Preview
Electronically Filed Superior Court of CA County of Contra Costa 10/17/2022 2:26 PM By: S. Gonzalez, Deputy
1 Keith E. Patterson, State Bar No. 225753
CARBONE, SMITH & KOYAMA
2 Mailing Address:
P.O. Box 24508
3 Oakland, CA 94623-1508
Physical Address:
4 555 12th Street, Suite 1250
Oakland, CA 94607-4095
5 Telephone: (510) 267-7252
Facsimile: (510) 834-8450
6 Email: Keith.Patterson@csaa.com
7 Attorneys For Petitioner, CSAA Insurance Exchange
8 SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA
9 UNINSURED MOTORIST ARBITRATION
10 CSAA Insurance Exchange, Case No. N22-1819
11 Petitioner, PETITIONER'S REPLY TO PLAINTIFF'S
DECLARATION OF ATTORNEY FOR
12 v. PETITIONER IN OPPOSITION TO
13 MOTION TO ENFORCE SETTLEMENT
Gabriella DePaula Alves,
14 DATE: October 26, 2022
Respondent. TIME: 9:00 a.m.
15 Dept.: 21
16 I. INTRODUCTION
17 Petitioner CSAA Insurance Exchange submits the following reply to Respondent’s Opposition
18 to Petitioner’s Motion to Compel Enforcement of Settlement Agreement.
19 II. ARGUMENT
20 A. Respondent Has Failed To Show A Reason Why The Settlement of Gabriella De Paula
21 Alves’s First Party Arbitration Claim Should Not Be Enforced
22 Respondent’s Reply proves that she made at least two offers to settle Claimant Gabriella De
23 Paula’s claim for $50,000.00. One offer was made on June 16, 2022, and a second offer was made on
24 June 30, 2022. In the first offer, she indicated that, if $50,000.00 was not paid, she would be asking
25 for $100,000.00 if the case were arbitrated.
26 Petitioner’s moving papers clearly show that Claimant Gabriella De Paula’s attorney made an
27 offer of settlement of her claim in the amount of $50,000.00 on June 30, 2022 at 5:51 a.m. and provided
28 ________________________________________________________________________________
PETITIONER'S REPLY TO PLAINTIFF'S DECLARATION OF ATTORNEY FOR PETITIONER IN OPPOSITION
TO MOTION TO ENFORCE SETTLEMENT
1 additional documents in support of her offer. Petitioner accepted the offer on the same date at 11:20
2 a.m. Respondent was told that each claim is evaluated separately on its own merits. Respondent has
3 not cited any legal authority that requires all three claims to be settled as a group. Petitioner was well
4 within its right to settle each claim separately and arbitrate any remaining claims that could not be
5 settled.
6 Respondent does not dispute this fact. Instead, Respondent continues to state that her offer
7 was contingent upon settling two other claims. Respondent’s offer as to Claimant Gabriella De Paula
8 was independent of the offer to the other two Claimants. The facts clearly show that Petitioner
9 accepted Respondent’s offer. Moreover, the settlement negotiations with respect to the other two
10 Claimants are not at issue with this Motion.
11 B. Petitioner Is Unable To Respond To Respondent’s Assertions About What Took
Place At A Mediation Without Violating The California Mediation Privilege
12
In her Opposition, Respondent makes several assertions about what allegedly transpired during
13
14 a Mediation in this case. However, California Evidence Code Section 1119, The California Mediation
15 Privilege, precludes Petitioner from disclosing what was said or discussed at a Mediation.
16 Accordingly, Petitioner cannot respond to the statements about what Respondent said took place at a
17
Mediation in this case. Petitioner objects to Respondent’s production of information and/or facts that
18
alleged transpired at a Mediation in this matter.
