Preview
J. Paul Gignac, State Bar No. 125676
RIMON, P.C.
200 E. Carrillo Street, Suite 201
Santa Barbara, California 93101
Main Telephone: (805) 695-4080
Direct Telephone: (805) 568-7891
Email: jpaul.gignac@rimonlaw.com
Attorneys for Defendants Ian Alban Stewart, Sr.
and Ian Alban Stewart, Jr.
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SANTA BARBARA - ANACAPA DIVISION
10 THE MICHAEL M. STEWART TRUST, a Case No.: 22CV04219
California trust,
11
Assigned to the Honorable Colleen K. Sterne
12 Plaintiff,
EVIDENTIARY OBJECTIONS TO
13 DECLARATION OF NORMAN
VS. COLAVINCENZO IN SUPPORT OF
14 PLAINTIFF’S APPLICATION FOR RIGHT
IAN ALBAN STEWART, SR., an individual; TO ATTACH ORDER AND FOR WRIT OF
15 ATTACHMENT
IAN ALBAN STEWART, JR., an individual;
16 and DOES 1 through 10, inclusive,
Hearing Date: November 20, 2023
17 Defendants.
18 Hearing Time: 10:00 a.m.
19 Department: 5
20 Trial Date: None Set
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
-1-
28
EVIDENTIARY OBJECTIONS TO DECLARATION OF NORMAN COLAVINCENZO IN
SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF’S APPLICATION FOR RIGHT TO ATTACH ORDER AND FOR
WRIT OF ATTACHMENT
EVIDENTIARY OBJECTIONS TO DECLARATION OF NORMAN
COLAVINCENZO IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF’S APPLICATION FOR RIGHT TO
ATTACH ORDER AND FOR WRIT OF ATTACHMENT
Defendant Ian Alban Stewart, Sr. (“Stewart, Sr.”) submits the following evidentiary
objections! to the Declaration of Norman Colavincenzo in Support of Plaintiffs Application for
Right to Attach Order and for Writ of Attachment:
Paragraph 3. lines 12-14: “If Stewart Sr. receives the cash distribution after the sale of Sea
Cliff, the money will be gone, dissipated, spent, or hidden. Stewart Sr. has shown that he is able to
10
dissipate assets, particularly cash, in a very short time.”
11
Objection(s): Argumentative and irrelevant to the Court’s determination of Plaintiff's
12
entitlement to a right to attach order and a writ of attachment.
13
14 Paragraph 3, lines 14-17: “It is important to note that Stewart Sr.’s own teenage son is in
15
control of the Trust. This means that the only person standing between the trust assets and Stewart,
16
Sr. is lan Stewart Jr. (“Stewart Jr.”) who is the current trustee.”
17
Objection(s): Argumentative and irrelevant to the Court’s determination of Plaintiff's
18
entitlement to a right to attach order and a writ of attachment.
19
20 Paragraph 4: All testimony
21 Objection(s): Lack of foundation in personal knowledge; hearsay; and irrelevant to the
22 Court’s determination of Plaintiff's entitlement to a right to attach order and a writ of attachment.
23
24 ' All facts in declarations attached to an application for a writ of attachment order must be stated
“with particularity.” Code Civ. Proc. §482.040. Under California law, an affiant or declarant making
25 an affidavit or declaration in support of an application for a right to attach order must show actual,
personal knowledge of the relevant facts, rather than the ultimate facts commonly found in
26 pleadings, and such evidence must be admissible and not objectionable. Hamilton Beach Brands,
Inc. v. Metric and Inch Tools, Inc. (2009) 614 F.Supp.2d 1056, 1063; Lydig Construction, Inc. v.
27 Martinez Steel Corp. (2015) 234 Cal.App.4th 937, 944.
-2-
28
EVIDENTIARY OBJECTIONS TO DECLARATION OF NORMAN COLAVINCENZO IN
SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF’S APPLICATION FOR RIGHT TO ATTACH ORDER AND FOR
WRIT OF ATTACHMENT
Paragraph 6, lines 13-15: “Stewart Jr. has no experience or expertise to act as a Trustee.
But, nonetheless, Stewart Sr. assigned his duties to his son. What occurred here says a lot about
Stewart Sr. and his ability to act as Trustee.”
Objection(s): Argumentative and irrelevant to the Court’s determination of Plaintiffs
entitlement to a right to attach order and a writ of attachment.
Paragraph 7, lines 18-19: “Further, the facts written below were confirmed by Stewart, Sr.
in his deposition.”
