Document for ARNTSEN FAMILY PARTNERSHIP, LP, et al vs. GREGORY J DAVIS, et al

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

						
                                
Preview
                                Collin J. Vierra (State Bar No. 322720)
 1   EIMER STAHL LLP
     99 Almaden Blvd., Suite 600
 2
     San Jose, CA 95113-1605
 3   Telephone: (408) 889-1668
     Email: cvierra@eimerstahl.com
 4
     Attorney for Plaintiffs Robert Arntsen,
 5   Mary Lee, Arntsen Family Partnership, LP,
 6   Brian Christopher Dunn Custodianship,
     John Ho, and Jacky Huang
 7

 8                    SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

 9                                    COUNTY OF SAN MATEO

10
      Robert Arntsen; Mary Lee; Arntsen Family            Lead Case No. 22-CIV-01148
11    Partnership, LP; Brian Christopher Dunn             Consolidated with Case No. 23-CIV-01099
      Custodianship; John Ho, and Quanyu Huang;
12
                                                          Hon. Jeffrey R. Finigan
13                  Plaintiffs,
      v.                                                  NOTICE REGARDING BANKRUPTCY
14                                                        TRIAL
      David M. Bragg; Silicon Valley Real Ventures
15    LLC; SVRV 385 Moore, LLC; SVRV 387
16    Moore, LLC; Gregory J. Davis; Kevin Wolfe;
      Jason Justesen; Paramont Woodside, LLC;
17    Paramont Capital, LLC; Monks Family Trust;
      TEH Capital LLC; Caproc III, LLC; WZ
18    Partners, LLC; McClan Trust; Wild Rose
      Irrevocable Trust; Black Horse Holdings,
19    LLC; Phil Stoker; Diane Stoker; Scott O’Neil;
20    Dale Huish; and DOES 1–20,

21                  Defendants.

22

23

24

25

26

27

28
                                                      1
                                  NOTICE REGARDING BANKRUPTCY TRIAL
 1          Plaintiffs write to inform the Court that on December 21, 2023, the bankruptcy court sua

 2   sponte vacated the January 8, 2024 trial date regarding Plaintiffs’ claims against Defendant David

 3   M. Bragg. In so doing, the bankruptcy court reiterated that its February 24, 2023 order lifting the

 4   automatic stay “remains in full force and effect.” The bankruptcy court continued, “There is no

 5   limitation in or as a result of that order on proceedings in the state court action and nothing in that

 6   order precludes the parties from addressing any and all aspects of the merits of the claims in the

 7   state court action for purposes of determining the underlying debt that plaintiffs allege in this

 8   adversary proceeding is nondischargeable.” (See Attachment A.)

 9          The bankruptcy court further ordered the parties to the bankruptcy proceeding to submit a

10   status report on January 8, 2024 addressing, among other issues, whether the parties want the

11   bankruptcy court to resolve the merits of the underlying debt.

12          Plaintiffs will keep this Court apprised of material developments in the bankruptcy court,

13   including as to any trial that may occur in the bankruptcy court before the March 11, 2024 trial in

14   this Court.

15

16

17
     Dated: December 29, 2023                               By: ______________________
18
                                                                 Collin James Vierra
19                                                               EIMER STAHL, LLP
20
                                                                 Attorney for Plaintiffs
21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28
                                                       2
                                  NOTICE REGARDING BANKRUPTCY TRIAL
Attachment A
Filed 12/21/23                        Case 22-02112                            Doc 75



