Motion for Informal Discovery Conference in Jensen Landscape Contractor, Llc vs Brightview Landscape Development, Inc.| Trellis.Law

On June 15, 2018 a Motion-Secondary was filed involving a dispute between and Liberty Mutual Insurance Company, for Breach of Contract/Warranty Unlimited(06) in the District Court of Santa Clara County.

Preview
Meredith Jones-McKeown, State Bar No. 233301
mjonesmckeown@perkinscoie.com
PERKINS COIE LLP
505 Howard Street, Suite 1000
San Francisco, CA 94105-3201
Telephone: 415.344.7097
Facsimile: 415.344.7297

Jacob A. Dean, Bar No. 301640
Jacobdean@perkinscoie.com
PERKINS COTE LLP
1888 Century Park East Suite 1700
Los Angeles, CA 90067-1721
Telephone: 1.310.788.3289
Facsimile: 1.310.843.1283

10 Attorneys for Plaintiff
JENSEN LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR, LLC
11
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
12
COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA - UNLIMITED JURISDICTION
13

14 JENSEN LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR, Case No. 18CV330108
LLC, a California limited liability company,
15 PLAINTIFF JENSEN LANDSCAPE
Plaintiff, CONTRACTOR, LLC’S INFORMAL
16 DISCOVERY CONFERENCE BRIEF
Vv ON OUTSTANDING DISCOVERY
17
ISSUES
18 BRIGHTVIEW LANDSCAPE
DEVELOPMENT, INC., a California Date; August 16, 2019
19 corporation; LIBERTY MUTUAL Time: 9:00 a.m.
INSURANCE COMPANY, a Massachusetts Dept: 9
20 corporation; and DOFS 1 through 20, Judge: Hon. Mary E. Arand
inclusive,
21
Complaint Filed: June 15, 2018
22 Defendants. ‘Trial Date: Not Set

23 AND RELATED CROSS-ACTIONS.
——_.
24

Case No. 18CV330108
PLAINTIFF JENSEN LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR, LLC’S INFORMAI. DISCOVERY CONFERENCE BRIEF
I INTRODUCTION

This case arises out of the construction of the Apple 2 Campus located in Cupertino,

California (the “Project”), Apple, Inc. (“Apple”) is the owner. Truebeck Construction, Inc.

(“Truebeck”) served as the general contractor for certain scopes of the Project. Brightview

Landscape Development, Inc. (“Brightview”) served as Truebeck’s landscaping subcontractor,

Jensen Landscape Contractor, LLC’s (“Jensen”) served as a subcontractor to Brightview and was

responsible for certain scopes of the landscaping work on the Project.

Jensen alleges in its First Amended Complaint that Brightview breached its subcontract

with Jensen by, among other things, failing to pay Jensen for certain change orders and extra

10 work that Jensen performed on the Project for which Brightview received payments specifically

1\ earmarked for Jensen’s work on the Project.’ To support these allegations, Jensen propounded

12 straightforward discovery requests to Brightview secking information substantiating the payments

13 nade (o Brightview by Truebeck and/or Apple for the change order and extra work performed by

14 Jensen on the Project. Unfortunately, Brightview ignored its obligations under the Civil

15 Discovery Act and produced wholly redacted documents, hiding bchind untimely, unsubstantiated

16 and improper claims that the documents requested are protected as private and confidential

17 business records and/or trade secrets. By way of example, Brightview produced documents

18 reflecting amounts paid by Truebeck for landscaping work and services performed at the Project,

19 but wholly redacted all information relating to the amount paid, the description of work

20 performed, and several other categorics of information that directly prove Jensen’s claims. A truc

21 and correct copy of a typical document produced by Brightvicw is attached hereto as Exhibit A.

22 Brightview’s redaction of these clearly discoverable documents is improper.

23 Jensen also propounded discovery on Rana Creek requesting documents relating to a

24 settlement agreement entered into between Rana Creek and Brightview for change order and exira

25 landscaping work performed hy Rana Creck on the Project for which it claimed it was not paid by

27 -
' Brightview asserted cross-claims against Truebeck and Rana Creek Habitat Restoration, Inc.
28 (“Rana Creek”) in response to Jensen’s First Amended Complaint.

Qe Case No, 18CV330108
PLAINTIFF JENSEN LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR, LLC’S INFORMAL DISCOVERY CONFERENCE BRIEF
Brightview. However, Rana Creek has improperly refused to produce this document despite the

fact that it is discoverable under the Civil Discovery Act.

As discussed in greater detail below, Jensen is entitled fo full and unredacted production

of documents responsive to its discovery requests. Jensen is appearing at the Informal Discovery

Conference in good faith to resolve these discovery disputes without judicial intervention.

Il. LEGAL ANALYSIS

A Brightview is required by the Civil Discovery Act to produce all unredacted
documents responsive to Jensen’s discovery requests.

Under the Civil Discovery Act, “information is discoverable if it is unprivileged and... .

