Preview
)—.A
David W. Evans (Bar No. 79466)
devans@hbblaw.com
Stephen J. Squillario (Bar No. 257781)
EELEE
SAN MATEO COUNTY
ssquillario@hbblaw.com
Stephen M. Tye (Bar No. 299326) JUL 1 @2017
stye@hbblaw.c0m
HAIGHT BROWN & BONESTEEL LLP
Three Embarcadero Center, Suite 200
San Francisco, California 94111
\oooqoxmbwio
Telephone: 415.546.7500
Facsimile: 415.546.7505
16 — ClV — 02643
DEC
Attorneys for Defendants Declaration
KELLY J OE SHINDELL DELACEY and 594355
SIDEMAN & BANCROFT LLP
|
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SAN MATEO
mni—‘O
b—‘D—‘r—ib—‘D—‘H
ANNEMARIE SCHILDERS, Case No. 16CIV02643
l
Iaight
v.
Plaintiff,
KELLY J OE SHINDELL DELACEY,
f
SIDEMAN & BANCROFT LLP, and DOES l
to 5,
Defendants.
‘_ '_
,
'
DECLARATION OF STEPHEN J.
SQUILLARIO IN SUPPORT OF
DEFENDANT SIDEMAN & BANCROFT
LLP’S MOTION TO COMPEL FURTHER
RESPONSES TO REQUEST FOR
PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS
Action Filed: December 2, 2016
1, Stephen J. Squillario, declare as follows:
1. I am a partner with the'law firm of Haight BrOWn’&' Bonesteel LLP, counsel for
NNNNNNNNNHHHH
OO\IO\UI~I>UJNr—‘O\DOO\ION
Defendants Kelly Shindell DeLacey Esq. and Sideman & Bancroft LLP (“S&B”) (collectively
“Defendants’fi in the above-captioned action. I am a member in good standing of the State Bar of
California. I have personal knowledge of the facts set forth in this declaration and, if called as a
witness, could and would testify c ampetently to such facts under oath.
2. Plaintiff Armemarie Schilders (“Plaintiff”) has sued Defendants for legal
malpractice in connection with their representation of Plaintiff in the underlying divorce action
.
filed and still-pending in this Couit, Stupp v. Schilders (San Mateo County Superior Court case no.
1
RIOS-0000059 DECLARATIO OF STEPHEN J. SQUILLARIO IN SUPPORT OF
12356326.] DEFENDANT SID MAN & BANCROFT LLP’S MOTION TO COMPEL
110799) (the “Underlying Action”). I have reviewed Defendants’ files from the Underlying
Action and am familiar with its contents, the various individuals who were involved, and the
general chronology and filings therein. Plaintiff alleges herein that she entered into the settlement
with ex-husband as reflected in the two Term Sheets executed in November 2013 and reduced to 3
\OmflONm-PUJNr—t
Judgment in March 2014 because of Defendants’ alleged negligence.
3. Attached hereto as Exhibit A is a true and correct copy of the Petition for
Dissolution of Marriage filed by Steven Stupp on September 28, 2010 in the Underlying Action.
4. Attached hereto as Exhibit B is a true and correct copy of the January 14, 2011
Order appointing Richard Berra, Esq. as Judge Pro Tem in the Underlying Action. Attached
>—I
O hereto as Exhibit C is a true and correct copy of the May 7, 2013 Order appointing Clifford Ross
.
Actionfm-CM
,_.
H Chemick, Esq. as Judge Pro Tem in the Underlying
r—A
N 5. Attached hereto as Exhibit D is a true and correct copy of the March 28, 2014
b—n DJ Judgment for Dissolution filed in the Underlying Action.
6. Attached hereto as Exhibit E is a true and correct c0py of Defendants’ Notice of
I
laight r—t
A
r—d
Li! Withdrawal of Attorney of Record filed on April 2, 2014 in the Underlying Action.
b—l O\ 7. According to this Court’s online docket, on April 11, 2014, Ester Adut filed a
’
b—d
\l’
Substitution of Attorney to become counsel of record for Plaintiff, 'who was proceeding in pro per,
)—‘ 00 in the Underlying Action. 4
I i i
)—-
\D 8. Since Ms. Adut became counsel of record,'Plaintiff has unsuccessfully moved to
vacate the Judgment in the Underlying Action pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 473(b)
NO
[\J H and (d). Plaintiff has also filed as many as m appeals/writ. petitions in the First Appellate
District, i.e., Case Nos.: A150080, A149976,‘ A149954, A149714, A149435, A149185, A148811,
-
NN
N L13 A148382, A148051, A147532, A147151, A146733, A146301, A145598, A144762, A144007,
N 4> A143186, and A142302
[\J U] 9. On April 7, 2017, my office served, via mail, written discovery to Plaintiff. This
N O\ included the following: (1) S&B’s Special Interrogatories (a true and correct copy of which is
N \l attached hereto as Exhibit F); (2) Ms. Shindell’s Special Interrogatories (a true and correct copy
N
00'
of which is attached hereto as Exhibit G); (3) S&B’s Form Interrogatories (a true and correct
2
PT05'0000059 DECLARATION OF STEPHEN J. SQUILLARIO IN SUPPORT OF
123553261 DEFENDANT SIDEMAN & BANCROFT LLP’ S MOTION TO COMPEL
copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit H); and (4) S&B’s Request for Production of
Documents (a true and correct copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit 1), in which Defendants
hUJN expressly requested a privilege log.
