Preview
1 EIMER STAHL LLP
Collin J. Vierra (SBN 322720)
2
cvierra@eimerstahl.com
3 99 S. Almaden Blvd., Suite 600
San Jose, CA 95113
4 Telephone: (408) 889-1690
5 Attorney for Plaintiffs Robert Arntsen,
Mary Lee, Arntsen Family Partnership, LP,
6
Brian Christopher Dunn Custodianship,
7 John Ho, and Jacky Huang
8
9 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
10 COUNTY OF SAN MATEO
11
Robert Arntsen; Mary Lee; Arntsen Family Lead Case No. 22-CIV-01148
12 Partnership, LP; Brian Christopher Dunn (Consolidated With Case No. 23-CIV-01099)
Custodianship, John Ho, and Quanyu Huang;
13
14 Plaintiffs, Hon. Robert D. Foiles
v.
15 EXHIBITS TO DECLARATION OF
David M. Bragg; Silicon Valley Real Ventures COLLIN VIERRA IN SUPPORTO F
16 LLC; SVRV 385 Moore, LLC; SVRV 387 PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR TRIAL
Moore, LLC; Gregory J. Davis; Kevin Wolfe; PREFERENANCE
17
Jason Justesen; Paramont Woodside, LLC;
18 Paramont Capital, LLC; Monks Family Trust; Date: October 20, 2023
TEH Capital LLC; Caproc III, LLC; WZ Time: 9:00 a.m.
19 Partners, LLC; McClan Trust; Wild Rose Dept.: 21
Irrevocable Trust; Black Horse Holdings,
20 LLC; Phil Stoker; Diane Stoker; Scott O’Neil;
21 Dale Huish; and DOES 1–20,
22 Defendants.
23
24
25
26
27
28
Exhibit Page 1
EXHIBITS TO DECLARATION OF COLLIN VIERRA
1
INDEX
2
3 Exhibit A: August 2022, Email correspondence between Collin Vierra and Paramont Defendants’
4
Counsel regarding availability for third-party depositions……………...…………………....……3
5
Exhibit B: March 2023, Email correspondence between Collin Vierra and Paramont Defendants’
6
7 Counsel regarding availability for depositions ……………………..…………………..…..……10
8
9
10
11 Dated: September 18, 2023 By: ______________________
12 Collin J. Vierra
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Exhibit PageOF
EXHIBITS TO DECLARATION 2 COLLIN VIERRA
Exhibit A
Exhibit Page 3
From: Reisch, Nick
Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2022 3:56 PM
To: Vierra, Collin; Zimmerman, Brian W.
Cc: Mark Poe; Ryan Van Steenis; Chong, Jessica; Ernesto Aldover; Story, Julia
Subject: RE: Third-party deposition scheduling
WARNING: External Email.
Collin,
In the future, it would be helpful if—before you pick dates and send out subpoenas—you identify
a particular witness and proposed dates for the deposition of that particular witness. Or identify
witnesses and ask us for dates we are available for each.
And we will need at least some time to provide a response, especially over the next half year or
so because we do have a great many trials that will almost certainly go to trial, including the one
next week.
As for the witnesses you identified earlier today, we will need to discuss the witnesses internally
and with the client and figure things out. I anticipate I can let you know whether we can
accommodate the dates you have identified early next week
Nicholas Reisch Of Counsel
Spencer Fane LLP
3040 Post Oak Blvd., Suite 1300| Houston, TX 77056-6560
O 713.212.2644
nreisch@spencerfane.com | spencerfane.com
************************************************************************************************************
***
CONFIDENTIALITY: This electronic mail transmission contains confidential information. The transmission contains information
that may be protected under the attorney-client privilege, work product doctrine, joint defense privilege, and/or other recognized
privileges or protections under the law. The email is not intended for transmission to, or receipt by, any unauthorized persons. If you
have received this electronic mail transmission in error, please delete it from your system without copying or disseminating, and noti fy
the sender by Reply e-mail or by calling (713) 552-1234, so that our address record can be corrected.
************************************************************************************************************
***
From: Vierra, Collin
Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2022 12:43 PM
To: Zimmerman, Brian W.
Cc: Reisch, Nick ; Mark Poe ; Ryan Van Steenis
; Chong, Jessica ; Ernesto Aldover ;
Story, Julia
Subject: [EXTERNAL] RE: Third-party deposition scheduling
1
Exhibit Page 4
[Warning] This E-mail came from an External sender. Please do not open links or attachments unless you are sure it is
trusted.
As I said, I have been and am available to discuss. Please propose some times.
To help protect y ou r priv acy , Microsoft O ffice prev ented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.
Collin Vierra
408-889-1668
www.eimerstahl.com
NOTICE: This e-mail message and any attachments transmitted with it may contain legally privileged and
confidential information. It is not intended for transmission to, or receipt by, any unauthorized persons. If you
have received this message in error, please (i) do not read it, (ii) reply to the sender that you received the
message in error, and (iii) erase or destroy the message and all attachments. Legal advice contained in the
preceding message is solely for the benefit of the Eimer Stahl LLP client(s) represented by the Firm in the
particular matter that is the subject of this message, and may not be relied upon by any other party.
From: Zimmerman, Brian W.
Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2022 9:40 AM
To: Vierra, Collin
Cc: Reisch, Nick ; Mark Poe ; Ryan Van Steenis
; Chong, Jessica ; Ernesto Aldover ;
Story, Julia
Subject: RE: Third-party deposition scheduling
WARNING: External Email.
Collin:
I am in the middle of trial preparation. Your self-serving emails are really not helpful or what anyone
would consider trying to work with opposing on scheduling. Rather, you just unilaterally noticed
depositions.
If your response is get someone else handle it, that is unreasonable.
All I am asking is to sit down with Nick and work on an agreeable schedule. I am not trying to prevent
you from third party discovery.
Brian Zimmerman Partner
Spencer Fane LLP
3040 Post Oak Blvd., Suite 1300| Houston, TX 77056-6560
O 713.212.2651
bzimmerman@spencerfane.com | spencerfane.com
From: Vierra, Collin
Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2022 11:24 AM
To: Zimmerman, Brian W.
Cc: Reisch, Nick ; Mark Poe ; Ryan Van Steenis
; Chong, Jessica ; Ernesto Aldover ;
Story, Julia
Subject: [EXTERNAL] RE: Third-party deposition scheduling
[Warning] This E-mail came from an External sender. Please do not open links or attachments unless you are sure it is
trusted.
2
Exhibit Page 5
Brian, I was referring to Nick’s comment that he would need to see “whether we can have someone else cover the
deposition or whether it is a deposition one of us needs to be at.” As Nick requested, I provided the names of the third-
party deponents and their connection to the case. Based on that, I do not believe “one of [you] needs to be at” those
depositions, but rather, “[you] can have someone else cover the deposition[s].” But as I also indicated, that is your
choice.
I remain available to discuss alternative schedules, and I understand that you have other client obligations, but
respectfully, you have been saying that you are in trial throughout this case, and it is not acceptable to use that as a
reason to close off third-party (not even party) depositions for two whole months. I emailed this whole group nine days
ago to ask about conflicts and no one responded. I told you I intended to notice “probably three” third- party depositions
that day, and “one or two more later this week.” I set my schedule based on your lack of response. I have also noticed
these depositions to be remote (I intend to use Zoom), and I do not expect any of them to last more than a few hours.
Let me know if you’d like to have a call to discuss next week. We can also try to lock down times for party depositions.
I raised the issue of your trial conflicts last week, as well, when I informed you that you had not responded to my emails
about a simple discovery request for more than two weeks. And only yesterday did you give me a load file that you
promised three weeks ago, a task which should have taken a few hours. I have also granted you repeated discovery
extensions, including an extension that you used just this week because of your other trials.
