this sheet on top of the document to be scanned.Edward S. Zusman (State Bar No. 154366) Benjamin W. Lutgen (State Bar No. 265026) MARKUN ZUSMAN & COMPTON LLP 465 California Street, Suite 500 San Francisco, CA 94104 Telephone: (415) 438-4515 Facsimile: (415) 434-4505 Attorneys for Cross-Respondent Gary Wong SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO PROBATE DIVISION JENNIFER SHUK-HAN KWOK, Petitioner, vs. JEANNE KWONG, individually and as a former trustee of the Stan Kwong Irrevocable Trust II, Respondent. AND RELATED CROSS-PETITIONS ) Case No.: PES-10-293505 RESPONSE TO CROSS-PETITION BY JENNIFER SHUK-HAN KWOK FOR NEGLIGENCE, BREACH OF TRUST, INDEMNITY AND CONTRIBUTION ) Date: November 10, 2010 Time: 2 p.m. Place: Department 204 BY FAX Cross Respondent Gary Wong (“Wong”) hereby responds to the Cross-Petition by Jennifer Shuk-Han Kwok for Negligence, Breach of Trust, Indemnity, and Contribution, by admitting, denying and alleging as follows: L RESPONSE TO AMENDED CROSS-PETITION 1. Wong admits the information in Paragraph 1. PF YN Wong denies the information in Paragraph 2. Wong admits the information in Paragraph 3. Wong admits the information in Paragraph 4. 1 RESPONSE TO CROSS-PETITION BY JENNIFER SHUK-HAN KWOK-_ we 5. Wong lacks information and belief to sufficiently answer the allegations in Paragraph 5, and basing his denial on that ground, denies each and every allegation thereof. 6. Wong lacks information and belief to sufficiently answer the allegations in Paragraph 6, and basing his denial on that ground, denies each and every allegation thereof. 7. Wong denies the allegations in Paragraph 7 as to himself, and lacks information and belief to sufficiently answer the allegations as to the other cross-respondents and basing his denial on that ground, denies each and every allegation thereof. 8. Wong denies the allegations in Paragraph 8. 9. Wong denies the allegations in Paragraph 9. 10. | Wong denies the allegations in Paragraph 10. 11. Wong denies the allegations in Paragraph 11. 12. Wong denies the allegations in Paragraph 12. 13. | Wong denies the allegations in Paragraph 13 as to himself, and lacks information and belief to sufficiently answer the allegations as to the other cross-respondents and basing his denial on that ground, denies each and every allegation thereof. 14. Wong denies the allegations in Paragraph 14. 15. | Wong denies the allegations in Paragraph 15 as to himself, and lacks information and belief to sufficiently answer the allegations as to the other cross-respondents and basing his denial on that ground, denies each and every allegation thereof. 16. | Wong denies the allegations in Paragraph 16. 17. Wong denies the allegations in Paragraph 17. 18. | Wong denies the allegations in Paragraph 18. 19. | Wong denies the allegations in Paragraph 19. 20. Wong denies the allegations in Paragraph 20. 21. Wong denies the allegations in Paragraph 21. Mt Mt 2 RESPONSE TO CROSS-PETITION BY JENNIFER SHUK-HAN KWOKTl. AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE The purported claims of Jennifer Shuk-Han Kwok fail to state a cause of action. SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE Gary Wong acted in good faith, and did not know of and in the exercise of reasonable care could not have known of the facts from which liability is alleged to arise. THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE The purported claims of Jennifer Shuk-Han Kwok are barred by the applicable statute of limitations. FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE Gary Wong did not sell the policy at issue and was never the agent of record for the policy from which liability is alleged to arise. FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE ‘The purported claims of Jennifer Shuk-Han Kwok are barred because of her failure to mitigate any alleged damages. SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE The purported claims of Jennifer Shuk-Han Kwok and alleged damages resulted from her own acts and