10 relevant to the subject matter of the action.” Schnabel v. Super. Ct (1993) 5 Cal.4th 704, 711. “For

ll discovery purposes, information is relevant if it might reasonably assist a party in evaluating the

12 case, preparing for trial, or facilitating settlement.” Lipton v. Super. Ct. (1996) 48 Cal.App.4th

13 1599, 1611. The party seeking a privilege bears the burden of establishing its existence.

14 Bridgestone/Firestone, Inc. v. Super. Ct. (1992) 7 Cal. App. 4th 1384, 1393.

15 Here, Jensen propounded one set of Requests for Production of Documents, Form

16 Interrogatories, and Requests for Admissions on Brightview requesting, among other things,

17 documents supporting its contention that Brightview failed to pay Jensen for certain change

18 orders and extra work that Jensen performed on tbe Project for which Brightview reccived

19 payments specifically earmarked for Jensen’s work.? Brightview responded to Jensen’s

20 discovery requests and agreed to produce all responsive documents. However, on June 10, 2019,

2) Jensen reccived Brightview’s document production that consisted enly of 1677 documents, which

22 is extremely minimal for a construction project of this size. A review of Brightview’s document

23 production reveals that Brightview failed to provide documents responsive to Jensen’s Request

24 for Production of Documents Numbers 1 through 48 and 50 through 70. These categories of

25 documents include, without limitation:

26 e communications between Brightvicw and Apple relating to the Project;

27
2 A truc and correct copy of Jensen’s Request for Production outlining all specific categorics of
28 documents requested is attached as Exhibit B.

3- Case No. 18CV330108
PLAINTIFF JENSEN LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR, LLC’S INFORMAL DISCOVERY CONFERENCE BRIEF
communications between Brightvicw and Truebeck relating to the Project;

communications between Brightview and any other person relating to the Project;

documents rclating to transportation on the Project;

documents relating to Brightview presenting Jensen’s claims to Truebeck or Apple;

« documents relating to temporary restrooms on the Project; and
. documents relating to the grow and kill sequence on the Project.

Accordingly, Brightview has failed to comply with its requirements under the Civil Discovery

Act and therefore must produce aff documents responsive to Request for Production of

Documents Numbers | through 48 and 50 through 70.

10 Brightview did provide some documents that were responsive to Jensen’s Request for

11 Production Number 49. However, Brightview primarily produced checks, payment applications,

12 invoices, and change orders, most of which were completely redacted and therefore unintelligible.

13 Brightview purportedly redacted these documents on the grounds that they are protected from

14 discovery as private business records and/or trade secrets, but failed to provide any support for

15 thesc baseless claims of privilege. In fact, Brightview failed to cven assert its objections in its

16 responses and therefore waived any such claim of privilege.

17 Brightview’s unsubstantiated objections fail as a matter of law for two reasons. First, the
18 documents sought by Jensen are not private or confidential business records. Instead, the

19 documents redacted (invoices, payments, receipts) are typical project records that are routinely

20 discoverable. Even if these documents contained private business information, which they do

21 not, such privacy must give way as the requested documents are relevant and prove Jensen's

22 claims. See, e.g., SCC Acquisitions, Inc. v. Super. Ct. (2015) 243 Cal. App. 4th 741, 755 (holding

23 corporations do not have a right of privacy protected by the California Constitution and that any

24 claim to privacy must be balanced against (1) the relevancy ol the discovery Lo the subject matter

25 of the pending lawsuit and (2) whether the discovery appears reasonably calculated to lead to the

26 discovery of admissible evidence). Second, Brightview has failed to provide any information that

27 in any way would support its claim that these typical project records constitute “trade secrets.”

28 See Bridgestone/Firestone, Inc, v. Super. Ct. (1992) 7 Cal. App. 4th 1384, 1393 (holding that the

4. Case No. 18CV330108
PLAINTIFF JENSEN LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR, LLC’S INFORMAL DISCOVERY CONFERENCE BRIEF
burden is on the party claiming privilege to demonstrate that the documents contain trade secrets)

This is not surprising because these documents are not trade scercts, but instead typical project

documents that are routinely discoverablo, If these documents were confidential business

records, which they are not, then the proper avenue would be for Brightview to mark the

documents as confidential pursuant to Brightview’s and Jensen’s protective order, not redact the

documents. A true and correct copy of the protective order is attached hereto as Exhibit C.

Accordingly, Brightview’s purported claims of privilege are unfounded and therefore Brightview

must re-produce all redacted documents without any redactions?

B Rana Creek is required by the Civil Discovery Act to produce documents
responsive to Jensen’s discovery requests.
10

Ul Jensen propounded discovery requests on Rana Creek seeking a settlement agreement

12 hetween Rana Creek and Brightview that includes costs payable to Rana Creek that were

13 carmarked for Jensen’s work and services on the Project. This settlement agreement is highly

14 relevant to this action and identifies amounts paid to Rana Creek that includes, among other

15 things, cosis that are earmarked for Jensen’s work and services on the Project. Rana Creek has

16 refused to provide this agreement on the ground that it is privileged. However, Rana Creek has

17 provided no information supporting this claim and therefore has failed to meet its hurden.