19
III. CONCLUSION
20
21 Petitioner requests that its Motion be granted in full.
22 DATED: October 17, 2022 CARBONE, SMITH & KOYAMA
23
24
__________________________________
25 Keith E. Patterson
Attorneys for Petitioner
26 CSAA Insurance Exchange
27
28 ________________________________________________________________________________
PETITIONER'S REPLY TO PLAINTIFF'S DECLARATION OF ATTORNEY FOR PETITIONER IN OPPOSITION
TO MOTION TO ENFORCE SETTLEMENT
-2-
1 De Paula v. CSAA Insurance Exchange
UNINSURED MOTORIST ARBITRATION
2
PROOF OF SERVICE
3
4 I, Victoria A. Dimitroff, am a citizen of the United States and employed by the office of
5 Carbone, Smith & Koyama located at P.O. Box 24508, Oakland, CA 94623-1508. I am over the age
6 of 18 years and am not a party to this action.
7 On the below date, I served the accompanying PETITIONER'S REPLY TO PLAINTIFF'S
8 DECLARATION OF ATTORNEY FOR PETITIONER IN OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO
9 ENFORCE SETTLEMENT on the parties in said action addressed as follows:
10
Roseann Torres, Esq.
11 Torres Law Group
1211 Embarcadero, Suite 200
12 Oakland, CA 94606
Attorney for Claimant
13 (510) 835-2381
14 rtorres@torreslawoffices.com, assistant@torreslawoffices.com
15 BY ELECTRONIC TRANSMISSION: Pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure
section 1010.6(e)(1), effective September 18, 2020, or an agreement of the parties to accept
16 service by electronic transmission, I caused the document(s) to be electronically sent to the
persons at the email address(es) indicated on the above list. I did not receive, within a
17 reasonable time after the transmission, any electronic message or other indication that the
18 transmission was unsuccessful.
19 I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing
20 is true and correct. I declare that I am employed in the offices of a member of the bar of this court at
21 whose direction the service was made.
22 Dated: October 17, 2022
23 __________________________________
24 Victoria A. Dimitroff
25
26
27
28 ________________________________________________________________________________
PETITIONER'S REPLY TO PLAINTIFF'S DECLARATION OF ATTORNEY FOR PETITIONER IN OPPOSITION
TO MOTION TO ENFORCE SETTLEMENT
-3-
Preview
Electronically Filed Superior Court of CA County of Contra Costa 10/17/2022 2:26 PM By: S. Gonzalez, Deputy 1 Keith E. Patterson, State Bar No. 225753 CARBONE, SMITH & KOYAMA 2 Mailing Address: P.O. Box 24508 3 Oakland, CA 94623-1508 Physical Address: 4 555 12th Street, Suite 1250 Oakland, CA 94607-4095 5 Telephone: (510) 267-7252 Facsimile: (510) 834-8450 6 Email: Keith.Patterson@csaa.com 7 Attorneys For Petitioner, CSAA Insurance Exchange 8 SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA 9 UNINSURED MOTORIST ARBITRATION 10 CSAA Insurance Exchange, Case No. N22-1819 11 Petitioner, PETITIONER'S REPLY TO PLAINTIFF'S DECLARATION OF ATTORNEY FOR 12 v. PETITIONER IN OPPOSITION TO 13 MOTION TO ENFORCE SETTLEMENT Gabriella DePaula Alves, 14 DATE: October 26, 2022 Respondent. TIME: 9:00 a.m. 15 Dept.: 21 16 I. INTRODUCTION 17 Petitioner CSAA Insurance Exchange submits the following reply to Respondent’s Opposition 18 to Petitioner’s Motion to Compel Enforcement of Settlement Agreement. 19 II. ARGUMENT 20 A. Respondent Has Failed To Show A Reason Why The Settlement of Gabriella De Paula 21 Alves’s First Party Arbitration Claim Should Not Be Enforced 22 Respondent’s Reply proves that she made at least two offers to settle Claimant Gabriella De 23 Paula’s claim for $50,000.00. One offer was made on June 16, 2022, and a second offer was made on 24 June 30, 2022. In the first offer, she indicated that, if $50,000.00 was not paid, she would be asking 25 for $100,000.00 if the case were arbitrated. 