Preview
1 John S. Rueppel (SBN: 267467)
Angie Lam (SBN: 244719)
2 JOHNSTON, KINNEY & ZULAICA LLP
101 Montgomery Street, Suite 1600
3 San Francisco, California 94104
4 Telephone: (415) 693-0550
Facsimile: (415) 693-0500
5 Email: john@jkzllp.com
angie.lam@jkzllp.com
6
Attorneys for Plaintiff
7
Lisa Keith
8
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
9
IN THE COUNTY OF NAPA
10
11 LISA KEITH, CASE NO: 22CV001269
12 Plaintiff, SEPARATE STATEMENT IN SUPPORT
PLAINTIFF LISA KEITH’S MOTION TO
13 v. COMPEL FURTHER RESPONSES; AND
PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS FROM
14 CELESTE WHITE, an individual, ROBERT PLATINUM ADVISORS, LLC AND
WHITE, an individual, the VALLEY ROCK KENWOOD INVESTMENTS, LLC; AND
15 FOUNDATION, aka THE BAR 49 FOUNDATION, FOR MONETARY SANCTIONS
a charitable organization, and DOES 1-50,
16
INCLUSIVE,
17 Date: March 19, 2024
Defendants. Time: 8:30 a.m.
18 Judge: Hon. Scott R.L. Young
Dept.: B
19 Complaint Filed: October 25, 2022
FAC Filed: March 8, 2023
20 Trial Date: April 2, 2024
21
22 Pursuant to California Rule of Court 3.1345, Plaintiff Lisa Keith (“Plaintiff”) hereby submits
23 this Separate Statement in support of her Motion to Compel Further Responses and Production of
24 Documents from Platinum Advisors LLC (“Platinum”) and Kenwood Investments LLC
25 (“Kenwood”), and for Monetary Sanctions.
26 ///
27 ///
28 ///
1
SEPARATE STATEMENT ISO MOT. TO COMPEL FURTHER RESPONSE FROM KENWOOD & PLATINUM
1 PLAINTIFF’S DEPOSITION SUBPOENA FOR PERSONAL APPEARANCE AND
2 PRODUCTION OF BUSINESS RECORDS TO PLATINUM ADVISORS LLC RESPONSES IN
3 DISPUTE
4 REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 1:
5 All DOCUMENTS reflecting any and all COMMUNICATIONS of any kind or nature that
6 PLATINUM ADVISORS LLC have had with any PERSON, from August 20, 2020, to the present,
7 making any mention of LISA KEITH and/or CELESTE WHITE.
8 RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 1:
9 No written response was provided. Documents Bate Stamped KP0000001-KP0000300 were
10 produced.
11 REASON WHY FURTHER RESPONSE SHOULD BE COMPELLED:
12 Section 2031.310(a) of the Code of Civ. Proc. permits the demanding party to move for an
13 order compelling further responses to the demand if the demanding party deems that any of the
14 following apply: (1) a statement of compliance with the demand is incomplete, (2) a representation of
15 inability to comply is inadequate, incomplete, or evasive, or (3) an objection in the response is without
16 merit or too general.
17 Platinum Advisors LLC’s response is inadequate, incomplete, and evasive. Per the Affidavit of
18 Custodian Records for Platinum Advisors LLC, the records were prepared by searching the electronic
19 repository at Platinum Advisors LLC. “A party cannot plead ignorance to information which can be
20 obtained from sources under his control. This includes a party’s lawyer, agents or employees, family
21 members and experts.” See Deyo v. Kilbourne (1978) 84 Cal.App.3d 771, 782. Furthermore, these
22 items need not be in the actual possession of a party but it must at least be within the party’s custody or
23 control pursuant to Code of Civ. Proc §2031.010. As the Defendants hired Darius Anderson, it would
24 be reasonable to have such communications. Thus, the response to this request is evasive and does not
25 comply with Code of Civ. Proc. §2030.220.
26 Furthermore, “Any party may obtain discovery regarding any matter, not privileged, that is
27 relevant to the subject matter involved in the pending action…if it appears reasonably calculated to
28 lead to discovery of admissible evidence.” (Code of Civ. Proc. §2017.010) Such relevant information
2
SEPARATE STATEMENT ISO MOT. TO COMPEL FURTHER RESPONSE FROM KENWOOD & PLATINUM
1 is pertinent “if it might reasonably assist a party in evaluating the case, preparing for trial, or
2 facilitating settlement of.” Gonzalez v. Superior Court (1995) 33 Cal.App.4th 1539, 1546. At a
3 minimum, this request is “reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence”
4 regarding Plaintiff’ claims or Defendants’ defenses to the claims.
5 REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 2:
6 All DOCUMENTS reflecting any and all COMMUNICATIONS of any kind or nature that
7 PLATINUM ADVISORS LLC have had with any PERSON, from August 20, 2020, to the present,
8 making any mention of the lawsuit filed by LISA KEITH in Napa County Superior Court, Case No.
9 26-36111.
10 RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 1:
11 No written response was provided. Documents Bate Stamped KP0000001-KP0000300 were
12 produced.
13 REASON WHY FURTHER RESPONSE SHOULD BE COMPELLED:
14 Section 2031.310(a) of the Code of Civ. Proc. permits the demanding party to move for an
15 order compelling further responses to the demand if the demanding party deems that any of the
16 following apply: (1) a statement of compliance with the demand is incomplete, (2) a representation of
17 inability to comply is inadequate, incomplete, or evasive, or (3) an objection in the response is without
18 merit or too general.
19 Platinum Advisors LLC’s response is inadequate, incomplete, and evasive. Per the Affidavit of
20 Custodian Records for Platinum Advisors LLC, the records were prepared by searching the electronic
21 repository at Platinum Advisors LLC. “A party cannot plead ignorance to information which can be
22 obtained from sources under his control. This includes a party’s lawyer, agents or employees, family
23 members and experts.” See Deyo v. Kilbourne (1978) 84 Cal.App.3d 771, 782. Furthermore, these
24 items need not be in the actual possession of a party but it must at least be within the party’s custody or
25 control pursuant to Code of Civ. Proc §2031.010. As the Defendants hired Darius Anderson, it would
26 be reasonable to have such communications. Thus, the response to this request is evasive and does not
27 comply with Code of Civ. Proc. §2030.220.
28
3
SEPARATE STATEMENT ISO MOT. TO COMPEL FURTHER RESPONSE FROM KENWOOD & PLATINUM
1 Furthermore, “Any party may obtain discovery regarding any matter, not privileged, that is
2 relevant to the subject matter involved in the pending action…if it appears reasonably calculated to
3 lead to discovery of admissible evidence.” (Code of Civ. Proc. §2017.010) Such relevant information
4 is pertinent “if it might reasonably assist a party in evaluating the case, preparing for trial, or
5 facilitating settlement of.” Gonzalez v. Superior Court (1995) 33 Cal.App.4th 1539, 1546. At a
6 minimum, this request is “reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence”
7 regarding Plaintiff’ claims or Defendants’ defenses to the claims.
8 REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 3:
9 All DOCUMENTS reflecting any and all COMMUNICATIONS of any kind or nature that
10 PLATINUM ADVISORS LLC had with any PERSON from August 20, 2020, to the present in which
11 PLATINUM ADVISORS LLC has stated that CELESTE WHITE had prevailed in a lawsuit against
12 LISA KEITH.
13 RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 3:
14 No written response was provided. Documents Bate Stamped KP0000001-KP0000300 were
15 produced.
16 REASON WHY FURTHER RESPONSE SHOULD BE COMPELLED:
17 Section 2031.310(a) of the Code of Civ. Proc. permits the demanding party to move for an
18 order compelling further responses to the demand if the demanding party deems that any of the
19 following apply: (1) a statement of compliance with the demand is incomplete, (2) a representation of
20 inability to comply is inadequate, incomplete, or evasive, or (3) an objection in the response is without
21 merit or too general.
22 Platinum Advisors LLC’s response is inadequate, incomplete, and evasive. Per the Affidavit of
23 Custodian Records for Platinum Advisors LLC, the records were prepared by searching the electronic
24 repository at Platinum Advisors LLC. “A party cannot plead ignorance to information which can be
25 obtained from sources under his control. This includes a party’s lawyer, agents or employees, family
26 members and experts.” See Deyo v. Kilbourne (1978) 84 Cal.App.3d 771, 782. Furthermore, these
27 items need not be in the actual possession of a party but it must at least be within the party’s custody or
28 control pursuant to Code of Civ. Proc §2031.010. As the Defendants hired Darius Anderson, it would
4
SEPARATE STATEMENT ISO MOT. TO COMPEL FURTHER RESPONSE FROM KENWOOD & PLATINUM
1 be reasonable to have such communications. Thus, the response to this request is evasive and does not
2 comply with Code of Civ. Proc. §2030.220.
3 Furthermore, “Any party may obtain discovery regarding any matter, not privileged, that is
4 relevant to the subject matter involved in the pending action…if it appears reasonably calculated to
5 lead to discovery of admissible evidence.” (Code of Civ. Proc. §2017.010) Such relevant information
6 is pertinent “if it might reasonably assist a party in evaluating the case, preparing for trial, or
7 facilitating settlement of.” Gonzalez v. Superior Court (1995) 33 Cal.App.4th 1539, 1546. At a
8 minimum, this request is “reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence”
9 regarding Plaintiff’ claims or Defendants’ defenses to the claims.
10 REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 8
11 All DOCUMENTS reflecting any and all COMMUNICATIONS of any kind or nature that
12 PLATINUM ADVISORS LLC have had with SINGER ASSOCIATES INC. making any mention of
13 LISA KEITH.
14 RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 8:
15 No written response was provided. Documents Bate Stamped KP0000001-KP0000300 were
16 produced.