18 Accordingly, Rana Creek should he compelled to produce this settlement agreement.

19 Jensen’s deadline to file a motion to compel is currently set for August 13, 2019.

20 Tlowever, because the IDC is scheduled for August 16, 2019, Jensen has requested that Rana

21 Creek extend this deadline so that the parties can resolve this dispute without the need of judicial

22 intervention.

23 it

24 Mt

26 3 Separately, Brightview filed motions to compel Jensen to issue further responses to form
interrogatories and requests lor admission. which is currently set for hearing on October 3, 2019.
27 Jensen contends that Brighiview's motion to compel is without merit and is born out of
Brightview’s refusal to review documents alrcady in its possession. Jensen intends to oppose these
28 motions.

5. Case No. 18CV330108
PLAINTIFF JENSEN LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR, LLC’S INFORMAL DISCOVERY CONFERENCE BRIEF
TH. CONCLUSION
For all of the foregoing reasons, Jensen requests that Brightview and Rana Creek produce

unredacted documents responsive to Jensen’s discovery requests within ten (10) days of the

Informal Discovery Conference.

DATED: August 8, 2019 PERKINS COIE LLP

By: pt Q—
Meredith A. Jones-McKeown
Jacob A. Dean

Attomeys for Plaintiff
JENSEN LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR, LLC
10

13
14

6 Case No. 18CV330108
PLAINTIFF JENSEN LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR, LLC’S INFORMAL DISCOVERY CONFERENCE BRIEF
EXHIBIT A
Meredith Jones-McKeown, State Bar No. 233301
PERKINS COIE LLP
505 Howard Street, Suite 1000
San Francisco, CA 94105-3201
Telephone: 415.344.7097
Facsimile: 415.344.7297
Email: mjonesmckeown@perkinscoie.com

Helen J. Lauderdale, State Bar No. 119952
PERKINS COIE LLP
1888 Century Park East, Suite 1700
Los Angeles, CA 90067-1721
Telephone: 310.788.3216
Facsimile: 310.788.3399
Email: hlauderdale@perkinscoie.com

Attorneys for Plaintiff
JENSEN LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR, LLC
10

11 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA.

12 COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA

14 JENSEN LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR, UNLIMITED JURISDICTION
LLC, a California limited liability
15 company, Case No. 18CV330108

16 Plaintiff, PLAINTIFF JENSEN LANDSCAPE
CONTRACTOR, LLC’s DEMANDS FOR
17 a INSPECTION, COPYING, AND
PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS AND
18 BRIGHTVIEW LANDSCAPE ELECTRONICALLY STORED
DEVELOPMENT, INC., a California INFORMATION TO DEFENDANT
19 corporation; LIBERTY MUTUAL BRIGHTVIEW LANDSCAPE
INSURANCE COMPANY, a DEVELOPMENT, INC.
20 Massachusetts corporation; and DOES 1
through 20, inclusive, SET NO. ONE
21
Defendants.
22

24 PROPOUNDING PARTY: Plaintiff Jensen Landscape Contractor, LLC

25 RESPONDING PARTY: Defendant BrightView Landscape Development, Inc.

26 SET No.: One

27
28

DEMANDS FOR INSPECTION
LEGAL141750208.2
TO DEFENDANT BRIGHTVIEW LANDSCAPE DEVELOPMENT, INC. AND ITS

ATTORNEYS OF RECORD

Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure Sections 2031.010, et seg., plaintiff Jensen

Landscape Contractor, LLC (“JENSEN”) requests that defendant BrightView Landscape

Development Inc. (“BVLD”) produce for inspection and copying the documents and

electronically stored information responsive to the demands set forth below within thirty (30)

days of the service of these Requests for Production at 10:00 a.m. at the office of Perkins Coie

LLP, 505 Howard Street, Suite 1000, San Francisco, CA 94105-3201. BVLD must also provide

written responses to the demands below in a format complying the Code of Civil Procedure

10 Sections 2031.210 through 20.31.250 and within the time specified by Code of Civil Procedure

11 Section 2031.260(a).

12 DEFINITIONS

13 The following definitions are incorporated into each demand for inspection:

14 1 “YOU” or “YOUR” or “BVLD” mean BrightView Landscape Development, Inc.,

15 the successor-in-interest to ValleyCrest Landscape Development, Inc., and all its members,

16 officers, directors, shareholders, attorneys, agents, employees, investigators, representatives, and

17 any PERSON or entity acting on its behalf or at its direction or request.

18 2 “JENSEN” means Jensen Landscape Contractor, LLC, and any of its officers,

19 directors, shareholders, attorneys, agents, employees, investigators, representatives, and any

20 PERSON or entity acting on its behalf or at its direction or request.

21 3 “OWNER” means Apple, Inc. and all of its officers, directors, shareholders,

22 attorneys, agents, employees, investigators, representatives, and any PERSON or entity acting on

23 its behalf or at its direction or request.