26 Petitioner’s moving papers clearly show that Claimant Gabriella De Paula’s attorney made an 27 offer of settlement of her claim in the amount of $50,000.00 on June 30, 2022 at 5:51 a.m. and provided 28 ________________________________________________________________________________ PETITIONER'S REPLY TO PLAINTIFF'S DECLARATION OF ATTORNEY FOR PETITIONER IN OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO ENFORCE SETTLEMENT 1 additional documents in support of her offer. Petitioner accepted the offer on the same date at 11:20 2 a.m. Respondent was told that each claim is evaluated separately on its own merits. Respondent has 3 not cited any legal authority that requires all three claims to be settled as a group. Petitioner was well 4 within its right to settle each claim separately and arbitrate any remaining claims that could not be 5 settled. 6 Respondent does not dispute this fact. Instead, Respondent continues to state that her offer 7 was contingent upon settling two other claims. Respondent’s offer as to Claimant Gabriella De Paula 8 was independent of the offer to the other two Claimants. The facts clearly show that Petitioner 9 accepted Respondent’s offer. Moreover, the settlement negotiations with respect to the other two 10 Claimants are not at issue with this Motion. 11 B. Petitioner Is Unable To Respond To Respondent’s Assertions About What Took Place At A Mediation Without Violating The California Mediation Privilege 12 In her Opposition, Respondent makes several assertions about what allegedly transpired during 13 14 a Mediation in this case. However, California Evidence Code Section 1119, The California Mediation 15 Privilege, precludes Petitioner from disclosing what was said or discussed at a Mediation. 16 Accordingly, Petitioner cannot respond to the statements about what Respondent said took place at a 17 Mediation in this case. Petitioner objects to Respondent’s production of information and/or facts that 18 alleged transpired at a Mediation in this matter. 19 III. CONCLUSION 20 21 Petitioner requests that its Motion be granted in full. 22 DATED: October 17, 2022 CARBONE, SMITH & KOYAMA 23 24 __________________________________ 25 Keith E. Patterson Attorneys for Petitioner 26 CSAA Insurance Exchange 27 28 ________________________________________________________________________________ PETITIONER'S REPLY TO PLAINTIFF'S DECLARATION OF ATTORNEY FOR PETITIONER IN OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO ENFORCE SETTLEMENT -2- 1 De Paula v. CSAA Insurance Exchange UNINSURED MOTORIST ARBITRATION 2 PROOF OF SERVICE 3 4 I, Victoria A. Dimitroff, am a citizen of the United States and employed by the office of 5 Carbone, Smith & Koyama located at P.O. Box 24508, Oakland, CA 94623-1508. I am over the age 6 of 18 years and am not a party to this action. 7 On the below date, I served the accompanying PETITIONER'S REPLY TO PLAINTIFF'S 8 DECLARATION OF ATTORNEY FOR PETITIONER IN OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO 9 ENFORCE SETTLEMENT on the parties in said action addressed as follows: 10 Roseann Torres, Esq. 11 Torres Law Group 1211 Embarcadero, Suite 200 12 Oakland, CA 94606 Attorney for Claimant 13 (510) 835-2381 14 rtorres@torreslawoffices.com, assistant@torreslawoffices.com 15 BY ELECTRONIC TRANSMISSION: Pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure section 1010.6(e)(1), effective September 18, 2020, or an agreement of the parties to accept 16 service by electronic transmission, I caused the document(s) to be electronically sent to the persons at the email address(es) indicated on the above list. I did not receive, within a 17 reasonable time after the transmission, any electronic message or other indication that the 18 transmission was unsuccessful. 19 I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing 20 is true and correct. I declare that I am employed in the offices of a member of the bar of this court at 21 whose direction the service was made. 22 Dated: October 17, 2022 23 __________________________________ 24 Victoria A. Dimitroff 25 26 27 28 ________________________________________________________________________________ PETITIONER'S REPLY TO PLAINTIFF'S DECLARATION OF ATTORNEY FOR PETITIONER IN OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO ENFORCE SETTLEMENT -3-