Again, I am amenable to trying to work with your schedule. But if your other trials are interfering with your ability to
participate in this case, you need to bring someone else on board who can give this case appropriate attention and
respond to my inquires in a timely manner.
To help protect y ou r priv acy , Microsoft O ffice prev ented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.
Collin Vierra
408-889-1668
www.eimerstahl.com
NOTICE: This e-mail message and any attachments transmitted with it may contain legally privileged and
confidential information. It is not intended for transmission to, or receipt by, any unauthorized persons. If you
have received this message in error, please (i) do not read it, (ii) reply to the sender that you received the
message in error, and (iii) erase or destroy the message and all attachments. Legal advice contained in the
preceding message is solely for the benefit of the Eimer Stahl LLP client(s) represented by the Firm in the
particular matter that is the subject of this message, and may not be relied upon by any other party.
From: Zimmerman, Brian W.
Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2022 6:46 AM
To: Vierra, Collin
Cc: Reisch, Nick ; Mark Poe ; Ryan Van Steenis
; Chong, Jessica ; Ernesto Aldover ;
Story, Julia
Subject: RE: Third-party deposition scheduling
WARNING: External Email.
Collin:
I am getting ready for trial and received your email below with three subpoenas for depositions after Nick Reisch from
our office informed you we were not available.
Your email indicates that you “do not believe [we] will need to cover these as they relate mostly if not exclusively to the
SVRV Defendants’ actions, but of course that is up to us”.
Collin, please confirm you will work with us as required by the Code and rules. We will need to attend ALL depositions
taken in this matter so long as our clients are parties to this matter.
3
Exhibit Page 6
It is my hope that you will work with our schedule.
Best regards,
Brian
Brian Zimmerman Partner
Spencer Fane LLP
3040 Post Oak Blvd., Suite 1300| Houston, TX 77056-6560
O 713.212.2651
bzimmerman@spencerfane.com | spencerfane.com
From: Vierra, Collin
Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2022 1:26 AM
To: Reisch, Nick ; Mark Poe ; Ryan Van Steenis
; Zimmerman, Brian W. ; Chong, Jessica
; Ernesto Aldover ; Story, Julia
Subject: [EXTERNAL] RE: Third-party deposition scheduling
[Warning] This E-mail came from an External sender. Please do not open links or attachments unless you are sure it is
trusted.
Nick, I sent out three more depo notices today, one more for the same week as Geyer, and the other two for the third
week of October. These individuals are:
John Geyer, originally an investor in the Project who withdrew his investment in March 2018
Lukas Leuthold, Project Manager for the Project and accountant for SVRV (hired as independent contractor)
Richard Crevelt, former VP Operations for SVRV and plaintiff in prior action against SVRV Defendants for unpaid
loan
Rich Bragg, sibling to Dave Bragg and recipient of substantial sums of money from SVRV during relevant time
period
I do not believe you will need to cover these as they relate mostly if not exclusively to the SVRV Defendants’ actions, but
of course that is up to you.
To help protect y ou r priv acy , Microsoft O ffice prev ented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.
Collin Vierra
408-889-1668
www.eimerstahl.com
NOTICE: This e-mail message and any attachments transmitted with it may contain legally privileged and
confidential information. It is not intended for transmission to, or receipt by, any unauthorized persons. If you
have received this message in error, please (i) do not read it, (ii) reply to the sender that you received the
message in error, and (iii) erase or destroy the message and all attachments. Legal advice contained in the
preceding message is solely for the benefit of the Eimer Stahl LLP client(s) represented by the Firm in the
particular matter that is the subject of this message, and may not be relied upon by any other party.
From: Reisch, Nick
Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2022 7:30 AM
To: Vierra, Collin ; Mark Poe ; Ryan Van Steenis
; Zimmerman, Brian W. ; Chong, Jessica
4
Exhibit Page 7
; Ernesto Aldover ; Story, Julia
Subject: RE: Third-party deposition scheduling
WARNING: External Email.
Collin,
I missed seeing this email last week and going back I see that you sent one deposition notice
already.
Brian and I currently have three trials in the next two month period. We have a preferential trial
setting scheduled to begin next week. We expect that trial to be 1.5 to two weeks long. Then we
have another preferential trial setting for the two week period starting Sept 19. That trial will be
less than a week, but it could occur in either week of the trial period based on the judge’s
schedule and we typically do not find out for sure which week it will go from the court until
sometime the week before the setting (the week of Sept 12).
And we also currently have a preferential trial setting scheduled for Oct 3. Based on the needs of
the parties for additional time to complete discovery, we are trying to move that last trial setting
and think we will be successful. But opposing counsel (despite acknowledging the need) is being
difficult. And we are still depending on a ruling from the court. So, we can’t yet commit to
anything in that early October window.
I see that you sent out a notice for a deposition already the second week of that Sept 19 trial
setting I mentioned above.
Could you please let me know the name and general connection to the case for each
person you want to depose during this window, including the connection of John
Geyer whom you already noticed?
We will try to accommodate depositions, but we need to know more about the witnesses to assess
whether we can have someone else cover the deposition or whether it is a deposition one of us
needs to be at.
Nicholas Reisch Of Counsel
Spencer Fane LLP
3040 Post Oak Blvd., Suite 1300| Houston, TX 77056-6560
O 713.212.2644
nreisch@spencerfane.com | spencerfane.com
************************************************************************************************************
***
CONFIDENTIALITY: This electronic mail transmission contains confidential information. The transmission contains information
that may be protected under the attorney-client privilege, work product doctrine, joint defense privilege, and/or other recognized
privileges or protections under the law. The email is not intended for transmission to, or receipt by, any unauthorized persons. If you
have received this electronic mail transmission in error, please delete it from your system without copying or disseminating, and noti fy
the sender by Reply e-mail or by calling (713) 552-1234, so that our address record can be corrected.
************************************************************************************************************
***
5
Exhibit Page 8
From: Vierra, Collin
Sent: Monday, August 8, 2022 2:01 PM
To: Mark Poe ; Ryan Van Steenis ; Zimmerman, Brian W.
; Chong, Jessica ; Ernesto Aldover
; Reisch, Nick ; Story, Julia
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Third-party deposition scheduling
[Warning] This E-mail came from an External sender. Please do not open links or attachments unless you are sure it is
trusted.
All, I intend to send out several (probably three) third-party deposition notices today—possibly tomorrow if some
personal obligations this afternoon keep me too busy. I may send out one or two more later this week. I intend to
schedule these for mid-to-late September through mid-to-late October.
Could you please let me know if you have timing preferences and/or known conflicts, and I will try to work around them
in preparing the notices? Obviously, I am willing to revisit these if new conflicts arise. Brian, I think I recall that you have
a trial in late October, for example. I have trial the week of October 10 and will be swamped in prep for probably several
days before that, but otherwise my schedule at the moment seems flexible enough around this time.
I will send you the subpoena packets before transmitting them to Swift Legal.
Thank you.
Collin Vierra To help protect y ou r priv acy , Microsoft O ffice prev ented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.
Eimer Stahl LLP www.eimerstahl.com
99 Almaden Blvd, Suite 642
San Jose, CA 95113-1605
Phone: 408-889-1668
Mobile: 831-917-8266
cvierra@eimerstahl.com
NOTICE: This e-mail message and any attachments transmitted with it may contain legally privileged and
confidential information. It is not intended for transmission to, or receipt by, any unauthorized persons. If you
have received this message in error, please (i) do not read it, (ii) reply to the sender that you received the
message in error, and (iii) erase or destroy the message and all attachments. Legal advice contained in the
preceding message is solely for the benefit of the Eimer Stahl LLP client(s) represented by the Firm in the
particular matter that is the subject of this message, and may not be relied upon by any other party.