24 4. “CONTRACTOR?” or “TRUEBECK” mean Truebeck Construction, Inc. and all of

25 its officers, directors, shareholders, attorneys, agents, employees, investigators, representatives, or

26 predecessors-in-interest such as BNBT, and any PERSON or entity acting on its behalf or at its

27 direction or request.

28
-2-
DEMANDS FOR INSPECTION
LEGAL141750208.2
5 “PROJECT” means the AC2 Landscaping and Site Improvements Project on the

real property located at 19050 Pruneridge Avenue, Cupertino, CA 95014.

6 “PROJECT SITE” means the real property—including all staging areas, storage

facilities, warehouses, receiving areas, fields, and other real property—of the PROJECT and

where PROJECT materials and equipment were either temporarily or permanently used, stored,

maintained, repaired, delivered, unloaded, and transported.

id “SUBCONTRACT” means the written agreement dated March 31, 2015 between

YOU and JENSEN for the construction of the AC2 Landscaping and Site Improvements Project

on the real property located at 19050 Pruneridge Avenue, Cupertino, CA 95014.

10 8 “ATTACHMENT F” means the DOCUMENT, with exhibits, titled “Attachment F

11 - Site Logistics Plans 09/09/2014, 01/28/2014 & 08/09/2013” to the SUBCONTRACT.

12 9. “DOCUMENT” or “DOCUMENTS” mean all documents, electronically stored

13 information, and tangible things, including without limitation all writings (as defined in Section

14 250 of the California Evidence Code) and all other means of recording information, whether

15 written, transcribed, taped, filmed, microfilmed, or in any other way produced, reproduced, or

16 records, and including but not limited to: originals, drafts, computer-sorted and computer-

17 retrievable information, copies and duplicates that are marked with any notion or annotation or

18 otherwise differ in any way from the original, correspondence, memoranda, reports, notes,

19 minutes, contracts, agreements, books, records, checks, vouchers, invoices, purchase orders,

20 ledgers, diaries, logs, calendars, computer printouts, computer disks, card files, lists of persons

21 attending meetings or conferences, sketches, diagrams, calculations, evaluations, analyses,

22 directions, work papers, press clippings, sworn or unsworn statements, requisitions, manuals or

23 guidelines, audit work papers, financial analyses, tables of organizations, charts, graphs, indices,

24 advertisements and promotional materials, audited and unaudited financial statements, trade

25 letters, trade publications, newspapers and newsletters, photographs, emails, electronic or

26 mechanical records, facsimiles, telegrams and telecopies, and audiotapes. Each draft, annotated

27 or otherwise non-identical copy is a separate DOCUMENT within the meaning of this term.

28 DOCUMENTS shall also include any removable sticky notes, flags, or other attachments affixed
3-
DEMANDS FOR INSPECTION
LEGAL141750208.2
to any of the foregoing, as well as the files, folder tabs, and labels appended to or containing and

DOCUMENTS. DOCUMENTS expressly include all ELECTRONIC RECORDS.

10. “ELECTRONIC RECORDS” mean the original (or identical duplicate when the

original is not available) and any non-identical copies (whether non-identical because of notes

made on copies or attached comments, annotations, marks transmission notations, or highlighting

of any kind) of writings of every kind and description inscribed by mechanical, facsimile,

electronic, magnetic, digital, or other means. ELECTRONIC RECORDS includes, by way of

example and not by limitation, computer programs (whether private, commercial, or work-in-

progress), programming notes and instructions, activity listings of email transmittals and receipts,

10 output resulting from the use of any software program (including word processing documents,

11 spreadsheets, database files, charts, graphs and outlines), electronic mail, and any and all

12 miscellaneous files and file fragments, regardless of the media on which they reside and

13 regardless of whether said ELECTRONIC RECORDS exists in an active file, deleted file, or file

14 fragment. ELECTRONIC RECORDS includes without limitation any and all items stored on

15 computer memories, hard disks, diskettes and cartridges, network drives, network memory

16 storage, archived tapes and cartridges, backup tapes, floppy disks, CD-ROMs, removable media,

17 removable storage of all types, magnetic tapes of all types, microfiche, and any other media used

18 for digital data storage or transmittal. ELECTRONIC RECORDS also includes the file, folder

19 tabs, and containers and labels appended to or associated with each original and non-identical

20 copy.

21 ll. “COMMUNICATION” or “COMMUNICATIONS” mean any process by which

22 information is exchanged between PERSONS including without limit any form of written or oral

23 communication, letters, memoranda, electronic mail, voice mail, text message, telegrams, Internet

24 chat programs, invoices, telephone conversations, face-to-face meetings, and other similar forms

25 of correspondence or communication.

26 12. “PERSON” and “PERSONS” mean any natural person, marital community,

27 partnership, corporation, joint venture, business entity, or governmental entity.