       1                     UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT
       2                     EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
       3
           In re:                          )   Case No. 22-22700-B-7
       4                                   )
           DAVID MATTHEW BRAGG,            )   Adversary No. 22-2112
       5                                   )
                                           )
       6                   Debtor(s).      )
           ________________________________)
       7                                   )
           ROBERT ARNTSEN, MARY LEE,       )
       8   ARNTSEN FAMILY PARTNERSHIP, LP, )
           BRIAN CHRISTOPHER DUNN          )
       9   CUSTODIANSHIP, JOHN HO, and     )
           QUANYI HUANG,                   )
      10                                   )
                                           )
      11                 Plaintiff(s),     )
                                           )
      12   v.                              )
                                           )
      13   DAVID MATTHEW BRAGG,            )
                                           )
      14                                   )
                         Defendant(s).     )
      15   ________________________________)
      16
                                  ORDER VACATING TRIAL
      17
                 On its own motion, and based on a review of the record in
      18
           this adversary proceeding, the court has reconsidered its order
      19
           of November 13, 2023, setting this matter for trial on the merits
      20
           and as dischargeability.
      21
                 By an order filed on February 24, 2023, this court
      22
           terminated the automatic stay so that a pending state court
      23
           action - involving defendant David Bragg and a number of co-
      24
           defendants not named in this adversary proceeding - could proceed
      25
           in all respects and without limitation on the merits of the
      26
           plaintiffs’ claims and to establish the debt plaintiffs allege is
      27
           nondischargeable in this adversary proceeding.
      28
Filed 12/21/23                          Case 22-02112                              Doc 75



       1         A number of status reports were subsequently filed which
       2   reflect that this case is not anywhere near ready for trial- in
       3   this court or in the state court.     There are a number of
       4   contested issues and proceedings that apparently remain
       5   unresolved in the state court action, i.e., evidentiary,
       6   discovery, sanctions, and default.      There are also a number of
       7   co-defendants in the state court action who are not before this
       8   court.     The claims at issue in the state court action are
       9   primarily state law claims.    And there is a demand for a jury
      10   trial in the state court action.
      11         The court is cognizant of the medical events experienced by
      12   several of the plaintiffs.    However, the court can not sacrifice
      13   due process rights, comity with the state court, and run the risk
      14   of inconsistent rulings with the state court as previously noted
      15   for purposes of convenience of litigation.      Therefore, good cause
      16   appearing:
      17         IT IS ORDERED that the Order Setting Trial filed on November
      18   13, 2023, and the corresponding trial set on January 8, 2024, are
      19   VACATED.
      20         IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the order of February 24, 2023,
      21   remains in full force and effect.     There is no limitation in or
      22   as a result of that order on proceedings in the state court
      23   action and nothing in that order precludes the parties from
      24   addressing any and all aspects of the merits of the claims in the
      25   state court action for purposes of determining the underlying
      26   debt that plaintiffs allege in this adversary proceeding is
      27   nondischargeable.
      28         IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the parties shall file a joint

                                           - 2 -
Filed 12/21/23                        Case 22-02112                            Doc 75



       1   status report on January 8, 2024, that addresses: (1) the status
       2   of the state court action; (2) the status of any unresolved and
       3   pending issues, matters, or proceedings before the state court;
       4   and (3) to the extent parties desire this court to proceed on the
       5   merits of the underlying debt, how this court can sever the
       6   debtor/defendant from co-defendants in the state court action
       7   consistent with due process and protection of rights of parties
       8   not before this court.
       9
      10          December 21, 2023

      11
      12
      13
      14
      15
      16
      17
      18
      19
      20
      21
      22
      23
      24
      25
      26
      27
      28

                                         - 3 -
Filed 12/21/23                          Case 22-02112                   Doc 75



       1                    INSTRUCTIONS TO CLERK OF COURT
                                     SERVICE LIST
       2
                The Clerk of Court is instructed to send the attached
       3   document, via the BNC, to the following parties:
       4   Collin Vierra
           Eimer Stahl LLP
       5   99 South Almaden Boulevard
           Suite 600
       6   San Jose CA 95113
       7   Peter G. Macaluso
           7230 South Land Park Drive #127
       8   Sacramento CA 95831
       9
      10
      11
      12
      13
      14
      15
      16
      17
      18
      19
      20
      21
      22
      23
      24
      25
      26
      27
      28

                                           - 4 -