-
-
-
6
Exhibit Page 9
Exhibit B
Exhibit Page 10
From: Vierra, Collin
Sent: Friday, March 31, 2023 6:05 PM
To: Reisch, Nick; Woods, Julia
Cc: Ernesto Aldover (ealdover@aldoverlaw.com); Chong, Jessica; Zimmerman, Brian W.
Subject: RE: Plaintiffs' Availability for Depositions
Nick,
Respectfully, Plaintiffs intend to leave the May 23–24 dates on the calendar and expect your clients to appear. You said
you were available on those dates. Plaintiffs are accommodating your schedule (as I’ve noted, my preference would be
April), which results in you having two full months to prepare for two depositions in an action that, by then, will have
been pending for more than fourteen months. There is absolutely nothing unreasonable about the timing of these
depositions.
I agree that we should all do our part to keep the working relationship civil, but your team is not holding up its end.
When you asked for dates the Plaintiffs could be available, I checked with them and responded within one business day
with dates that work for me and them. It is totally unreasonable for your team to take two weeks to get back to me with
counsel’s availability (apparently not even having spoken with your clients) and then provide only four possible days
over the next two months—especially since you nominally have four attorneys on the matter. I gave you ample time to
engage in productive discussions before noticing the depositions. In addition to my communications on March 17,
March 22, and March 24, I told you again on Tuesday that I intended to send out deposition notices by COB Wednesday.
I then gave you additional time by waiting until after midnight CST on Thursday. Yet you did not respond. That
unprofessional conduct is making it very difficult to maintain a productive working relationship. If you do not have
adequate time to litigate this case, you should alert your client to that fact and withdraw from the representation. If
Plaintiffs have to file a motion to compel depositions, they will specifically ask the court to revoke your (and Brian’s) pro
hac vice admissions in this case. You told me last August—over seven months ago—that I would need to accommodate
your belated responses for the next half year or so because of your trial schedule. You then told the court in your case
management statement that you are unavailable for trial for the rest of 2023. And now you are resisting depositions
scheduled two months out because of insufficient time to prep your witnesses. I understand you are busy, but if you
want to represent clients in California you are obligated to comply with California rules and ethical standards.
I have also repeatedly articulated Plaintiffs’ desire to streamline these depositions for your clients, including by having
Davis and Wolfe speak on behalf of the Paramont and Moore Road entities. That should not pose a problem, as apart
from Justesen (who played a comparatively minor role in the Moore Road Project), Davis and Wolfe were the only two
individuals from Paramont with significant, day-to-day involvement with the Moore Road Project. Accordingly, it
remains Plaintiffs’ preference to depose Wolfe on May 23, and Davis on May 24, and that their testimony be on behalf
of both themselves and the Moore Road and Paramont entities. I have even graciously offered to travel to Paramont’s
offices in Arizona to accommodate your clients’ depositions. This is far beyond what Plaintiffs are required to do under
California law.
Regarding the topics, none of them should come as a surprise. However, if you have questions about the scope of any of
the topics, please give me a call and we can discuss them. As indicated above, I think it is quite obvious that Wolfe and
Davis are the appropriate representatives to speak on these topics.
As for Bragg/SVRV, they are in default and are not parties to this action, and they are not permitted to participate in
depositions. Plaintiffs intend to proceed with the depositions as scheduled, including by appearing for their own
depositions that you requested, and which are now scheduled to take place before your clients’ depositions. If
Bragg/SVRV are permitted to depose Plaintiffs at a later date, Plaintiffs will make themselves available. There is no
1
Exhibit Page 11
indication Bragg/SVRV have any desire to depose your clients (indeed, they have not propounded any discovery on them
over the past year).
Please let me know as soon as possible:
a. Whether Wolfe will be available on May 23;
b. Whether Davis will be available on May 24;
c. Whether Wolfe and Davis is each prepared to testify both on behalf of themselves and the Moore Road and
Paramont entities;
d. Whether Wolfe and Davis prefer that their depositions take place in Arizona or California.
For now, the May 23–24 corporate depositions will proceed as noticed, and Plaintiffs reserve their rights to notice
separate, individual depositions of Wolfe, Davis, and Justesen.
From: Reisch, Nick
Sent: Friday, March 31, 2023 8:25 AM
To: Vierra, Collin ; Woods, Julia
Cc: Ernesto Aldover (ealdover@aldoverlaw.com) ; Chong, Jessica
; Zimmerman, Brian W.
Subject: RE: Plaintiffs' Availability for Depositions
WARNING: External Email
Collin,
We would appreciate a bit more patience in getting depositions scheduled.
The reason we handled figuring out dates the way we did is that Brian’s schedule is the most
likely conflict for our side with any dates and, as we made clear last year, fitting in depositions
can be challenging. It has not been that long since your initial request for dates. I think we have
developed a good working relationship, so let’s keep it going.
That is also why I’m not clear on why you sent out the entity deposition notices you did. We did
not have a list of topics prior to you sending notices, so have not had a chance to discuss with our
client which witnesses might be presented on which topics. We do not have any objection in
principle to your proposal that depositions be done in dual capacities, but we cannot commit to
doing so for the individuals you requested until we have evaluated the topics and discussed them
with our clients. But I will note that the breadth of your topics may make it difficult to
adequately prepare any witness to provide all the information you might be after.
I also think you should wait to send out notices until we have resolved another issue relating to
the depositions. We are concerned about your insistence on excluding Bragg/SVRV from the
depositions. We don’t have a dog in the default fight. But we are concerned about the possibility
that they may eventually have the default set aside. If that occurs, then they will be entitled to
depose our witnesses (and yours). But if that doesn’t happen until after the depositions occur,
that would mean a second deposition for everyone if Bragg/SVRV want it (and I suspect they
will). We have been through this situation before where a party “missed” certain depositions for
one reason or another (e.g. not being joined until later in the case). Each court involved has
always let them have another deposition. I know that is not a result our clients want and I
assume your clients would feel the same.
2
Exhibit Page 12
I think the easiest solution would be to simply let Bragg/SVRV participate in the depositions
even if their default is eventually confirmed. But we are open to other options that could protect
against this possibility of repeat depositions. But, I don’t think we should lock in dates for any
depositions until we have a plan to avoid the repeat deposition possibility.
Nicholas Reisch Of Counsel
Spencer Fane LLP
3040 Post Oak Blvd., Suite 1400| Houston, TX 77056-6560
O 713.212.2644
nreisch@spencerfane.com | spencerfane.com
************************************************************************************************************
***
CONFIDENTIALITY: This electronic mail transmission contains confidential information. The transmission contains information
that may be protected under the attorney-client privilege, work product doctrine, joint defense privilege, and/or other recognized
privileges or protections under the law. The email is not intended for transmission to, or receipt by, any unauthorized persons. If you
have received this electronic mail transmission in error, please delete it from your system without copying or disseminating, and no tify
the sender by Reply e-mail or by calling (713) 552-1234, so that our address record can be corrected.
************************************************************************************************************
***
From: Vierra, Collin
Sent: Wednesday, March 29, 2023 7:43 PM
To: Woods, Julia
Cc: Ernesto Aldover (ealdover@aldoverlaw.com) ; Reisch, Nick
; Chong, Jessica ; Zimmerman, Brian W.
Subject: [EXTERNAL] RE: Plaintiffs' Availability for Depositions
[Warning] This E-mail came from an External sender. Please do not open links or attachments unless you are sure it is
trusted.