10. On May 5, 2017, Ms. Adut called me to request an extension on Plaintiffs
responses to June 12, 2017. On May 8, 2017, I advised Ms. Adut that I could not grant an
extension on Plaintiff’s responses to S&B’s Request for Production (which remained due on May
\OOO\IO\LII
12, 2017), but that I could extend the deadline for the other written discovery to June 12, 2017.
Attached hereto as Exhibit J is a true and correct copy of my May 8, 2017 e-mail to Ms. Adut’s
regarding this extension.
10 11. Attached hereto as Exhibit K is a true and correct copy of Plaintiffs verified
11 Response to S&B’ 3 Request for Production of Documents. Plaintiff did not include any
12 documents when she served the Response. However, on May 24, 2017, my office received a flash
13 drive containing 19 folders, each appearing to be labeled by a corresponding request. The drive
laight 14 did not include any documents in responses to Request Nos. 1-6, 15—16, or 27—28. In addition, the
15 drive was not accompanied by a letter describing it contents or a privilege log as requested. In all,
’
1 16 Plaintiff produced the following categories of documents: (1) communications and documents
17 pertaining to a tolling agreement; (2) a letter from Ms. Shindell regarding hourly rates; (3) select
18 pleadings and orders from 2010 to 2016; (4) invoices from the judges pro tem; (5) Plaintiffs
19 communications with the second judge pro term; (6) two letters from Plaintiffs court-appointed
20 guardian ad litem; (7) two promissory notes from Plaintiff to Dr. Alfred Lerner 1n the total amount
21 of $60,000; (8) communications between Ms. Shindell and Ms. Adut; (9) printouts of the online
22 docket for the Underlying ‘Action; and (10)‘six appellate opinions relating to the Underlying
23 Action. However, Plaintiff did 'n_ot produce such requested materials as: (l) e-mails exchanged
24 with Defendants; (2) communications between her and Ms. Adut pre-dating April 11, 2014, (3)
25 communications between her and Dr. Lerner, (4) communications between Ms. Adut and Dr.
26 Lerner, (5) communications between her and Mr. Stupp; (6) communications between Ms. Adut
27 and Mr. Stupp’s counsel; (7) filings with the Court of Appeal; (8) legal invoices for which she is
'28 seeking to recover fees incurred hereinyor (9) discovery exchanged in the Underlying Action.
3
”059000059 DECLARATION OF STEPHEN J. SQUILLARIO IN SUPPORT OF
123563254 DEFENDANT SIDEMAN & BANCROFT LLP’S MOTION TO COMPEL
Specifically, Dr. Alfred Lerner is a key witness because in addition to providing funding to
Plaintiff for the Underlying Action, he was part of frequent communications with Plaintiff and Ms.
Shindell while Defendants represented Plaintiff. It is also my understanding that he was present
on at least one Of the'days in November 2013 on which Plaintiff entered into the settlement.
\OOOQO’tklI-PUJNr—I
12. On June 12, 2017, I sent a “meet and confer” letter to Ms. Adut, detailing
deficiencies in Plaintiffs Response tO S&B’s Request for Production of Documents and her
document production and requesting a privilege log by June 26, 2017. Attached hereto as Exhibit
L is a true and correct copy of this letter.
13. On June 22, 2017, Ms. Adut and I reached an agreement on a one—week extension
Of the motion to compel deadline for Plaintiff’s Response to S&B’s Request for Production of
Documents to July 10, 2017. Attached hereto as Exhibit M is a true and correct copy of the
corresponding e-mail exchange.
14. Attached hereto as Exhibit N is a true and correct copy of Plaintiff’s verified
Response to S&B’s Form Interrogatories. Attached hereto as Exhibit 0 is a true and correct copy
I
laight
of Plaintiff’s verified Response to S&B’s Special Interrogatories. Attached hereto as Exhibit P is
a true and correct copy of Plaintiff s verified Response to Ms. Shindell’s Special Interrogatories.
In these responses, Plaintiff identified such individuals-as Dr. Lerner, Ms. Adut and Mr. Chemick
as having personal knowledge Of facts that support her claims and claimed to have incurred over
mflom-PWNi—‘OKOOONO‘Im-PWNi—‘O
$7 million in damages, as well as legal fees incurred since Defendants withdrew as counsel of
V
i
record in the Underlying Action.
