Preview
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA
191 N. FIRST STREET
SAN JOSE, CA 95113-1090
TO: FILE COPY
RE: Edwards v. Complete Credit Solutions, Inc.
CASE NUMBER: 21C0V375187
ORDER DEEMING CASE COMPLEX AND STAYING DISCOVERY
AND RESPONSIVE PLEADING DEADLINE
WHEREAS, the Complaint was filed by Plaintiff MARGUERITE RUTH EDWARDS (“Plaintiff”) in the
Superior Court of California, County of Santa Clara, on January 12, 2021 and assigned to
Department 1 (Complex Civil Litigation), the Honorable Sunil R. Kulkarni presiding, pending a ruling
on the complexity issue;
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:
The Court determines that the above-referenced case is COMPLEX within the meaning of
California Rules of Court 3.400. The matter remains assigned, for all purposes, including discovery
and trial, to Department 1 (Complex Civil Litigation), the Honorable Sunil R. Kulkarni presiding.
The parties are directed to the Court’s local rules and guidelines regarding electronic filing
and to the Complex Civil Guidelines, which are available on the Court’s website.
Pursuant to California Rules of Court, Rule 3.254, the creation and maintenance of the Master
Service List shall be under the auspices of (1) Plaintiff MARGUERITE RUTH EDWARDS, as the first-named
party in the Complaint, and (2) the first-named party in each Cross-Complaint, if any.
Pursuant to Government Code section 70616(c), each party’s complex case fee is due within
ten (10) calendar days of this date.
Plaintiff shall serve a copy of this Order on all parties forthwith and file a proof of service within
seven (7) days of service.
Any party objecting to the complex designation must file an objection and proof of service
within ten (10) days of service of this Order. Any response to the objection must be filed within
seven (7) days of service of the objection. The Court will make its ruling on the submitted pleadings.
The Case Management Conference remains set for May 13, 2021 at 2:30 p.m. in Department
1 and all counsel are ordered to attend by CourtCall.
Counsel for all parties are ordered to meet and confer in person at least 15 days prior to the
First Case Management Conference and discuss the following issues:
4
Issues related to recusal or disqualification;
2. Issues of law that, if considered by the Court, may simplify or further resolution of the case,
including issues regarding choice of law;
—
Updated on 7/30/20.
Appropriate alternative dispute resolution (ADR), for example, mediation, mandatory
settlement conference, arbitration, mini-trial;
A plan for preservation of evidence and a uniform system for identification of documents
throughout the course of this litigation;
A plan for document disclosure/production and additional discovery; which will generally
be conducted under court supervision and by court order;
Whether it is advisable to address discovery in phases so that information needed to
conduct meaningful ADR is obtained early in the case (counsel should consider whether
they will stipulated to limited merits discovery in advance of certification proceedings),
allowing the option to complete discovery if ADR efforts are unsuccessful;
7 Any issues involving the protection of evidence and confidentiality;
8 The handling of any potential publicity issues;
Counsel for Plaintiff is to take the lead in preparing a Joint Case Management Conference
Statement to be filed 5 calendar days prior to the First Case Management Conference, and include
the following:
4
A Statement as to whether additional parties are likely to be added and a proposed
date by which all parties must be served;
2 Service lists identifying all primary and secondary counsel, firm names, addresses,
telephone numbers, email addresses and fax numbers for all counsel;
3 A description of all discovery completed to date and any outstanding discovery as of the
date of the conference;
Applicability and enforceability of arbitration clauses, if any;
A list of all related litigation pending in other courts, including Federal Court, and a brief
description of any such litigation, and a statement as to whether any additional related
litigation is anticipated (CRC 3.300);
A description of factual and legal issues — the parties should address any specific contract
provisions the interpretation of which may assist in resolution of significant issues in the
case;
The parties’ tentative views on an ADR mechanism and how such mechanism might be
integrated into the course of the litigation;
Whether discovery should be conducted in phases or limited; and if so, the order of
phasing or types of limitations of discovery. If this is a class action lawsuit, the parties
should address the issue of limited merits discovery in advance of class certification
motions.
