arrow left
arrow right
  • DAVID F. TAGGART, ET AL. VS. FORD MOTOR COMPANYcivil document preview
  • DAVID F. TAGGART, ET AL. VS. FORD MOTOR COMPANYcivil document preview
  • DAVID F. TAGGART, ET AL. VS. FORD MOTOR COMPANYcivil document preview
  • DAVID F. TAGGART, ET AL. VS. FORD MOTOR COMPANYcivil document preview
  • DAVID F. TAGGART, ET AL. VS. FORD MOTOR COMPANYcivil document preview
  • DAVID F. TAGGART, ET AL. VS. FORD MOTOR COMPANYcivil document preview
  • DAVID F. TAGGART, ET AL. VS. FORD MOTOR COMPANYcivil document preview
  • DAVID F. TAGGART, ET AL. VS. FORD MOTOR COMPANYcivil document preview
						
                                

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