omissions. SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE The purported claims of Jennifer Shuk-Han Kwok should be barred by her delay in pursuing relief, which caused irreparable harm to Wong. Thus, under the doctrine of Laches, Jennifer Shuk-Han Kwok’s claims should be barred. EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE The purported claims of Jennifer Shuk-Han Kwok should be barred by reason of her acts, omissions, representations and course of conduct, which Wong relied on to his detriment. Thus, under the doctrine of Equitable Estoppel, Jennifer Shuk-Han Kwok’s claims should be barred. My 3 RESPONSE TO CROSS-PETITION BY JENNIFER SHUK-HAN KWOKQ) NINTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE Gary Wong alleges that Jennifer Shuk-Han Kwok’s inequitable conduct constitutes unclean hands, thereby barring her causes of action. TENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE The damages, if any, allegedly suffered by Cross-Petitioner were proximately caused, or were the consequence of the conduct, actions, omissions, negligence or intentional acts of parties other than Gary Wong. Cross-Petitioner’s damages, if any, should be reduced by the amount that these other parties were at fault. IH. RELIEF REQUESTED Cross-Respondent Gary Wong respectfully requests: 1. That this matter be compelled to arbitration before the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (“FINRA”) Dispute Resolution forum; 2. Gary Wong’s costs and attorneys fees as allowed by law; 2. Jennifer Shuk-Han Kwok take nothing by way of the Petition; and 3. Any other relief that the Court deems just and proper. Dated: October 14, 2010 Respectfully submitted, MARKUN ZUSMAN & COMPTON LLP Edward Zi Benjamin Lutgen Attorneys for Cross-Respondent Gary Wong 4 RESPONSE TO CROSS-PETITION BY JENNIFER SHUK-HAN KWOKoo tT DAH PR WN & ea ea ae es oN DH A FF BY NHN & 19 PROOF OF SERVICE Jennifer Shuk-Han Kwok v. Jeanne Kwong, and Related Cross-Action Superior Court of California, County of San Francisco — Probate Division Case No. PES-10-293505 1, the undersigned, declare that I am employed in the City and County of San Francisco, State of California; that 1 am over the age of eighteen years; and not a party to the within action. My business address is Markun Zusman & Compton LLP, 465 California Street, 5th floor, San Francisco, California 94104. On October 14, 2010, I served the within document: RESPONSE TO CROSS-PETITION BY JENNIFER SHUK-HAN KWOK FOR NEGLIGENCE, BREACH OF TRUST, INDEMNITY AND CONTRIBUTION on the interested party(ies) in this action, by placing a true copy thereof enclosed in a sealed envelope addressed as follows: (By U.S. Mail) by placing true and correct copies thereof in sealed envelopes, addressed to the person(s) listed below, for collection and mailing pursuant to the ordinary business practice of this office. [am readily familiar with Markun Zusman & Compton LLP’s practice for collecting and processing correspondence for mailing with the United States Postal Service, which is that correspondence is deposited with the United States Postal Service that same day in the ordinary course of business. Danie! T. Bernhard, Esq. Paul Tour-Sarkissian, Esq. FREELAND COOPER & FOREMAN LLP Michael Griffin, Esq. 150 Spear Street, Suite 1800 Phil Foster, Esq. San Francisco, CA 94105 TOUR-SARKISSIAN LAW OFFICES Telephone: (415) 541-0200 211 Gough Street, Third Floor Facsimile: (415) 495-4332 San Francisco, CA 94102 Email: Bernhard@freelandlaw.com Telephone: (415) 626-7744 Attorneys for Petitioner Jennifer Shuk-Han Kwok Facsimile: (415) 626-8189 Email: paul@tslo.com Attorneys for Respondent Jeanne Kwong Richard M. Bryan, Esq. BRYAN HINSHAW, P.C. 425 California Street, Suite 900 San Francisco, CA 94104 Telephone: (415) 269-0800 Facsimile: (415) 296-0812 Email: rbryan@bryanhinshaw.com Attorneys for Cross-Respondent Feng Ouyang I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on October 14, 2010, at San Francisco, California. Erika Calderon PROOF OF SERVICE Case No. PES-10-293505