Objection(s): Argumentative.
10
Paragraph 10: All testimony
11
Objection(s): Lack of foundation in personal knowledge; hearsay; and argumentative
12
13
Paragraph 11: All testimony
14
Objection(s): Lack of foundation in personal knowledge; hearsay; and argumentative.
15
16
Paragraph 12: All testimony
17
Objection(s): Lack of foundation in personal knowledge; hearsay; and argumentative.
18
19
Paragraph 13: All testimony
20
Objection(s): Lack of foundation in personal knowledge; hearsay; and argumentative
21
22
Paragraph 14: All testimony
23
Objection(s): Lack of foundation in personal knowledge; hearsay; and argumentative
24
25
Paragraph 15: All testimony
26
Objection(s): Lack of foundation in personal knowledge; hearsay; and argumentative
27
-3-
28
EVIDENTIARY OBJECTIONS TO DECLARATION OF NORMAN COLAVINCENZO IN
SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF’S APPLICATION FOR RIGHT TO ATTACH ORDER AND FOR
WRIT OF ATTACHMENT
Paragraph 16: All testimony
Objection(s): Lack of foundation in personal knowledge; hearsay; and irrelevant to the
Court’s determination of Plaintiff's entitlement to a right to attach order and a writ of attachment.
Paragraph 17: All testimony
Objection(s): Lack of foundation in personal knowledge; hearsay; argumentative; and
irrelevant to the Court’s determination of Plaintiffs entitlement to a right to attach order and a writ
of attachment.
10 Paragraph 18: All testimony
11 Objection(s): Lack of foundation in personal knowledge; hearsay; argumentative; and
12 irrelevant to the Court’s determination of Plaintiff's entitlement to a right to attach order and a writ
13 of attachment.
14
15 Paragraph 19: All testimony
16 Objection(s): Lack of foundation in personal knowledge; hearsay; argumentative; and
17 irrelevant to the Court’s determination of Plaintiff's entitlement to a right to attach order and a writ
18 of attachment.
19
20 Paragraph 20: All testimony
21 Objection(s): Lack of foundation in personal knowledge; hearsay; argumentative; and
22 irrelevant to the Court’s determination of Plaintiff's entitlement to a right to attach order and a writ
23 of attachment.
24
25 Paragraph 21: All testimony
26 Objection(s): Lack of foundation in personal knowledge; hearsay; argumentative; and
27
-4-
28
EVIDENTIARY OBJECTIONS TO DECLARATION OF NORMAN COLAVINCENZO IN
SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF’S APPLICATION FOR RIGHT TO ATTACH ORDER AND FOR
WRIT OF ATTACHMENT
irrelevant to the Court’s determination of Plaintiff's entitlement to a right to attach order and a writ
of attachment.
Paragraph 22: All testimony
Objection(s): Lack of foundation in personal knowledge; hearsay; argumentative; and
irrelevant to the Court’s determination of Plaintiff’s entitlement to a right to attach order and a writ
of attachment.
Paragraph 23: All testimony
10 Objection(s): Lack of foundation in personal knowledge; hearsay; argumentative; and
11 irrelevant to the Court’s determination of Plaintiff's entitlement to a right to attach order and a writ
12 of attachment.
13
14 Paragraph 24: All testimony
15 Objection(s): Lack of foundation in personal knowledge; hearsay; argumentative; and
16 irrelevant to the Court’s determination of Plaintiff's entitlement to a right to attach order and a writ
17 of attachment.
18
19 Paragraph 25: All testimony
20 Objection(s): Lack of foundation in personal knowledge; hearsay; argumentative; and
21 irrelevant to the Court’s determination of Plaintiff's entitlement to a right to attach order and a writ
22 of attachment.
23 Dated: November 13, 2023 RIMON, P.C.
24
25 4,
By:
26 J. Baul Gignac
sibel for Defendants Ian Alban Stewart,
27 Sr. and Ian Alban Stewart, Jr.
-5-
28
EVIDENTIARY OBJECTIONS TO DECLARATION OF NORMAN COLAVINCENZO IN
SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF’S APPLICATION FOR RIGHT TO ATTACH ORDER AND FOR
WRIT OF ATTACHMENT
PROOF OF SERVICE
The Michael M. Stewart Trust, a California trust vs.