15. On June 29, 2017, I inquired about the status of Ms. Adut’s response to the “meet
and confer” letter, to .which Ms. Adut replied that she planned to respond by July 10, 2017, even
though that was the motion to" compel deadline. Attached hereto as Exhibit Q is a true and correct
copy of this e-mail exchange. To date, I have not received a response from Ms. Adut to my June
12, 2017 “meet and confer” letter.
16. Defendants have incurred a total of $7,860.00 in fees, based on the following
—
applicable hourly billing rates of the personnel involved: Stephen J. Squillario, Esq. (partner)
$300.00 (for 15.0 hours); and Stephen M. Tye (associate) — $240.00 (for 14.0 hours). In addition,
4
PT05-0000059 DECLARATION OF STEPHEN J. SQUILLARIO IN SUPPORT OF
123563261 DEFENDANT SIDEMAN & BANCROFT LLP’S MOTION TO COMPEL
p—d
Defendants will incur a $60.00 filing fee. As such, at this time, Defendants have incurred a total
of $7,920.00 in total fees and costs in conjunction with this matter. It is anticipated that
Defendants will incur additional fees in drafting the reply papers and at the hearing for which they
will provide support in their reply papers.
\OOOQONU‘I-PWN
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the
foregoing is true and correct. Executed on July 10, 2017, at San Francisco, California.
O 6
@en J. Squillario
H
N
03
HHr—ty—tHr—Ar—An—Iv—n
-P
Haight
U1
\1'0
00
wv
NNNNNNNJNN
oofiOxm-tHO
5
PT05-0000059 DECLARATION OF STEPHEN J. SQUILLARIO IN SUPPORT OF
12356326J DEFENDANT SIDEMAN & BANCROFT LLP’S MOTION TO COMPEL
EXHIBIT A
{'13.-
FL-‘i 00
ATTORNEY OR PARTY WATTORNEY (Name, Smaarnumbar, and address): m CDURT'USE ONLY
Alissa Kempton, Esq. (SEN: 225681)
T Robin, Ferguson & Kempton, LLP
750 Menlo Avenue
15433153 ggrk, CA 94 025 ENDORSED FILED
TELEPHONENO' (650) 752— 0800 FAXNOJpbneO:
SAN MATEOCOUW
emu. mazes {Ophml}:
ATTORNEY FOR (Narne): Steven 311q
SUPERIOR coum-or: CALIFORNIA, courmror= San Mateo SEP 2 8 2010
summonses 400 County Center
MAILNG ADDRESS: Same 85m“ vlsil‘l‘ghongfitig’ uoun
CITYAMDZIPCODE: City, CA 94063
Redwood DEPUTYC K
mums- Family Law Division
MARRIAGE OF
PETmONER: Steven Stupp
RESPONDENT: Annemarie Schilders
PETITION FOR W mm:
IE Dissolution of Marriage
11 0799
:1 NuliityofMam‘age
Legal Separation
[:1 1:] AMENDED
1. RESIDENCE (Dissolution only) [:23 Petitioner I: Respondent has' been a resident of this state for at least six months and
ofthis county for at least three months immediately preceding the filing of this Petition forDlssoiution of Maniage,
2. STATISTICAL FACTS
a. Date of maniage: 12/ 05/ 1 995 c.‘ Time from date of marriage to date of separation (specify):
b. Data of separation: TED Years: Months:
3. DECLARA‘HON REGARDING MINOR CHILDREN (Include children of this relationship bom priorto orduring the marriage or
adopted during the marriage):
a. [:1There are no minor children.
b. [3:] The minor children are:
Child's name Blrthdate
”
.
weeks
Age &
Finn Robert Max Stupp 7/15/2010 9 M
:1
Continued on Attachment 3b.
children of the Petitioner and Respondent. a completed Declaration Under Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction
minor
"
c it there are
and Enforcement/tot (UCCJEA) (form FL-105) must be attached.
d. [:1 A completed voluntary declaration of paternity regarding minor children born to the Petitioner and Respondent prior to
the marriage is attached.
4 SEPARATE PROPERTY .
7
4
Petitioner requests that the assets and debts listed [:1 in Property Declaration (form FL-tED) [:1 in Attachment 4
[E below be confirmed as separate property. ' '
,
Coflnnig
'
lt_e__m
Any and all
property acquired by Petitioner before marriage, Petitioner
after separation or that which was acquired through gift,
or by inheritance.
NOTtCE: You may redact (black out) social security numbers from any written material filed with the court in this case
other than a form used to collect child or spousal support.
Fags 1 “2
PEl'mON—MARRIAGE
' 552mm
Form ruraummw . 30%] FamilyCodo.
ofmfitornia
Dumciiof
Pfiwmw.hmytm1 . (Family Law)
taunt}?
s
CASE NUMBER
MARRIAGE OF {last name, first name ofperiies):
_§tupp vs . Schilders
5. DECIARATION REGARDING COMMUNITY AND OUASI-COMMUNITYASSETS AND
DEBTS AS CURRENTLY KNOWN
a. [:i
There are no such assets or debts subject to disposition by the court inthls proceeding.
