On July 10, 2017 a
Motion-Secondary
was filed
involving a dispute between
Carrie Teasdale, Betty C,
Carrie Teasdale, Betty C.,
and
Cass, Michael Leroy,
Cass, Peggy Lee,
Does 1-10,
Weaver, Peggy Lee,
for Breach of Contract/Warranty
in the District Court of San Bernardino County.
Preview
F I L E
SUPERIOR COURT 0F CALIFORNIA
D
COUNTY 0F SAN BERNAHDINO
SAN BERNARDINO CIVIL DIVISION
BETTY C. CARRIE TEASDALE, ESQ, (SBN 231285) FEB 0 6 2923
Law Office of Betty C. Carrie Teasdale
407 West Imperial Highway, H157
Brea, California 92821
wm . ,. m,$w DEPUW
Telephone: 714-326-6358
ROSEMARY AMEZCUA—MOLL (SBN 223875)
rose@ama1aw.net
\Dmflamhwwm Amezcua-Moll & Associates, P.C.
1122 E Lincoln Avenue, Suite 203
Orange, CA 92865
Telephone: 714-288-2826
Fax: 714-464-4536
JONATHAN W. CAYTON (SBN 303877)
2601 Main Street, Penthouse Suite
Irvine, CA 92614
Irvine, CA 92612
T: (949) 287-8735
jon@crimlawoc.com
Attorneys for Plaintiff, Betty Teasdale
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, SAN BERNARDINO DISTRICT — CIVIL DIVISION
NNNNNNNNNb—fir—tt—Ar—dr—Ip—ny—‘b—r—‘p—A
BETTY C. CARRIE TEASDALE, an Case No. CIVDS 1712990
individual, (Consolidated withCIVDS 1803800)
Hon. David E. Driscoll, Dept. $22
Plaintiff,
OONQMAWNHOWWNQMAWNHO
PLAINTIFF BETTY C. CARRIE
vs.
TEASDALE’S OPPOSITION TO
DEFENDANTS’ MOTION IN LIMINE
MICHAEL LEROY CASS, an individual; NO. 15 PRECLUDING ADMISSION 0F
PEGGY LEE CASS, an individual and DOES EVIDENCE OF FINANCIAL
1 to 10, inclusive,
CONDITION
Defendants.
Date: February 6, 2023
Time: 9:00 a.m.
AND RELATED CROSS-COMPLAINT BY Dept: 522
MICHAEL LEROY CASS, an individual.
Complaint Filed: July 10, 2017
Trial Readiness Conference: February 2, 2023
Trial Date: February 6, 2023
PL’S OPP TO DEFS’ MIL NO. l4
CIVDS l7 l 2990 Hon. David E. Driscoll, Department $22
OPPOSITION
Plaintiff and Cross-Defendant Betty C. Carrie Teasdale (“Plaintiff”) hereby opposes
Defendant and Cross-Complainant Michael Leroy Cass and Defendant Peggy Lee Cass’ (“Peggy
Cass”) Motion in Limine No. 15 (MIL 15).
PRIOR 1/25/23 COURT ORDER RENDERS MIL 15 MOOT AS TO ALL BUT
COGNQM-AUJN
DEFENDANTS’ REQUEST FOR BIFURCATION OF PUNITIVE DAMAGES
In a minute order dated January 25, 2023, Judge Donald Alvarez ruled following the
hearing on Plaintiffs Motions to Compel the Appearances of both Defendant and Cross-
Complainant Cass and Defendant Peggy Cass and Production of Documents at Trial, pursuant to
10
her CCP section 1987(b) and (c) Notices to Appear and Produce, which included information
from both Defendants regarding their financial conditions, as well as other information not
11
pertaining to their financial condition‘ in pertinent part as follows:
12
“Court grants the motion to compel both defendants to appear at trial. .. Court orders
13
Defendants to bring the documents on the first day of trial. However, Plaintiff’s counsel will not
14
receive the documents until the beginning of the punitive damages phrase, if any.”
15
With regard to Defendants’ reference to “profits or financial condition” in MIL 15 (page
16
2, lines 5-6 of MIL 15), Plaintiff understands that phrase to pertain solely to Defendants’
17
financial worth for the purposes of assessing and determining punitive damages against
18
Defendants in the event either or both are found liable and the trial enters into a punitive
19
damages phase to determine the amount of punitive damages to be awarded. With regard to
20
Defendants’ reference to “punitive damages claim(s)” (page 4, lines 17 and 25 of MIL 5),
21
Plaintiff understands that phrase to only mean Plaintiff’s claims for punitive damages, and not
22
Plaintiff’s causes of action that seek punitive damages.
23
Therefore, and t0 the extent that MIL 15 is not an end around in an attempt to avoid
24
providing other financial documents during trial that do not pertain to their financial worth which
25
26
1
Certain requests for production in the 1/25/23 Minute Order pertained to information concerning Defendants” real
27 estate holdings, and escrow and related documents pertaining to the 5807 Date Street, Rialto, CA propeny, whose
ownership is at and are the subject of a separate motion in limine number
issue in this action, l brought by Plaintiff.
