On October 05, 2018 a
Motion-Secondary
was filed
involving a dispute between
Hill, Lisa,
and
Quaid Harley-Davidson, Inc. A California Corporation,
for Business Tort/Unfair Business Practice Unlimited
in the District Court of San Bernardino County.
Preview
SCALI RASMUSSEN, PC SU'VE’DJ’V:
x
ii.v'V ‘r,
r\ 3'
couva‘§:UR’ OF CI‘UFCNM
Christian J. Scali, Esq. (SBN 193785) 3m r52«PNARDWQ
SAN BERNA
'
cscali@scalilaw.c0m DISTgBé¥O
(SBN l83043)
Julie S. Pearson, Esq.
jpearson@scalilaw.com
’UN 08 2023
300 South Grand Ave., Suite 2750
Los Angeles, CA 9007]
Telephone: 213.239.5622
Facsimile: 213.239.5623
BY
A NTHCNY n @fi .
Tmsz. . B‘UTY
Attorneys for Defendant and Cross-Complainant
QUAID HARLEY—DAVIDSON, INC.
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO
LISA HILL, Case N0. CIVDS 826573 l
CLASS ACTION
Plaintiff,
-
g. Judge: Hon. Wilfred J. Schneider, Jr.
f;
vs. Dept: S32
x‘m.
.2
QUAlD HARLEY-DAVIDSON, INC, a Date: June 22. 2023
California corporation, and DOES through I Time: 8:30 am.
Ré‘é 10, inclusive, Dept: S32
f 4*?
O R! Defendants. DECLARATION 0F JULIE S. PEARSON IN VS:
SUPPORT OF OPPOSITION TO
Scal DEMURRER ()F CROSS-DEFENDANT
QUAID HARLEY-DAVIDSON. INC. a HARLEY-I)AVII)S()N MOTOR COMPANY,
California corporation; and DOES through l IO. INC. TO SECOND AMENDED CROSS-
inclusive, COMPLAINT
vs. [.S‘L)/)(II‘(IIL'[\"(filed c'o/n‘z/I'I'UUIU hcrewilh: Cross—
(‘ump/uinun/ 'x
()ppuxl'linn Iu Demurrer IO
HARLEY-DAVIDSON MOTOR COMPANY. Second 11 mended ( 'I'oss— (7 '0/77p/uim]
INC, a Wisconsin corporation, and DOES 1
through 10., inclusive. Complaint Filed: October 5, 20] 8
22 FAC Filed: March 4. 20|9
SAC Filed: May 22. 2019
23
Cross-Cmnplaint l-‘ilcd: May 28. 2021
24 FACC Filed: July 29. 202]
SACC Filed: Decem ber 6. 2022
25 Trial Date: January 29, 2024
26
27
28
_ I
_
DECLARATION 015 .IlTLHi S. l’li:\RS().\
[N SUPPORT OF OPPOSITION TO [)EML'RRER TO Sli(‘()\[) .»\.\Ili\l)l{[) ('ROSS—(‘OMPLAINT
;UUSU‘»JU3 j:
DECLARATION OF JULIE S. PEARSON
l, .lulic S. Pearson. declare as follows:
l. l am an attorney duly licensed Io practice law in the State ofCalifornia and a Principal
at Scali Rasmussen. PC. counsel ot‘record for Defendant and Cross—Complainant QUAID HARLEY-
DAVIDSON, INC. ("QUAID") in the above-captioned action. I submit this Declaration in support
0f Cross—complainant‘s Opposition 10 Demurrer 0f Cross-Defendant Harley-Davidson Motor
Company, Inc. t0 Second Amended Complaint. I have personal knowledge 0f the facts set fonh
below and ifcalled upon to d0 so. could competently testify t0 them.
2. Cross-Defendam Harley-Davidson Motor Company. Inc. (“HDMC”) demurred t0
Quaid’s Amended Cross-complaint. which was heard on 0r about October 25., 202].
