Preview
1 SPENCER P. HUGRET (SBN 240424)
shugret@grsm.com
2 AMY MACLEAR (SBN 215638)
amaclear@grsm.com 2/2/2021
3 KATHERINE P. VILCHEZ (SBN 212179)
kvilchez@grsm.com
4 HAILEY M. ROGERSON (SBN 311918)
hrogerson@grsm.com
5 GORDON REES SCULLY MANSUKHANI, LLP
275 Battery Street, Suite 2000
6 San Francisco, CA 94111
Telephone: (415) 986-5900
7 Facsimile: (415) 986-8054
8 Attorneys for Defendant
FORD MOTOR COMPANY
9
10 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
11 FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN MATEO
Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani, LLP
275 Battery Street, Suite 2000
12
San Francisco, CA 94111
DAVID FERGUS TAGGART and MICHELE ) Case No. CIV538275
13 TAGGART, ) Unlimited Jurisdiction
)
14 Plaintiffs, ) DEFENDANT FORD MOTOR
) COMPANY’S EVIDENTIARY
15 vs. ) OBJECTIONS TO THE DECLARATION
) OF ERIN K. BARNES IN OPPOSITION
16 FORD MOTOR COMPANY, a Delaware ) TO DEFENDANTS MOTION TO TAX
Corporation, and DOES 1 through 10, ) DECEMBER 18, 2020 MEMORANDUM
17 inclusive, ) OF COSTS
)
18 Defendants. ) [Served concurrently with Ford’s Reply; the
) Declaration of Katherine P. Vilchez; the
19 ) Objections to the Declarations Filed In
) Support Of Plaintiffs’ Opposition (Steve
20 ) Mikhov. Jessica Underwood); and the
) Response to Plaintiffs’ Objections to the
21 ) Declaration of John Shea Pierce]
)
22 ) Date: February 9, 2021
) Time: 2:00 p.m.
23 Dept.: 4
)
) Complaint Filed: April 20, 2016
24 )
25
26
27
28
-1-
DEFENDANT FORD MOTOR COMPANY’S EVIDENTIARY OBJECTIONS TO THE DECLARATION OF
ERIN K. BARNES IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS MOTION TO TAX DECEMBER 18, 2020
MEMORANDUM OF COSTS
1 TO THIS HONORABLE COURT, PLAINTIFFS, AND THEIR ATTORNEYS OF
2 RECORD:
3 Defendant FORD MOTOR COMPANY (“Ford”) hereby submits its objections to the
4 following portions of the Declaration of Erin K. Barnes filed in support of Plaintiffs DAVID
5 FERGUS TAGGART and MICHELLE TAGGART’s (“Plaintiffs”) Opposition to Ford’s Motion
6 to Tax/Strike Costs.
7 OBJECTIONS TO THE DECLARATION OF ERIN K. BARNES
8 Ford objects specifically to the Declaration of Erin K. Barnes as follows:
9 No. FORD’S OBJECTIONS
10 01. Para. 2, p. 2:9:22: Plaintiffs’ motion for attorney’s fees was filed on March 2, 2020, and
11 included all future anticipated time. However, as of the filing of the motion the only
Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani, LLP
anticipated future time was the preparation of the reply in support of the motion and
attendance at the hearing on the motion for fees. After that motion was filed, Ford filed
275 Battery Street, Suite 2000
12
San Francisco, CA 94111
a motion to tax costs on May 22, 2020, which Plaintiffs had to oppose. Erin Barns, who
13 specializes in motions related to the recovery of fees and costs in Song Beverly Act
actions, drafted that opposition. The Court then continued the hearing on Plaintiffs’
14 motion for attorney’s fees, costs, and expenses and Ford’s Motion to Tax, to allow the
15 parties to meet and confer. The parties were unsuccessful in doing so and the motions
were heard again on October 29, 2020. The Court deemed the motions for attorney’s
16 fees moot but did not rule on the motion to tax costs. Plaintiffs filed their third motion
for attorney’s fees, costs, and expenses in December 2020 which included all fees
17 through December 17, 2020 and anticipated fees for the reply and the hearing. Ford then
both (1) served an untimely “amended notice” for the original motion to tax costs and
18 (2) this new motion to tax costs, which Plaintiffs have had to prepare another opposition
19 to.
Ford’s Objections:
20
(1) Irrelevant, Misleading and Unduly Prejudicial (Evid. Code § 352);
21
Ford’s counsel explained to the Court that it was willing to proceed on the original
22
Motion for Fees and Costs. It is Plaintiffs who chose to file a third Motion for Fees and
23 Costs and submit a different Memorandum of Costs. As such, Ford was obligated to
address the current Memorandum of Costs.