To the extent the parties are unable to agree on the matters to be addressed in the Joint
Case Management Conference Statement, the positions of each party or of various parties should
be set forth separately and attached to this report as addenda. The parties are encouraged to
propose, either jointly or separately, any approaches to case management they believe will
promote the fair and efficient handling of this case. The Court is particularly interested in identifying
potentially dispositive or significant threshold issues the early resolution of which may assist in moving
the case toward effective ADR and/or a final disposition.
STAY_ON DISCOVERY AND RESPONSIVE PLEADING DEADLINE Pending further order of this
Court, the service of discovery and the obligation to respond to any outstanding discovery is
stayed. However, Defendant(s) shall file a Notice of Appearance for purposes of identification of
counsel and preparation of a service list. The filing of such a Notice of Appearance shall be without
prejudice to the later filing of a motion to quash to contest jurisdiction. Parties shall not file or serve
responsive pleadings, including answers to the complaint, motions to strike, demurrers, motions for
—
Updated on 7/30/20.
change of venue and cross-complaints until a date is set at the First Case Management
Conference for such filings and hearings.
This Order is issued to assist the Court and the parties in the management of this “Complex”
case through the development of an orderly schedule for briefing and hearings. This Order shall not
preclude the parties from continuing to informally exchange documents that may assist in their
initial evaluation of the issues presented in this Case.
Plaintiff shall serve a copy of this Order on all the parties in this matter forthwith.
SO ORDERED.
L~____
Date:
Hon. Sunil R. Kulkarni
Judge of the Superior Court
If you, a party represented by you, or a witness to be called on behalf of that party need an accommodation under the
American with Disabilities Act, please contact the Court Administrator’s office at (408) 882-2700, or use the Court’s TDD line,
(408) 882-2690 or the Voice/TDD California Relay Service, (800) 735-2922.
—
Updated on 7/30/20.
Preview
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA 191 N. FIRST STREET SAN JOSE, CA 95113-1090 TO: FILE COPY RE: Edwards v. Complete Credit Solutions, Inc. CASE NUMBER: 21C0V375187 ORDER DEEMING CASE COMPLEX AND STAYING DISCOVERY AND RESPONSIVE PLEADING DEADLINE WHEREAS, the Complaint was filed by Plaintiff MARGUERITE RUTH EDWARDS (“Plaintiff”) in the Superior Court of California, County of Santa Clara, on January 12, 2021 and assigned to Department 1 (Complex Civil Litigation), the Honorable Sunil R. Kulkarni presiding, pending a ruling on the complexity issue; IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: The Court determines that the above-referenced case is COMPLEX within the meaning of California Rules of Court 3.400. The matter remains assigned, for all purposes, including discovery and trial, to Department 1 (Complex Civil Litigation), the Honorable Sunil R. Kulkarni presiding. The parties are directed to the Court’s local rules and guidelines regarding electronic filing and to the Complex Civil Guidelines, which are available on the Court’s website. Pursuant to California Rules of Court, Rule 3.254, the creation and maintenance of the Master Service List shall be under the auspices of (1) Plaintiff MARGUERITE RUTH EDWARDS, as the first-named party in the Complaint, and (2) the first-named party in each Cross-Complaint, if any. Pursuant to Government Code section 70616(c), each party’s complex case fee is due within ten (10) calendar days of this date. Plaintiff shall serve a copy of this Order on all parties forthwith and file a proof of service within seven (7) days of service. Any party objecting to the complex designation must file an objection and proof of service within ten (10) days of service of this Order. Any response to the objection must be filed within seven (7) days of service of the objection. The Court will make its ruling on the submitted pleadings. The Case Management Conference remains set for May 13, 2021 at 2:30 p.m. in Department 1 and all counsel are ordered to attend by CourtCall. Counsel for all parties are ordered to meet and confer in person at least 15 days prior to the First Case Management Conference and discuss the following issues: 4 Issues related to recusal or disqualification; 2. Issues of law that, if considered by the Court, may simplify or further resolution of the case, including issues