Removing Ryan from this thread, as per my prior email, Bragg and SVRV are in default and not permitted to participate
in depositions.
Although I would prefer to depose Wolfe and Davis in April, as I wrote to counsel a week ago and mentioned on the
phone the week before that, I am available May 23 and 24 and willing to accommodate your preference for those dates.
Plaintiffs will notice depositions for those dates tomorrow. To be frank, I find it very odd that you would reach out to me
about dates without having spoken to your clients, but I assume they have agreed to work around your extremely
limited availability and that you will ensure their presence on those dates. The California rules allow parties to notice
depositions with significantly less notice than I have provided, CCP §§ 1013, 2016.050, 2025.270, and Plaintiffs reserve
the right to notice depositions for their preferred dates in April if the deponents are not available on May 23 and 24.
Per my prior request, please also confirm that in addition to testifying in their personal capacities, at least one of Wolfe
or Davis will testify concurrently on behalf of the Moore Road LLCs, Paramont Capital, and Paramont Woodside. If
Plaintiffs are forced to take separate personal and corporate depositions, Plaintiffs will require the corporate
representative(s) to come to San Mateo for their depositions. CCP § 2025.250(d). If Wolfe and/or Davis agrees to testify
3
Exhibit Page 13
on behalf of the corporate defendants as well as in their personal capacities, I am happy to travel to Arizona to take their
depositions locally on May 23 and 24.
Plaintiffs will reserve their deposition of Justesen.
Bob’s and Martha’s depositions can be taken at my office in San Jose. We would like to do Mary’s deposition remotely,
as (a) she had significantly less direct contact with the Moore Road Project than did Bob and Martha, as described in the
FAC, (b) she lives over 300 miles from my office and cannot reasonably be compelled to travel that distance, and (c) she
is 74 years old and in ill health, having suffered a stroke last year.
Thank you.
To help protect y ou r priv acy , Microsoft O ffice prev ented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.
Collin Vierra
408-889-1668
www.eimerstahl.com
NOTICE: This e-mail message and any attachments transmitted with it may contain legally privileged and
confidential information. It is not intended for transmission to, or receipt by, any unauthorized persons. If you
have received this message in error, please (i) do not read it, (ii) reply to the sender that you received the
message in error, and (iii) erase or destroy the message and all attachments. Legal advice contained in the
preceding message is solely for the benefit of the Eimer Stahl LLP client(s) represented by the Firm in the
particular matter that is the subject of this message, and may not be relied upon by any other party.
From: Woods, Julia
Sent: Wednesday, March 29, 2023 10:33 AM
To: Vierra, Collin ; Ryan
Cc: Ernesto Aldover (ealdover@aldoverlaw.com) ; Reisch, Nick
; Chong, Jessica ; Woods, Julia ;
Zimmerman, Brian W.
Subject: RE: Plaintiffs' Availability for Depositions
WARNING: External Email
Collin/Ryan:
Are you available on the following dates: May 3, 4, 8, 23, 24? If yes, I need to check with the witnesses. Please let us
know.
Additionally, the following dates works for the other depositions:
Martha - May 1
Bob - May 11
Mary - May 12
We would like to take these depositions in person – would you like them to take place at your office?
Thank you.
Julia Woods (formerly Story) (Please note our new Suite # and
my new email address)
Legal Administrative Assistant
Spencer Fane LLP
4
Exhibit Page 14
3040 Post Oak Blvd., Suite 1400| Houston, TX 77056-6560
O 713.212.2656
jwoods@spencerfane.com | spencerfane.com
*******************************************************************************************
CONFIDENTIALITY: This electronic mail transmission contains confidential information. The transmission contains information
that may be protected under the attorney-client privilege, work product doctrine, joint defense privilege, and/or other recognized
privileges or protections under the law. The email is not intended for transmission to, or receipt by, any unauthorized persons. If you
have received this electronic mail transmission in error, please delete it from your system without copying or disseminating, and notify
the sender by Reply e-mail or by calling (713) 552-1234, so that our address record can be corrected.
*******************************************************************************************
From: Zimmerman, Brian W.
Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2023 8:44 PM
To: 'Vierra, Collin'
Cc: Ernesto Aldover (ealdover@aldoverlaw.com) ; Reisch, Nick
; Chong, Jessica ; Woods, Julia
Subject: RE: Plaintiffs' Availability for Depositions
Julia will respond with some proposed dates.
Thank you,
Brian
From: Vierra, Collin
Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2023 8:41 PM
To: Zimmerman, Brian W.
Cc: Ernesto Aldover (ealdover@aldoverlaw.com) ; Reisch, Nick
; Chong, Jessica ; Woods, Julia
Subject: [EXTERNAL] RE: Plaintiffs' Availability for Depositions
[Warning] This E-mail came from an External sender. Please do not open links or attachments unless you are sure it is
trusted.
Counsel,
I intend to send out deposition notices by COB tomorrow. Please let me know if you have any preferred dates before
then.
To help protect y ou r priv acy , Microsoft O ffice prev ented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.
Collin Vierra
408-889-1668
www.eimerstahl.com
NOTICE: This e-mail message and any attachments transmitted with it may contain legally privileged and
confidential information. It is not intended for transmission to, or receipt by, any unauthorized persons. If you
have received this message in error, please (i) do not read it, (ii) reply to the sender that you received the
message in error, and (iii) erase or destroy the message and all attachments. Legal advice contained in the
preceding message is solely for the benefit of the Eimer Stahl LLP client(s) represented by the Firm in the
particular matter that is the subject of this message, and may not be relied upon by any other party.
From: Vierra, Collin
Sent: Monday, March 27, 2023 6:03 PM
To: Zimmerman, Brian W.
Cc: Ernesto Aldover (ealdover@aldoverlaw.com) ; Reisch, Nick
5
Exhibit Page 15
; Chong, Jessica ; Woods, Julia
Subject: RE: Plaintiffs' Availability for Depositions
Mary is also available May 11 and May 12.
From: Zimmerman, Brian W.
Sent: Monday, March 27, 2023 5:31 PM
To: Vierra, Collin
Cc: Ernesto Aldover (ealdover@aldoverlaw.com) ; Reisch, Nick
; Chong, Jessica ; Woods, Julia
Subject: RE: Plaintiffs' Availability for Depositions
WARNING: External Email
Thank you. Collin: I will get back with you as soon as possible.
I have been tied up in meetings today and most of tomorrow.
From: Vierra, Collin
Sent: Monday, March 27, 2023 5:31 PM
To: Zimmerman, Brian W. ; Reisch, Nick ; Ernesto
Aldover (ealdover@aldoverlaw.com) ; Chong, Jessica ; Woods,
Julia
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Plaintiffs' Availability for Depositions
[Warning] This E-mail came from an External sender. Please do not open links or attachments unless you are sure it is
trusted.
All,
Martha is available for deposition on May 1 and 2. Bob is available for deposition on May 11 and 12. Mary is likely also
available on May 11 and 12 but I am awaiting confirmation.
Please let me know if you have received any updates about Davis’s, Wolfe’s, and Justesen’s availability for depositions.
Plaintiffs anticipate Justesen’s deposition being short.
Thank you.
Collin Vierra To help protect y ou r priv acy , Microsoft O ffice prev ented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.