28
4.
DEMANDS FOR INSPECTION
LEGAL141750208.2
13. “RELATING TO,” “RELATED TO” or “RELATE(S) TO” mean constituting,

containing, concerning, embodying, reflecting, identifying, stating, mentioning, discussing,

describing, evidencing, referring to, with respect to, describing, or in any other way being

relevant to that given subject matter.

14. In this set of demands for inspection:

a. The terms “all” and “each” shall be constructed as all and each;

b. The connectives “and” and “or” shall be construed either disjunctively or

conjunctively as necessary to bring within the scope of the discovery request all responses that

might otherwise be construed to be outside of its scope; and

10 c The use of the singular form of any word includes the plural, and vice

11 versa.

13 DEMANDS FOR PRODUCTION

14 DEMAND NO. 1:

15 All DOCUMENTS RELATING TO COMMUNICATIONS between YOU and the

16 OWNER relating to the PROJECT, including without limitation, memoranda, correspondence,

17 electronic mail, meeting minutes, notes, progress reports, change order requests, change orders,

18 claims, and payment applications.

19 DEMAND NO. 2:

20 All DOCUMENTS RELATING TO COMMUNICATIONS between YOU and

21 TRUEBECK relating to the PROJECT, including without limitation, memoranda,

22 correspondence, electronic mail, meeting minutes, notes, progress reports, change order requests,

23 change orders, claims, and payment applications.

24 DEMAND NO. 3:

25 All DOCUMENTS that RELATE TO COMMUNICATIONS between YOU and any

26 PERSON that has provided work, labor, materials, services, or equipment to the PROJECT.

27
28
5.
DEMANDS FOR INSPECTION
LEGAL141750208.2
DEMAND NO. 4:

All DOCUMENTS RELATING TO the personnel transport tram to transport PERSONS

to the PROJECT.

DEMAND NO. 5:

All DOCUMENTS RELATING TO the use of buggies on and to the PROJECT SITE.

DEMAND NO. 6:

All DOCUMENTS RELATING TO the OWNER prohibiting the use of buggies on and to

the PROJECT SITE.

DEMAND NO. 7:

10 All DOCUMENTS RELATING TO the transportation and movement of PERSONS,

11 material, and equipment on and to the PROJECT SITE in the time period when the OWNER

12 prohibited the use of buggies on the PROJECT SITE.

13 DEMAND NO. 8:

14 All DOCUMENTS RELATING TO the OWNER permitting buggies back on the

15 PROJECT SITE.

16 DEMAND NO. 9:

17 All DOCUMENTS RELATING TO the quantity, location, and condition of the temporary

18 toilets on the PROJECT SITE.

19 DEMAND NO. 10:

20 All DOCUMENTS that RELATE TO COMMUNICATIONS about changing the location

21 of the temporary toilets on the PROJECT SITE.

22 DEMAND NO. 11:

23 All DOCUMENTS that RELATE TO COMMUNICATIONS about the quantity and

24 condition of temporary toilets on the PROJECT SITE.

25 DEMAND NO. 12:

26 All DOCUMENTS that RELATE TO COMMUNICATIONS with the OWNER

27 concerning temporary toilets.
28
-6-
DEMANDS FOR INSPECTION
LEGAL141750208.2
DEMAND NO. 13:

All DOCUMENTS that RELATE TO COMMUNICATIONS with TRUEBECK

concerning temporary toilets.

DEMAND NO. 14:

All DOCUMENT RELATING TO Specification Section 329200 for the PROJECT.

DEMAND NO. 15:

All DOCUMENTS RELATING TO the Grow and Kill sequence planned for the

PROJECT.

DEMAND NO. 16:

10 All DOCUMENTS that RELATE TO COMMUNICATIONS about eliminating the Grow

11 and Kill sequence from the PROJECT scope.

12 DEMAND NO. 17:

13 All DOCUMENTS RELATING TO the deferral of the Grow and Kill sequence.

14 DEMAND NO. 18:

15 All DOCUMENTS RELATING TO delivery of plants and other materials for the

16 PROJECT.

17 DEMAND NO. 19:

18 All DOCUMENTS RELATING TO the maintenance of plants and other materials at the

19 PROJECT SITE.

20 DEMAND NO. 20:

21 All DOCUMENTS RELATING TO the inspection of plants and other materials at the

22 PROJECT SITE.

23 DEMAND NO. 21:

24 All DOCUMENTS RELATING TO the acceptance or rejection of plants and other

25 materials at the PROJECT SITE.

26 DEMAND NO. 22:

27 All DOCUMENTS RELATING TO JENSEN accepting or rejecting plants and other

28 materials at the PROJECT SITE.
-T-
DEMANDS FOR INSPECTION
LEGAL141750208.2
DEMAND NO. 23:

All DOCUMENTS that RELATE TO the species of plants delivered and used in

connection with the PROJECT.

DEMAND NO. 24:

All DOCUMENTS RELATING TO the schedule for delivering trees and plants to the

PROJECT SITE.

