Preview
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO
Document Scanning Lead Sheet
Oct-17-2018 10:39 am
Case Number: CGC-14-539780
Filing Date: Oct-17-2018 10:36
Filed by: CAROL BALISTRERI
Image: 06537751
EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR ORDER
MONTEREY INSURANCE COMPANY VS. 1725 FULTON STREET,KLC et al
001006537751
Instructions:
Please place this sheet on top of the document to be scanned.© D9 I DH ON F&F WN
Dv NM NY NNN DYN DK FP BP PP HP BP Be RB oe
Oo 3A Oo & WN FP oO © OY A HW ® WN FP OS
© oS
JAMES K. O'GALLAGHER SB #97088 FF I
Attorney at Law E D
Sen
225 W. Winton Fremaieco
Suite 120), a County Seperor Goug
Hayward, CA
(510) 264-0500 T17 20%
Attorney for DEFENDANT ey THE COURT
NORMAN SABEL ‘
A California Resident Deputy Clerk
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO
MONTEREY INSURANCE COMPANY
A California Corporation
Plaintiff
Case No. CGC-14-539780
EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR
ORDER SHORTENING TIME TO
PERMIT MOTION TO WITHDRAW
AS ATTORNEY OF RECORD
cRC 3.1201
vs.
1725 Fulton St., LLC, NORMAN SABEL,
ARTHUR STEPHEN BROWN aka STEVEN
BROWN, individually and dba BETTER
PROPERTY MANAGEMENT, NIKKO BRAVO
MARINA KONAKOVA and Does 1 through
100, inclusive October 17, 2018
Time: 11:00 A.M.
Defendants. DEPT; 206
Mee SSS SS SS Se eS See eee
I, JAMES K. O’GALLAGHER, declare:
That at present, I am the attorney of record for Mr. Norman
Sabel, and also 1725 Fulton Street, in the above captioned matter;
I am unable to discharge my obligations to Mr. Norman Sable, and
his business entity, because he refuses to communicate, or even
meet in my office or other locations even when imminent discovery
deadlines are looming. This is more particularly described in the
declaration supporting the motion,o© Oo st DH OV fF WN
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
© °
The reason that the order shortening time is requested is
that Mr. Sabel has indicated to me that he is seeking “suitable
counsel” but by procrastinating until he obtains counsel that he
is comfortable with, he is prejudicing his own interests and a
reasonable chance at defending this case. It is my belief that
without shortening time, irreparable harm will result.
The opposing counsel, Mr. Bonino, has already granted two
extensions on the discovery deadlines, and also has rescheduled
the depositions of Mr. Sabel, and that of the PMQ of the LLC,
also Mr. Sabel, and despite this flexibility and reasonable
posture, I still, as of this writing, have not had an actual
meeting with Mr. Sable since 2016, and have not had adequate
communication with him appropriate for the preparation required
to protect his interests. His lack of cooperation is seriously
compromising his own interests. He will face sanctions, for
example, if the discovery is not responded to by the 23 of
this month. More pressing is the deposition, which is currently
set for October 30, 2018. He refuses to either meet with the
undersigned or sign a substitution.
As the clock ticks, the situation gets worse. If a brief
shortening of the time required under C.C.P. 1005 is granted to
permit this motion to be heard prior to the deposition date, it
will significantly mitigate the possible damage, and might move
Mr. Sabel to either find other counsel more quickly or agree to
cooperate to a sufficient degree to ameliorate the prejudice
he will suffer if he continues in his present posture.
Notice of this application, pursuant to CRC 3.1204, was
given by email to Mr. Sabel, Mr. Bonino, counsel for MONTEREY,© Oa A HW ® WwW nN
10)
11
12
13
14
15)
16)
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Cc °o
and Mr. Peter Catalanotti, counsel for Mr. Brown, on October 16,
2018 at approximately 9:55 to 10:00 A.M. by the undersigned,
stating the nature of the relief requested, the time, and the
place.