Eimer Stahl LLP www.eimerstahl.com
99 Almaden Blvd, Suite 600
San Jose, CA 95113-1605
Phone: 408-889-1668
Mobile: 831-917-8266
cvierra@EimerStahl.com
NOTICE: This e-mail message and any attachments transmitted with it may contain legally privileged and
confidential information. It is not intended for transmission to, or receipt by, any unauthorized persons. If you
have received this message in error, please (i) do not read it, (ii) reply to the sender that you received the
message in error, and (iii) erase or destroy the message and all attachments. Legal advice contained in the
preceding message is solely for the benefit of the Eimer Stahl LLP client(s) represented by the Firm in the
particular matter that is the subject of this message, and may not be relied upon by any other party.
6
Exhibit Page 16
Preview
1 EIMER STAHL LLP Collin J. Vierra (SBN 322720) 2 cvierra@eimerstahl.com 3 99 S. Almaden Blvd., Suite 600 San Jose, CA 95113 4 Telephone: (408) 889-1690 5 Attorney for Plaintiffs Robert Arntsen, Mary Lee, Arntsen Family Partnership, LP, 6 Brian Christopher Dunn Custodianship, 7 John Ho, and Jacky Huang 8 9 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 10 COUNTY OF SAN MATEO 11 Robert Arntsen; Mary Lee; Arntsen Family Lead Case No. 22-CIV-01148 12 Partnership, LP; Brian Christopher Dunn (Consolidated With Case No. 23-CIV-01099) Custodianship, John Ho, and Quanyu Huang; 13 14 Plaintiffs, Hon. Robert D. Foiles v. 15 EXHIBITS TO DECLARATION OF David M. Bragg; Silicon Valley Real Ventures COLLIN VIERRA IN SUPPORTO F 16 LLC; SVRV 385 Moore, LLC; SVRV 387 PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR TRIAL Moore, LLC; Gregory J. Davis; Kevin Wolfe; PREFERENANCE 17 Jason Justesen; Paramont Woodside, LLC; 18 Paramont Capital, LLC; Monks Family Trust; Date: October 20, 2023 TEH Capital LLC; Caproc III, LLC; WZ Time: 9:00 a.m. 19 Partners, LLC; McClan Trust; Wild Rose Dept.: 21 Irrevocable Trust; Black Horse Holdings, 20 LLC; Phil Stoker; Diane Stoker; Scott O’Neil; 21 Dale Huish; and DOES 1–20, 22 Defendants. 23 24 25 26 27 28 Exhibit Page 1 EXHIBITS TO DECLARATION OF COLLIN VIERRA 1 INDEX 2 3 Exhibit A: August 2022, Email correspondence between Collin Vierra and Paramont Defendants’ 4 Counsel regarding availability for third-party depositions……………...…………………....……3 5 Exhibit B: March 2023, Email correspondence between Collin Vierra and Paramont Defendants’ 6 7 Counsel regarding availability for depositions ……………………..…………………..…..……10 8 9 10 11 Dated: September 18, 2023 By: ______________________ 12 Collin J. Vierra 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Exhibit PageOF EXHIBITS TO DECLARATION 2 COLLIN VIERRA Exhibit A Exhibit Page 3 From: Reisch, Nick Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2022 3:56 PM To: Vierra, Collin; Zimmerman, Brian W. Cc: Mark Poe; Ryan Van Steenis; Chong, Jessica; Ernesto Aldover; Story, Julia Subject: RE: Third-party deposition scheduling WARNING: External Email. Collin, In the future, it would be helpful if—before you pick dates and send out subpoenas—you identify a particular witness and proposed dates for the deposition of that particular witness. Or identify witnesses and ask us for dates we are available for each. And we will need at least some time to provide a response, especially over the next half year or so because we do have a great many trials that will almost certainly go to trial, including the one next week. As for the witnesses you identified earlier today, we will need to discuss the witnesses internally and with the client and figure things out. I anticipate I can let you know whether we can accommodate the dates you have identified early next week Nicholas Reisch Of Counsel Spencer Fane LLP 3040 Post Oak Blvd., Suite 1300| Houston, TX 77056-6560 O 713.212.2644 nreisch@spencerfane.com | spencerfane.com ************************************************************************************************************ *** CONFIDENTIALITY: This electronic mail transmission contains confidential information. The transmission contains information that may be protected under the attorney-client privilege, work product doctrine, joint defense privilege, and/or other recognized privileges or protections under the law. The email is not intended for transmission to, or receipt by, any unauthorized persons. If you have received this electronic mail transmission in error, please delete it from your system without copying or disseminating, and noti fy the sender by Reply e-mail or by calling (713) 552-1234, so that our address record can be corrected. ************************************************************************************************************ *** From: Vierra, Collin Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2022 12:43 PM To: Zimmerman, Brian W. Cc: Reisch, Nick ; Mark Poe ; Ryan Van Steenis ; Chong, Jessica ; Ernesto Aldover ; Story, Julia Subject: [EXTERNAL] RE: Third-party deposition scheduling 1 Exhibit Page 4 [Warning] This E-mail came from an External sender. Please do not open links or attachments unless you are sure it is trusted. As I said, I have been and am available to discuss. Please propose some times. To help protect y ou r priv acy , Microsoft O ffice prev ented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. Collin Vierra 408-889-1668 www.eimerstahl.com NOTICE: This e-mail message and any attachments transmitted with it may contain legally privileged and confidential information. It is not intended for transmission to, or receipt by, any unauthorized persons. If you have received this message in error, please (i) do not read it, (ii) reply to the sender that you received the message in error, and (iii) erase or destroy the message and all attachments. Legal advice contained in the preceding message is solely for the benefit of the Eimer Stahl LLP client(s) represented by the Firm in the particular matter that is the subject of this message, and may not be relied upon by any other party. From: Zimmerman, Brian W. Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2022 9:40 AM To: Vierra, Collin Cc: Reisch, Nick ; Mark Poe ; Ryan Van Steenis ; Chong, Jessica ; Ernesto Aldover ; Story, Julia Subject: RE: Third-party deposition scheduling WARNING: External Email. Collin: I am in the middle of trial preparation. Your self-serving emails are really not helpful or what anyone would consider trying to work with opposing on scheduling. Rather, you just unilaterally noticed depositions. If your response is get someone else handle it, that is unreasonable. All I am asking is to sit down with Nick and work on an agreeable schedule. I am not trying to prevent you from third party discovery. Brian Zimmerman Partner Spencer Fane LLP 3040 Post Oak Blvd., Suite 1300| Houston, TX 77056-6560 O 713.212.2651 bzimmerman@spencerfane.com | spencerfane.com From: Vierra, Collin Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2022 11:24 AM To: Zimmerman, Brian W. Cc: Reisch, Nick ; Mark Poe ; Ryan Van Steenis ; Chong, Jessica ; Ernesto Aldover ; Story, Julia Subject: [EXTERNAL] RE: Third-party deposition scheduling [Warning] This E-mail came from an External sender. Please do not open links or attachments unless you are sure it is trusted. 2 Exhibit Page 5 Brian, I was referring to Nick’s comment that he would need to see “whether we can have someone else cover the deposition or whether it is a deposition one of us needs to be at.” As Nick requested, I provided the names of the third- party deponents and their connection to the case. Based on that, I do not believe “one of [you] needs to be at” those depositions, but rather, “[you] can have someone else cover the deposition[s].” But as I also indicated, that is your choice. I remain available to discuss alternative schedules, and I understand that you have other client obligations, but respectfully, you have been saying that you are in trial throughout this case, and it is not acceptable to use that as a reason to close off third-party (not even party) depositions for two whole months. I emailed this whole group nine days ago to ask about conflicts and no one responded. I told you I intended to notice “probably three” third- party depositions that day, and “one or two more later this week.” I set my schedule based on your lack of response. I have also noticed these depositions to be remote (I intend to use Zoom), and I do not expect any of them to last more than a few hours. Let me know if you’d like to have a call to discuss next week. We can also try to lock down times for party depositions. I raised the issue of your trial conflicts last week, as well, when I informed you that you had not responded to my emails about a simple discovery request for more than two weeks. And only yesterday did you give me a load file that you promised three weeks ago, a task which should have taken a few hours. I have also granted you repeated discovery extensions, including an extension that you used just this week because of your other trials. Again, I am amenable to trying to work with your schedule. But if your other trials are interfering with your ability to participate in this case, you need to bring someone else on board who can give this case appropriate attention and respond to my inquires in a timely manner. To help protect y ou r priv acy , Microsoft O ffice prev ented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. Collin Vierra 408-889-1668 www.eimerstahl.com NOTICE: This e-mail message and any attachments transmitted with it may contain legally privileged and confidential information. It is not intended for transmission to, or receipt by, any unauthorized persons. If you have received this message in error, please (i) do not read it, (ii) reply to the sender that you received the message in error, and (iii) erase or destroy the message and all attachments. Legal advice contained in the preceding message is solely for the benefit of the Eimer Stahl LLP client(s) represented by the Firm in the particular matter that is the subject of this message, and may not be relied upon by any other party. From: Zimmerman, Brian W. Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2022 6:46 AM To: Vierra, Collin Cc: Reisch, Nick ; Mark Poe ; Ryan Van Steenis ; Chong, Jessica ; Ernesto Aldover ; Story, Julia Subject: RE: Third-party deposition scheduling WARNING: External Email. Collin: I am getting ready for trial and received your email below with three subpoenas for depositions after Nick Reisch from our office informed you we were not available. Your email indicates that you “do not believe [we] will need to cover these as they relate mostly if not exclusively to the SVRV Defendants’ actions, but of course that is up to us”. Collin, please confirm you will work with us as required by the Code and rules. We will need to attend ALL depositions taken in this matter so long as our clients are parties to this matter. 3 Exhibit Page 6 It is my hope that you will work with our schedule. Best regards, Brian Brian Zimmerman Partner Spencer Fane LLP 3040 Post Oak Blvd., Suite 1300| Houston, TX 77056-6560 O 713.212.2651 bzimmerman@spencerfane.com | spencerfane.com From: Vierra, Collin Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2022 1:26 AM To: Reisch, Nick ; Mark Poe ; Ryan Van Steenis ; Zimmerman, Brian W. ; Chong, Jessica ; Ernesto Aldover ; Story, Julia Subject: [EXTERNAL] RE: Third-party deposition scheduling [Warning] This E-mail came from an External sender. Please do not open links or attachments unless you are sure it is trusted. Nick, I sent out three more depo notices today, one more for the same week as Geyer, and the other two for the third week of October. These individuals are: John Geyer, originally an investor in the Project who withdrew his investment in March 2018 Lukas Leuthold, Project Manager for the Project and accountant for SVRV (hired as independent contractor) Richard Crevelt, former VP Operations for SVRV and plaintiff in prior action against SVRV Defendants for unpaid loan Rich Bragg, sibling to Dave Bragg and recipient of substantial sums of money from SVRV during relevant time period I do not believe you will need to cover these as they relate mostly if not exclusively to the SVRV Defendants’ actions, but of course that is up to you. To help protect y ou r priv acy , Microsoft O ffice prev ented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. Collin Vierra 408-889-1668 www.eimerstahl.com NOTICE: This e-mail message and any attachments transmitted with it may contain legally privileged and confidential information. It is not intended for transmission to, or receipt by, any unauthorized persons. If you have received this message in error, please (i) do not read it, (ii) reply to the sender that you received the message in error, and (iii) erase or destroy the message and all attachments. Legal advice contained in the preceding message is solely for the benefit of the Eimer Stahl LLP client(s) represented by the Firm in the particular matter that is the subject of this message, and may not be relied upon by any other party. From: Reisch, Nick Sent: Wednesday, August 17, 2022 7:30 AM To: Vierra, Collin ; Mark Poe ; Ryan Van Steenis ; Zimmerman, Brian W. ; Chong, Jessica 4 Exhibit Page 7 ; Ernesto Aldover ; Story, Julia Subject: RE: Third-party deposition scheduling WARNING: External Email. Collin, I missed seeing this email last week and going back I see that you sent one deposition notice already. Brian and I currently have three trials in the next two month period. We have a preferential trial setting scheduled to begin next week. We expect that trial to be 1.5 to two weeks long. Then we have another preferential trial setting for the two week period starting Sept 19. That trial will be less than a week, but it could occur in either week of the trial period based on the judge’s schedule and we typically do not find out for sure which week it will go from the court until sometime the week before the setting (the week of Sept 12). And we also currently have a preferential trial setting scheduled for Oct 3. Based on the needs of the parties for additional time to complete discovery, we are trying to move that last trial setting and think we will be successful. But opposing counsel (despite acknowledging the need) is being difficult. And we are still depending on a ruling from the court. So, we can’t yet commit to anything in that early October window. I see that you sent out a notice for a deposition already the second week of that Sept 19 trial setting I mentioned above. Could you please let me know the name and general connection to the case for each person you want to depose during this window, including the connection of John Geyer whom you already noticed? We will try to accommodate depositions, but we need to know more about the witnesses to assess whether we can have someone else cover the deposition or whether it is a deposition one of us needs to be at. Nicholas Reisch Of Counsel Spencer Fane LLP 3040 Post Oak Blvd., Suite 1300| Houston, TX 77056-6560 O 713.212.2644 nreisch@spencerfane.com | spencerfane.com ************************************************************************************************************ *** CONFIDENTIALITY: This electronic mail transmission contains confidential information. The transmission contains information that may be protected under the attorney-client privilege, work product doctrine, joint defense privilege, and/or other recognized privileges or protections under the law. The email is not intended for transmission to, or receipt by, any unauthorized persons. If you have received this electronic mail transmission in error, please delete it from your system without copying or disseminating, and noti fy the sender by Reply e-mail or by calling (713) 552-1234, so that our address record can be corrected. ************************************************************************************************************ *** 5 Exhibit Page 8 From: Vierra, Collin Sent: Monday, August 8, 2022 2:01 PM To: Mark Poe ; Ryan Van Steenis ; Zimmerman, Brian W. ; Chong, Jessica ; Ernesto Aldover ; Reisch, Nick ; Story, Julia Subject: [EXTERNAL] Third-party deposition scheduling [Warning] This E-mail came from an External sender. Please do not open links or attachments unless you are sure it is trusted. All, I intend to send out several (probably three) third-party deposition notices today—possibly tomorrow if some personal obligations this afternoon keep me too busy. I may send out one or two more later this week. I intend to schedule these for mid-to-late September through mid-to-late October. Could you please let me know if you have timing preferences and/or known conflicts, and I will try to work around them in preparing the notices? Obviously, I am willing to revisit these if new conflicts arise. Brian, I think I recall that you have a trial in late October, for example. I have trial the week of October 10 and will be swamped in prep for probably several days before that, but otherwise my schedule at the moment seems flexible enough around this time. I will send you the subpoena packets before transmitting them to Swift Legal. Thank you. Collin Vierra To help protect y ou r priv acy , Microsoft O ffice prev ented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. Eimer Stahl LLP www.eimerstahl.com 99 Almaden Blvd, Suite 642 San Jose, CA 95113-1605 Phone: 408-889-1668 Mobile: 831-917-8266 cvierra@eimerstahl.com NOTICE: This e-mail message and any attachments transmitted with it may contain legally privileged and confidential information. It is not intended for transmission to, or receipt by, any unauthorized persons. If you have received this message in error, please (i) do not read it, (ii) reply to the sender that you received the message