DEMAND NO. 25:

All DOCUMENTS RELATING TO the access to the Ring Road for delivery and staging

referenced in ATTACHMENT F.

10 DEMAND NO. 26:

11 All DOCUMENTS RELATING TO restricting access to the Ring Road for delivery and

12 staging referenced in ATTACHMENT F.

13 DEMAND NO. 27:

14 All DOCUMENTS RELATING TO use of the lay down area at the Vallco Parkway in

15 connection with the PROJECT.

16 DEMAND NO. 28:

17 All DOCUMENTS RELATING TO the PROJECT schedule.

18 DEMAND NO. 29:

19 All DOCUMENTS RELATING TO adjusting the PROJECT schedule.

20 DEMAND NO. 30:

21 All DOCUMENTS RELATING TO extension of equipment used in connection with the

22 PROJECT.

23 DEMAND NO. 31:

24 All DOCUMENTS RELATING TO the Grand Opening of the Steve Jobs Theater.

25 DEMAND NO. 32:

26 All DOCUMENTS that RELATE TO COMMUNICATIONS with the OWNER about the

27 Grand Opening of the Steve Jobs Theater.

28
-8-
DEMANDS FOR INSPECTION
LEGAL141750208.2
DEMAND NO. 33:

All DOCUMENTS that RELATE TO COMMUNICATIONS with TRUEBECK about the

Grand Opening of the Steve Jobs Theater.
DEMAND NO. 34:

All DOCUMENTS RELATING TO overtime performed in connection with the

PROJECT.

DEMAND NO. 35:

All DOCUMENTS that RELATE TO any analysis, evaluation, or report prepared by the

OWNER regarding the quality of work performed by JENSEN at the PROJECT.

10 DEMAND NO. 36:

11 All DOCUMENTS that RELATE TO any analysis, evaluation, or report prepared by

12 TRUEBECK regarding the quality of work performed by JENSEN at the PROJECT

13 DEMAND NO. 37:

14 All DOCUMENTS that RELATE TO any analysis, evaluation, or report prepared by

15 YOU regarding the quality of work performed by JENSEN at the PROJECT.

16 DEMAND NO. 38:

17 All DOCUMENTS RELATING TO any analysis, evaluation, or report regarding any

18 proposed change order provided by JENSEN on the PROJECT.

19 DEMAND NO. 39:

20 All DOCUMENTS RELATING TO any analysis, evaluation, or report regarding any time

21 extension request made by JENSEN on the PROJECT.

22 DEMAND NO. 40:

23 All DOCUMENTS, including but not limited to COMMUNICATIONS, RELATING TO

24 the PROJECT.

25 DEMAND NO. 41:

26 All DOCUMENTS, including but not limited to COMMUNICATIONS, RELATING TO

27 JENSEN.

28
-9-
DEMANDS FOR INSPECTION
LEGAL141750208.2
DEMAND NO. 42:

All DOCUMENTS, including but not limited to COMMUNICATIONS, RELATING TO

work, labor, materials, or services performed on the PROJECT by any PERSON.

DEMAND NO. 43:

All DOCUMENTS, including but not limited to COMMUNICATIONS, RELATING TO

the construction schedule for the PROJECT.

DEMAND NO. 44:

All DOCUMENTS, including but not limited to COMMUNICATIONS, RELATING TO

any proposed changed order on the PROJECT.

10 DEMAND NO. 45:

11 All DOCUMENTS RELATING TO YOUR budget for the PROJECT.

12 DEMAND NO. 46:

13 All DOCUMENTS RELATING TO any analysis, evaluation, investigation, or report

14 regarding YOUR actual costs incurred for the PROJECT.

15 DEMAND NO. 47:

16 All DOCUMENTS RELATING TO any analysis, evaluation, investigation, or report

17 regarding YOUR actual costs incurred for the PROJECT in comparison to YOUR budget for the

18 PROJECT.

19 DEMAND NO. 48:

20 All DOCUMENTS RELATING TO any daily field reports, diaries, or progress reports

21 regarding the PROJECT prepared by or for YOU.

22 DEMAND NO. 49:

23 All DOCUMENTS RELATING TO invoices, billings, or payment applications from

24 YOU to TRUEBECK in connection with the PROJECT.

25 DEMAND NO. 50:

26 All DOCUMENTS RELATING TO any reports, analyses, or evaluation of construction

27 schedules and schedule updates for the PROJECT.

28
-10-
DEMANDS FOR INSPECTION
LEGAL141750208.2
DEMAND NO. 51:

All DOCUMENTS RELATING TO any actions YOU took to present JENSEN’s claims

to TRUEBECK and/or OWNER.

DEMAND NO. 32:

All DOCUMENTS RELATING TO any actions YOU took to pursue JENSEN’s claims

with TRUEBECK and/or OWNER.

DEMAND NO. 53:

All DOCUMENTS RELATING TO any actions YOU took to prosecute JENSEN’s

claims.

