Preview
1 PETER J. HIRSIG (State Bar No. 197993)
peter.hirsig@mcnamaralaw.com
2 DANIEL R. MAYER (State Bar No. 300077)
daniel.mayer@mcnamaralaw.com
3 MCNAMARA, AMBACHER, WHEELER,
HIRSIG & GRAY LLP
4 639 Kentucky Street,
Fairfield, CA 94533
5 Telephone: (707) 427-3998
Facsimile: (707) 427-0268
6
Attorneys for Defendants
7 HARJOBAN KAUR TOOR and BALJIT SINGH TOOR
8 SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF PLACER
9 CIVIL - UNLIMITED JURISDICTION
McNAMARA, AMBACHER, WHEELER, HIRSIG & GRAY LLP
10
639 KENTUCKY STREET, FAIRFIELD, CA 94533 -5530
11
DANIEL GREGORY BONILLA, an Case No. S-CV-0048973
12 individual,
TELEPHONE: (707) 427-3998
DECLARATION OF DANIEL R. MAYER
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
13 Plaintiff, IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS’ EX
PARTE APPLICATION FOR AN ORDER
14 vs. SHORTENING TIME TO HEAR MOTION
TO VACATE TRIAL AND PRE-TRIAL
15 HARJOBAN KAUR TOOR, an individual; CONFERENCE DATES
BALJIT SINGH TOOR, an individual;
16 DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, Date: February 29, 2024
Time: 8:00 a.m.
17 Defendants. Dept: 42
Trial Date: 4/2/2024
18 Action Filed: 8/19/2022
19
20 I, Daniel R. Mayer, declare:
21 1. I am an attorney at law duly admitted to practice before all the courts of the State of
22 California and an associate with the law firm of McNamara, Ambacher, Wheeler, Hirsig
23 & Gray LLP, attorneys for Defendants HARJOBAN KAUR TOOR and BALJIT
24 SINGH TOOR (“Defendants”) in this case.
25 2. I have personal knowledge of the facts set forth below. As to matters stated upon
26 information and belief, I believe them to be true. If called as a witness, could and would
27 testify competently thereto.
28
DECLARATION OF DANIEL R. MAYER IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS’ EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR
AN ORDER SHORTENING TIME TO HEAR MOTION TO VACATE TRIAL AND PRE-TRIAL
CONFERENCE DATES
1 3. This matter arises out of an incident that that occurred at approximately 5:58 p.m. on
2 November 13, 2021 in the parking structure located at 1151 Galleria Boulevard in
3 Roseville, California. the underlying incident, Plaintiff allegedly sustained a broken left
4 arm from coming into contact with a stop sign.
5 4. Trial in this matter is set for April 2, 2024. The events and circumstances immediately
6 preceding trial, and this Application, have necessitated the filing of the aforementioned
7 Motion by Defendants.
8 5. The Motion is based on the briefing schedule ordered by the Court on Defendants’ prior
9 ex parte for an order shortening time to hear three motions follows: (1) for Protective
McNAMARA, AMBACHER, WHEELER, HIRSIG & GRAY LLP
10 Order is based on Plaintiff’s excessive and oppressive expert witness disclosure; (2) for
639 KENTUCKY STREET, FAIRFIELD, CA 94533 -5530
11 Leave to Take a Second Volume of Plaintiff’s Deposition; and (3) for Leave to Perform
12 a Further Physical Examination of Plaintiff, which will be heard according to that
TELEPHONE: (707) 427-3998
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
13 schedule on March 12, 2024. A true and correct copy of the complete papers supporting
14 Defendants’ Motion for an Order Vacating Trial and Pre-Trial Conference is attached
15 hereto as Exhibit “A.”