F'
P
‘g
3. The Court's ruling on HDMC'S Dcmurrer ("Demurrer Ruling”) t0 Quaid’s Amended
1”“?
Cross-complainl ('“AXC") issued November I7. 2021, and overruled the demurrer as t0 the First,
ééifiissen
{W
‘
Second. Third. Fourth And Seventh Causes ofAcIion and sustained the Demurrer and granted Quaid
WM:
sum leave t0 amend as t0 the Fifth and Sixth Causes ofAction. A true and correct copy 0fthe November
17, 2021 Demurrer Ruling is attached hereto as Exhibit “A".
O \!R 4. The case was stayed pending the appeal of‘the ruling 0n Quaid’s Petition to Compel
WW
Scal Arbitration. Remittitur issued January 3 l. 2023.
5. During thc mccl and confer telephone call prior t0 the filing of HDMC'S instant
demurrer. HDMC"5 counsel Ms. Abi (inanadcsigan acknowledged the conference was "more ofa
check the box than a detailed mccl and conl‘cr" because she had already prepared HDMC’s demurrer.
l advised Ms. Gnanadesigan that while l believed the SAXC was legally sufficient, Quaid was
22 amenable t0 stipulating Io amend the Fifth and Sixth causes of action t0 address the concerns Ofthe
23 demurrer. Ms. Gnanadesigan agreed lhm Quaid would confirm the ability t0 amend.
24 6. When l responded shorll} thereafter Ms. Gnanadesigan replied HDMC did not believe
25 Quaid was permitted 10 amend. and slated HDMC would not stipulate t0 any amendment and would
26 proceed with the Demurrer.
27 7. Should the Court determine i1 10 be necessary. further facts can be alleged t0 address
28 inadequacy in pleading of Quaid‘s Fifth (‘ausc 0f Action including that dealer hang tags prepared
_ 2 _
DI:(‘|..\R;\']‘I().\' ()F JULIES. PEARSON
l:\’ SUPPORT OF OPPOSITION ’I'() l)l{.\ll,'RR[{R TO SECOND AMENDED (‘ROSS-(‘OIVIPLAIN’I‘
:Im;n34mg;
Document Filed Date
June 08, 2023
Case Filing Date
October 05, 2018
Category
Business Tort/Unfair Business Practice Unlimited
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
Preview
SCALI RASMUSSEN, PC SU'VE’DJ’V: x ii.v'V ‘r, r\ 3' couva‘§:UR’ OF CI‘UFCNM Christian J. Scali, Esq. (SBN 193785) 3m r52«PNARDWQ SAN BERNA ' cscali@scalilaw.c0m DISTgBé¥O (SBN l83043) Julie S. Pearson, Esq. jpearson@scalilaw.com ’UN 08 2023 300 South Grand Ave., Suite 2750 Los Angeles, CA 9007] Telephone: 213.239.5622 Facsimile: 213.239.5623 BY A NTHCNY n @fi . Tmsz. . B‘UTY Attorneys for Defendant and Cross-Complainant QUAID HARLEY—DAVIDSON, INC. SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO LISA HILL, Case N0. CIVDS 826573 l CLASS ACTION Plaintiff, - g. Judge: Hon. Wilfred J. Schneider, Jr. f; vs. Dept: S32 x‘m. .2 QUAlD HARLEY-DAVIDSON, INC, a Date: June 22. 2023 California corporation, and DOES through I Time: 8:30 am. Ré‘é 10, inclusive, Dept: S32 f 4*? O R! Defendants. DECLARATION 0F JULIE S. PEARSON IN VS: SUPPORT OF OPPOSITION TO Scal DEMURRER ()F CROSS-DEFENDANT QUAID HARLEY-DAVIDSON. INC. a HARLEY-I)AVII)S()N MOTOR COMPANY, California corporation; and DOES through l IO. INC. TO SECOND AMENDED CROSS- inclusive, COMPLAINT vs. [.S‘L)/)(II‘(IIL'[\"(filed c'o/n‘z/I'I'UUIU hcrewilh: Cross— (‘ump/uinun/ 'x ()ppuxl'linn Iu Demurrer IO HARLEY-DAVIDSON MOTOR COMPANY. Second 11 mended ( 'I'oss— (7 '0/77p/uim] INC, a Wisconsin corporation, and DOES 1 through 10., inclusive. Complaint Filed: October 5, 20] 8 22 FAC Filed: March 4. 