17 REASON WHY FURTHER RESPONSE SHOULD BE COMPELLED:
18 Section 2031.310(a) of the Code of Civ. Proc. permits the demanding party to move for an
19 order compelling further responses to the demand if the demanding party deems that any of the
20 following apply: (1) a statement of compliance with the demand is incomplete, (2) a representation of
21 inability to comply is inadequate, incomplete, or evasive, or (3) an objection in the response is without
22 merit or too general.
23 Platinum Advisors LLC’s response is inadequate, incomplete, and evasive. Per the Affidavit of
24 Custodian Records for Platinum Advisors LLC, the records were prepared by searching the electronic
25 repository at Platinum Advisors LLC. “A party cannot plead ignorance to information which can be
26 obtained from sources under his control. This includes a party’s lawyer, agents or employees, family
27 members and experts.” See Deyo v. Kilbourne (1978) 84 Cal.App.3d 771, 782. Furthermore, these
28 items need not be in the actual possession of a party but it must at least be within the party’s custody or
5
SEPARATE STATEMENT ISO MOT. TO COMPEL FURTHER RESPONSE FROM KENWOOD & PLATINUM
1 control pursuant to Code of Civ. Proc §2031.010. As the Defendants hired Darius Anderson, it would
2 be reasonable to have such communications. Thus, the response to this request is evasive and does not
3 comply with Code of Civ. Proc. §2030.220.
4 Furthermore, “Any party may obtain discovery regarding any matter, not privileged, that is
5 relevant to the subject matter involved in the pending action…if it appears reasonably calculated to
6 lead to discovery of admissible evidence.” (Code of Civ. Proc. §2017.010) Such relevant information
7 is pertinent “if it might reasonably assist a party in evaluating the case, preparing for trial, or
8 facilitating settlement of.” Gonzalez v. Superior Court (1995) 33 Cal.App.4th 1539, 1546. At a
9 minimum, this request is “reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence”
10 regarding Plaintiff’ claims or Defendants’ defenses to the claims.
11 REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 9:
12 All DOCUMENTS reflecting any and all COMMUNICATIONS of any kind or nature that
13 PLATINUM ADVISORS LLC have had with SINGER ASSOCIATES INC. making any mention of
14 the lawsuit filed by LISA KEITH in Napa County Superior Court, Case No. 26-36111.
15 RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 9:
16 No written response was provided. Documents Bate Stamped KP0000001-KP0000300 were
17 produced.
18 REASON WHY FURTHER RESPONSE SHOULD BE COMPELLED:
19 Section 2031.310(a) of the Code of Civ. Proc. permits the demanding party to move for an
20 order compelling further responses to the demand if the demanding party deems that any of the
21 following apply: (1) a statement of compliance with the demand is incomplete, (2) a representation of
22 inability to comply is inadequate, incomplete, or evasive, or (3) an objection in the response is without
23 merit or too general.
24 Platinum Advisors LLC’s response is inadequate, incomplete, and evasive. Per the Affidavit of
25 Custodian Records for Platinum Advisors LLC, the records were prepared by searching the electronic
26 repository at Platinum Advisors LLC. “A party cannot plead ignorance to information which can be
27 obtained from sources under his control. This includes a party’s lawyer, agents or employees, family
28 members and experts.” See Deyo v. Kilbourne (1978) 84 Cal.App.3d 771, 782. Furthermore, these
6
SEPARATE STATEMENT ISO MOT. TO COMPEL FURTHER RESPONSE FROM KENWOOD & PLATINUM
1 items need not be in the actual possession of a party but it must at least be within the party’s custody or
2 control pursuant to Code of Civ. Proc §2031.010. As the Defendants hired Darius Anderson, it would
3 be reasonable to have such communications. Thus, the response to this request is evasive and does not
4 comply with Code of Civ. Proc. §2030.220.
5 Furthermore, “Any party may obtain discovery regarding any matter, not privileged, that is
6 relevant to the subject matter involved in the pending action…if it appears reasonably calculated to
7 lead to discovery of admissible evidence.” (Code of Civ. Proc. §2017.010) Such relevant information
8 is pertinent “if it might reasonably assist a party in evaluating the case, preparing for trial, or
9 facilitating settlement of.” Gonzalez v. Superior Court (1995) 33 Cal.App.4th 1539, 1546. At a
10 minimum, this request is “reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence”
11 regarding Plaintiff’ claims or Defendants’ defenses to the claims.
12 REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 10:
13 All DOCUMENTS reflecting any and all COMMUNICATIONS of any kind or nature that
14 PLATINUM ADVISORS LLC have had with SINGER ASSOCIATES INC. making any mention of
15 CELESTE WHITE.
16 RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 10:
17 No written response was provided. Documents Bate Stamped KP0000001-KP0000300 were
18 produced.
19 REASON WHY FURTHER RESPONSE SHOULD BE COMPELLED:
20 Section 2031.310(a) of the Code of Civ. Proc. permits the demanding party to move for an
21 order compelling further responses to the demand if the demanding party deems that any of the
22 following apply: (1) a statement of compliance with the demand is incomplete, (2) a representation of
23 inability to comply is inadequate, incomplete, or evasive, or (3) an objection in the response is without
24 merit or too general.
25 Platinum Advisors LLC’s response is inadequate, incomplete, and evasive. Per the Affidavit of
26 Custodian Records for Platinum Advisors LLC, the records were prepared by searching the electronic
27 repository at Platinum Advisors LLC. “A party cannot plead ignorance to information which can be
28 obtained from sources under his control. This includes a party’s lawyer, agents or employees, family
7
SEPARATE STATEMENT ISO MOT. TO COMPEL FURTHER RESPONSE FROM KENWOOD & PLATINUM
1 members and experts.” See Deyo v. Kilbourne (1978) 84 Cal.App.3d 771, 782. Furthermore, these
2 items need not be in the actual possession of a party but it must at least be within the party’s custody or
3 control pursuant to Code of Civ. Proc §2031.010. As the Defendants hired Darius Anderson, it would
4 be reasonable to have such communications. Thus, the response to this request is evasive and does not
5 comply with Code of Civ. Proc. §2030.220.
6 Furthermore, “Any party may obtain discovery regarding any matter, not privileged, that is
7 relevant to the subject matter involved in the pending action…if it appears reasonably calculated to
8 lead to discovery of admissible evidence.” (Code of Civ. Proc. §2017.010) Such relevant information
9 is pertinent “if it might reasonably assist a party in evaluating the case, preparing for trial, or
10 facilitating settlement of.” Gonzalez v. Superior Court (1995) 33 Cal.App.4th 1539, 1546. At a
11 minimum, this request is “reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence”
12 regarding Plaintiff’ claims or Defendants’ defenses to the claims.
13 REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 24:
14 All DOCUMENTS and COMMUNICATIONS RELATED to metrics and/or measurements of
15 the publication and/or dissemination of press releases and/or social media posts, indicating any
16 qualities such as the extent of dissemination, the number of views, the number of clicks, or the likes or
17 dislikes or any reaction to the press releases and/or social media posts which specifically or generally
18 make any mention of CELESTE WHITE prevailing in a lawsuit against LISA KEITH.
19 RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 24:
20 No written response was provided. Documents Bate Stamped KP0000001-KP0000300 were produced.
21 REASON WHY FURTHER RESPONSE SHOULD BE COMPELLED:
22 Section 2031.310(a) of the Code of Civ. Proc. permits the demanding party to move for an
23 order compelling further responses to the demand if the demanding party deems that any of the
24 following apply: (1) a statement of compliance with the demand is incomplete, (2) a representation of
25 inability to comply is inadequate, incomplete, or evasive, or (3) an objection in the response is without
26 merit or too general.
27 Platinum Advisors LLC’s response is inadequate, incomplete, and evasive. Per the Affidavit of
28 Custodian Records for Platinum Advisors LLC, the records were prepared by searching the electronic
8
SEPARATE STATEMENT ISO MOT. TO COMPEL FURTHER RESPONSE FROM KENWOOD & PLATINUM
1 repository at Platinum Advisors LLC. “A party cannot plead ignorance to information which can be
2 obtained from sources under his control. This includes a party’s lawyer, agents or employees, family
3 members and experts.” See Deyo v. Kilbourne (1978) 84 Cal.App.3d 771, 782. Furthermore, these
4 items need not be in the actual possession of a party but it must at least be within the party’s custody or
5 control pursuant to Code of Civ. Proc §2031.010. As the Defendants hired Darius Anderson, it would
6 be reasonable to have such communications. Thus, the response to this request is evasive and does not
7 comply with Code of Civ. Proc. §2030.220.
8 Furthermore, “Any party may obtain discovery regarding any matter, not privileged, that is
9 relevant to the subject matter involved in the pending action…if it appears reasonably calculated to
10 lead to discovery of admissible evidence.” (Code of Civ. Proc. §2017.010) Such relevant information
11 is pertinent “if it might reasonably assist a party in evaluating the case, preparing for trial, or
12 facilitating settlement of.” Gonzalez v. Superior Court (1995) 33 Cal.App.4th 1539, 1546. At a
13 minimum, this request is “reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence”
14 regarding Plaintiff’ claims or Defendants’ defenses to the claims.
