Motion-Secondary: DIEGO CONRADO -V- CLS LANDSCAPING Print

• 
• 
• 
• 

						
                                
Preview
                                ORJGINAL
      Christopher B. Dolan        (SBN 165358)
      Aimee    E. Kirby(SBN 216909)
      Cristina Garcia (SBN 308161)
      DOLAN        LAW FIRM, PC
      1438 Market Street                                                     mam   501%?
                                                                              comm oswsan
      San Francisco, California 94102                                                   CML DIVISION
      Telephone: (4 1 5) 42 1 -2800
      Facsimile: (415) 421-2830                                                        um     24    2022


                                                                           BW
     Attorneys for       Plaintiff,                                                          phame need. Deputy
     DIEGO CONRADO




10
                             SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
                                            COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO
11
                                          UNLIMITED CIVIL JURISDICTION
12


13   DIEGO CONRADO,               an individual,               Case No. CIVDSl723453

14                         Plaintiff,                          PLAINTIFF’S SUR-REPLY IN SUPPORT                            A8
     V.
                                                               OF PLAINTIFF’S OPPOSITION TO
15
                                                               DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR COSTS
                                                                                                                           XVd
16   CLS LANDSCAPING MANAGEMENT,
                                                               PURSUANT TO C.C.P. § 998;
     INC., JOSE JUAN ESPINOZA GONZALEZ,
                                                               DECLARATIONS 0F COUNSEL
17
     and   DOES     1   to 50,
                                                               Date:            April   8,   2022
18                                                             Time:            8:30   am.
                          Defendants.
                                                               Dept:            S30
19
                                                               Judge:           Hon. Brian     S.   McCarVille
20

21

22        I.       PRELIMINARY STATEMENT
               Plaintiff    hereby files a Sur—Reply Brief in Support of         Plaintiff’s    Opposition to Defendants
23
     Motion    for Costs Pursuant to       Code of Civil Procedure      (C.C.P.) section 998. Plaintiff contends that
24
     Defendant’s Motion for Costs must be denied because Plaintiff‘s pre-offer attomey’s fees and pre-
25
     offer costs   must be added        to the   award Which exceeds defendants’        statutory offer thereby   making
26
     Plaintiff the prevailing palty. Furthermore, Defendants’             998 statutory offer was defective thus not
                                                              §
27
     enforceable.

28

                                                               -1-

      PLAINTIFF’S SUR-REPLY IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF’S OPPOSITION                   TO DEFENDANTS’ MOTION
                         FOR COSTS PURSUANT TO C.C.P.         § 998;   DECLARATIONS OF COUNSEL
\—   K,