:1
b. [I]
All such assets and debts are listed (:1
in Property Declaration (form FL—160) in Attachment 5b.
[1] below (specify):
Petitioner does not have sufficient information at this time to list the
community and quasi-commity assets and debts . The community and quasi~
'will be listed on Petitioner ' 5 Declaration of
community assets and debts
Dis closure .
.
6. Petitioner requests
a: El dissolution of the marriage based on
irreconcilable differences. (Fern. Code, § 2310(a).)
d. 1:] nullity of voidable marriage based on
(1) i:| petitioner‘s age at time of marriage.
(1)
(2) [:i incurable insanity. (Fem. Code. § 231003).) (Fem. Code. §2210(a).)
[3 legal separation of the parties based on (2) [:1 prior existing marriage.
b.
(1)
(2)
I:
[:1
irreconcilable differences. (Fam. Code. § 2310(a).)
incurable insanity. (Fain. Code. § 2310(b).) (3) E]
(Fern. Code, §2210(b).)
unsound mind. (Fem. Code. § 2210(c).)
c. C] nullity ofvoid marriage based on
-
(4) Shared -(Eam. Code, § 2210(d).)
(i) [:1 incestuous montage. (Fem. Code. § 2200.) (5) [:1 force. (Fam. Code, § 2210(9).)
(2) (:1 bigamous marriage. (Fam. Code. § 2201.) (e) (:1 physical incapacity. (Fem. Code. § 2210(0)
7. Petitioner requests that the court grant the above relief and make lnjunctive (including
restraining) and other orders as follows:
a. Legal custody of children to ......................... ............ [I]
.
....................................... [Z]
. ..
Petitioner Respondent Joint other
. [:1
[:1
[j
E3
[:1
l:|
b.
c.
Physical custody of children to
Child visitation be granted to . . ( Supervised) ........ ............... D ,
[j . IE] I:
As FL-311
requested in rormz- [:1 i:] FL-312 1:] FL-341(C) [:l FL-34‘i(D) FL-3'41(E) [:3 Attachment 76.
d. [:1
Detennlnatlon of parentage of any children born to the Petitioner and Respondent prior to’ the marriage.
:1
a. Attorney fees and costs payable by ................ .................... 1:] .
f. Spousal support payable to (earnings assignment will be issued) ............... C]
~
[:1
g.. 'm
Terminate the court‘s jurisdiction (ability) to award spousal support to Respondent.
’ '
h. [1:] Property rights be determined.
l. [:I
Petitioner's tanner name be restored to (specify):
1- D Other {Specify}:
'
_
'
[:1 Continued on Attachment T). .
, ~
before or during this marriage, the
8. Child support-if there are minor children born to or adopted by the Petitioner and Respondent
'
court will make orders for the support of the children upon request and submission of financial forms by the requesting party. An
earnings assignment may be issued without further notice. Any party required to pay support must pay interest on overdue
amounts at the 'legai" rate. which is currentiy10 percent. .
. r _ ‘
UNDERSTAND THAT THEY APPLY
9. HAVE READ THE RESTRAINING ORDERS ON THE BACK OF THE SUMMONS, AND
I
I
'
To ME WHEN THIS PETITION is FILED.
- .
,
, . _
. _
'
l declare un er pe ty of perjury under the laws of the State of California th atthe
‘
Date: 4) 2 3* l1)
Steven S tup'o
[TYPE DR PRINT NAME)
Date: 9/23/10
Ali sa Ke ton Es .
('IYFEORPRNTNAME)
: 5681
NOTICE: Dissolution or legal separation may automatically cancel the rights of a spouse under
the other spouse's will, trust.
in joint tenancy, and any
retirement plan. power of attomey, pay on death bank amount. sunrivorshlp rights to any property owned
other similar thing. it does not automatically cancel the right of a spouse as beneficiary of the
other spouse‘s life Insurance policy.
insurance polices, retirement plans, and aedit
You should reviewthese matters. as well as any credit cards, other credit accounts, actions. However, some changes may
reports to determine whether they should be changed or whether you should take any other
agreement of your spouse or a court order (see Family Code sections 231—235).
require the
FL-iwmmmfi PETITION—MARRIAGE ran-2m
(Family Law)
EXHIBIT B
'
81/19/2811 18: 38 65836431: SHIFT ATI'DRNEY 'SVC PAGE 62/12
. .
_
‘
1
ENBGREEEB men
2 SAN MATEO COUNW
3 JAN 1 8 2011
-'
.4 -
'
-
- -
ememsmmrcoun
g
5
‘
.
.
By '
mew
6
..
7 _
SUPERIOR COUR’l‘ OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
8 '
COUNTY OF SANMATEO
9
10 _
Case No. -FAM0110799
11
In Re the Marriage of
'
..