15 PLAINTIFF’S DEPOSITION SUBPOENA FOR PERSONAL APPEARANCE AND
16 PRODUCTION OF BUSINESS RECORDS TO KENWOOD INVESTMENTS LLC
17 RESPONSES IN DISPUTE
18 REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 1:
19 All DOCUMENTS reflecting any and all COMMUNICATIONS of any kind or nature that
20 KENWOOD INVESTMENTS LLC have had with any PERSON, from August 20, 2020, to the
21 present, making any mention of LISA KEITH and/or CELESTE WHITE.
22 RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 1:
23 No written response was provided. Documents Bate Stamped KP0000001-KP0000300 were produced.
24 REASON WHY FURTHER RESPONSE SHOULD BE COMPELLED:
25 Section 2031.310(a) of the Code of Civ. Proc. permits the demanding party to move for an
26 order compelling further responses to the demand if the demanding party deems that any of the
27 following apply: (1) a statement of compliance with the demand is incomplete, (2) a representation of
28
9
SEPARATE STATEMENT ISO MOT. TO COMPEL FURTHER RESPONSE FROM KENWOOD & PLATINUM
1 inability to comply is inadequate, incomplete, or evasive, or (3) an objection in the response is without
2 merit or too general.
3 Kenwood Investments LLC’s response is inadequate, incomplete, and evasive. Per the
4 Affidavit of Custodian Records for Kenwood Investments LLC, the records were prepared by
5 searching the electronic repository at Kenwood Investments LLC. “A party cannot plead ignorance to
6 information which can be obtained from sources under his control. This includes a party’s lawyer,
7 agents or employees, family members and experts.” See Deyo v. Kilbourne (1978) 84 Cal.App.3d 771,
8 782. Furthermore, these items need not be in the actual possession of a party but it must at least be
9 within the party’s custody or control pursuant to Code of Civ. Proc §2031.010. As the Defendants
10 hired Darius Anderson, it would be reasonable to have such communications. Thus, the response to
11 this request is evasive and does not comply with Code of Civ. Proc. §2030.220.
12 Furthermore, “Any party may obtain discovery regarding any matter, not privileged, that is
13 relevant to the subject matter involved in the pending action…if it appears reasonably calculated to
14 lead to discovery of admissible evidence.” (Code of Civ. Proc. §2017.010) Such relevant information
15 is pertinent “if it might reasonably assist a party in evaluating the case, preparing for trial, or
16 facilitating settlement of.” Gonzalez v. Superior Court (1995) 33 Cal.App.4th 1539, 1546. At a
17 minimum, this request is “reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence”
18 regarding Plaintiff’ claims or Defendants’ defenses to the claims.
19 REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 2:
20 All DOCUMENTS reflecting any and all COMMUNICATIONS of any kind or nature that
21 KENWOOD INVESTMENTS LLC have had with any PERSON, from August 20, 2020, to the
22 present, making any mention of the lawsuit filed by LISA KEITH in Napa County Superior Court,
23 Case No. 26-36111.
24 RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 2:
25 No written response was provided. Documents Bate Stamped KP0000001-KP0000300 were produced.
26 REASON WHY FURTHER RESPONSE SHOULD BE COMPELLED:
27 Section 2031.310(a) of the Code of Civ. Proc. permits the demanding party to move for an
28 order compelling further responses to the demand if the demanding party deems that any of the
10
SEPARATE STATEMENT ISO MOT. TO COMPEL FURTHER RESPONSE FROM KENWOOD & PLATINUM
1 following apply: (1) a statement of compliance with the demand is incomplete, (2) a representation of
2 inability to comply is inadequate, incomplete, or evasive, or (3) an objection in the response is without
3 merit or too general.
4 Kenwood Investments LLC’s response is inadequate, incomplete, and evasive. Per the
5 Affidavit of Custodian Records for Kenwood Investments LLC, the records were prepared by
6 searching the electronic repository at Kenwood Investments LLC. “A party cannot plead ignorance to
7 information which can be obtained from sources under his control. This includes a party’s lawyer,
8 agents or employees, family members and experts.” See Deyo v. Kilbourne (1978) 84 Cal.App.3d 771,
9 782. Furthermore, these items need not be in the actual possession of a party but it must at least be
10 within the party’s custody or control pursuant to Code of Civ. Proc §2031.010. As the Defendants
11 hired Darius Anderson , it would be reasonable to have such communications. Thus, the response to
12 this request is evasive and does not comply with Code of Civ. Proc. §2030.220.
13 Furthermore, “Any party may obtain discovery regarding any matter, not privileged, that is
14 relevant to the subject matter involved in the pending action…if it appears reasonably calculated to
15 lead to discovery of admissible evidence.” (Code of Civ. Proc. §2017.010) Such relevant information
16 is pertinent “if it might reasonably assist a party in evaluating the case, preparing for trial, or
17 facilitating settlement of.” Gonzalez v. Superior Court (1995) 33 Cal.App.4th 1539, 1546. At a
18 minimum, this request is “reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence”
19 regarding Plaintiff’ claims or Defendants’ defenses to the claims.
20 REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 3:
21 All DOCUMENTS reflecting any and all COMMUNICATIONS of any kind or nature that
22 KENWOOD INVESTMENTS LLC have had with any PERSON from August 20, 2020, to the present
23 in which KENWOOD INVESTMENTS LLC has stated that CELESTE WHITE prevailed in a lawsuit
24 against LISA KEITH.
25 RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 3:
26 No written response was provided. Documents Bate Stamped KP0000001-KP0000300 were produced.
27 //
28 //
11
SEPARATE STATEMENT ISO MOT. TO COMPEL FURTHER RESPONSE FROM KENWOOD & PLATINUM
1 REASON WHY FURTHER RESPONSE SHOULD BE COMPELLED:
2 Section 2031.310(a) of the Code of Civ. Proc. permits the demanding party to move for an
3 order compelling further responses to the demand if the demanding party deems that any of the
4 following apply: (1) a statement of compliance with the demand is incomplete, (2) a representation of
5 inability to comply is inadequate, incomplete, or evasive, or (3) an objection in the response is without
6 merit or too general.
7 Kenwood Investments LLC and Platinum Advisors LLC’s response is inadequate, incomplete,
8 and evasive. Per the Affidavit of Custodian Records for Kenwood Investments LLC, the records were
9 prepared by searching the electronic repository at Kenwood Investments LLC. “A party cannot plead
10 ignorance to information which can be obtained from sources under his control. This includes a party’s
11 lawyer, agents or employees, family members and experts.” See Deyo v. Kilbourne (1978) 84
12 Cal.App.3d 771, 782. Furthermore, these items need not be in the actual possession of a party but it
13 must at least be within the party’s custody or control pursuant to Code of Civ. Proc §2031.010. As the
14 Defendants hired Darius Anderson, it would be reasonable to have such communications. Thus, the
15 response to this request is evasive and does not comply with Code of Civ. Proc. §2030.220.
16 Furthermore, “Any party may obtain discovery regarding any matter, not privileged, that is
17 relevant to the subject matter involved in the pending action…if it appears reasonably calculated to
18 lead to discovery of admissible evidence.” (Code of Civ. Proc. §2017.010) Such relevant information
19 is pertinent “if it might reasonably assist a party in evaluating the case, preparing for trial, or
20 facilitating settlement of.” Gonzalez v. Superior Court (1995) 33 Cal.App.4th 1539, 1546. At a
21 minimum, this request is “reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence”
22 regarding Plaintiff’ claims or Defendants’ defenses to the claims.
23 REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 8:
24 All DOCUMENTS reflecting any and all COMMUNICATIONS of any kind or nature that
25 KENWOOD INVESTMENTS LLC have had with SINGER ASSOCIATES, INC. making any
26 mention of LISA KEITH.
27 RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 8:
28 No written response was provided. Documents Bate Stamped KP0000001-KP0000300 were produced.
12
SEPARATE STATEMENT ISO MOT. TO COMPEL FURTHER RESPONSE FROM KENWOOD & PLATINUM
1 REASON WHY FURTHER RESPONSE SHOULD BE COMPELLED:
2 Section 2031.310(a) of the Code of Civ. Proc. permits the demanding party to move for an
3 order compelling further responses to the demand if the demanding party deems that any of the
4 following apply: (1) a statement of compliance with the demand is incomplete, (2) a representation of
5 inability to comply is inadequate, incomplete, or evasive, or (3) an objection in the response is without
6 merit or too general.
7 Kenwood Investments LLC’s response is inadequate, incomplete, and evasive. Per the
8 Affidavit of Custodian Records for Kenwood Investments LLC, the records were prepared by
9 searching the electronic repository at Kenwood Investments LLC. “A party cannot plead ignorance to
10 information which can be obtained from sources under his control. This includes a party’s lawyer,
11 agents or employees, family members and experts.” See Deyo v. Kilbourne (1978) 84 Cal.App.3d 771,
12 782. Furthermore, these items need not be in the actual possession of a party but it must at least be
13 within the party’s custody or control pursuant to Code of Civ. Proc §2031.010. As the Defendants
14 hired Darius Anderson, it would be reasonable to have such communications. Thus, the response to
15 this request is evasive and does not comply with Code of Civ. Proc. §2030.220.
16 Furthermore, “Any party may obtain discovery regarding any matter, not privileged, that is
17 relevant to the subject matter involved in the pending action…if it appears reasonably calculated to
18 lead to discovery of admissible evidence.” (Code of Civ. Proc. §2017.010) Such relevant information
19 is pertinent “if it might reasonably assist a party in evaluating the case, preparing for trial, or
20 facilitating settlement of.” Gonzalez v. Superior Court (1995) 33 Cal.App.4th 1539, 1546. At a
21 minimum, this request is “reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence”
22 regarding Plaintiff’ claims or Defendants’ defenses to the claims.