regarding choice of law; — Updated on 7/30/20. Appropriate alternative dispute resolution (ADR), for example, mediation, mandatory settlement conference, arbitration, mini-trial; A plan for preservation of evidence and a uniform system for identification of documents throughout the course of this litigation; A plan for document disclosure/production and additional discovery; which will generally be conducted under court supervision and by court order; Whether it is advisable to address discovery in phases so that information needed to conduct meaningful ADR is obtained early in the case (counsel should consider whether they will stipulated to limited merits discovery in advance of certification proceedings), allowing the option to complete discovery if ADR efforts are unsuccessful; 7 Any issues involving the protection of evidence and confidentiality; 8 The handling of any potential publicity issues; Counsel for Plaintiff is to take the lead in preparing a Joint Case Management Conference Statement to be filed 5 calendar days prior to the First Case Management Conference, and include the following: 4 A Statement as to whether additional parties are likely to be added and a proposed date by which all parties must be served; 2 Service lists identifying all primary and secondary counsel, firm names, addresses, telephone numbers, email addresses and fax numbers for all counsel; 3 A description of all discovery completed to date and any outstanding discovery as of the date of the conference; Applicability and enforceability of arbitration clauses, if any; A list of all related litigation pending in other courts, including Federal Court, and a brief description of any such litigation, and a statement as to whether any additional related litigation is anticipated (CRC 3.300); A description of factual and legal issues — the parties should address any specific contract provisions the interpretation of which may assist in resolution of significant issues in the case; The parties’ tentative views on an ADR mechanism and how such mechanism might be integrated into the course of the litigation; Whether discovery should be conducted in phases or limited; and if so, the order of phasing or types of limitations of discovery. If this is a class action lawsuit, the parties should address the issue of limited merits discovery in advance of class certification motions. To the extent the parties are unable to agree on the matters to be addressed in the Joint Case Management Conference Statement, the positions of each party or of various parties should be set forth separately and attached to this report as addenda. The parties are encouraged to propose, either jointly or separately, any approaches to case management they believe will promote the fair and efficient handling of this case. The Court is particularly interested in identifying potentially dispositive or significant threshold issues the early resolution of which may assist in moving the case toward effective ADR and/or a final disposition. STAY_ON DISCOVERY AND RESPONSIVE PLEADING DEADLINE Pending further order of this Court, the service of discovery and the obligation to respond to any outstanding discovery is stayed. However, Defendant(s) shall file a Notice of Appearance for purposes of identification of counsel and preparation of a service list. The filing of such a Notice of Appearance shall be without prejudice to the later filing of a motion to quash to contest jurisdiction. Parties shall not file or serve responsive pleadings, including answers to the complaint, motions to strike, demurrers, motions for — Updated on 7/30/20. change of venue and cross-complaints until a date is set at the First Case Management Conference for such filings and hearings. This Order is issued to assist the Court and the parties in the management of this “Complex” case through the development of an orderly schedule for briefing and hearings. This Order shall not preclude the parties from continuing to informally exchange documents that may assist in their initial evaluation of the issues presented in this Case. Plaintiff shall serve a copy of this Order on all the parties in this matter forthwith. SO ORDERED. L~____ Date: Hon. Sunil R. Kulkarni Judge of the Superior Court If you, a party represented by you, or a witness to be called on behalf of that party need an accommodation under the American with Disabilities Act, please contact the Court Administrator’s office at (408) 882-2700, or use the Court’s TDD line, (408) 882-2690 or the Voice/TDD California Relay Service, (800) 735-2922. — Updated on 7/30/20.