16 a. On March 12, 2024, very little time will remain to complete any discovery
17 ordered by the Court, and to incorporate that into the parties’ trial preparation
18 and completion of expert discovery as to (1) and/or (2);
19 b. In particular, as to (2), the physician who will perform the examination, if leave
20 is granted, Scott Berta, M.D., has his first available date to perform the
21 examination on March 25, 2024, which will essentially not permit him to be
22 meaningfully deposed before trial;
23 c. Also in particular, and as to (3) Defendants’ counsel are compelled to expend
24 significant time and costs in regard to Plaintiff’s fifty-five disclosed non-
25 retained expert witnesses before the date set for hearing of (3). In that latter
26 regard, some twenty-nine of Plaintiff’s non-retained experts are due to be
27 deposed before the hearing of Defendants’ motion in this regard, and every day
28 2
DECLARATION OF DANIEL R. MAYER IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS’ EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR
AN ORDER SHORTENING TIME TO HEAR MOTION TO VACATE TRIAL AND PRE-TRIAL
CONFERENCE DATES
1 that passes between now and then will involve significant costs and time
2 expenditure to coordinate and confirm those depositions.1
3 6. Otherwise, and as described in the Motion proper, Defendants’ counsel has a significant
4 trial conflict, the parties have been entirely diligent in litigating this matter up to the
5 present, and this is the first continuance or vacation that has yet been requested.
6 7. Defendants’ counsel proposed a stipulation to achieve the same effect as this ex parte
7 and the instant Motion for an Order Vacating Trial and Pre-Trial Conference Dates, and
8 met-and-conferred thereon. However, the parties were unable to reach an agreement and
9 these papers were necessarily filed. In the course of this meet-and-confer, and via email
McNAMARA, AMBACHER, WHEELER, HIRSIG & GRAY LLP
10 on February 27, 2024, at 11:06 a.m. and on February 28, 2024 at 9:28 a.m., Defendants’
639 KENTUCKY STREET, FAIRFIELD, CA 94533 -5530
11 counsel gave notice of this Application. It was not stated whether Plaintiff’s counsel
12 intended to appear at or oppose this Application, but considering the previous course of
TELEPHONE: (707) 427-3998
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
13 dealing, opposition is expected. In this fashion, Defendants’ counsel have complied with
14 all applicable rules. A true and correct copy of the proposed stipulation is attached
15 hereto as Exhibit “B.” A true and correct copy of the email correspondence described
16 above is attached hereto as Exhibit “C.”
17 8. Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure § 1005(b), sixteen court days (the ordinary notice
18 period) from February 28, 2024 is March 21, 2024, only twelve days before trial. If
19 Defendants’ Motion were to be heard on this schedule, it would be much too late to
20 avoid prejudice to the parties as just described. Even if the Motion were not to be granted
21 ultimately, this period represents a significant portion of the time remaining before trial,
22 and during which the trial preparation of both parties would be held in a prejudicial
23 limbo.
24 9. At the same time, considering the significance of the discovery concerned by the
25 motions (a substantial portion of expert discovery and highly salient aspects of fact
26 1
Due to an oversight by counsel, the facts of this unilaterally set schedule for non-retained expert depositions were
not included in Defendants’ Motion for Protective Order or in the prior ex parte. On the date set for that ex parte,
27 February 22, 2024, the Court declined oral argument, when this and every other point addressed in this Motion and
the renewed ex parte application would have been raised with the Court. Counsel regrets the error.
28 3
DECLARATION OF DANIEL R. MAYER IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS’ EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR
AN ORDER SHORTENING TIME TO HEAR MOTION TO VACATE TRIAL AND PRE-TRIAL
CONFERENCE DATES
1 discovery), the Court’s ruling and the results of that discovery if the Motions are granted
2 will significantly impact all aspects of trial preparation, and due to the time frame which
3 is implicated by the Court’s ruling on Defendants’ prior ex parte, Defendants are at a
4 significant and irreducible risk of substantial prejudice if trial in the matter is not
5 vacated. More specifically, and again, the issues related to depositions of Plaintiff’s non-
6 retained experts are imposing significant prejudice on a day-to-day basis in the present
7 and will do so through the time set for hearing of Defendants’ motion for protective
8 order. As a result of these facts, Defendants, and even Plaintiff, are at risk of imminently
9 suffering irreparable harm.
McNAMARA, AMBACHER, WHEELER, HIRSIG & GRAY LLP
10
639 KENTUCKY STREET, FAIRFIELD, CA 94533 -5530
11 I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing
12 is true and correct to the best of my knowledge. Executed in Fairfield, California on this twenty-
TELEPHONE: (707) 427-3998
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
13 eighth day of February, 2024.