I declare under penalty of perjury, under the laws of the
State of California, that the foregoing is true and correct and
within my own knowledge, and that if called upon to testify, I
could competently attest thereto. This declaration is executed
9
<
O’ GALLAGHER
on October 16, 2018 in San Francisco,
JAMES K.TO (namo end address of client}, 1725 Fulton Street, San Francisco, CA
4. PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that (name of withdrawing attomey): JAMES K, O'GALLAGHER
moves under Califomia Cotie of Civil Procedure section 284(2) end Callfomia Rutes of Court, rule 3.1362, for an order permitting
the atlomey to be relieved as attomay of record in this action or proceeding.
2. Aleartng on this motion to be reflaved as counsel will be held as follows:
a Date: Time: Dept: Room:
b. The address of the cour: [7] sameasnoted ahove [__] other (epecty):
3, This motion is supported by the accompanying declaration, the papers and records fled in this action or proceeding, and
(This motion does not need to be accompenied by a memorandum of points and authorities. Cal. Rutes of Court, ute 3.1362.)
4, ‘The client presently represented by the attomey is
a an individual. 9 a trustee,
b a. comporation. he @ personal representative.
o I @ partnership. 4 ‘a probate fiduciary.
a an unincorporated association. b @ guardien ad fitem,
e ‘|. guardian. kK other (spacily):
f. [=] aconservator. Limited Liability Corporation
(Continued on reverse)
ve NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION SaaSaiees satNOTICE TO CLIENT :
1 this motion to be relleved as counsel is granted, your present attorney will no longer be representing you. You
i
|
|
| may not In most cases represent yourself if you are one of the parties on the following list:
| *Aguardian A personal representative + Aguardian ad lem
| ° A conservator *A probate fiduciary + An unincorporated association
| A trustee + A corporation
1
|
{
ff you ere one of these parties, YCU SHOULD IMMEDIATELY SEEK LEGAL ADVICE REGARDING LEGAL
REPRESENTATION, Failure to retain an attomey may lead to an order striking the pleadings or to the entry ofa
default Judgment.
5. Ifthis motion Is granted and a cient Is representing himself or herself, the client will be solely responsible for tha case.
NOTICE TO CLIENT WHO WILL BE UNREPRESENTED
Permitted to do go, you will be |
tutes and applicable tawe. i you fall to do eo, or to appear at hearings, action may be taken against you. You may
your case.
6, If this motion is granted, the client must keap the court informed of the client's current address.
tf this motion to be relleved as counsel fs granted, the court needs to know how to contact you. If you do not keep the
court and other parties Informed of your current address and telephone number, they will not be able to send you
notions of setions thet may effect you, hackuding actions Cut cay advorsbty aitect your iaraste or reout in your
tosing the case.
rs
‘HOS day 9 20) NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION Reet
COUNSEL—CIVILlL
© °
JAMES K. O'GALLAGHER SB #97088
Attorney at Law
225 W. Winton
Suite 120
Hayward, CA 94544
(510) 264-0500
Attorney for DEFENDANT
NORMAN SABEL
A California Resident
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO
MONTEREY INSURANCE COMPANY
A California Corporation
Plaintiff
Case No. CGC-14-539780
DECLARATION OF COUNSEL IN
SUPPORT OF MOTION TO WITH-
DRAW PURSUANT TO CALIFORNIA
CODE OF CIVIL PROCEDURE
284 AND CALIFORNIA RULE OF
COURT 3.1362
vs.
1725 Fulton St., LLC, NORMAN SABEL,
ARTHUR STEPHEN BROWN aka STEVEN
BROWN, individually and dba BETTER
PROPERTY MANAGEMENT, NIKKO BRAVO
MARINA KONAKOVA and Does 1 through
100, inclusive October 2018
Time: 9:30 A.M.