23 REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 9:
24 All DOCUMENTS reflecting any and all COMMUNICATIONS of any kind or nature that
25 KENWOOD INVESTMENTS LLC have had with SINGER ASSOCIATES, INC. making any
26 mention of the lawsuit filed by LISA KEITH in Napa County Superior Court, Case No. 26-36111.
27 RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 9:
28 No written response was provided. Documents Bate Stamped KP0000001-KP0000300 were produced.
13
SEPARATE STATEMENT ISO MOT. TO COMPEL FURTHER RESPONSE FROM KENWOOD & PLATINUM
1 REASON WHY FURTHER RESPONSE SHOULD BE COMPELLED:
2 Section 2031.310(a) of the Code of Civ. Proc. permits the demanding party to move for an
3 order compelling further responses to the demand if the demanding party deems that any of the
4 following apply: (1) a statement of compliance with the demand is incomplete, (2) a representation of
5 inability to comply is inadequate, incomplete, or evasive, or (3) an objection in the response is without
6 merit or too general.
7 Kenwood Investments LLC’s response is inadequate, incomplete, and evasive. Per the
8 Affidavit of Custodian Records for Kenwood Investments LLC, the records were prepared by
9 searching the electronic repository at Kenwood Investments LLC. “A party cannot plead ignorance to
10 information which can be obtained from sources under his control. This includes a party’s lawyer,
11 agents or employees, family members and experts.” See Deyo v. Kilbourne (1978) 84 Cal.App.3d 771,
12 782. Furthermore, these items need not be in the actual possession of a party but it must at least be
13 within the party’s custody or control pursuant to Code of Civ. Proc §2031.010. As the Defendants
14 hired Darius Anderson, it would be reasonable to have such communications. Thus, the response to
15 this request is evasive and does not comply with Code of Civ. Proc. §2030.220.
16 Furthermore, “Any party may obtain discovery regarding any matter, not privileged, that is
17 relevant to the subject matter involved in the pending action…if it appears reasonably calculated to
18 lead to discovery of admissible evidence.” (Code of Civ. Proc. §2017.010) Such relevant information
19 is pertinent “if it might reasonably assist a party in evaluating the case, preparing for trial, or
20 facilitating settlement of.” Gonzalez v. Superior Court (1995) 33 Cal.App.4th 1539, 1546. At a
21 minimum, this request is “reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence”
22 regarding Plaintiff’ claims or Defendants’ defenses to the claims.
23 REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 10:
24 All DOCUMENTS reflecting any and all COMMUNICATIONS of any kind or nature that
25 KENWOOD INVESTMENTS LLC have had with SAM SINGER ASSOCIATES, INC. making any
26 mention of CELESTE WHITE.
27 RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 10:
28 No written response was provided. Documents Bate Stamped KP0000001-KP0000300 were produced.
14
SEPARATE STATEMENT ISO MOT. TO COMPEL FURTHER RESPONSE FROM KENWOOD & PLATINUM
1 REASON WHY FURTHER RESPONSE SHOULD BE COMPELLED:
2 Section 2031.310(a) of the Code of Civ. Proc. permits the demanding party to move for an
3 order compelling further responses to the demand if the demanding party deems that any of the
4 following apply: (1) a statement of compliance with the demand is incomplete, (2) a representation of
5 inability to comply is inadequate, incomplete, or evasive, or (3) an objection in the response is without
6 merit or too general.
7 Kenwood Investments LLC’s response is inadequate, incomplete, and evasive. Per the
8 Affidavit of Custodian Records for Kenwood Investments LLC, the records were prepared by
9 searching the electronic repository at Kenwood Investments LLC. “A party cannot plead ignorance to
10 information which can be obtained from sources under his control. This includes a party’s lawyer,
11 agents or employees, family members and experts.” See Deyo v. Kilbourne (1978) 84 Cal.App.3d 771,
12 782. Furthermore, these items need not be in the actual possession of a party but it must at least be
13 within the party’s custody or control pursuant to Code of Civ. Proc §2031.010. As the Defendants
14 hired Darius Anderson, it would be reasonable to have such communications. Thus, the response to
15 this request is evasive and does not comply with Code of Civ. Proc. §2030.220.
16 Furthermore, “Any party may obtain discovery regarding any matter, not privileged, that is
17 relevant to the subject matter involved in the pending action…if it appears reasonably calculated to
18 lead to discovery of admissible evidence.” (Code of Civ. Proc. §2017.010) Such relevant information
19 is pertinent “if it might reasonably assist a party in evaluating the case, preparing for trial, or
20 facilitating settlement of.” Gonzalez v. Superior Court (1995) 33 Cal.App.4th 1539, 1546. At a
21 minimum, this request is “reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence”
22 regarding Plaintiff’ claims or Defendants’ defenses to the claims.
23 REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 24:
24 All DOCUMENTS and COMMUNICATIONS RELATED to metrics and/or measurements of
25 the publication and/or dissemination of press releases and/or social media posts, indicating any
26 qualities such as the extent of dissemination, the number of views, the number of clicks, or the likes or
27 dislikes or any reaction to the press releases and/or social media posts which specifically or generally
28 make any mention of CELESTE WHITE prevailing in a lawsuit against LISA KEITH.
15
SEPARATE STATEMENT ISO MOT. TO COMPEL FURTHER RESPONSE FROM KENWOOD & PLATINUM
1 RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 24:
2 No written response was provided. Documents Bate Stamped KP0000001-KP0000300 were produced.
3 REASON WHY FURTHER RESPONSE SHOULD BE COMPELLED:
4 Section 2031.310(a) of the Code of Civ. Proc. permits the demanding party to move for an
5 order compelling further responses to the demand if the demanding party deems that any of the
6 following apply: (1) a statement of compliance with the demand is incomplete, (2) a representation of
7 inability to comply is inadequate, incomplete, or evasive, or (3) an objection in the response is without
8 merit or too general.
9 Kenwood Investments LLC’s response is inadequate, incomplete, and evasive. Per the
10 Affidavit of Custodian Records for Kenwood Investments LLC, the records were prepared by
11 searching the electronic repository at Kenwood Investments LLC. “A party cannot plead ignorance to
12 information which can be obtained from sources under his control. This includes a party’s lawyer,
13 agents or employees, family members and experts.” See Deyo v. Kilbourne (1978) 84 Cal.App.3d 771,
14 782. Furthermore, these items need not be in the actual possession of a party but it must at least be
15 within the party’s custody or control pursuant to Code of Civ. Proc §2031.010. As the Defendants
16 hired Darius Anderson, it would be reasonable to have such communications. Thus, the response to
17 this request is evasive and does not comply with Code of Civ. Proc. §2030.220.
18 //
19 //
20 //
21 //
22 //
23 //
24 //
25 //
26 //
27 //
28
16
SEPARATE STATEMENT ISO MOT. TO COMPEL FURTHER RESPONSE FROM KENWOOD & PLATINUM
1 Furthermore, “Any party may obtain discovery regarding any matter, not privileged, that is
2 relevant to the subject matter involved in the pending action…if it appears reasonably calculated to
3 lead to discovery of admissible evidence.” (Code of Civ. Proc. §2017.010) Such relevant information
4 is pertinent “if it might reasonably assist a party in evaluating the case, preparing for trial, or
5 facilitating settlement of.” Gonzalez v. Superior Court (1995) 33 Cal.App.4th 1539, 1546. At a
6 minimum, this request is “reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence”
7 regarding Plaintiff’ claims or Defendants’ defenses to the claims.
8 Respectfully submitted,
9 JOHNSTON, KINNEY & ZULAICA LLP
10
11 Dated: March 8, 2024 By:
John S. Rueppel, Esq.
12 Angie Lam, Esq.
13 Attorneys for Plaintiff
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
17
SEPARATE STATEMENT ISO MOT. TO COMPEL FURTHER RESPONSE FROM KENWOOD & PLATINUM
1 PROOF OF SERVICE
2
STATE OF CALIFORNIA, CITY OF ANTIOCH AND COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA
3
I am employed in the City and County of San Francisco, State of California. I am over the age
4 of 18 years and not a party to the within action; my business address is Johnston Kinney & Zulaica
LLP, 101 Montgomery Street, Suite 1600, San Francisco, California 94104. My electronic business
5 address is carolina@jkzllp.com.
6
On March 8, 2024, I served the foregoing document(s):
7
SEPARATE STATEMENT IN SUPPORT PLAINTIFF LISA KEITH’S MOTION TO
8 COMPEL FURTHER RESPONSES; AND PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS FROM
PLATINUM ADVISORS, LLC AND KENWOOD INVESTMENTS, LLC; AND FOR
9 MONETARY SANCTIONS
10
I served the documents on the person or persons listed below as follows:
11
Jeffrey E. Tsai
12 Kathleen S. Kizer
DLA PIPER LLP (US)
13 555 Mission Street, Suite 2400
San Francisco, CA 94105
14 Jeff.tsai@us.dlapiper.com
Katy.kizer@us.dlapiper.com
15 Attorneys for Defendants
16 [X] (BY EMAIL) Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 1010.6, I caused the document(s) to
be electronically transmitted by me to the persons listed in the above email address(es). I did not
17
receive within a reasonable time after the transmission, any electronic message or other indication that
18 the transmission was unsuccessful.
19 I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is
true and correct.