14
Daniel R. Mayer
_______________________________________
15
DANIEL R. MAYER
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28 4
DECLARATION OF DANIEL R. MAYER IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS’ EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR
AN ORDER SHORTENING TIME TO HEAR MOTION TO VACATE TRIAL AND PRE-TRIAL
CONFERENCE DATES
EXHIBIT “A”
1 PETER J. HIRSIG (State Bar No. 197993)
peter.hirsig@mcnamaralaw.com
2 DANIEL R. MAYER (State Bar No. 300077)
daniel.mayer@mcnamaralaw.com
3 MCNAMARA, AMBACHER, WHEELER,
HIRSIG & GRAY LLP
4 639 Kentucky Street,
Fairfield, CA 94533
5 Telephone: (707) 427-3998
Facsimile: (707) 427-0268
6
Attorneys for Defendants
7 HARJOBAN KAUR TOOR and BALJIT SINGH TOOR
8 SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF PLACER
9 CIVIL - UNLIMITED JURISDICTION
McNAMARA, AMBACHER, WHEELER, HIRSIG & GRAY LLP
10
639 KENTUCKY STREET, FAIRFIELD, CA 94533 -5530
11
DANIEL GREGORY BONILLA, an Case No. S-CV-0048973
12 individual,
TELEPHONE: (707) 427-3998
DEFENDANTS’ NOTICE OF MOTION
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
13 Plaintiff, AND MOTION FOR AN ORDER
VACATING TRIAL AND PRE-TRIAL
14 vs. CONFERENCE DATES
15 HARJOBAN KAUR TOOR, an individual; Date: February 29, 2024
BALJIT SINGH TOOR, an individual; Time: 8:00 a.m.
16 DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, Dept: 42
Trial Date: 4/2/2024
17 Defendants. Action Filed: 8/19/2022
18
19 TO ALL PARTIES AND THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD:
20 PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that on February 29, 2024 at 8:00 a.m. or as soon thereafter as
21 the matter may be heard in Department 42 and before the Honorable Trisha Hirashima, of the
22 above-entitled Court, located at 10820 Justice Center Dr, Roseville, CA 95678, Defendants
23 HARJOBAN KAUR TOOR and BALJIT SINGH TOOR will and hereby do move 1 this Court for
24 an order vacating the presently-set trial and pre-trial conference dates.
25 This motion is made pursuant to Local Rule 20.1.12 and Rules of Court Rule 3.1332. Good
26 cause exists for the relief sought herein on numerous bases as discussed herein, but generally that
27 Defendants’ counsel have a likely trial conflict, and the nature of the calendar in the lead-up to trial
28 1
Pursuant to Defendants’ concurrently filed ex parte application incorporating this Motion and its papers.
DEFENDANTS’ NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION FOR AN ORDER VACATING TRIAL AND PRE-
TRIAL CONFERENCE DATES
1 as presently set is impracticable for the needs of Defendant.
2 This Motion will be based on this Notice of Motion, the Memorandum of Points and
3 Authorities, the Declaration of Daniel R. Mayer and the exhibits attached thereto, any and all Reply
4 papers filed in response to any Opposition papers filed by the plaintiffs, on the records and file
5 herein, and on such evidence as may be presented at hearing of the motion.
6 Tentative Rulings:
7 Tentative rulings are posted at noon one day prior to each Law and Motion Calendar.
8 Tentative rulings will be the final ruling unless the court and all parties are notified of a request for
9 oral argument by 4pm the day before the scheduled hearing per Local rule 20.2.3. For submitting
McNAMARA, AMBACHER, WHEELER, HIRSIG & GRAY LLP
10 orders after hearing, refer to Local Rule 20.2.5. To obtain a tentative ruling call (916) 408-6480.