10 DEMAND NO. 54:

11 All DOCUMENTS YOU submitted to TRUEBECK or OWNER in connection with

12 YOUR change order requests.

13 DEMAND NO. 55:

14 All DOCUMENTS YOU submitted to TRUEBECK or OWNER in connection with

15 YOUR claims on the PROJECT.

16 DEMAND NO. 56:

17 All DOCUMENTS YOU submitted to TRUEBECK or OWNER in connection with

18 JENSEN’S change order requests.

19 DEMAND NO. 57:

20 All DOCUMENTS YOU submitted to TRUEBECK or OWNER in connection with

21 JENSEN’S claims on the PROJECT.

22 DEMAND NO. 58:

23 All DOCUMENTS YOU received from TRUEBECK or OWNER in connection with

24 YOUR change order requests.

25 DEMAND NO. 59:

26 All DOCUMENTS YOU received from TRUEBECK or OWNER in connection with

27 YOUR claims on the PROJECT.

28
elie
DEMANDS FOR INSPECTION
LEGAL141750208.2
DEMAND NO. 60:

All DOCUMENTS YOU received from TRUEBECK or OWNER in connection with

JENSEN’S change order requests.

DEMAND NO. 61:

All DOCUMENTS YOU received from TRUEBECK or OWNER in connection with

JENSEN’S claims on the PROJECT.

DEMAND NO. 62:

All DOCUMENTS prepared or received by Ray Tristan RELATED TO JENSEN’S work

on the PROJECT.

10 DEMAND NO. 63:

11 All DOCUMENTS prepared or received by Skip Stevens RELATED TO JENSEN’S

12 work on the PROJECT.

13 DEMAND NO. 64:

14 All DOCUMENTS prepared or received by Dan Harter RELATED TO JENSEN’S work

15 on the PROJECT.

16 DEMAND NO. 65:

17 All DOCUMENTS prepared or received by Sal Ochoa RELATED TO JENSEN’S work

18 on the PROJECT.

19 DEMAND NO. 66:

20 All DOCUMENTS prepared or received by Tom Donnelly RELATED TO JENSEN’S

21 work on the PROJECT.

22 DEMAND NO. 67:

23 All DOCUMENTS prepared or received by Dan Dalske RELATED TO JENSEN’S work

24 on the PROJECT.

25 DEMAND NO. 68:

26 All DOCUMENTS prepared or received by Yvette Gonzalez RELATED TO JENSEN’S

27 work on the PROJECT.
28
-12-
DEMANDS FOR INSPECTION
LEGAL141750208.2
DEMAND NO. 69:

All DOCUMENTS prepared or received by Art Williams RELATED TO JENSEN’S

work on the PROJECT.

DEMAND NO. 70:

All DOCUMENTS prepared or received by Linnea Bennett RELATED TO JENSEN’S

work on the PROJECT.

DATED: November 8, 2018 PERKINS COIE LLP

10 By:
Meredith A. Jones-McKeown
11 Helen J. Lauderdale
12 Attorneys for Plaintiff
JENSEN LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR, LLC
13

19
20

27
28
Figs
DEMANDS FOR INSPECTION
LEGAL141750208.2
PROOF OF SERVICE BY OVERNIGHT DELIVERY
lam a citizen of the United States and employed in San Francisco County, California. I

am over the age of eighteen years and not a party to the within-entitled action. My business

address is 505 Howard Street, Suite 1000, San Francisco, California 94105-3204. On

November 8, 2018, I deposited with Federal Express, a true and correct copy of the within

documents:

PLAINTIFF JENSEN LANDSCAPE CONTRACTOR, LLC’s
DEMANDS FOR INSPECTION, COPYING, AND
PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS AND
ELECTRONICALLY STORED INFORMATION TO
DEFENDANT BRIGHTVIEW LANDSCAPE
DEVELOPMENT, INC.
10
in a sealed envelope, addressed as follows:
11
Marion Hack
12 Pepper Hamilton LLP
350 South Grand Avenue, Suite 3400
13 Los Angeles, CA 90071-3427
14 Following ordinary business practices, the envelope was sealed and placed for collection

15 by Federal Express on this date, and would, in the ordinary course of business, be retrieved by

16 Federal Express for overnight delivery on this date.

17 I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the above

18 is true and correct.