Ian Alban Stewart, Sr., an individual; Ian Alban Stewart, Jr., an individual
Santa Barbara Superior Court Case No. 22CV04219
I am employed in the County of Santa Barbara, State of California. I am over the age of
18 and not a party to the within action; my business address is 200 E. Carrillo Street, Suite 201,
Santa Barbara, California 93101. My electronic service address is sarah.chacon@rimonlaw.com.
On November 13, 2023, I served the document described: EVIDENTIARY
OBJECTIONS TO DECLARATION OF NORMAN COLAVINCENZO IN SUPPORT
OF PLAINTIFF’S APPLICATION FOR RIGHT TO ATTACH ORDER AND FOR
WRIT OF ATTACHMENT on the interested parties in this action as follows:
SEE ATTACHED SERVICE LIST
10
11 O BY MAIL (U.S. POSTAL SERVICE):
O I deposited the sealed envelopes with the U.S. Postal Service with postage fully
12 prepaid.
OI placed the envelope for collection and mailing on the date and at the place as
13 indicated herein following our ordinary business practices. I am readily familiar with this
14 business’s practice for collecting and processing correspondence/documents for mailing. On the
same day that it is placed for collection and mailing, it is deposited in the ordinary course of
15 business with the U.S. Postal Service in sealed envelopes with postage fully prepaid.
16 BY EMAIL-PDF TRANSMISSION: I electronically served the above document to the
17 electronic service addresses of the persons as shown on the Service List, below. My email
address is sarah.chacon@rimonlaw.com.
18
O BY PERSONAL SERVICE: Such envelopes were hand-delivered to the addressees on the
19 Service List, below.
20
O BY OVERNIGHT DELIVERY SERVICE: | deposited such envelopes for collection by
21 FedEx, in Santa Barbara, CA, sealed in an envelope or package designated by FedEx, addressed
as indicated on the Service List below, and with fees paid for overnight delivery.
22
23 M (STATE) I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the
foregoing is true and correct.
24
Executed on November 13, 2023, at Santa Barbara, California.
25
26 Sarah Chacon
27 Sarah Chacon
Litigation Practice Assistant
28
1
PROOF OF SERVICE
SERVICE LIST
Name & Address Relationship
Matthew Clarke, Esq. Attorneys for Plaintiff, Norman Colavincenzo,
Kelley Clarke, PC Trustee of the Michael M. Stewart Trust
603 East Broadway Street
Prosper, Texas 75078
natt@kelleyclarke.com
(Via email only)
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
PROOF OF SERVICE
Preview
J. Paul Gignac, State Bar No. 125676 RIMON, P.C. 200 E. Carrillo Street, Suite 201 Santa Barbara, California 93101 Main Telephone: (805) 695-4080 Direct Telephone: (805) 568-7891 Email: jpaul.gignac@rimonlaw.com Attorneys for Defendants Ian Alban Stewart, Sr. and Ian Alban Stewart, Jr. SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SANTA BARBARA - ANACAPA DIVISION 10 THE MICHAEL M. STEWART TRUST, a Case No.: 22CV04219 California trust, 11 Assigned to the Honorable Colleen K. Sterne 12 Plaintiff, EVIDENTIARY OBJECTIONS TO 13 DECLARATION OF NORMAN VS. COLAVINCENZO IN SUPPORT OF 14 PLAINTIFF’S APPLICATION FOR RIGHT IAN ALBAN STEWART, SR., an individual; TO ATTACH ORDER AND FOR WRIT OF 15 ATTACHMENT IAN ALBAN STEWART, JR., an individual; 16 and DOES 1 through 10, inclusive, Hearing Date: November 20, 2023 17 Defendants. 18 Hearing Time: 10:00 a.m. 19 Department: 5 20 Trial Date: None Set 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 -1- 28 EVIDENTIARY OBJECTIONS TO DECLARATION OF NORMAN COLAVINCENZO IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF’S APPLICATION FOR RIGHT TO ATTACH ORDER AND FOR WRIT OF ATTACHMENT EVIDENTIARY OBJECTIONS TO DECLARATION OF NORMAN COLAVINCENZO IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF’S APPLICATION FOR RIGHT TO ATTACH ORDER AND FOR WRIT OF ATTACHMENT Defendant Ian Alban Stewart, Sr. (“Stewart, Sr.”) submits the following evidentiary objections! to the Declaration of Norman Colavincenzo in Support of Plaintiffs Application for Right to Attach Order and for Writ of Attachment: Paragraph 3. lines 12-14: “If Stewart Sr. receives the cash distribution after the sale of Sea Cliff, the money will be gone, dissipated, spent, or hidden. Stewart Sr. has shown that he is able to 10 dissipate assets, particularly cash, in a very short time.” 11 Objection(s): Argumentative and irrelevant to the Court’s determination of Plaintiff's 12 entitlement to a right to attach order and a writ of attachment. 