Petitioner: STEVEN STUFF STIPULATION FOR
12 APPOINTMENT OF JUDGE PRO TEM
'Califomia‘Cpnsfimtion
and
13 Article VI, Section 21
Respondent: ANNEMARIB SCHILDERS
14
JUDGE,
15
STIPULATION FOR APPOINTMENT OF TEMPORARY
ORDER
15 AUTHORITY, CONDITIONS OFTRIALPROCEDURE,
'1 Article VI, Sectioi). 21, afid
17 Plusuant to me provisions ofCalifOrnia Constitutiexi
their respeefive counsel
13 California Rules of Court, Rule 2.831, the parties personally and through
I
Preview
)—.A David W. Evans (Bar No. 79466) devans@hbblaw.com Stephen J. Squillario (Bar No. 257781) EELEE SAN MATEO COUNTY ssquillario@hbblaw.com Stephen M. Tye (Bar No. 299326) JUL 1 @2017 stye@hbblaw.c0m HAIGHT BROWN & BONESTEEL LLP Three Embarcadero Center, Suite 200 San Francisco, California 94111 \oooqoxmbwio Telephone: 415.546.7500 Facsimile: 415.546.7505 16 — ClV — 02643 DEC Attorneys for Defendants Declaration KELLY J OE SHINDELL DELACEY and 594355 SIDEMAN & BANCROFT LLP | SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN MATEO mni—‘O b—‘D—‘r—ib—‘D—‘H ANNEMARIE SCHILDERS, Case No. 16CIV02643 l Iaight v. Plaintiff, KELLY J OE SHINDELL DELACEY, f SIDEMAN & BANCROFT LLP, and DOES l to 5, Defendants. ‘_ '_ , ' DECLARATION OF STEPHEN J. SQUILLARIO IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT SIDEMAN & BANCROFT LLP’S MOTION TO COMPEL FURTHER RESPONSES TO REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS Action Filed: December 2, 2016 1, Stephen J. Squillario, declare as follows: 1. I am a partner with the'law firm of Haight BrOWn’&' Bonesteel LLP, counsel for NNNNNNNNNHHHH OO\IO\UI~I>UJNr—‘O\DOO\ION Defendants Kelly Shindell DeLacey Esq. and Sideman & Bancroft LLP (“S&B”) (collectively “Defendants’fi in the above-captioned action. I am a member in good standing of the State Bar of California. I have personal knowledge of the facts set forth in this declaration and, if called as a witness, could and would testify c ampetently to such facts under oath. 2. Plaintiff Armemarie Schilders (“Plaintiff”) has sued Defendants for legal malpractice in connection with their representation of Plaintiff in the underlying divorce action . filed and still-pending in this Couit, Stupp v. Schilders (San Mateo County Superior Court case no. 1 RIOS-0000059 DECLARATIO OF STEPHEN J. SQUILLARIO IN SUPPORT OF 12356326.] DEFENDANT SID MAN & BANCROFT LLP’S MOTION TO COMPEL 110799) (the “Underlying Action”). I have reviewed Defendants’ files from the Underlying Action and am familiar with its contents, the various individuals who were involved, and the general chronology and filings therein. Plaintiff alleges herein that she entered into the settlement with ex-husband as reflected in the two Term Sheets executed in November 2013 and reduced to 3 \OmflONm-PUJNr—t Judgment in March 2014 because of Defendants’ alleged negligence. 3. Attached hereto as Exhibit A is a true and correct copy of the Petition for Dissolution of Marriage filed by Steven Stupp on September 28, 2010 in the Underlying Action. 4. Attached hereto as Exhibit B is a true and correct copy of the January 14, 2011 Order appointing Richard Berra, Esq. as Judge Pro Tem in the Underlying Action. Attached >—I O hereto as Exhibit C is a true and correct copy of the May 7, 2013 Order appointing Clifford Ross . Actionfm-CM ,_. H Chemick, Esq. as Judge Pro Tem in the Underlying r—A N 5. Attached hereto as Exhibit D is a true and correct copy of the March 28, 2014 b—n DJ Judgment for Dissolution filed in the Underlying Action. 6. Attached hereto as Exhibit E is a true and correct c0py of Defendants’ Notice of I laight r—t A r—d Li! Withdrawal of Attorney of Record filed on April 2, 2014 in the Underlying Action. b—l O\ 7. According to this Court’s online docket, on April 11, 2014, Ester Adut filed a ’ b—d \l’ Substitution of Attorney to become counsel of record for Plaintiff, 'who was proceeding in pro per, )—‘ 00 in the Underlying Action. 