19 Executed on November 8, 2018, at San Francisco, California.

21
~ Tsabel Haas
22

28
-14-
DEMANDS FOR INSPECTION
LEGAL141750208.2
EXHIBIT B
FRESE He PACE UP i DOCUMENT HAS A LULUNEL SAL RSRUUNE UN HEMETEN swe rere raet rere rare rer ree
nora evn ran ari 0
—_ Briige Bank, NA. ‘go-a526/t211 417009316
we | RUE
co TION
201 Redwood Shores Phuvy #125 Reciigad Ci CA 94065 DATE 10/17/2018

AI RIOR MRR REREAD Seog DRR SRN NnN REANIM
;
nO eats a
.
.
TO
THE
ORDER
BrightView La
7039 Commercé ircle.
Pleasanton, CA. g4588
Scape Developm
_Hhtby
Gp rc _
OF
SSSR Saeasceiesetes
a
Tre GAG OF THIS DOCUMENT CONTAIN AN BATFIGIAL WATERMARIC HOLOAT
oo ee POPRCTET
Duss recbl

wh’70093 4B0e Wh2ebbh32Oun b02594 2980

VALLO03 BrightView Landscape Developm
Truebeck Construction
DATE INVOICE NO DESCRIPTION DEDUCTION | BALANCE
5-31-18] 414065-41 MAY 2018

Client# 4422900
Job# lo4u3g
Invoice# sgo3g31
CHECK CHECK
ATE 10-17-18 NUMBER 417009316 TOTAL>
PLEASE DETACH AND RETAIN FOR YOUR RECORDS

a crt ne case sea sereean

BVLD0000859
“
ZO0IT-\2
A B c D E F H f J
CHG ITEM WORK COMPLETED TOTAL COMP % AGE BAL TO FINISH
DESCRIPTION OF WORK SCHEDULED WORK RETAINAGE
ORD | NO. PREVIOUS CURRENT (E+F) (H/D} (D-H)
O1 Preconstruction Services 100.0%)
02 General Conditions 100.0%)
03 ‘Soil Tiling Amended 98.0%)
04 Soil Tiling import 95.0%)
05 Grading 95.0%)
06 Wall Drains 100.0%
07 Underdrain System 95.0%)
08 Irrigation - Mainline 98.0%)
09 Irrigation - Shrubs & Plants 88.0%)
10 Irrigation - Eco Mat System 75.0%
11 Irrigation - Trees 89.09%)
12 Irrigation - Sleeving 100.0%
13 Irrigation - Sleeving for Tree 90.0%
14 Irrigation - Extra Materials 0.0%
15 Receive, Unload & Stage Trees 98.0%
16 Planting 15 Gallon - 48" Box 90.0%
17 Planting 60" Box - 156" Box 95.0%
18 Temporary Access Roads 98.0%!
19 Planting - Feature Shrubs 75.0%
20 Planting ~ Turf Lawn 100.0%
iz Planting - Turf Lawn Reinforce 100.0%
22 Planting - Native Lawns 1%
3. Ptanting - Matrix Groundcover 60.0%
24 Planting - Vines 75.0%
25 Planting - Grassland Bulb Drift 30.0%
26 Planting Material 68.0%
27 General Mulching 78.0%
28 General Aggregate Mulching 60.0%)
29 Mulching at Tree Pits 62.7%)
X30 Volleyball Courts
30.1 Earthwork 100.0%
30.2 Rock, Leveling Sed & Fabric 100.0%
30.3 Header 100.0%
30.4 Volteyball Equipment 98.0%
30.5 Sand Play Surfacing 100.0%
30.6 Synthetic Turf Play Surfacing 40.0%

BVLD0000860
*

A B € D Ei F H 1 J
CHG ITEM. WORK COMPLETED TOTAL COMP % AGE BAL TO FINISH
DESCRIPTION OF WORK SCHEDULED WORK RETAINAGE
ORD} NO. PREVIOUS CURRENT {E+F} (H/0) (D-H)
X31 Basketball Courts
311 Earthwork & Baserock 100.0%
31.2 Concrete 100.0% |
31.3 Basketball Court Surfacing 85.0%)
31.4 Basketball Equipment 85.0%
32 SWPPP 80.0%)
33 Metal Edging, Stakes & Cobbles 80.0%
34 |Gravel/Cobble at Main Building 80.0%)
35 T

Case Info

Judge

Maureen A. Folan Track Judge’s New Case

Case No.

(Subscribe to View)

Document Filed Date

August 09, 2019

Case Filing Date

June 15, 2018

County

Parties

A. Robert Rosin Attorney
Brightview Landscape Development, Inc. Defendant/cross Complainant
Helen Jean Lauderdale Attorney
Jensen Landscape Contractor, Llc Plaintiff/cross Defendant
John H Conrad Attorney For The Defendant
Liberty Mutual Insurance Company Defendant
Marion Teresa Hack Attorney
Rana Creek Habitat Restoration, Inc. Cross Defendant
Truebeck Construction, Inc. Cross Defendant
William Mitchell Kaufman Attorneys for Plaintiffs
Alan Rosin Attorneys for Plaintiffs
Jacob Dean Attorneys for Plaintiffs
Christopher Panetta Attorneys for Plaintiffs
Laura Franklin Attorneys for Plaintiffs
Lair Franklin Attorney
William Kaplan Attorney
Gregory Gerson Attorneys for Plaintiffs
Joseph Sweeney Attorney

For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.

Motion-Secondary: Jensen Landscape Contractor, Llc vs Brightview Landscape Development, Inc.

Preview

Related Topics

Case Info

Parties