24
25 Court’s Ruling:
26
Sustained: _______________ Overruled: __________________
27
28
-2-
DEFENDANT FORD MOTOR COMPANY’S EVIDENTIARY OBJECTIONS TO THE DECLARATION OF
ERIN K. BARNES IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS MOTION TO TAX DECEMBER 18, 2020
MEMORANDUM OF COSTS
1 02. Para. 3, p. 2:23-3:5: The following is the time spent after December 17, 2020 on the
motions to tax costs which are properly recoverable and should be awarded:
2 1/11/2021 Receive and review additional motion to tax; compare to 0.3
3 amended notice
4
1/11/2021 Receive and review amended notice of motion to tax 0.4
5 with reference to declaration; Draft, review and revise
objections and notice of opposition
6
7 1/26/2021 Review and compare motion to tax costs #2; Draft, 3.0
8 review, and revise opposition and supporting declarations
Ford’s Objections:
9
(1) Irrelevant, Misleading and Unduly Prejudicial (Evid. Code § 352);
10
11 Ford’s counsel explained to the Court that it was wiling to proceed on the original Motion
Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani, LLP
for Fees and Costs. It is Plaintiffs who chose to file a third Motion for Fees and Costs
and submit a different Memorandum of Costs. As such, Ford was obligated to address
275 Battery Street, Suite 2000
12
San Francisco, CA 94111
the current Memorandum of Costs. Ford should not have to pay for the time Plaintiffs
13 took to oppose the Motion to Tax Costs as they created the situation by filing a different
Memorandum of Costs instead of proceeding on the one that they originally submitted.
14 Moreover, Plaintiffs’ fee request is improper in this Motion and should have been
15 addressed in the Fee Motion.
16 Court’s Ruling:
17 Sustained: _______________ Overruled: __________________
18
19
Dated: February 2, 2021 GORDON REES SCULLY MANSUKHANI, LLP
20
21 By: __________________________
Spencer P. Hugret
22 Amy Maclear
Katherine P. Vilchez
23 Hailey M. Rogerson
Attorneys for Defendant
24 FORD MOTOR COMPANY
25
26
27
28
-3-
DEFENDANT FORD MOTOR COMPANY’S EVIDENTIARY OBJECTIONS TO THE DECLARATION OF
ERIN K. BARNES IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS MOTION TO TAX DECEMBER 18, 2020
MEMORANDUM OF COSTS
1 PROOF OF SERVICE
David Fergus Taggart, et al. v. Ford Motor Company, et al.
2 San Mateo County Superior Court, Case No. CIV538275
3 I am a resident of the State of California, over the age of eighteen years, and not a party
to the within action. My business address is Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani, LLP, 275 Battery
4 Street, Suite 2000, San Francisco, CA 94111. On the date below, I served the within documents:
5 DEFENDANT FORD MOTOR COMPANY’S EVIDENTIARY OBJECTIONS TO THE
DECLARATION OF ERIN K. BARNES IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS MOTION
6 TO TAX DECEMBER 18, 2020 MEMORANDUM OF COSTS
7 by transmitting VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL the document listed above to the email
8 address set forth below on this date before 5:00 p.m. per agreement of the parties.
9
10 Steve Mikhov, Esq. Bryan C. Altman, Esq.
Amy Morse, Esq. THE ALTMAN LAW GROUP
11 Roger Kirnos, Esq. 10250 Constellation Blvd., Ste. 2500
Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani, LLP
Deepak Devabose, Esq. Los Angeles, CA 90067
KNIGHT LAW GROUP, LLP Tel: (310) 277-8481
275 Battery Street, Suite 2000
12
10250 Constellation Blvd. #2500 Fax: (310) 277-8483
San Francisco, CA 94111
13 Los Angeles, CA 90067 Email: bryan@altmanlawgroup.net
Tel: (310) 552-2250
14 Fax: (310) 552-7973 Attorney for Plaintiffs
Email: stevem@knightlaw.com Richard M. Wirtz, Esq.
15 Email: amym@knightlaw.com Amy R. Rotman, Esq.
Email: rogerk@knightlaw.com WIRTZ LAW APC
16 Email: deepakd@knightlaw.com 4370 La Jolla Village Drive, Suite 800
Email: emailservice@knightlaw.com San Diego, CA 92122
17 Tel.: (858) 259-5009
Attorneys for Plaintiffs Email: rwirtz@wirtzlaw.com
18 Email: arotman@wirtzlaw.com
19
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the above
20 is true and correct.
21 Executed on February 2, 2021, at San Francisco, California.
22
23
Jesica Cortez
24
25
26
27
28
-4-
PROOF OF SERVICE