13 14 Paragraph 3, lines 14-17: “It is important to note that Stewart Sr.’s own teenage son is in 15 control of the Trust. This means that the only person standing between the trust assets and Stewart, 16 Sr. is lan Stewart Jr. (“Stewart Jr.”) who is the current trustee.” 17 Objection(s): Argumentative and irrelevant to the Court’s determination of Plaintiff's 18 entitlement to a right to attach order and a writ of attachment. 19 20 Paragraph 4: All testimony 21 Objection(s): Lack of foundation in personal knowledge; hearsay; and irrelevant to the 22 Court’s determination of Plaintiff's entitlement to a right to attach order and a writ of attachment. 23 24 ' All facts in declarations attached to an application for a writ of attachment order must be stated “with particularity.” Code Civ. Proc. §482.040. Under California law, an affiant or declarant making 25 an affidavit or declaration in support of an application for a right to attach order must show actual, personal knowledge of the relevant facts, rather than the ultimate facts commonly found in 26 pleadings, and such evidence must be admissible and not objectionable. Hamilton Beach Brands, Inc. v. Metric and Inch Tools, Inc. (2009) 614 F.Supp.2d 1056, 1063; Lydig Construction, Inc. v. 27 Martinez Steel Corp. (2015) 234 Cal.App.4th 937, 944. -2- 28 EVIDENTIARY OBJECTIONS TO DECLARATION OF NORMAN COLAVINCENZO IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF’S APPLICATION FOR RIGHT TO ATTACH ORDER AND FOR WRIT OF ATTACHMENT Paragraph 6, lines 13-15: “Stewart Jr. has no experience or expertise to act as a Trustee. But, nonetheless, Stewart Sr. assigned his duties to his son. What occurred here says a lot about Stewart Sr. and his ability to act as Trustee.” Objection(s): Argumentative and irrelevant to the Court’s determination of Plaintiffs entitlement to a right to attach order and a writ of attachment. Paragraph 7, lines 18-19: “Further, the facts written below were confirmed by Stewart, Sr. in his deposition.” Objection(s): Argumentative. 10 Paragraph 10: All testimony 11 Objection(s): Lack of foundation in personal knowledge; hearsay; and argumentative 12 13 Paragraph 11: All testimony 14 Objection(s): Lack of foundation in personal knowledge; hearsay; and argumentative. 15 16 Paragraph 12: All testimony 17 Objection(s): Lack of foundation in personal knowledge; hearsay; and argumentative. 18 19 Paragraph 13: All testimony 20 Objection(s): Lack of foundation in personal knowledge; hearsay; and argumentative 21 22 Paragraph 14: All testimony 23 Objection(s): Lack of foundation in personal knowledge; hearsay; and argumentative 24 25 Paragraph 15: All testimony 26 Objection(s): Lack of foundation in personal knowledge; hearsay; and argumentative 27 -3- 28 EVIDENTIARY OBJECTIONS TO DECLARATION OF NORMAN COLAVINCENZO IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF’S APPLICATION FOR RIGHT TO ATTACH ORDER AND FOR WRIT OF ATTACHMENT Paragraph 16: All testimony Objection(s): Lack of foundation in personal knowledge; hearsay; and irrelevant to the Court’s determination of Plaintiff's entitlement to a right to attach order and a writ of attachment. Paragraph 17: All testimony Objection(s): Lack of foundation in personal knowledge; hearsay; argumentative; and irrelevant to the Court’s determination of Plaintiffs entitlement to a right to attach order and a writ of attachment. 10 Paragraph 18: All testimony 11 Objection(s): Lack of foundation in personal knowledge; hearsay; argumentative; and 12 irrelevant to the Court’s determination of Plaintiff's entitlement to a right to attach order and a writ 13 of attachment. 14 15 Paragraph 19: All testimony 16 Objection(s): Lack of foundation in personal knowledge; hearsay; argumentative; and 17 irrelevant to the Court’s determination of Plaintiff's entitlement to a right to attach order and a writ 18 of attachment. 19 20 Paragraph 20: All testimony 21 Objection(s): Lack of foundation in personal knowledge; hearsay; argumentative; and 22 irrelevant to the Court’s determination of Plaintiff's entitlement to a right to attach order and a writ 23 of attachment. 