639 KENTUCKY STREET, FAIRFIELD, CA 94533 -5530
11 To request an oral argument call (916) 408-6481 or for Tahoe call (530) 584-3463.
12 Dated: February 28, 2024 MCNAMARA, AMBACHER, WHEELER,
TELEPHONE: (707) 427-3998
HIRSIG & GRAY LLP
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
13
14
By: Daniel R. Mayer
15 Peter J. Hirsig
Daniel R. Mayer
16 Attorneys for Defendant
HARJOBAN KAUR TOOR and BALJIT SINGH
17 TOOR
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
DEFENDANTS’ NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION FOR AN ORDER VACATING TRIAL AND PRE-
TRIAL CONFERENCE DATES
1 PETER J. HIRSIG (State Bar No. 197993)
peter.hirsig@mcnamaralaw.com
2 DANIEL R. MAYER (State Bar No. 300077)
daniel.mayer@mcnamaralaw.com
3 MCNAMARA, AMBACHER, WHEELER,
HIRSIG & GRAY LLP
4 639 Kentucky Street,
Fairfield, CA 94533
5 Telephone: (707) 427-3998
Facsimile: (707) 427-0268
6
Attorneys for Defendants
7 HARJOBAN KAUR TOOR and BALJIT SINGH TOOR
8 SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF PLACER
9 CIVIL - UNLIMITED JURISDICTION
McNAMARA, AMBACHER, WHEELER, HIRSIG & GRAY LLP
10
639 KENTUCKY STREET, FAIRFIELD, CA 94533 -5530
11 DANIEL GREGORY BONILLA, an Case No. S-CV-0048973
individual,
12 MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND
TELEPHONE: (707) 427-3998
Plaintiff, AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
13 DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR AN
vs. ORDER VACATING TRIAL AND PRE-
14 TRIAL CONFERENCE DATES
HARJOBAN KAUR TOOR, an individual;
15 BALJIT SINGH TOOR, an individual; Date: February 29, 2024
DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, Time: 8:00 a.m.
16 Dept: 42
Defendants. Trial Date: 4/2/2024
17 Action Filed: 8/19/2022
18 I. INTRODUCTION
19 This matter arises out of an incident that that occurred at approximately 5:58 p.m. on
20 November 13, 2021 in the parking structure located at 1151 Galleria Boulevard in Roseville,
21 California.
22 This matter is set for trial on April 2, 2024. In the first two weeks of February, Plaintiff
23 responded to pre-trial discovery; declined to appear a second independent medical examination by
24 Defendants’ expert Scott C. Berta, M.D.; declined to appear at a second volume of deposition
25 noticed due to new claims which were made and/or arose after Plaintiff’s initial deposition,
26 examination, and discovery responses; and disclosed expert witnesses, in which Plaintiff disclosed
27 fifty-five non-retained expert witnesses.
28 Defendants’ counsel attempted to meet-and-confer on all of these topics, but agreement
MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR AN
ORDER VACATING TRIAL AND PRE-TRIAL CONFERENCE DATES
1 could not be reached. As a result, on February 22, 2024, Defendants made an ex parte application
2 for an order shortening time to hear their motions for (1) leave to take a further volume of Plaintiff’s
3 deposition; for (2) leave to perform a second medical examination; and for (3) a protective order to
4 reduce the list of Plaintiff’s non-retained experts.
5 The Court granted the ex parte, but set the date for hearing of Defendants’ Motions to March
6 12, 2024. Unfortunately, this is too late to protect Defendants from prejudice in regard to Plaintiff’s
7 list of non-retained experts, whether the Motion for Protective Order is granted or not. It will also
8 not permit sufficient time to conduct the further deposition and examination of Plaintiff in a
9 reasonable time before trial, assuming they are ordered.
McNAMARA, AMBACHER, WHEELER, HIRSIG & GRAY LLP
10 Due to the nature of Plaintiff’s list of non-retained experts, and Plaintiff’s counsel’s
639 KENTUCKY STREET, FAIRFIELD, CA 94533 -5530
11 representation during meet-and-confer that they intended to call all 55 witnesses, Defendants’
12 counsel immediately began sending out deposition subpoenas for those witnesses on February 14,
TELEPHONE: (707) 427-3998
ATTORNEYS AT LAW
13 2024. These were noticed, unilaterally, for deposition between March 8 and 15, in order to begin
14 the process. Of course, the vast majority of them will need to be re-set for times convenient to the
15 witnesses and the parties, but a significant fraction may still be required to proceed on dates and
16 times prior to the hearing of Defendants’ Motion for Protective Order on March 12, 2024.1
17 There are other grounds as well. First, there are the basic chronological difficulties
18 presented by (and assuming the Court grants the relief Defendants have requested) the need to
19 conduct a further volume of Plaintiff’s deposition, and a further examination of Plaintiff by Dr.