20
21 Executed on March 8, 2024, at Antioch, California.
22
23
Carolina Ramos
24
4874-3055-9148, v. 4
25
26
27
28
18
SEPARATE STATEMENT ISO MOT. TO COMPEL FURTHER RESPONSE FROM KENWOOD & PLATINUM
Preview
1 John S. Rueppel (SBN: 267467) Angie Lam (SBN: 244719) 2 JOHNSTON, KINNEY & ZULAICA LLP 101 Montgomery Street, Suite 1600 3 San Francisco, California 94104 4 Telephone: (415) 693-0550 Facsimile: (415) 693-0500 5 Email: john@jkzllp.com angie.lam@jkzllp.com 6 Attorneys for Plaintiff 7 Lisa Keith 8 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 9 IN THE COUNTY OF NAPA 10 11 LISA KEITH, CASE NO: 22CV001269 12 Plaintiff, SEPARATE STATEMENT IN SUPPORT PLAINTIFF LISA KEITH’S MOTION TO 13 v. COMPEL FURTHER RESPONSES; AND PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS FROM 14 CELESTE WHITE, an individual, ROBERT PLATINUM ADVISORS, LLC AND WHITE, an individual, the VALLEY ROCK KENWOOD INVESTMENTS, LLC; AND 15 FOUNDATION, aka THE BAR 49 FOUNDATION, FOR MONETARY SANCTIONS a charitable organization, and DOES 1-50, 16 INCLUSIVE, 17 Date: March 19, 2024 Defendants. Time: 8:30 a.m. 18 Judge: Hon. Scott R.L. Young Dept.: B 19 Complaint Filed: October 25, 2022 FAC Filed: March 8, 2023 20 Trial Date: April 2, 2024 21 22 Pursuant to California Rule of Court 3.1345, Plaintiff Lisa Keith (“Plaintiff”) hereby submits 23 this Separate Statement in support of her Motion to Compel Further Responses and Production of 24 Documents from Platinum Advisors LLC (“Platinum”) and Kenwood Investments LLC 25 (“Kenwood”), and for Monetary Sanctions. 26 /// 27 /// 28 /// 1 SEPARATE STATEMENT ISO MOT. TO COMPEL FURTHER RESPONSE FROM KENWOOD & PLATINUM 1 PLAINTIFF’S DEPOSITION SUBPOENA FOR PERSONAL APPEARANCE AND 2 PRODUCTION OF BUSINESS RECORDS TO PLATINUM ADVISORS LLC RESPONSES IN 3 DISPUTE 4 REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 1: 5 All DOCUMENTS reflecting any and all COMMUNICATIONS of any kind or nature that 6 PLATINUM ADVISORS LLC have had with any PERSON, from August 20, 2020, to the present, 7 making any mention of LISA KEITH and/or CELESTE WHITE. 8 RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 1: 9 No written response was provided. Documents Bate Stamped KP0000001-KP0000300 were 10 produced. 11 REASON WHY FURTHER RESPONSE SHOULD BE COMPELLED: 12 Section 2031.310(a) of the Code of Civ. Proc. permits the demanding party to move for an 13 order compelling further responses to the demand if the demanding party deems that any of the 14 following apply: (1) a statement of compliance with the demand is incomplete, (2) a representation of 15 inability to comply is inadequate, incomplete, or evasive, or (3) an objection in the response is without 16 merit or too general. 17 Platinum Advisors LLC’s response is inadequate, incomplete, and evasive. Per the Affidavit of 18 Custodian Records for Platinum Advisors LLC, the records were prepared by searching the electronic 19 repository at Platinum Advisors LLC. “A party cannot plead ignorance to information which can be 20 obtained from sources under his control. This includes a party’s lawyer, agents or employees, family 21 members and experts.” See Deyo v. Kilbourne (1978) 84 Cal.App.3d 771, 782. Furthermore, these 22 items need not be in the actual possession of a party but it must at least be within the party’s custody or 23 control pursuant to Code of Civ. Proc §2031.010. As the Defendants hired Darius Anderson, it would 24 be reasonable to have such communications. Thus, the response to this request is evasive and does not 25 comply with Code of Civ. Proc. §2030.220. 26 Furthermore, “Any party may obtain discovery regarding any matter, not privileged, that is 27 relevant to the subject matter involved in the pending action…if it appears reasonably calculated to 28 lead to discovery of admissible evidence.” (Code of Civ. Proc. §2017.010) Such relevant information 2 SEPARATE STATEMENT ISO MOT. TO COMPEL FURTHER RESPONSE FROM KENWOOD & PLATINUM 1 is pertinent “if it might reasonably assist a party in evaluating the case, preparing for trial, or 2 facilitating settlement of.” Gonzalez v. Superior Court (1995) 33 Cal.App.4th 1539, 1546. At a 3 minimum, this request is “reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence” 4 regarding Plaintiff’ claims or Defendants’ defenses to the claims. 5 REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 2: 6 All DOCUMENTS reflecting any and all COMMUNICATIONS of any kind or nature that 7 PLATINUM ADVISORS LLC have had with any PERSON, from August 20, 2020, to the present, 8 making any mention of the lawsuit filed by LISA KEITH in Napa County Superior Court, Case No. 9 26-36111. 10 RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 1: 11 No written response was provided. Documents Bate Stamped KP0000001-KP0000300 were 12 produced. 13 REASON WHY FURTHER RESPONSE SHOULD BE COMPELLED: 14 Section 2031.310(a) of the Code of Civ. Proc. permits the demanding party to move for an 15 order compelling further responses to the demand if the demanding party deems that any of the 16 following apply: (1) a statement of compliance with the demand is incomplete, (2) a representation of 17 inability to comply is inadequate, incomplete, or evasive, or (3) an objection in the response is without 18 merit or too general. 19 Platinum Advisors LLC’s response is inadequate, incomplete, and evasive. Per the Affidavit of 20 Custodian Records for Platinum Advisors LLC, the records were prepared by searching the electronic 21 repository at Platinum Advisors LLC. “A party cannot plead ignorance to information which can be 22 obtained from sources under his control. This includes a party’s lawyer, agents or employees, family 23 members and experts.” See Deyo v. Kilbourne (1978) 84 Cal.App.3d 771, 782. Furthermore, these 24 items need not be in the actual possession of a party but it must at least be within the party’s custody or 25 control pursuant to Code of Civ. Proc §2031.010. As the Defendants hired Darius Anderson, it would 26 be reasonable to have such communications. Thus, the response to this request is evasive and does not 27 comply with Code of Civ. Proc. §2030.220. 28 3 SEPARATE STATEMENT ISO MOT. TO COMPEL FURTHER RESPONSE FROM KENWOOD & PLATINUM 1 Furthermore, “Any party may obtain discovery regarding any matter, not privileged, that is 2 relevant to the subject matter involved in the pending action…if it appears reasonably calculated to 3 lead to discovery of admissible evidence.” (Code of Civ. Proc. §2017.010) Such relevant information 4 is pertinent “if it might reasonably assist a party in evaluating the case, preparing for trial, or 5 facilitating settlement of.” Gonzalez v. Superior Court (1995) 33 Cal.App.4th 1539, 1546. At a 6 minimum, this request is “reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence” 7 regarding Plaintiff’ claims or Defendants’ defenses to the claims. 8 REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 3: 9 All DOCUMENTS reflecting any and all COMMUNICATIONS of any kind or nature that 10 PLATINUM ADVISORS LLC had with any PERSON from August 20, 2020, to the present in which 11 PLATINUM ADVISORS LLC has stated that CELESTE WHITE had prevailed in a lawsuit against 12 LISA KEITH. 13 RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 3: 14 No written response was provided. Documents Bate Stamped KP0000001-KP0000300 were 15 produced. 16 REASON WHY FURTHER RESPONSE SHOULD BE COMPELLED: 17 Section 2031.310(a) of the Code of Civ. Proc. permits the demanding party to move for an 18 order compelling further responses to the demand if the demanding party deems that any of the 19 following apply: (1) a statement of compliance with the demand is incomplete, (2) a representation of 20 inability to comply is inadequate, incomplete, or evasive, or (3) an objection in the response is without 21 merit or too general. 22 Platinum Advisors LLC’s response is inadequate, incomplete, and evasive. Per the Affidavit of 23 Custodian Records for Platinum Advisors LLC, the records were prepared by searching the electronic 24 repository at Platinum Advisors LLC. “A party cannot plead ignorance to information which can be 25 obtained from sources under his control. This includes a party’s lawyer, agents or employees, family 26 members and experts.” See Deyo v. Kilbourne (1978) 84 Cal.App.3d 771, 782. Furthermore, these 27 items need not be in the actual possession of a party but it must at least be within the party’s custody or 28 control pursuant to Code of Civ. Proc §2031.010. As the Defendants hired Darius Anderson, it would 4 SEPARATE STATEMENT ISO MOT. TO COMPEL FURTHER RESPONSE FROM KENWOOD & PLATINUM 1 be reasonable to have such communications. Thus, the response to this request is evasive and does not 2 comply with Code of Civ. Proc. §2030.220. 3 Furthermore, “Any party may obtain discovery regarding any matter, not privileged, that is 4 relevant to the subject matter involved in the pending action…if it appears reasonably calculated to 5 lead to discovery of admissible evidence.” (Code of Civ. Proc. §2017.010) Such relevant information 6 is pertinent “if it might reasonably assist a party in evaluating the case, preparing for trial, or 7 facilitating settlement of.” Gonzalez v. Superior Court (1995) 33 Cal.App.4th 1539, 1546. At a 8 minimum, this request is “reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence” 9 regarding Plaintiff’ claims or Defendants’ defenses to the claims. 10 REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 8 11 All DOCUMENTS reflecting any and all COMMUNICATIONS of any kind or nature that 12 PLATINUM ADVISORS LLC have had with SINGER ASSOCIATES INC. making any mention of 13 LISA KEITH. 14 RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 8: 15 No written response was provided. Documents Bate Stamped KP0000001-KP0000300 were 16 produced. 