4 I i i )—- \D 8. Since Ms. Adut became counsel of record,'Plaintiff has unsuccessfully moved to vacate the Judgment in the Underlying Action pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 473(b) NO [\J H and (d). Plaintiff has also filed as many as m appeals/writ. petitions in the First Appellate District, i.e., Case Nos.: A150080, A149976,‘ A149954, A149714, A149435, A149185, A148811, - NN N L13 A148382, A148051, A147532, A147151, A146733, A146301, A145598, A144762, A144007, N 4> A143186, and A142302 [\J U] 9. On April 7, 2017, my office served, via mail, written discovery to Plaintiff. This N O\ included the following: (1) S&B’s Special Interrogatories (a true and correct copy of which is N \l attached hereto as Exhibit F); (2) Ms. Shindell’s Special Interrogatories (a true and correct copy N 00' of which is attached hereto as Exhibit G); (3) S&B’s Form Interrogatories (a true and correct 2 PT05'0000059 DECLARATION OF STEPHEN J. SQUILLARIO IN SUPPORT OF 123553261 DEFENDANT SIDEMAN & BANCROFT LLP’ S MOTION TO COMPEL copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit H); and (4) S&B’s Request for Production of Documents (a true and correct copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit 1), in which Defendants hUJN expressly requested a privilege log. 10. On May 5, 2017, Ms. Adut called me to request an extension on Plaintiffs responses to June 12, 2017. On May 8, 2017, I advised Ms. Adut that I could not grant an extension on Plaintiff’s responses to S&B’s Request for Production (which remained due on May \OOO\IO\LII 12, 2017), but that I could extend the deadline for the other written discovery to June 12, 2017. Attached hereto as Exhibit J is a true and correct copy of my May 8, 2017 e-mail to Ms. Adut’s regarding this extension. 10 11. Attached hereto as Exhibit K is a true and correct copy of Plaintiffs verified 11 Response to S&B’ 3 Request for Production of Documents. Plaintiff did not include any 12 documents when she served the Response. However, on May 24, 2017, my office received a flash 13 drive containing 19 folders, each appearing to be labeled by a corresponding request. The drive laight 14 did not include any documents in responses to Request Nos. 1-6, 15—16, or 27—28. In addition, the 15 drive was not accompanied by a letter describing it contents or a privilege log as requested. In all, ’ 1 16 Plaintiff produced the following categories of documents: (1) communications and documents 17 pertaining to a tolling agreement; (2) a letter from Ms. Shindell regarding hourly rates; (3) select 18 pleadings and orders from 2010 to 2016; (4) invoices from the judges pro tem; (5) Plaintiffs 19 communications with the second judge pro term; (6) two letters from Plaintiffs court-appointed 20 guardian ad litem; (7) two promissory notes from Plaintiff to Dr. Alfred Lerner 1n the total amount 21 of $60,000; (8) communications between Ms. Shindell and Ms. Adut; (9) printouts of the online 22 docket for the Underlying ‘Action; and (10)‘six appellate opinions relating to the Underlying 23 Action. However, Plaintiff did 'n_ot produce such requested materials as: (l) e-mails exchanged 24 with Defendants; (2) communications between her and Ms. Adut pre-dating April 11, 2014, (3) 25 communications between her and Dr. Lerner, (4) communications between Ms. Adut and Dr. 26 Lerner, (5) communications between her and Mr. Stupp; (6) communications between Ms. Adut 27 and Mr. Stupp’s counsel; (7) filings with the Court of Appeal; (8) legal invoices for which she is '28 seeking to recover fees incurred hereinyor (9) discovery exchanged in the Underlying Action. 3 ”059000059 DECLARATION OF STEPHEN J. SQUILLARIO IN SUPPORT OF 123563254 DEFENDANT SIDEMAN & BANCROFT LLP’S MOTION TO COMPEL Specifically, Dr. Alfred Lerner is a key witness because in addition to providing funding to Plaintiff for the Underlying Action, he was part of frequent communications with Plaintiff and Ms. Shindell while Defendants represented Plaintiff. It is also my understanding that he was present on at least one Of the'days in November 2013 on which Plaintiff entered into the settlement. \OOOQO’tklI-PUJNr—I 12. On June 12, 2017, I sent a “meet and confer” letter to Ms. Adut, detailing deficiencies in Plaintiffs Response tO S&B’s Request for Production of Documents and her document production and requesting a privilege log by June 26, 2017. Attached hereto as Exhibit L is a true and correct copy of this letter. 13. On June 22, 2017, Ms. Adut and I reached an agreement on a one—week extension Of the motion to compel deadline for Plaintiff’s Response to S&B’s Request for Production of Documents to July 10, 2017. Attached hereto as Exhibit M is a true and correct copy of the corresponding e-mail exchange. 14. Attached hereto as Exhibit N is a true and correct copy of Plaintiff’s verified Response to S&B’s Form Interrogatories. Attached hereto as Exhibit 0 is a true and correct copy I laight of Plaintiff’s verified Response to S&B’s Special Interrogatories. Attached hereto as Exhibit P is a true and correct copy of Plaintiff s verified Response to Ms. Shindell’s Special Interrogatories. In these responses, Plaintiff identified such individuals-as Dr. Lerner, Ms. Adut and Mr. Chemick as having personal knowledge Of facts that support her claims and claimed to have incurred over mflom-PWNi—‘OKOOONO‘Im-PWNi—‘O $7 million in damages, as well as legal fees incurred since Defendants withdrew as counsel of V i record in the Underlying Action. 