20|9 SAC Filed: May 22. 2019 23 Cross-Cmnplaint l-‘ilcd: May 28. 2021 24 FACC Filed: July 29. 202] SACC Filed: Decem ber 6. 2022 25 Trial Date: January 29, 2024 26 27 28 _ I _ DECLARATION 015 .IlTLHi S. l’li:\RS().\ [N SUPPORT OF OPPOSITION TO [)EML'RRER TO Sli(‘()\[) .»\.\Ili\l)l{[) ('ROSS—(‘OMPLAINT ;UUSU‘»JU3 j: DECLARATION OF JULIE S. PEARSON l, .lulic S. Pearson. declare as follows: l. l am an attorney duly licensed Io practice law in the State ofCalifornia and a Principal at Scali Rasmussen. PC. counsel ot‘record for Defendant and Cross—Complainant QUAID HARLEY- DAVIDSON, INC. ("QUAID") in the above-captioned action. I submit this Declaration in support 0f Cross—complainant‘s Opposition 10 Demurrer 0f Cross-Defendant Harley-Davidson Motor Company, Inc. t0 Second Amended Complaint. I have personal knowledge 0f the facts set fonh below and ifcalled upon to d0 so. could competently testify t0 them. 2. Cross-Defendam Harley-Davidson Motor Company. Inc. (“HDMC”) demurred t0 Quaid’s Amended Cross-complaint. which was heard on 0r about October 25., 202]. F' P ‘g 3. The Court's ruling on HDMC'S Dcmurrer ("Demurrer Ruling”) t0 Quaid’s Amended 1”“? Cross-complainl ('“AXC") issued November I7. 2021, and overruled the demurrer as t0 the First, ééifiissen {W ‘ Second. Third. Fourth And Seventh Causes ofAcIion and sustained the Demurrer and granted Quaid WM: sum leave t0 amend as t0 the Fifth and Sixth Causes ofAction. A true and correct copy 0fthe November 17, 2021 Demurrer Ruling is attached hereto as Exhibit “A". O \!R 4. The case was stayed pending the appeal of‘the ruling 0n Quaid’s Petition to Compel WW Scal Arbitration. Remittitur issued January 3 l. 2023. 5. During thc mccl and confer telephone call prior t0 the filing of HDMC'S instant demurrer. HDMC"5 counsel Ms. Abi (inanadcsigan acknowledged the conference was "more ofa check the box than a detailed mccl and conl‘cr" because she had already prepared HDMC’s demurrer. l advised Ms. Gnanadesigan that while l believed the SAXC was legally sufficient, Quaid was 22 amenable t0 stipulating Io amend the Fifth and Sixth causes of action t0 address the concerns Ofthe 23 demurrer. Ms. Gnanadesigan agreed lhm Quaid would confirm the ability t0 amend. 24 6. When l responded shorll} thereafter Ms. Gnanadesigan replied HDMC did not believe 25 Quaid was permitted 10 amend. and slated HDMC would not stipulate t0 any amendment and would 26 proceed with the Demurrer. 27 7. Should the Court determine i1 10 be necessary. further facts can be alleged t0 address 28 inadequacy in pleading of Quaid‘s Fifth (‘ausc 0f Action including that dealer hang tags prepared _ 2 _ DI:(‘|..\R;\']‘I().\' ()F JULIES. PEARSON l:\’ SUPPORT OF OPPOSITION ’I'() l)l{.\ll,'RR[{R TO SECOND AMENDED (‘ROSS-(‘OIVIPLAIN’I‘ :Im;n34mg;