20 Berta in sufficient time for Dr. Berta to be able to undergo a meaningful deposition, all in a
21 sufficient time before trial so as to permit trial preparation both by counsel and their experts to be
22 completed. Secondly in this regard, it appears that Dr. Berta’s soonest availability for an
23 examination at a location within 75 miles of Plaintiff’s residence is March 25, 2024, which
Preview
1 PETER J. HIRSIG (State Bar No. 197993) peter.hirsig@mcnamaralaw.com 2 DANIEL R. MAYER (State Bar No. 300077) daniel.mayer@mcnamaralaw.com 3 MCNAMARA, AMBACHER, WHEELER, HIRSIG & GRAY LLP 4 639 Kentucky Street, Fairfield, CA 94533 5 Telephone: (707) 427-3998 Facsimile: (707) 427-0268 6 Attorneys for Defendants 7 HARJOBAN KAUR TOOR and BALJIT SINGH TOOR 8 SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF PLACER 9 CIVIL - UNLIMITED JURISDICTION McNAMARA, AMBACHER, WHEELER, HIRSIG & GRAY LLP 10 639 KENTUCKY STREET, FAIRFIELD, CA 94533 -5530 11 DANIEL GREGORY BONILLA, an Case No. S-CV-0048973 12 individual, TELEPHONE: (707) 427-3998 DECLARATION OF DANIEL R. MAYER ATTORNEYS AT LAW 13 Plaintiff, IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS’ EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR AN ORDER 14 vs. SHORTENING TIME TO HEAR MOTION TO VACATE TRIAL AND PRE-TRIAL 15 HARJOBAN KAUR TOOR, an individual; CONFERENCE DATES BALJIT SINGH TOOR, an individual; 16 DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, Date: February 29, 2024 Time: 8:00 a.m. 17 Defendants. Dept: 42 Trial Date: 4/2/2024 18 Action Filed: 8/19/2022 19 20 I, Daniel R. Mayer, declare: 21 1. I am an attorney at law duly admitted to practice before all the courts of the State of 22 California and an associate with the law firm of McNamara, Ambacher, Wheeler, Hirsig 23 & Gray LLP, attorneys for Defendants HARJOBAN KAUR TOOR and BALJIT 24 SINGH TOOR (“Defendants”) in this case. 25 2. I have personal knowledge of the facts set forth below. As to matters stated upon 26 information and belief, I believe them to be true. If called as a witness, could and would 27 testify competently thereto. 28 DECLARATION OF DANIEL R. MAYER IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS’ EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR AN ORDER SHORTENING TIME TO HEAR MOTION TO VACATE TRIAL AND PRE-TRIAL CONFERENCE DATES 1 3. This matter arises out of an incident that that occurred at approximately 5:58 p.m. on 2 November 13, 2021 in the parking structure located at 1151 Galleria Boulevard in 3 Roseville, California. the underlying incident, Plaintiff allegedly sustained a broken left 4 arm from coming into contact with a stop sign. 5 4. Trial in this matter is set for April 2, 2024. The events and circumstances immediately 6 preceding trial, and this Application, have necessitated the filing of the aforementioned 7 Motion by Defendants. 8 5. The Motion is based on the briefing schedule ordered by the Court on Defendants’ prior 9 ex parte for an order shortening time to hear three motions follows: (1) for Protective McNAMARA, AMBACHER, WHEELER, HIRSIG & GRAY LLP 10 Order is based on Plaintiff’s excessive and oppressive expert witness disclosure; (2) for 639 KENTUCKY STREET, FAIRFIELD, CA 94533 -5530 11 Leave to Take a Second Volume of Plaintiff’s Deposition; and (3) for Leave to Perform 12 a Further Physical Examination of Plaintiff, which will be heard according to that TELEPHONE: (707) 427-3998 ATTORNEYS AT LAW 13 schedule on March 12, 2024. A true and correct copy of the complete papers supporting 14 Defendants’ Motion for an Order Vacating Trial and Pre-Trial Conference is attached 15 hereto as Exhibit “A.” 16 a. On March 12, 2024, very little time will remain to complete any discovery 17 ordered by the Court, and to incorporate that into the parties’ trial preparation 18 and completion of expert discovery as to (1) and/or (2); 19 b. In particular, as to (2), the physician who will perform the examination, if leave 20 is granted, Scott Berta, M.D., has his first available date to perform the 21 examination on March 25, 2024, which will essentially not permit him to be 22 meaningfully deposed before trial; 23 c. Also in particular, and as to (3) Defendants’ counsel are compelled to expend 24 significant time and costs in regard to Plaintiff’s