in error, and (iii) erase or destroy the message and all attachments. Legal advice contained in the preceding message is solely for the benefit of the Eimer Stahl LLP client(s) represented by the Firm in the particular matter that is the subject of this message, and may not be relied upon by any other party. - - - 6 Exhibit Page 9 Exhibit B Exhibit Page 10 From: Vierra, Collin Sent: Friday, March 31, 2023 6:05 PM To: Reisch, Nick; Woods, Julia Cc: Ernesto Aldover (ealdover@aldoverlaw.com); Chong, Jessica; Zimmerman, Brian W. Subject: RE: Plaintiffs' Availability for Depositions Nick, Respectfully, Plaintiffs intend to leave the May 23–24 dates on the calendar and expect your clients to appear. You said you were available on those dates. Plaintiffs are accommodating your schedule (as I’ve noted, my preference would be April), which results in you having two full months to prepare for two depositions in an action that, by then, will have been pending for more than fourteen months. There is absolutely nothing unreasonable about the timing of these depositions. I agree that we should all do our part to keep the working relationship civil, but your team is not holding up its end. When you asked for dates the Plaintiffs could be available, I checked with them and responded within one business day with dates that work for me and them. It is totally unreasonable for your team to take two weeks to get back to me with counsel’s availability (apparently not even having spoken with your clients) and then provide only four possible days over the next two months—especially since you nominally have four attorneys on the matter. I gave you ample time to engage in productive discussions before noticing the depositions. In addition to my communications on March 17, March 22, and March 24, I told you again on Tuesday that I intended to send out deposition notices by COB Wednesday. I then gave you additional time by waiting until after midnight CST on Thursday. Yet you did not respond. That unprofessional conduct is making it very difficult to maintain a productive working relationship. If you do not have adequate time to litigate this case, you should alert your client to that fact and withdraw from the representation. If Plaintiffs have to file a motion to compel depositions, they will specifically ask the court to revoke your (and Brian’s) pro hac vice admissions in this case. You told me last August—over seven months ago—that I would need to accommodate your belated responses for the next half year or so because of your trial schedule. You then told the court in your case management statement that you are unavailable for trial for the rest of 2023. And now you are resisting depositions scheduled two months out because of insufficient time to prep your witnesses. I understand you are busy, but if you want to represent clients in California you are obligated to comply with California rules and ethical standards. I have also repeatedly articulated Plaintiffs’ desire to streamline these depositions for your clients, including by having Davis and Wolfe speak on behalf of the Paramont and Moore Road entities. That should not pose a problem, as apart from Justesen (who played a comparatively minor role in the Moore Road Project), Davis and Wolfe were the only two individuals from Paramont with significant, day-to-day involvement with the Moore Road Project. Accordingly, it remains Plaintiffs’ preference to depose Wolfe on May 23, and Davis on May 24, and that their testimony be on behalf of both themselves and the Moore Road and Paramont entities. I have even graciously offered to travel to Paramont’s offices in Arizona to accommodate your clients’ depositions. This is far beyond what Plaintiffs are required to do under California law. Regarding the topics, none of them should come as a surprise. However, if you have questions about the scope of any of the topics, please give me a call and we can discuss them. As indicated above, I think it is quite obvious that Wolfe and Davis are the appropriate representatives to speak on these topics. As for Bragg/SVRV, they are in default and are not parties to this action, and they are not permitted to participate in depositions. Plaintiffs intend to proceed with the depositions as scheduled, including by appearing for their own depositions that you requested, and which are now scheduled to take place before your clients’ depositions. If Bragg/SVRV are permitted to depose Plaintiffs at a later date, Plaintiffs will make themselves available. There is no 1 Exhibit Page 11 indication Bragg/SVRV have any desire to depose your clients (indeed, they have not propounded any discovery on them over the past year). Please let me know as soon as possible: a. Whether Wolfe will be available on May 23; b. Whether Davis will be available on May 24; c. Whether Wolfe and Davis is each prepared to testify both on behalf of themselves and the Moore Road and Paramont entities; d. Whether Wolfe and Davis prefer that their depositions take place in Arizona or California. For now, the May 23–24 corporate depositions will proceed as noticed, and Plaintiffs reserve their rights to notice separate, individual depositions of Wolfe, Davis, and Justesen. From: Reisch, Nick Sent: Friday, March 31, 2023 8:25 AM To: Vierra, Collin ; Woods, Julia Cc: Ernesto Aldover (ealdover@aldoverlaw.com) ; Chong, Jessica ; Zimmerman, Brian W. Subject: RE: Plaintiffs' Availability for Depositions WARNING: External Email Collin, We would appreciate a bit more patience in getting depositions scheduled. The reason we handled figuring out dates the way we did is that Brian’s schedule is the most likely conflict for our side with any dates and, as we made clear last year, fitting in depositions can be challenging. It has not been that long since your initial request for dates. I think we have developed a good working relationship, so let’s keep it going. That is also why I’m not clear on why you sent out the entity deposition notices you did. We did not have a list of topics prior to you sending notices, so have not had a chance to discuss with our client which witnesses might be presented on which topics. We do not have any objection in principle to your proposal that depositions be done in dual capacities, but we cannot commit to doing so for the individuals you requested until we have evaluated the topics and discussed them with our clients. But I will note that the breadth of your topics may make it difficult to adequately prepare any witness to provide all the information you might be after. I also think you should wait to send out notices until we have resolved another issue relating to the depositions. We are concerned about your insistence on excluding Bragg/SVRV from the depositions. We don’t have a dog in the default fight. But we are concerned about the possibility that they may eventually have the default set aside. If that occurs, then they will be entitled to depose our witnesses (and yours). But if that doesn’t happen until after the depositions occur, that would mean a second deposition for everyone if Bragg/SVRV want it (and I suspect they will). We have been through this situation before where a party “missed” certain depositions for one reason or another (e.g. not being joined until later in the case). Each court involved has always let them have another deposition. I know that is not a result our clients want and I assume your clients would feel the same. 2 Exhibit Page 12 I think the easiest solution would be to simply let Bragg/SVRV participate in the depositions even if their default is eventually confirmed. But we are open to other options that could protect against this possibility of repeat depositions. But, I don’t think we should lock in dates for any depositions until we have a plan to avoid the repeat deposition possibility. Nicholas Reisch Of Counsel Spencer Fane LLP 3040 Post Oak Blvd., Suite 1400| Houston, TX 77056-6560 O 713.212.2644 nreisch@spencerfane.com | spencerfane.com ************************************************************************************************************ *** CONFIDENTIALITY: This electronic mail transmission contains confidential information. The transmission contains information that may be protected under the attorney-client privilege, work product doctrine, joint defense privilege, and/or other recognized privileges or protections under the law. The email is not intended for transmission to, or receipt by, any unauthorized persons. If you have received this electronic mail transmission in error, please delete it from your system without copying or disseminating, and no tify the sender by Reply e-mail or by calling (713) 552-1234, so that our address record can be corrected. ************************************************************************************************************ *** From: Vierra, Collin Sent: Wednesday, March 29, 