15. On June 29, 2017, I inquired about the status of Ms. Adut’s response to the “meet and confer” letter, to .which Ms. Adut replied that she planned to respond by July 10, 2017, even though that was the motion to" compel deadline. Attached hereto as Exhibit Q is a true and correct copy of this e-mail exchange. To date, I have not received a response from Ms. Adut to my June 12, 2017 “meet and confer” letter. 16. Defendants have incurred a total of $7,860.00 in fees, based on the following — applicable hourly billing rates of the personnel involved: Stephen J. Squillario, Esq. (partner) $300.00 (for 15.0 hours); and Stephen M. Tye (associate) — $240.00 (for 14.0 hours). In addition, 4 PT05-0000059 DECLARATION OF STEPHEN J. SQUILLARIO IN SUPPORT OF 123563261 DEFENDANT SIDEMAN & BANCROFT LLP’S MOTION TO COMPEL p—d Defendants will incur a $60.00 filing fee. As such, at this time, Defendants have incurred a total of $7,920.00 in total fees and costs in conjunction with this matter. It is anticipated that Defendants will incur additional fees in drafting the reply papers and at the hearing for which they will provide support in their reply papers. \OOOQONU‘I-PWN I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on July 10, 2017, at San Francisco, California. O 6 @en J. Squillario H N 03 HHr—ty—tHr—Ar—An—Iv—n -P Haight U1 \1'0 00 wv NNNNNNNJNN oofiOxm-tHO 5 PT05-0000059 DECLARATION OF STEPHEN J. SQUILLARIO IN SUPPORT OF 12356326J DEFENDANT SIDEMAN & BANCROFT LLP’S MOTION TO COMPEL EXHIBIT A {'13.- FL-‘i 00 ATTORNEY OR PARTY WATTORNEY (Name, Smaarnumbar, and address): m CDURT'USE ONLY Alissa Kempton, Esq. (SEN: 225681) T Robin, Ferguson & Kempton, LLP 750 Menlo Avenue 15433153 ggrk, CA 94 025 ENDORSED FILED TELEPHONENO' (650) 752— 0800 FAXNOJpbneO: SAN MATEOCOUW emu. mazes {Ophml}: ATTORNEY FOR (Narne): Steven 311q SUPERIOR coum-or: CALIFORNIA, courmror= San Mateo SEP 2 8 2010 summonses 400 County Center MAILNG ADDRESS: Same 85m“ vlsil‘l‘ghongfitig’ uoun CITYAMDZIPCODE: City, CA 94063 Redwood DEPUTYC K mums- Family Law Division MARRIAGE OF PETmONER: Steven Stupp RESPONDENT: Annemarie Schilders PETITION FOR W mm: IE Dissolution of Marriage 11 0799 :1 NuliityofMam‘age Legal Separation [:1 1:] AMENDED 1. RESIDENCE (Dissolution only) [:23 Petitioner I: Respondent has' been a resident of this state for at least six months and ofthis county for at least three months immediately preceding the filing of this Petition forDlssoiution of Maniage, 2. STATISTICAL FACTS a. Date of maniage: 12/ 05/ 1 995 c.‘ Time from date of marriage to date of separation (specify): b. Data of separation: TED Years: Months: 3. DECLARA‘HON REGARDING MINOR CHILDREN (Include children of this relationship bom priorto orduring the marriage or adopted during the marriage): a. [:1There are no minor children. b. [3:] The minor children are: Child's name Blrthdate ” . weeks Age & Finn Robert Max Stupp 7/15/2010 9 M :1 Continued on Attachment 3b. children of the Petitioner and Respondent. a completed Declaration Under Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction minor " c it there are and Enforcement/tot (UCCJEA) (form FL-105) must be attached. d. [:1 A completed voluntary declaration of paternity regarding minor children born to the Petitioner and Respondent prior to the marriage is attached. 4 SEPARATE PROPERTY . 7 4 Petitioner requests that the assets and debts listed [:1 in Property Declaration (form FL-tED) [:1 in Attachment 4 [E below be confirmed as separate property. ' ' , Coflnnig ' lt_e__m Any and all property acquired by Petitioner before marriage, Petitioner after separation or that which was acquired through gift, or by inheritance. NOTtCE: You may redact (black out) social security numbers from any written material filed with the court in this case other than a form used to collect child or spousal support. Fags 1 “2 PEl'mON—MARRIAGE ' 552mm Form ruraummw . 30%] FamilyCodo. ofmfitornia Dumciiof Pfiwmw.hmytm1 . (Family Law) taunt}? s CASE NUMBER MARRIAGE OF {last name, first name ofperiies): _§tupp vs . Schilders 5. DECIARATION REGARDING COMMUNITY AND OUASI-COMMUNITYASSETS AND DEBTS AS CURRENTLY KNOWN a. [:i There are no such assets or debts subject to disposition by the court inthls proceeding. :1 b. [I] All such assets and debts are listed (:1 in Property Declaration (form FL—160) in Attachment 5b. [1] below (specify): Petitioner does not have sufficient information at this time to list the community and quasi-commity assets and debts . The community and quasi~ 'will be listed on Petitioner ' 5 Declaration of community assets and debts Dis closure . . 