28
2
PL’S OPP TO DEFS’ MIL NO. l4
CIVDS 1712990 Hon. David E. Driscoll, Department $22
Preview
F I L E SUPERIOR COURT 0F CALIFORNIA D COUNTY 0F SAN BERNAHDINO SAN BERNARDINO CIVIL DIVISION BETTY C. CARRIE TEASDALE, ESQ, (SBN 231285) FEB 0 6 2923 Law Office of Betty C. Carrie Teasdale 407 West Imperial Highway, H157 Brea, California 92821 wm . ,. m,$w DEPUW Telephone: 714-326-6358 ROSEMARY AMEZCUA—MOLL (SBN 223875) rose@ama1aw.net \Dmflamhwwm Amezcua-Moll & Associates, P.C. 1122 E Lincoln Avenue, Suite 203 Orange, CA 92865 Telephone: 714-288-2826 Fax: 714-464-4536 JONATHAN W. CAYTON (SBN 303877) 2601 Main Street, Penthouse Suite Irvine, CA 92614 Irvine, CA 92612 T: (949) 287-8735 jon@crimlawoc.com Attorneys for Plaintiff, Betty Teasdale SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, SAN BERNARDINO DISTRICT — CIVIL DIVISION NNNNNNNNNb—fir—tt—Ar—dr—Ip—ny—‘b—r—‘p—A BETTY C. CARRIE TEASDALE, an Case No. CIVDS 1712990 individual, (Consolidated withCIVDS 1803800) Hon. David E. Driscoll, Dept. $22 Plaintiff, OONQMAWNHOWWNQMAWNHO PLAINTIFF BETTY C. CARRIE vs. TEASDALE’S OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS’ MOTION IN LIMINE MICHAEL LEROY CASS, an individual; NO. 15 PRECLUDING ADMISSION 0F PEGGY LEE CASS, an individual and DOES EVIDENCE OF FINANCIAL 1 to 10, inclusive, CONDITION Defendants. Date: February 6, 2023 Time: 9:00 a.m. AND RELATED CROSS-COMPLAINT BY Dept: 522 MICHAEL LEROY CASS, an individual. Complaint Filed: July 10, 2017 Trial Readiness Conference: February 2, 2023 Trial Date: February 6, 2023 PL’S OPP TO DEFS’ MIL NO. l4 CIVDS l7 l 2990 Hon. David E. Driscoll, Department $22 OPPOSITION Plaintiff and Cross-Defendant Betty C. Carrie Teasdale (“Plaintiff”) hereby opposes Defendant and Cross-Complainant Michael Leroy Cass and Defendant Peggy Lee Cass’ (“Peggy Cass”) Motion in Limine No. 15 (MIL 15). PRIOR 1/25/23 COURT ORDER RENDERS MIL 15 MOOT AS TO ALL BUT COGNQM-AUJN DEFENDANTS’ REQUEST FOR BIFURCATION OF PUNITIVE DAMAGES In a minute order dated January 25, 2023, Judge Donald Alvarez ruled following the hearing on Plaintiffs Motions to Compel the Appearances of both Defendant and Cross- Complainant Cass and Defendant Peggy Cass and Production of Documents at Trial, pursuant to 10 her CCP section 1987(b) and (c) Notices to Appear and Produce, which included information from both Defendants regarding their financial conditions, as well as other information not 11 pertaining to their financial condition‘ in pertinent part as follows: 12 “Court grants the motion to compel both defendants to appear at trial. .. Court orders 13 Defendants to bring the documents on the first day of trial. However, Plaintiff’s counsel will not 14 receive the documents until the beginning of the punitive damages phrase, if any.” 15 With regard to Defendants’ reference to “profits or financial condition” in MIL 15 (page 16 2, lines 5-6 of MIL 15), Plaintiff understands that phrase to pertain solely to Defendants’ 17 financial worth for the purposes of assessing and determining punitive damages against 18 Defendants in the event either or both are found liable and the trial enters into a punitive 19 damages phase to determine the amount of punitive damages to be awarded. With regard to 20 Defendants’ reference to “punitive damages claim(s)” (page 4, lines 17 and 25 of MIL 5), 21 Plaintiff understands that phrase to only mean Plaintiff’s claims for punitive damages, and not 22 Plaintiff’s causes of action that seek punitive damages. 23 Therefore, and t0 the extent that MIL 15 is not an end around in an attempt to avoid 24 providing other financial documents during trial that do not pertain to their financial worth which 25 26 1 Certain requests for production in the 1/25/23 Minute Order pertained to information concerning Defendants” real 27 estate holdings, and escrow and related documents pertaining to the 5807 Date Street, Rialto, CA propeny, whose ownership is at and are the subject of a separate motion in limine number issue in this action, l brought by Plaintiff. 28 2 PL’S OPP TO DEFS’ MIL NO. l4 CIVDS 1712990 Hon. David E. Driscoll, Department $22