2023 7:43 PM To: Woods, Julia Cc: Ernesto Aldover (ealdover@aldoverlaw.com) ; Reisch, Nick ; Chong, Jessica ; Zimmerman, Brian W. Subject: [EXTERNAL] RE: Plaintiffs' Availability for Depositions [Warning] This E-mail came from an External sender. Please do not open links or attachments unless you are sure it is trusted. Removing Ryan from this thread, as per my prior email, Bragg and SVRV are in default and not permitted to participate in depositions. Although I would prefer to depose Wolfe and Davis in April, as I wrote to counsel a week ago and mentioned on the phone the week before that, I am available May 23 and 24 and willing to accommodate your preference for those dates. Plaintiffs will notice depositions for those dates tomorrow. To be frank, I find it very odd that you would reach out to me about dates without having spoken to your clients, but I assume they have agreed to work around your extremely limited availability and that you will ensure their presence on those dates. The California rules allow parties to notice depositions with significantly less notice than I have provided, CCP §§ 1013, 2016.050, 2025.270, and Plaintiffs reserve the right to notice depositions for their preferred dates in April if the deponents are not available on May 23 and 24. Per my prior request, please also confirm that in addition to testifying in their personal capacities, at least one of Wolfe or Davis will testify concurrently on behalf of the Moore Road LLCs, Paramont Capital, and Paramont Woodside. If Plaintiffs are forced to take separate personal and corporate depositions, Plaintiffs will require the corporate representative(s) to come to San Mateo for their depositions. CCP § 2025.250(d). If Wolfe and/or Davis agrees to testify 3 Exhibit Page 13 on behalf of the corporate defendants as well as in their personal capacities, I am happy to travel to Arizona to take their depositions locally on May 23 and 24. Plaintiffs will reserve their deposition of Justesen. Bob’s and Martha’s depositions can be taken at my office in San Jose. We would like to do Mary’s deposition remotely, as (a) she had significantly less direct contact with the Moore Road Project than did Bob and Martha, as described in the FAC, (b) she lives over 300 miles from my office and cannot reasonably be compelled to travel that distance, and (c) she is 74 years old and in ill health, having suffered a stroke last year. Thank you. To help protect y ou r priv acy , Microsoft O ffice prev ented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. Collin Vierra 408-889-1668 www.eimerstahl.com NOTICE: This e-mail message and any attachments transmitted with it may contain legally privileged and confidential information. It is not intended for transmission to, or receipt by, any unauthorized persons. If you have received this message in error, please (i) do not read it, (ii) reply to the sender that you received the message in error, and (iii) erase or destroy the message and all attachments. Legal advice contained in the preceding message is solely for the benefit of the Eimer Stahl LLP client(s) represented by the Firm in the particular matter that is the subject of this message, and may not be relied upon by any other party. From: Woods, Julia Sent: Wednesday, March 29, 2023 10:33 AM To: Vierra, Collin ; Ryan Cc: Ernesto Aldover (ealdover@aldoverlaw.com) ; Reisch, Nick ; Chong, Jessica ; Woods, Julia ; Zimmerman, Brian W. Subject: RE: Plaintiffs' Availability for Depositions WARNING: External Email Collin/Ryan: Are you available on the following dates: May 3, 4, 8, 23, 24? If yes, I need to check with the witnesses. Please let us know. Additionally, the following dates works for the other depositions: Martha - May 1 Bob - May 11 Mary - May 12 We would like to take these depositions in person – would you like them to take place at your office? Thank you. Julia Woods (formerly Story) (Please note our new Suite # and my new email address) Legal Administrative Assistant Spencer Fane LLP 4 Exhibit Page 14 3040 Post Oak Blvd., Suite 1400| Houston, TX 77056-6560 O 713.212.2656 jwoods@spencerfane.com | spencerfane.com ******************************************************************************************* CONFIDENTIALITY: This electronic mail transmission contains confidential information. The transmission contains information that may be protected under the attorney-client privilege, work product doctrine, joint defense privilege, and/or other recognized privileges or protections under the law. The email is not intended for transmission to, or receipt by, any unauthorized persons. If you have received this electronic mail transmission in error, please delete it from your system without copying or disseminating, and notify the sender by Reply e-mail or by calling (713) 552-1234, so that our address record can be corrected. ******************************************************************************************* From: Zimmerman, Brian W. Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2023 8:44 PM To: 'Vierra, Collin' Cc: Ernesto Aldover (ealdover@aldoverlaw.com) ; Reisch, Nick ; Chong, Jessica ; Woods, Julia Subject: RE: Plaintiffs' Availability for Depositions Julia will respond with some proposed dates. Thank you, Brian From: Vierra, Collin Sent: Tuesday, March 28, 2023 8:41 PM To: Zimmerman, Brian W. Cc: Ernesto Aldover (ealdover@aldoverlaw.com) ; Reisch, Nick ; Chong, Jessica ; Woods, Julia Subject: [EXTERNAL] RE: Plaintiffs' Availability for Depositions [Warning] This E-mail came from an External sender. Please do not open links or attachments unless you are sure it is trusted. Counsel, I intend to send out deposition notices by COB tomorrow. Please let me know if you have any preferred dates before then. To help protect y ou r priv acy , Microsoft O ffice prev ented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. Collin Vierra 408-889-1668 www.eimerstahl.com NOTICE: This e-mail message and any attachments transmitted with it may contain legally privileged and confidential information. It is not intended for transmission to, or receipt by, any unauthorized persons. If you have received this message in error, please (i) do not read it, (ii) reply to the sender that you received the message in error, and (iii) erase or destroy the message and all attachments. Legal advice contained in the preceding message is solely for the benefit of the Eimer Stahl LLP client(s) represented by the Firm in the particular matter that is the subject of this message, and may not be relied upon by any other party. From: Vierra, Collin Sent: Monday, March 27, 2023 6:03 PM To: Zimmerman, Brian W. Cc: Ernesto Aldover (ealdover@aldoverlaw.com) ; Reisch, Nick 5 Exhibit Page 15 ; Chong, Jessica ; Woods, Julia Subject: RE: Plaintiffs' Availability for Depositions Mary is also available May 11 and May 12. From: Zimmerman, Brian W. Sent: Monday, March 27, 2023 5:31 PM To: Vierra, Collin Cc: Ernesto Aldover (ealdover@aldoverlaw.com) ; Reisch, Nick ; Chong, Jessica ; Woods, Julia Subject: RE: Plaintiffs' Availability for Depositions WARNING: External Email Thank you. Collin: I will get back with you as soon as possible. I have been tied up in meetings today and most of tomorrow. From: Vierra, Collin Sent: Monday, March 27, 2023 5:31 PM To: Zimmerman, Brian W. ; Reisch, Nick ; Ernesto Aldover (ealdover@aldoverlaw.com) ; Chong, Jessica ; Woods, Julia Subject: [EXTERNAL] Plaintiffs' Availability for Depositions [Warning] This E-mail came from an External sender. Please do not open links or attachments unless you are sure it is trusted. All, Martha is available for deposition on May 1 and 2. Bob is available for deposition on May 11 and 12. Mary is likely also available on May 11 and 12 but I am awaiting confirmation. Please let me know if you have received any updates about Davis’s, Wolfe’s, and Justesen’s availability for depositions. Plaintiffs anticipate Justesen’s deposition being short. Thank you. Collin Vierra To help protect y ou r priv acy , Microsoft O ffice prev ented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. Eimer Stahl LLP www.eimerstahl.com 99 Almaden Blvd, Suite 600 San Jose, CA 95113-1605 Phone: 408-889-1668 Mobile: 831-917-8266 cvierra@EimerStahl.com NOTICE: This e-mail message and any attachments transmitted with it may contain legally privileged and confidential information. It is not intended for transmission to, or receipt by, any unauthorized persons. If you have received this message in error, please (i) do not read it, (ii) reply to the sender that you received the message in error, and (iii) erase or destroy the message and all attachments. Legal advice contained in the preceding message is solely for the benefit of the Eimer Stahl LLP client(s) represented by the Firm in the particular matter that is the subject of this message, and may not be relied upon by any other party. 6 Exhibit Page 16