6. Petitioner requests a: El dissolution of the marriage based on irreconcilable differences. (Fern. Code, § 2310(a).) d. 1:] nullity of voidable marriage based on (1) i:| petitioner‘s age at time of marriage. (1) (2) [:i incurable insanity. (Fem. Code. § 231003).) (Fem. Code. §2210(a).) [3 legal separation of the parties based on (2) [:1 prior existing marriage. b. (1) (2) I: [:1 irreconcilable differences. (Fam. Code. § 2310(a).) incurable insanity. (Fain. Code. § 2310(b).) (3) E] (Fern. Code, §2210(b).) unsound mind. (Fem. Code. § 2210(c).) c. C] nullity ofvoid marriage based on - (4) Shared -(Eam. Code, § 2210(d).) (i) [:1 incestuous montage. (Fem. Code. § 2200.) (5) [:1 force. (Fam. Code, § 2210(9).) (2) (:1 bigamous marriage. (Fam. Code. § 2201.) (e) (:1 physical incapacity. (Fem. Code. § 2210(0) 7. Petitioner requests that the court grant the above relief and make lnjunctive (including restraining) and other orders as follows: a. Legal custody of children to ......................... ............ [I] . ....................................... [Z] . .. Petitioner Respondent Joint other . [:1 [:1 [j E3 [:1 l:| b. c. Physical custody of children to Child visitation be granted to . . ( Supervised) ........ ............... D , [j . IE] I: As FL-311 requested in rormz- [:1 i:] FL-312 1:] FL-341(C) [:l FL-34‘i(D) FL-3'41(E) [:3 Attachment 76. d. [:1 Detennlnatlon of parentage of any children born to the Petitioner and Respondent prior to’ the marriage. :1 a. Attorney fees and costs payable by ................ .................... 1:] . f. Spousal support payable to (earnings assignment will be issued) ............... C] ~ [:1 g.. 'm Terminate the court‘s jurisdiction (ability) to award spousal support to Respondent. ’ ' h. [1:] Property rights be determined. l. [:I Petitioner's tanner name be restored to (specify): 1- D Other {Specify}: ' _ ' [:1 Continued on Attachment T). . , ~ before or during this marriage, the 8. Child support-if there are minor children born to or adopted by the Petitioner and Respondent ' court will make orders for the support of the children upon request and submission of financial forms by the requesting party. An earnings assignment may be issued without further notice. Any party required to pay support must pay interest on overdue amounts at the 'legai" rate. which is currentiy10 percent. . . r _ ‘ UNDERSTAND THAT THEY APPLY 9. HAVE READ THE RESTRAINING ORDERS ON THE BACK OF THE SUMMONS, AND I I ' To ME WHEN THIS PETITION is FILED. - . , , . _ . _ ' l declare un er pe ty of perjury under the laws of the State of California th atthe ‘ Date: 4) 2 3* l1) Steven S tup'o [TYPE DR PRINT NAME) Date: 9/23/10 Ali sa Ke ton Es . ('IYFEORPRNTNAME) : 5681 NOTICE: Dissolution or legal separation may automatically cancel the rights of a spouse under the other spouse's will, trust. in joint tenancy, and any retirement plan. power of attomey, pay on death bank amount. sunrivorshlp rights to any property owned other similar thing. it does not automatically cancel the right of a spouse as beneficiary of the other spouse‘s life Insurance policy. insurance polices, retirement plans, and aedit You should reviewthese matters. as well as any credit cards, other credit accounts, actions. However, some changes may reports to determine whether they should be changed or whether you should take any other agreement of your spouse or a court order (see Family Code sections 231—235). require the FL-iwmmmfi PETITION—MARRIAGE ran-2m (Family Law) EXHIBIT B ' 81/19/2811 18: 38 65836431: SHIFT ATI'DRNEY 'SVC PAGE 62/12 . . _ ‘ 1 ENBGREEEB men 2 SAN MATEO COUNW 3 JAN 1 8 2011 -' .4 - ' - - - ememsmmrcoun g 5 ‘ . . By ' mew 6 .. 7 _ SUPERIOR COUR’l‘ OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 8 ' COUNTY OF SANMATEO 9 10 _ Case No. -FAM0110799 11 In Re the Marriage of ' .. Petitioner: STEVEN STUFF STIPULATION FOR 12 APPOINTMENT OF JUDGE PRO TEM 'Califomia‘Cpnsfimtion and 13 Article VI, Section 21 Respondent: ANNEMARIB SCHILDERS 14 JUDGE, 15 STIPULATION FOR APPOINTMENT OF TEMPORARY ORDER 15 AUTHORITY, CONDITIONS OFTRIALPROCEDURE, '1 Article VI, Sectioi). 21, afid 17 Plusuant to me provisions ofCalifOrnia Constitutiexi their respeefive counsel 13 California Rules of Court, Rule 2.831, the parties personally and through I