17 REASON WHY FURTHER RESPONSE SHOULD BE COMPELLED: 18 Section 2031.310(a) of the Code of Civ. Proc. permits the demanding party to move for an 19 order compelling further responses to the demand if the demanding party deems that any of the 20 following apply: (1) a statement of compliance with the demand is incomplete, (2) a representation of 21 inability to comply is inadequate, incomplete, or evasive, or (3) an objection in the response is without 22 merit or too general. 23 Platinum Advisors LLC’s response is inadequate, incomplete, and evasive. Per the Affidavit of 24 Custodian Records for Platinum Advisors LLC, the records were prepared by searching the electronic 25 repository at Platinum Advisors LLC. “A party cannot plead ignorance to information which can be 26 obtained from sources under his control. This includes a party’s lawyer, agents or employees, family 27 members and experts.” See Deyo v. Kilbourne (1978) 84 Cal.App.3d 771, 782. Furthermore, these 28 items need not be in the actual possession of a party but it must at least be within the party’s custody or 5 SEPARATE STATEMENT ISO MOT. TO COMPEL FURTHER RESPONSE FROM KENWOOD & PLATINUM 1 control pursuant to Code of Civ. Proc §2031.010. As the Defendants hired Darius Anderson, it would 2 be reasonable to have such communications. Thus, the response to this request is evasive and does not 3 comply with Code of Civ. Proc. §2030.220. 4 Furthermore, “Any party may obtain discovery regarding any matter, not privileged, that is 5 relevant to the subject matter involved in the pending action…if it appears reasonably calculated to 6 lead to discovery of admissible evidence.” (Code of Civ. Proc. §2017.010) Such relevant information 7 is pertinent “if it might reasonably assist a party in evaluating the case, preparing for trial, or 8 facilitating settlement of.” Gonzalez v. Superior Court (1995) 33 Cal.App.4th 1539, 1546. At a 9 minimum, this request is “reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence” 10 regarding Plaintiff’ claims or Defendants’ defenses to the claims. 11 REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 9: 12 All DOCUMENTS reflecting any and all COMMUNICATIONS of any kind or nature that 13 PLATINUM ADVISORS LLC have had with SINGER ASSOCIATES INC. making any mention of 14 the lawsuit filed by LISA KEITH in Napa County Superior Court, Case No. 26-36111. 15 RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 9: 16 No written response was provided. Documents Bate Stamped KP0000001-KP0000300 were 17 produced. 18 REASON WHY FURTHER RESPONSE SHOULD BE COMPELLED: 19 Section 2031.310(a) of the Code of Civ. Proc. permits the demanding party to move for an 20 order compelling further responses to the demand if the demanding party deems that any of the 21 following apply: (1) a statement of compliance with the demand is incomplete, (2) a representation of 22 inability to comply is inadequate, incomplete, or evasive, or (3) an objection in the response is without 23 merit or too general. 24 Platinum Advisors LLC’s response is inadequate, incomplete, and evasive. Per the Affidavit of 25 Custodian Records for Platinum Advisors LLC, the records were prepared by searching the electronic 26 repository at Platinum Advisors LLC. “A party cannot plead ignorance to information which can be 27 obtained from sources under his control. This includes a party’s lawyer, agents or employees, family 28 members and experts.” See Deyo v. Kilbourne (1978) 84 Cal.App.3d 771, 782. Furthermore, these 6 SEPARATE STATEMENT ISO MOT. TO COMPEL FURTHER RESPONSE FROM KENWOOD & PLATINUM 1 items need not be in the actual possession of a party but it must at least be within the party’s custody or 2 control pursuant to Code of Civ. Proc §2031.010. As the Defendants hired Darius Anderson, it would 3 be reasonable to have such communications. Thus, the response to this request is evasive and does not 4 comply with Code of Civ. Proc. §2030.220. 5 Furthermore, “Any party may obtain discovery regarding any matter, not privileged, that is 6 relevant to the subject matter involved in the pending action…if it appears reasonably calculated to 7 lead to discovery of admissible evidence.” (Code of Civ. Proc. §2017.010) Such relevant information 8 is pertinent “if it might reasonably assist a party in evaluating the case, preparing for trial, or 9 facilitating settlement of.” Gonzalez v. Superior Court (1995) 33 Cal.App.4th 1539, 1546. At a 10 minimum, this request is “reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence” 11 regarding Plaintiff’ claims or Defendants’ defenses to the claims. 12 REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 10: 13 All DOCUMENTS reflecting any and all COMMUNICATIONS of any kind or nature that 14 PLATINUM ADVISORS LLC have had with SINGER ASSOCIATES INC. making any mention of 15 CELESTE WHITE. 16 RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 10: 17 No written response was provided. Documents Bate Stamped KP0000001-KP0000300 were 18 produced. 19 REASON WHY FURTHER RESPONSE SHOULD BE COMPELLED: 20 Section 2031.310(a) of the Code of Civ. Proc. permits the demanding party to move for an 21 order compelling further responses to the demand if the demanding party deems that any of the 22 following apply: (1) a statement of compliance with the demand is incomplete, (2) a representation of 23 inability to comply is inadequate, incomplete, or evasive, or (3) an objection in the response is without 24 merit or too general. 25 Platinum Advisors LLC’s response is inadequate, incomplete, and evasive. Per the Affidavit of 26 Custodian Records for Platinum Advisors LLC, the records were prepared by searching the electronic 27 repository at Platinum Advisors LLC. “A party cannot plead ignorance to information which can be 28 obtained from sources under his control. This includes a party’s lawyer, agents or employees, family 7 SEPARATE STATEMENT ISO MOT. TO COMPEL FURTHER RESPONSE FROM KENWOOD & PLATINUM 1 members and experts.” See Deyo v. Kilbourne (1978) 84 Cal.App.3d 771, 782. Furthermore, these 2 items need not be in the actual possession of a party but it must at least be within the party’s custody or 3 control pursuant to Code of Civ. Proc §2031.010. As the Defendants hired Darius Anderson, it would 4 be reasonable to have such communications. Thus, the response to this request is evasive and does not 5 comply with Code of Civ. Proc. §2030.220. 6 Furthermore, “Any party may obtain discovery regarding any matter, not privileged, that is 7 relevant to the subject matter involved in the pending action…if it appears reasonably calculated to 8 lead to discovery of admissible evidence.” (Code of Civ. Proc. §2017.010) Such relevant information 9 is pertinent “if it might reasonably assist a party in evaluating the case, preparing for trial, or 10 facilitating settlement of.” Gonzalez v. Superior Court (1995) 33 Cal.App.4th 1539, 1546. At a 11 minimum, this request is “reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence” 12 regarding Plaintiff’ claims or Defendants’ defenses to the claims. 13 REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 24: 14 All DOCUMENTS and COMMUNICATIONS RELATED to metrics and/or measurements of 15 the publication and/or dissemination of press releases and/or social media posts, indicating any 16 qualities such as the extent of dissemination, the number of views, the number of clicks, or the likes or 17 dislikes or any reaction to the press releases and/or social media posts which specifically or generally 18 make any mention of CELESTE WHITE prevailing in a lawsuit against LISA KEITH. 19 RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 24: 20 No written response was provided. Documents Bate Stamped KP0000001-KP0000300 were produced. 21 REASON WHY FURTHER RESPONSE SHOULD BE COMPELLED: 22 Section 2031.310(a) of the Code of Civ. Proc. permits the demanding party to move for an 23 order compelling further responses to the demand if the demanding party deems that any of the 24 following apply: (1) a statement of compliance with the demand is incomplete, (2) a representation of 25 inability to comply is inadequate, incomplete, or evasive, or (3) an objection in the response is without 26 merit or too general. 27 Platinum Advisors LLC’s response is inadequate, incomplete, and evasive. Per the Affidavit of 28 Custodian Records for Platinum Advisors LLC, the records were prepared by searching the electronic 8 SEPARATE STATEMENT ISO MOT. TO COMPEL FURTHER RESPONSE FROM KENWOOD & PLATINUM 1 repository at Platinum Advisors LLC. “A party cannot plead ignorance to information which can be 2 obtained from sources under his control. This includes a party’s lawyer, agents or employees, family 3 members and experts.” See Deyo v. Kilbourne (1978) 84 Cal.App.3d 771, 782. Furthermore, these 4 items need not be in the actual possession of a party but it must at least be within the party’s custody or 5 control pursuant to Code of Civ. Proc §2031.010. As the Defendants hired Darius Anderson, it would 6 be reasonable to have such communications. Thus, the response to this request is evasive and does not 7 comply with Code of Civ. Proc. §2030.220. 8 Furthermore, “Any party may obtain discovery regarding any matter, not privileged, that is 9 relevant to the subject matter involved in the pending action…if it appears reasonably calculated to 10 lead to discovery of admissible evidence.” (Code of Civ. Proc. §2017.010) Such relevant information 11 is pertinent “if it might reasonably assist a party in evaluating the case, preparing for trial, or 12 facilitating settlement of.” Gonzalez v. Superior Court (1995) 33 Cal.App.4th 1539, 1546. At a 13 minimum, this request is “reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence” 14 regarding Plaintiff’ claims or Defendants’ defenses to the claims. 15 PLAINTIFF’S DEPOSITION SUBPOENA FOR PERSONAL APPEARANCE AND 16 PRODUCTION OF BUSINESS RECORDS TO KENWOOD INVESTMENTS LLC 17 RESPONSES IN DISPUTE 18 REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 1: 19 All DOCUMENTS reflecting any and all COMMUNICATIONS of any kind or nature that 20 KENWOOD INVESTMENTS LLC have had with any PERSON, from August 20, 2020, to the 21 present, making any mention of LISA KEITH and/or CELESTE WHITE. 