24 25 Paragraph 21: All testimony 26 Objection(s): Lack of foundation in personal knowledge; hearsay; argumentative; and 27 -4- 28 EVIDENTIARY OBJECTIONS TO DECLARATION OF NORMAN COLAVINCENZO IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF’S APPLICATION FOR RIGHT TO ATTACH ORDER AND FOR WRIT OF ATTACHMENT irrelevant to the Court’s determination of Plaintiff's entitlement to a right to attach order and a writ of attachment. Paragraph 22: All testimony Objection(s): Lack of foundation in personal knowledge; hearsay; argumentative; and irrelevant to the Court’s determination of Plaintiff’s entitlement to a right to attach order and a writ of attachment. Paragraph 23: All testimony 10 Objection(s): Lack of foundation in personal knowledge; hearsay; argumentative; and 11 irrelevant to the Court’s determination of Plaintiff's entitlement to a right to attach order and a writ 12 of attachment. 13 14 Paragraph 24: All testimony 15 Objection(s): Lack of foundation in personal knowledge; hearsay; argumentative; and 16 irrelevant to the Court’s determination of Plaintiff's entitlement to a right to attach order and a writ 17 of attachment. 18 19 Paragraph 25: All testimony 20 Objection(s): Lack of foundation in personal knowledge; hearsay; argumentative; and 21 irrelevant to the Court’s determination of Plaintiff's entitlement to a right to attach order and a writ 22 of attachment. 23 Dated: November 13, 2023 RIMON, P.C. 24 25 4, By: 26 J. Baul Gignac sibel for Defendants Ian Alban Stewart, 27 Sr. and Ian Alban Stewart, Jr. -5- 28 EVIDENTIARY OBJECTIONS TO DECLARATION OF NORMAN COLAVINCENZO IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF’S APPLICATION FOR RIGHT TO ATTACH ORDER AND FOR WRIT OF ATTACHMENT PROOF OF SERVICE The Michael M. Stewart Trust, a California trust vs. Ian Alban Stewart, Sr., an individual; Ian Alban Stewart, Jr., an individual Santa Barbara Superior Court Case No. 22CV04219 I am employed in the County of Santa Barbara, State of California. I am over the age of 18 and not a party to the within action; my business address is 200 E. Carrillo Street, Suite 201, Santa Barbara, California 93101. My electronic service address is sarah.chacon@rimonlaw.com. On November 13, 2023, I served the document described: EVIDENTIARY OBJECTIONS TO DECLARATION OF NORMAN COLAVINCENZO IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF’S APPLICATION FOR RIGHT TO ATTACH ORDER AND FOR WRIT OF ATTACHMENT on the interested parties in this action as follows: SEE ATTACHED SERVICE LIST 10 11 O BY MAIL (U.S. POSTAL SERVICE): O I deposited the sealed envelopes with the U.S. Postal Service with postage fully 12 prepaid. OI placed the envelope for collection and mailing on the date and at the place as 13 indicated herein following our ordinary business practices. I am readily familiar with this 14 business’s practice for collecting and processing correspondence/documents for mailing. On the same day that it is placed for collection and mailing, it is deposited in the ordinary course of 15 business with the U.S. Postal Service in sealed envelopes with postage fully prepaid. 16 BY EMAIL-PDF TRANSMISSION: I electronically served the above document to the 17 electronic service addresses of the persons as shown on the Service List, below. My email address is sarah.chacon@rimonlaw.com. 18 O BY PERSONAL SERVICE: Such envelopes were hand-delivered to the addressees on the 19 Service List, below. 20 O BY OVERNIGHT DELIVERY SERVICE: | deposited such envelopes for collection by 21 FedEx, in Santa Barbara, CA, sealed in an envelope or package designated by FedEx, addressed as indicated on the Service List below, and with fees paid for overnight delivery. 22 23 M (STATE) I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct. 24 Executed on November 13, 2023, at Santa Barbara, California. 25 26 Sarah Chacon 27 Sarah Chacon Litigation Practice Assistant 28 1 PROOF OF SERVICE SERVICE LIST Name & Address Relationship Matthew Clarke, Esq. Attorneys for Plaintiff, Norman Colavincenzo, Kelley Clarke, PC Trustee of the Michael M. Stewart Trust 603 East Broadway Street Prosper, Texas 75078 natt@kelleyclarke.com (Via email only) 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2 PROOF OF SERVICE