Defendants. DEPT; 206
Nee ee SS SS SS SS Se ee
1, JAMES K. O’GALLAGHER declare:
That it is imperative that I seek an order to be relieved as counsel of record for two of the
defendants in the above matter, Mr. Norman Sabel, the owner of the real estate which is at the
center of the dispute, and also 1725 Fulton Street, a limited liability corporation in which Mr.
Norman Sabel is the person most qualified as spokesperson for the LLC;
This request is made with reluctance but it is necessary for ethical as well as for practical
reasons. I believe that continuing representation by the undersigned of Mr. Sabel and the business
entity which he owns is counterproductive, and could easily lead to serious prejudice to his interests;Oo 7 st An &F WN
NNN NAY NH NY NN BP YP BP BB Be Be eB eB
O24 aA ® OWN BP oO © Os Ao ® WN EY oO
© °
That the problems described below demonstrate that it is impossible for this attorney to
adequately discharge my responsibilities, professional, moral and legal, to the clients herein,
Norman Sabel and 1725 Fulton Street, LLC:
Generally, the problem is lack of adequate communication. There have been no actual meetings
between attomey and client during this calendar year in which much has happened after the ruling
of the appellate court;
Client has repeatedly refused to meet with the undersigned. There is no communication other than
by email and a few brief phone calls. Client has repeatedly been warned of imminent discovery
deadlines and lack of preparation , even after two extensions were granted by the adversary.
Aside from all of this, client repeatedly avoids the subject of payment of fees, always looking
for indemnification or other excuse. Even though the non-payment of fees is not the immediate
problem,
it is significant and grounds for withdrawal by itself. The client has made no payment since March
of 2016. Client “instructs” the attorney to request documents which do not address the crisis of the
moment.
Client seems to be in denial about the gravity of the situation he is in. In refusing
even to have a meeting to discuss how to respond to form interrogatories, or special interrogatories,
requests for admission and demands for documents, he places his own interests in peril.
He claims that it is entirely the attorney’s responsibility and will communicate only by
email.
This is not a practical means of proceeding particularly when discovery demands have been
served, and sent to the client long ago.
There is a fee dispute between the attorney and client, but that is less crucial than the simple
refusal to meet and confer to respond to the demands, which also include a scheduled deposition.
This refusal to cooperate has made it unreasonably difficult to meet the requirements of
employment effectively pursuant to rule 3-700(C)(1) Rules of professional conduct.
Client refused to appear at a mediation on October 5, 2018, which possibly could have resultedOo Oo wt DY 2B WN
w
o
11
12
13)
14
15
16)
17
18
19
20
2q
22
23
24
25
26)
27
28
© °
in settlement.
Amore specific description of the problems and evidence, including the record of emails having
been
-exchanged, could possibly violate California Evidence Code 952 and in that connection the court
is invited to hold an “in camera” meeting with Attomey and also the client if he appears at this
hearing on the motion to withdraw.
Additional specific facts which give rise to this motion are confidential and required to be kept
confidential pursuant to Business and Professions Code 6068(e), rule 3-100(A), California Rules
of Professional conduct and by the attorney client privilege (Ev. C. 952). _I{n the event this
court desires further information to ascertain the good faith basis and ethical dilemma for this
motion and for withdrawal, it is respectfully requested that the court hold an INCAMERA hearing
outside
the presence of the other parties so that the specific facts demonstrating the good cause for this
withdrawal may be demonstrated to the court. The client would be encouraged to participate.
Manfredi & Levine v. Superior Court (1998) 66 Cal App 4" 1128, 1136-1137, 3-700(B) or C).
This court is requested, for the reasons stated, to grant an order relieving the undersigned
of all responsibility for the case for both defendants, and placing Mr. Norman Sabel as the attorney
of record for both.
I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct and within my own
knowledge and that if called to testify, I could competently attest thereto.
This declaration is executed on October 16, 2018 in San Francisco.
v0.
JAMES K OGALLAGHER
Norman Sabel