22 RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 1: 23 No written response was provided. Documents Bate Stamped KP0000001-KP0000300 were produced. 24 REASON WHY FURTHER RESPONSE SHOULD BE COMPELLED: 25 Section 2031.310(a) of the Code of Civ. Proc. permits the demanding party to move for an 26 order compelling further responses to the demand if the demanding party deems that any of the 27 following apply: (1) a statement of compliance with the demand is incomplete, (2) a representation of 28 9 SEPARATE STATEMENT ISO MOT. TO COMPEL FURTHER RESPONSE FROM KENWOOD & PLATINUM 1 inability to comply is inadequate, incomplete, or evasive, or (3) an objection in the response is without 2 merit or too general. 3 Kenwood Investments LLC’s response is inadequate, incomplete, and evasive. Per the 4 Affidavit of Custodian Records for Kenwood Investments LLC, the records were prepared by 5 searching the electronic repository at Kenwood Investments LLC. “A party cannot plead ignorance to 6 information which can be obtained from sources under his control. This includes a party’s lawyer, 7 agents or employees, family members and experts.” See Deyo v. Kilbourne (1978) 84 Cal.App.3d 771, 8 782. Furthermore, these items need not be in the actual possession of a party but it must at least be 9 within the party’s custody or control pursuant to Code of Civ. Proc §2031.010. As the Defendants 10 hired Darius Anderson, it would be reasonable to have such communications. Thus, the response to 11 this request is evasive and does not comply with Code of Civ. Proc. §2030.220. 12 Furthermore, “Any party may obtain discovery regarding any matter, not privileged, that is 13 relevant to the subject matter involved in the pending action…if it appears reasonably calculated to 14 lead to discovery of admissible evidence.” (Code of Civ. Proc. §2017.010) Such relevant information 15 is pertinent “if it might reasonably assist a party in evaluating the case, preparing for trial, or 16 facilitating settlement of.” Gonzalez v. Superior Court (1995) 33 Cal.App.4th 1539, 1546. At a 17 minimum, this request is “reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence” 18 regarding Plaintiff’ claims or Defendants’ defenses to the claims. 19 REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 2: 20 All DOCUMENTS reflecting any and all COMMUNICATIONS of any kind or nature that 21 KENWOOD INVESTMENTS LLC have had with any PERSON, from August 20, 2020, to the 22 present, making any mention of the lawsuit filed by LISA KEITH in Napa County Superior Court, 23 Case No. 26-36111. 24 RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 2: 25 No written response was provided. Documents Bate Stamped KP0000001-KP0000300 were produced. 26 REASON WHY FURTHER RESPONSE SHOULD BE COMPELLED: 27 Section 2031.310(a) of the Code of Civ. Proc. permits the demanding party to move for an 28 order compelling further responses to the demand if the demanding party deems that any of the 10 SEPARATE STATEMENT ISO MOT. TO COMPEL FURTHER RESPONSE FROM KENWOOD & PLATINUM 1 following apply: (1) a statement of compliance with the demand is incomplete, (2) a representation of 2 inability to comply is inadequate, incomplete, or evasive, or (3) an objection in the response is without 3 merit or too general. 4 Kenwood Investments LLC’s response is inadequate, incomplete, and evasive. Per the 5 Affidavit of Custodian Records for Kenwood Investments LLC, the records were prepared by 6 searching the electronic repository at Kenwood Investments LLC. “A party cannot plead ignorance to 7 information which can be obtained from sources under his control. This includes a party’s lawyer, 8 agents or employees, family members and experts.” See Deyo v. Kilbourne (1978) 84 Cal.App.3d 771, 9 782. Furthermore, these items need not be in the actual possession of a party but it must at least be 10 within the party’s custody or control pursuant to Code of Civ. Proc §2031.010. As the Defendants 11 hired Darius Anderson , it would be reasonable to have such communications. Thus, the response to 12 this request is evasive and does not comply with Code of Civ. Proc. §2030.220. 13 Furthermore, “Any party may obtain discovery regarding any matter, not privileged, that is 14 relevant to the subject matter involved in the pending action…if it appears reasonably calculated to 15 lead to discovery of admissible evidence.” (Code of Civ. Proc. §2017.010) Such relevant information 16 is pertinent “if it might reasonably assist a party in evaluating the case, preparing for trial, or 17 facilitating settlement of.” Gonzalez v. Superior Court (1995) 33 Cal.App.4th 1539, 1546. At a 18 minimum, this request is “reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence” 19 regarding Plaintiff’ claims or Defendants’ defenses to the claims. 20 REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 3: 21 All DOCUMENTS reflecting any and all COMMUNICATIONS of any kind or nature that 22 KENWOOD INVESTMENTS LLC have had with any PERSON from August 20, 2020, to the present 23 in which KENWOOD INVESTMENTS LLC has stated that CELESTE WHITE prevailed in a lawsuit 24 against LISA KEITH. 25 RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 3: 26 No written response was provided. Documents Bate Stamped KP0000001-KP0000300 were produced. 27 // 28 // 11 SEPARATE STATEMENT ISO MOT. TO COMPEL FURTHER RESPONSE FROM KENWOOD & PLATINUM 1 REASON WHY FURTHER RESPONSE SHOULD BE COMPELLED: 2 Section 2031.310(a) of the Code of Civ. Proc. permits the demanding party to move for an 3 order compelling further responses to the demand if the demanding party deems that any of the 4 following apply: (1) a statement of compliance with the demand is incomplete, (2) a representation of 5 inability to comply is inadequate, incomplete, or evasive, or (3) an objection in the response is without 6 merit or too general. 7 Kenwood Investments LLC and Platinum Advisors LLC’s response is inadequate, incomplete, 8 and evasive. Per the Affidavit of Custodian Records for Kenwood Investments LLC, the records were 9 prepared by searching the electronic repository at Kenwood Investments LLC. “A party cannot plead 10 ignorance to information which can be obtained from sources under his control. This includes a party’s 11 lawyer, agents or employees, family members and experts.” See Deyo v. Kilbourne (1978) 84 12 Cal.App.3d 771, 782. Furthermore, these items need not be in the actual possession of a party but it 13 must at least be within the party’s custody or control pursuant to Code of Civ. Proc §2031.010. As the 14 Defendants hired Darius Anderson, it would be reasonable to have such communications. Thus, the 15 response to this request is evasive and does not comply with Code of Civ. Proc. §2030.220. 16 Furthermore, “Any party may obtain discovery regarding any matter, not privileged, that is 17 relevant to the subject matter involved in the pending action…if it appears reasonably calculated to 18 lead to discovery of admissible evidence.” (Code of Civ. Proc. §2017.010) Such relevant information 19 is pertinent “if it might reasonably assist a party in evaluating the case, preparing for trial, or 20 facilitating settlement of.” Gonzalez v. Superior Court (1995) 33 Cal.App.4th 1539, 1546. At a 21 minimum, this request is “reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence” 22 regarding Plaintiff’ claims or Defendants’ defenses to the claims. 23 REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 8: 24 All DOCUMENTS reflecting any and all COMMUNICATIONS of any kind or nature that 25 KENWOOD INVESTMENTS LLC have had with SINGER ASSOCIATES, INC. making any 26 mention of LISA KEITH. 27 RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 8: 28 No written response was provided. Documents Bate Stamped KP0000001-KP0000300 were produced. 12 SEPARATE STATEMENT ISO MOT. TO COMPEL FURTHER RESPONSE FROM KENWOOD & PLATINUM 1 REASON WHY FURTHER RESPONSE SHOULD BE COMPELLED: 2 Section 2031.310(a) of the Code of Civ. Proc. permits the demanding party to move for an 3 order compelling further responses to the demand if the demanding party deems that any of the 4 following apply: (1) a statement of compliance with the demand is incomplete, (2) a representation of 5 inability to comply is inadequate, incomplete, or evasive, or (3) an objection in the response is without 6 merit or too general. 7 Kenwood Investments LLC’s response is inadequate, incomplete, and evasive. Per the 8 Affidavit of Custodian Records for Kenwood Investments LLC, the records were prepared by 9 searching the electronic repository at Kenwood Investments LLC. “A party cannot plead ignorance to 10 information which can be obtained from sources under his control. This includes a party’s lawyer, 11 agents or employees, family members and experts.” See Deyo v. Kilbourne (1978) 84 Cal.App.3d 771, 12 782. Furthermore, these items need not be in the actual possession of a party but it must at least be 13 within the party’s custody or control pursuant to Code of Civ. Proc §2031.010. As the Defendants 14 hired Darius Anderson, it would be reasonable to have such communications. Thus, the response to 15 this request is evasive and does not comply with Code of Civ. Proc. §2030.220. 16 Furthermore, “Any party may obtain discovery regarding any matter, not privileged, that is 17 relevant to the subject matter involved in the pending action…if it appears reasonably calculated to 18 lead to discovery of admissible evidence.” (Code of Civ. Proc. §2017.010) Such relevant information 19 is pertinent “if it might reasonably assist a party in evaluating the case, preparing for trial, or 20 facilitating settlement of.” Gonzalez v. Superior Court (1995) 33 Cal.App.4th 1539, 1546. At a 21 minimum, this request is “reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence” 22 regarding Plaintiff’ claims or Defendants’ defenses to the claims. 