arrow left
arrow right
  • Mark Sellars et al vs Patrick Leahy et alUnlimited Other Complaint (Not Spec) (42) document preview
  • Mark Sellars et al vs Patrick Leahy et alUnlimited Other Complaint (Not Spec) (42) document preview
  • Mark Sellars et al vs Patrick Leahy et alUnlimited Other Complaint (Not Spec) (42) document preview
  • Mark Sellars et al vs Patrick Leahy et alUnlimited Other Complaint (Not Spec) (42) document preview
  • Mark Sellars et al vs Patrick Leahy et alUnlimited Other Complaint (Not Spec) (42) document preview
  • Mark Sellars et al vs Patrick Leahy et alUnlimited Other Complaint (Not Spec) (42) document preview
  • Mark Sellars et al vs Patrick Leahy et alUnlimited Other Complaint (Not Spec) (42) document preview
  • Mark Sellars et al vs Patrick Leahy et alUnlimited Other Complaint (Not Spec) (42) document preview
						
                                

Preview

LAW OFFICES OF McCARTHY & KROES ELECTRONICALLY FILED 125 E. VICTORIA STREET, SUITE A Superior Court of California SANTA BARBARA, CA 93101 County of Santa Barbara (805) 564-2085, Darrel E. Parker, Executive Officer 7/11/2023 1:57 PM By: Sarah Sisto , Deputy R. Chris Kroes, SBN 134935 Attorneys for Defendants: CHANNE COLES, THE LAW OFFICE OF CHANNE G. COLES, a California corporation SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF SANTA BARBARA 10 11 MARK SELLARS, individually and as Trustee CASE NO.: 20CV04132 of the Rosemary Fee Trust u/d/t dated ae 12 September 13, 2000, and REBECCA MORIN, OBJECTIONS TO DECLARATION OF na DAVID TAPPEINER o5< Conservator of the Estate and Person of Bao 13 Rosemary Free Leahy, os nee 14 ZOg ERa Plaintiffs, “eld a 15 and remains so today. Accordingly, the Bui < auS az 16 statute of limitations prescribed under CCP Section 340.6 has been tolled suring (sic) 17 such period. The demurrer filed by the Coles’ Defendants conveniently omits the 18 fact that the statutory period for commencing a professional negligence action is tolled 19 when the plaintiff is under a legal or physical 20 disability that restricts the plaintiff's ability to commence legal action (CCP Section 21 340.6(a)(4) as is the case here.” 22 22 Dated: July \\ , 2023 McCARTHY & KROES 23 24 25 By BWM R. CHRIS KROES i Attorneys for Defendants 26 CHANNE COLES and THE LAW OFFICE OF CHANNE G. COLES. 27 a California corporation 28 3 OBJECTIONS TO DECLARATION Case Name: Sellars v. Leahy, et al. Case No.: 20CV04132 PROOF OF SERVICE I am employed in the county of Santa Barbara, State of California. I am over the age of 18 years of age and am not a party to the within action; my business address is 125 E. Victoria Street, Suite A, Santa Barbara, California. On the date set forth below, I served the foregoing documents entitled: OBJECTIONS TO DECLARATION OF DAVID TAPPEINER on all interested parties in said action by: X__ (MAIL) By placing a true copy thereof enclosed in a sealed envelope for each 10 person(s) named below, addressed as set forth immediately below the respective 11 name(s), with postage thereon fully prepaid as first-class mail. I deposited the same in a mailing facility regularly maintained by the United States Post Office for the mailing 12 of letter(s) at my above-stated place of business.