fifty-five disclosed non- 25 retained expert witnesses before the date set for hearing of (3). In that latter 26 regard, some twenty-nine of Plaintiff’s non-retained experts are due to be 27 deposed before the hearing of Defendants’ motion in this regard, and every day 28 2 DECLARATION OF DANIEL R. MAYER IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS’ EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR AN ORDER SHORTENING TIME TO HEAR MOTION TO VACATE TRIAL AND PRE-TRIAL CONFERENCE DATES 1 that passes between now and then will involve significant costs and time 2 expenditure to coordinate and confirm those depositions.1 3 6. Otherwise, and as described in the Motion proper, Defendants’ counsel has a significant 4 trial conflict, the parties have been entirely diligent in litigating this matter up to the 5 present, and this is the first continuance or vacation that has yet been requested. 6 7. Defendants’ counsel proposed a stipulation to achieve the same effect as this ex parte 7 and the instant Motion for an Order Vacating Trial and Pre-Trial Conference Dates, and 8 met-and-conferred thereon. However, the parties were unable to reach an agreement and 9 these papers were necessarily filed. In the course of this meet-and-confer, and via email McNAMARA, AMBACHER, WHEELER, HIRSIG & GRAY LLP 10 on February 27, 2024, at 11:06 a.m. and on February 28, 2024 at 9:28 a.m., Defendants’ 639 KENTUCKY STREET, FAIRFIELD, CA 94533 -5530 11 counsel gave notice of this Application. It was not stated whether Plaintiff’s counsel 12 intended to appear at or oppose this Application, but considering the previous course of TELEPHONE: (707) 427-3998 ATTORNEYS AT LAW 13 dealing, opposition is expected. In this fashion, Defendants’ counsel have complied with 14 all applicable rules. A true and correct copy of the proposed stipulation is attached 15 hereto as Exhibit “B.” A true and correct copy of the email correspondence described 16 above is attached hereto as Exhibit “C.” 17 8. Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure § 1005(b), sixteen court days (the ordinary notice 18 period) from February 28, 2024 is March 21, 2024, only twelve days before trial. If 19 Defendants’ Motion were to be heard on this schedule, it would be much too late to 20 avoid prejudice to the parties as just described. Even if the Motion were not to be granted 21 ultimately, this period represents a significant portion of the time remaining before trial, 22 and during which the trial preparation of both parties would be held in a prejudicial 23 limbo. 24 9. At the same time, considering the significance of the discovery concerned by the 25 motions (a substantial portion of expert discovery and highly salient aspects of fact 26 1 Due to an oversight by counsel, the facts of this unilaterally set schedule for non-retained expert depositions were not included in Defendants’ Motion for Protective Order or in the prior ex parte. On the date set for that ex parte, 27 February 22, 2024, the Court declined oral argument, when this and every other point addressed in this Motion and the renewed ex parte application would have been raised with the Court. Counsel regrets the error. 28 3 DECLARATION OF DANIEL R. MAYER IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS’ EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR AN ORDER SHORTENING TIME TO HEAR MOTION TO VACATE TRIAL AND PRE-TRIAL CONFERENCE DATES 1 discovery), the Court’s ruling and the results of that discovery if the Motions are granted 2 will significantly impact all aspects of trial preparation, and due to the time frame which 3 is implicated by the Court’s ruling on Defendants’ prior ex parte, Defendants are at a 4 significant and irreducible risk of substantial prejudice if trial in the matter is not 5 vacated. More specifically, and again, the issues related to depositions of Plaintiff’s non- 6 retained experts are imposing significant prejudice on a day-to-day basis in the present 7 and will do so through the time set for hearing of Defendants’ motion for protective 8 order. As a result of these facts, Defendants, and even Plaintiff, are at risk of imminently 9 suffering irreparable harm. McNAMARA, AMBACHER, WHEELER, HIRSIG & GRAY LLP 10 639 KENTUCKY STREET, FAIRFIELD, CA 94533 -5530 11 I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing 12 is true and correct to the best of my knowledge. Executed in Fairfield, California on this twenty- TELEPHONE: (707) 427-3998 ATTORNEYS AT LAW 13 eighth day of February, 2024. 