23 REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 9: 24 All DOCUMENTS reflecting any and all COMMUNICATIONS of any kind or nature that 25 KENWOOD INVESTMENTS LLC have had with SINGER ASSOCIATES, INC. making any 26 mention of the lawsuit filed by LISA KEITH in Napa County Superior Court, Case No. 26-36111. 27 RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 9: 28 No written response was provided. Documents Bate Stamped KP0000001-KP0000300 were produced. 13 SEPARATE STATEMENT ISO MOT. TO COMPEL FURTHER RESPONSE FROM KENWOOD & PLATINUM 1 REASON WHY FURTHER RESPONSE SHOULD BE COMPELLED: 2 Section 2031.310(a) of the Code of Civ. Proc. permits the demanding party to move for an 3 order compelling further responses to the demand if the demanding party deems that any of the 4 following apply: (1) a statement of compliance with the demand is incomplete, (2) a representation of 5 inability to comply is inadequate, incomplete, or evasive, or (3) an objection in the response is without 6 merit or too general. 7 Kenwood Investments LLC’s response is inadequate, incomplete, and evasive. Per the 8 Affidavit of Custodian Records for Kenwood Investments LLC, the records were prepared by 9 searching the electronic repository at Kenwood Investments LLC. “A party cannot plead ignorance to 10 information which can be obtained from sources under his control. This includes a party’s lawyer, 11 agents or employees, family members and experts.” See Deyo v. Kilbourne (1978) 84 Cal.App.3d 771, 12 782. Furthermore, these items need not be in the actual possession of a party but it must at least be 13 within the party’s custody or control pursuant to Code of Civ. Proc §2031.010. As the Defendants 14 hired Darius Anderson, it would be reasonable to have such communications. Thus, the response to 15 this request is evasive and does not comply with Code of Civ. Proc. §2030.220. 16 Furthermore, “Any party may obtain discovery regarding any matter, not privileged, that is 17 relevant to the subject matter involved in the pending action…if it appears reasonably calculated to 18 lead to discovery of admissible evidence.” (Code of Civ. Proc. §2017.010) Such relevant information 19 is pertinent “if it might reasonably assist a party in evaluating the case, preparing for trial, or 20 facilitating settlement of.” Gonzalez v. Superior Court (1995) 33 Cal.App.4th 1539, 1546. At a 21 minimum, this request is “reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence” 22 regarding Plaintiff’ claims or Defendants’ defenses to the claims. 23 REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 10: 24 All DOCUMENTS reflecting any and all COMMUNICATIONS of any kind or nature that 25 KENWOOD INVESTMENTS LLC have had with SAM SINGER ASSOCIATES, INC. making any 26 mention of CELESTE WHITE. 27 RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 10: 28 No written response was provided. Documents Bate Stamped KP0000001-KP0000300 were produced. 14 SEPARATE STATEMENT ISO MOT. TO COMPEL FURTHER RESPONSE FROM KENWOOD & PLATINUM 1 REASON WHY FURTHER RESPONSE SHOULD BE COMPELLED: 2 Section 2031.310(a) of the Code of Civ. Proc. permits the demanding party to move for an 3 order compelling further responses to the demand if the demanding party deems that any of the 4 following apply: (1) a statement of compliance with the demand is incomplete, (2) a representation of 5 inability to comply is inadequate, incomplete, or evasive, or (3) an objection in the response is without 6 merit or too general. 7 Kenwood Investments LLC’s response is inadequate, incomplete, and evasive. Per the 8 Affidavit of Custodian Records for Kenwood Investments LLC, the records were prepared by 9 searching the electronic repository at Kenwood Investments LLC. “A party cannot plead ignorance to 10 information which can be obtained from sources under his control. This includes a party’s lawyer, 11 agents or employees, family members and experts.” See Deyo v. Kilbourne (1978) 84 Cal.App.3d 771, 12 782. Furthermore, these items need not be in the actual possession of a party but it must at least be 13 within the party’s custody or control pursuant to Code of Civ. Proc §2031.010. As the Defendants 14 hired Darius Anderson, it would be reasonable to have such communications. Thus, the response to 15 this request is evasive and does not comply with Code of Civ. Proc. §2030.220. 16 Furthermore, “Any party may obtain discovery regarding any matter, not privileged, that is 17 relevant to the subject matter involved in the pending action…if it appears reasonably calculated to 18 lead to discovery of admissible evidence.” (Code of Civ. Proc. §2017.010) Such relevant information 19 is pertinent “if it might reasonably assist a party in evaluating the case, preparing for trial, or 20 facilitating settlement of.” Gonzalez v. Superior Court (1995) 33 Cal.App.4th 1539, 1546. At a 21 minimum, this request is “reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence” 22 regarding Plaintiff’ claims or Defendants’ defenses to the claims. 23 REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 24: 24 All DOCUMENTS and COMMUNICATIONS RELATED to metrics and/or measurements of 25 the publication and/or dissemination of press releases and/or social media posts, indicating any 26 qualities such as the extent of dissemination, the number of views, the number of clicks, or the likes or 27 dislikes or any reaction to the press releases and/or social media posts which specifically or generally 28 make any mention of CELESTE WHITE prevailing in a lawsuit against LISA KEITH. 15 SEPARATE STATEMENT ISO MOT. TO COMPEL FURTHER RESPONSE FROM KENWOOD & PLATINUM 1 RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 24: 2 No written response was provided. Documents Bate Stamped KP0000001-KP0000300 were produced. 3 REASON WHY FURTHER RESPONSE SHOULD BE COMPELLED: 4 Section 2031.310(a) of the Code of Civ. Proc. permits the demanding party to move for an 5 order compelling further responses to the demand if the demanding party deems that any of the 6 following apply: (1) a statement of compliance with the demand is incomplete, (2) a representation of 7 inability to comply is inadequate, incomplete, or evasive, or (3) an objection in the response is without 8 merit or too general. 9 Kenwood Investments LLC’s response is inadequate, incomplete, and evasive. Per the 10 Affidavit of Custodian Records for Kenwood Investments LLC, the records were prepared by 11 searching the electronic repository at Kenwood Investments LLC. “A party cannot plead ignorance to 12 information which can be obtained from sources under his control. This includes a party’s lawyer, 13 agents or employees, family members and experts.” See Deyo v. Kilbourne (1978) 84 Cal.App.3d 771, 14 782. Furthermore, these items need not be in the actual possession of a party but it must at least be 15 within the party’s custody or control pursuant to Code of Civ. Proc §2031.010. As the Defendants 16 hired Darius Anderson, it would be reasonable to have such communications. Thus, the response to 17 this request is evasive and does not comply with Code of Civ. Proc. §2030.220. 18 // 19 // 20 // 21 // 22 // 23 // 24 // 25 // 26 // 27 // 28 16 SEPARATE STATEMENT ISO MOT. TO COMPEL FURTHER RESPONSE FROM KENWOOD & PLATINUM 1 Furthermore, “Any party may obtain discovery regarding any matter, not privileged, that is 2 relevant to the subject matter involved in the pending action…if it appears reasonably calculated to 3 lead to discovery of admissible evidence.” (Code of Civ. Proc. §2017.010) Such relevant information 4 is pertinent “if it might reasonably assist a party in evaluating the case, preparing for trial, or 5 facilitating settlement of.” Gonzalez v. Superior Court (1995) 33 Cal.App.4th 1539, 1546. At a 6 minimum, this request is “reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence” 7 regarding Plaintiff’ claims or Defendants’ defenses to the claims. 8 Respectfully submitted, 9 JOHNSTON, KINNEY & ZULAICA LLP 10 11 Dated: March 8, 2024 By: John S. Rueppel, Esq. 12 Angie Lam, Esq. 13 Attorneys for Plaintiff 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 17 SEPARATE STATEMENT ISO MOT. TO COMPEL FURTHER RESPONSE FROM KENWOOD & PLATINUM 1 PROOF OF SERVICE 2 STATE OF CALIFORNIA, CITY OF ANTIOCH AND COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA 3 I am employed in the City and County of San Francisco, State of California. I am over the age 4 of 18 years and not a party to the within action; my business address is Johnston Kinney & Zulaica LLP, 101 Montgomery Street, Suite 1600, San Francisco, California 94104. My electronic business 5 address is carolina@jkzllp.com. 6 On March 8, 2024, I served the foregoing document(s): 7 SEPARATE STATEMENT IN SUPPORT PLAINTIFF LISA KEITH’S MOTION TO 8 COMPEL FURTHER RESPONSES; AND PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS FROM PLATINUM ADVISORS, LLC AND KENWOOD INVESTMENTS, LLC; AND FOR 9 MONETARY SANCTIONS 10 I served the documents on the person or persons listed below as follows: 11 Jeffrey E. Tsai 12 Kathleen S. Kizer DLA PIPER LLP (US) 13 555 Mission Street, Suite 2400 San Francisco, CA 94105 14 Jeff.tsai@us.dlapiper.com Katy.kizer@us.dlapiper.com 15 Attorneys for Defendants 16 [X] (BY EMAIL) Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 1010.6, I caused the document(s) to be electronically transmitted by me to the persons listed in the above email address(es). I did not 17 receive within a reasonable time after the transmission, any electronic message or other indication that 18 the transmission was unsuccessful. 19 I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct. 20 21 Executed on March 8, 2024, at Antioch, California. 22 23 Carolina Ramos 24 4874-3055-9148, v. 4 25 26 27 28 18 SEPARATE STATEMENT ISO MOT. TO COMPEL FURTHER RESPONSE FROM KENWOOD & PLATINUM