14 Daniel R. Mayer _______________________________________ 15 DANIEL R. MAYER 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 4 DECLARATION OF DANIEL R. MAYER IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS’ EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR AN ORDER SHORTENING TIME TO HEAR MOTION TO VACATE TRIAL AND PRE-TRIAL CONFERENCE DATES EXHIBIT “A” 1 PETER J. HIRSIG (State Bar No. 197993) peter.hirsig@mcnamaralaw.com 2 DANIEL R. MAYER (State Bar No. 300077) daniel.mayer@mcnamaralaw.com 3 MCNAMARA, AMBACHER, WHEELER, HIRSIG & GRAY LLP 4 639 Kentucky Street, Fairfield, CA 94533 5 Telephone: (707) 427-3998 Facsimile: (707) 427-0268 6 Attorneys for Defendants 7 HARJOBAN KAUR TOOR and BALJIT SINGH TOOR 8 SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF PLACER 9 CIVIL - UNLIMITED JURISDICTION McNAMARA, AMBACHER, WHEELER, HIRSIG & GRAY LLP 10 639 KENTUCKY STREET, FAIRFIELD, CA 94533 -5530 11 DANIEL GREGORY BONILLA, an Case No. S-CV-0048973 12 individual, TELEPHONE: (707) 427-3998 DEFENDANTS’ NOTICE OF MOTION ATTORNEYS AT LAW 13 Plaintiff, AND MOTION FOR AN ORDER VACATING TRIAL AND PRE-TRIAL 14 vs. CONFERENCE DATES 15 HARJOBAN KAUR TOOR, an individual; Date: February 29, 2024 BALJIT SINGH TOOR, an individual; Time: 8:00 a.m. 16 DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, Dept: 42 Trial Date: 4/2/2024 17 Defendants. Action Filed: 8/19/2022 18 19 TO ALL PARTIES AND THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD: 20 PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that on February 29, 2024 at 8:00 a.m. or as soon thereafter as 21 the matter may be heard in Department 42 and before the Honorable Trisha Hirashima, of the 22 above-entitled Court, located at 10820 Justice Center Dr, Roseville, CA 95678, Defendants 23 HARJOBAN KAUR TOOR and BALJIT SINGH TOOR will and hereby do move 1 this Court for 24 an order vacating the presently-set trial and pre-trial conference dates. 25 This motion is made pursuant to Local Rule 20.1.12 and Rules of Court Rule 3.1332. Good 26 cause exists for the relief sought herein on numerous bases as discussed herein, but generally that 27 Defendants’ counsel have a likely trial conflict, and the nature of the calendar in the lead-up to trial 28 1 Pursuant to Defendants’ concurrently filed ex parte application incorporating this Motion and its papers. DEFENDANTS’ NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION FOR AN ORDER VACATING TRIAL AND PRE- TRIAL CONFERENCE DATES 1 as presently set is impracticable for the needs of Defendant. 2 This Motion will be based on this Notice of Motion, the Memorandum of Points and 3 Authorities, the Declaration of Daniel R. Mayer and the exhibits attached thereto, any and all Reply 4 papers filed in response to any Opposition papers filed by the plaintiffs, on the records and file 5 herein, and on such evidence as may be presented at hearing of the motion. 6 Tentative Rulings: 7 Tentative rulings are posted at noon one day prior to each Law and Motion Calendar. 8 Tentative rulings will be the final ruling unless the court and all parties are notified of a request for 9 oral argument by 4pm the day before the scheduled hearing per Local rule 20.2.3. For submitting McNAMARA, AMBACHER, WHEELER, HIRSIG & GRAY LLP 10 orders after hearing, refer to Local Rule 20.2.5. To obtain a tentative ruling call (916) 408-6480. 639 KENTUCKY STREET, FAIRFIELD, CA 94533 -5530 11 To request an oral argument call (916) 408-6481 or for Tahoe call (530) 584-3463. 12 Dated: February 28, 2024 MCNAMARA, AMBACHER, WHEELER, TELEPHONE: (707) 427-3998 HIRSIG & GRAY LLP ATTORNEYS AT LAW 13 14 By: Daniel R. Mayer 15 Peter J. Hirsig Daniel R. Mayer 16 Attorneys for Defendant HARJOBAN KAUR TOOR and BALJIT SINGH 17 TOOR 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 2 DEFENDANTS’ NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION FOR AN ORDER VACATING TRIAL AND PRE- TRIAL CONFERENCE DATES 1 PETER J. HIRSIG (State Bar No. 197993) peter.hirsig@mcnamaralaw.com 2 DANIEL R. MAYER (State Bar No. 300077) daniel.mayer@mcnamaralaw.com 3 MCNAMARA, AMBACHER, WHEELER, HIRSIG & GRAY LLP 4 639 Kentucky Street, Fairfield, CA 94533 5 Telephone: (707) 427-3998 Facsimile: (707) 427-0268 6 Attorneys for Defendants 7 HARJOBAN KAUR TOOR and BALJIT SINGH TOOR 8 SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF PLACER 9 CIVIL - UNLIMITED JURISDICTION McNAMARA, AMBACHER, WHEELER, HIRSIG & GRAY LLP 10 639 KENTUCKY STREET, FAIRFIELD, CA 94533 -5530 11 DANIEL GREGORY BONILLA, an Case No. S-CV-0048973 individual, 12 MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND TELEPHONE: (707) 427-3998 Plaintiff, AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF ATTORNEYS AT LAW 13 DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR AN vs. ORDER VACATING TRIAL AND PRE- 14 TRIAL CONFERENCE DATES HARJOBAN KAUR TOOR, an individual; 15 BALJIT SINGH TOOR, an individual; Date: February 29, 2024 DOES 1 through 50, inclusive, Time: 8:00 a.m. 16 Dept: 42 Defendants. Trial Date: 4/2/2024 17 Action Filed: 8/19/2022 18 I. INTRODUCTION 19 This matter arises out of an incident that that occurred at approximately 5:58 p.m. on 20 November 13, 2021 in the parking structure located at 1151 Galleria Boulevard in Roseville, 21 California. 22 This matter is set for trial on April 2, 2024. In the first two weeks of February, Plaintiff 23 responded to pre-trial discovery; declined to appear a second independent medical examination by 24 Defendants’ expert Scott C. Berta, M.D.; declined to appear at a second volume of deposition 25 noticed due to new claims which were made and/or arose after Plaintiff’s initial deposition, 26 examination, and discovery responses; and disclosed expert witnesses, in which Plaintiff disclosed 27 fifty-five non-retained expert witnesses. 28 Defendants’ counsel attempted to meet-and-confer on all of these topics, but agreement MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR AN ORDER VACATING TRIAL AND PRE-TRIAL CONFERENCE DATES 1 could not be reached. As a result, on February 22, 2024, Defendants made an ex parte application 2 for an order shortening time to hear their motions for (1) leave to take a further volume of Plaintiff’s 3 deposition; for (2) leave to perform a second medical examination; and for (3) a protective order to 4 reduce the list of Plaintiff’s non-retained experts. 5 The Court granted the ex parte, but set the date for hearing of Defendants’ Motions to March 6 12, 2024. Unfortunately, this is too late to protect Defendants from prejudice in regard to Plaintiff’s 7 list of non-retained experts, whether the Motion for Protective Order is granted or not. It will also 8 not permit sufficient time to conduct the further deposition and examination of Plaintiff in a 9 reasonable time before trial, assuming they are ordered. McNAMARA, AMBACHER, WHEELER, HIRSIG & GRAY LLP 10 Due to the nature of Plaintiff’s list of non-retained experts, and Plaintiff’s counsel’s 639 KENTUCKY STREET, FAIRFIELD, CA 94533 -5530 11 representation during meet-and-confer that they intended to call all 55 witnesses, Defendants’ 12 counsel immediately began sending out deposition subpoenas for those witnesses on February 14, TELEPHONE: (707) 427-3998 ATTORNEYS AT LAW 13 2024. These were noticed, unilaterally, for deposition between March 8 and 15, in order to begin 14 the process. Of course, the vast majority of them will need to be re-set for times convenient to the 15 witnesses and the parties, but a significant fraction may still be required to proceed on dates and 16 times prior to the hearing of Defendants’ Motion for Protective Order on March 12, 2024.1 17 There are other grounds as well. First, there are the basic chronological difficulties 18 presented by (and assuming the Court grants the relief Defendants have requested) the need to 19 conduct a further volume of Plaintiff’s deposition, and a further examination of Plaintiff by Dr. 20 Berta in sufficient time for Dr. Berta to be able to undergo a meaningful deposition, all in a 21 sufficient time before trial so as to permit trial preparation both by counsel and their experts to be 22 completed. Secondly in this regard, it appears that Dr. Berta’s soonest availability for an 23 examination at a location within 75 miles of Plaintiff’s residence is March 25, 2024, which