Preview
DEFENDANT’S OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST FOR TERMINATING
SANCTIONS VIA EX PARTE HEARING; REPLY TO PLAINTIFF’S “REPLY BRIEF
JESSICA BERRY
Tel: (805) 453-0106
“it eee
se
-mail: BerryJessica037@gmail.com APR a2 2021 tc
Darr
BY.
es (ee ( i i
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SANTA BARBARA-ANACAPA DIVISION
10
ll DAVID BERTRAND, An Individual, Case No. 19CV02429
DOROTHY CHURCHILL - JOHN- Dept. 5. Hon. JUDGE C. STERNE
12
SON, An Individual
13 DEFENDANT'S OPPOSITION TO
Plaintiffs PLAINTIFF'S EX PARTE RE-
14
QUEST FOR TERMINATING
15 VS. SANCTIONS; JESSICA BERRY’S
REPLY TO PLAINTIFF'S “RE-
16 PLY BRIEF FOR MOTION FOR
17 JESSICA BERRY, and TERMINATING SANCTIONS”
DOES 1-100, inclusive
18 PLAINTIFFS EXHIBITS SHOW
19 Defendant, DISCOVERY QUESTIONS WERE
NEVER GIVEN TO DEFENDANT
20
21 THIS ACTION IS RETALIATO-
RY, IN VIOLATION OF CA LA-
22 BOR BOARD CODE 98.6:
23
DEFENDANT REQUESTS FOR
24 FULL DISMISSAL AND A $10K-
CIVIL PENALTY ASSESSED
25
AGAINST DAVID BERTRAND.
26
Hearing Date: APRIL 5, 2021
27
Trial Date: April 20, 2021
28 Related Case: 19CV02357
Page I of 15
DEFENDANT’S OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFFS REQUEST FOR TERMINATING
SANCTIONS VIA EX PARTE HEARING; REPLY TO PLAINTIFF’S “REPLY BRIEF...”
DEFENDANT'S OPPOSITION TO TERMINATING SANCTIONS:
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that on APRIL 5, 2021, or as soon thereafter as
the matter may be heard in Department 5 of the above entitled Court, Located
at 1100 Anacapa Street, Santa Barbara, CA 93101, Defendant JESSICA BERRY.
will and hereby does oppose Plaintiffs Ex Parte for terminating sanctions. Plain-
tiffs are just pretending BERRY was uncooperative with the discovery process.
BERRY vehemently denies these allegations. COFFIN has derailed Discovery.
10
Defendant BERRY will use COFFIN’S EXHIBITS and email correspon-
u
dence with colluding attorneys COFFIN and KAESTNER to demonstrate these
12
men to be patterned liars and bad actors. Additionally, BERTRAND & Jaske/
13
Garcia are evidenced by the Court as patterned abusers of women.
14
COFFIN argues the point that BERRY could have ordered a copy of Discov-
15
ery from the records dept. BERRY ordered those 1/15/2021 and found no discov-
16
ery questions. Instead, she found minutes of court hearings not matching with
17
the reality of what had transpired, and her paperwork filed with exhibits miss-
18
19 ing; others were photo-copied until illegible prior to being scanned into records.
20 BERTRAND has been advantaged by a 30-year career in our governments
21 bureaucracy. COFFIN’S fraudulent documents forward a specific strategy: here
22 he is attempting to offset a Labor Board Award his client has owed BERRY for 2
23 years. If this case is won by default, COFFIN can validate his fraudulent hand
24 dated lease; it was specifically designed to give this Court justification for over-
I
25 turning BERRY’S now 6-figure Award. COFFIN & Plaintiffs then would cele- 1
26 brate a massive financial windfall, (the result of their crimes), by demanding i
27 millions in legal fees from the CA Office of the Labor Com; 1ss10ni
28 DATE: MARCH 30, 2021
éssica A. Berry, in Pro/Per
Page 2 of 15
ii
7:15 afl! -ov
Q CEI © Cancel
From To Message
mee ane
ee en a a ee
South County Records 15/21
Z
{F] 19CV02429- Part 7 G
Attachments: Minute Order.pdf, Case
Management Order Filed. pdt, Opposition. pdt
ao —— a
South County Records 45/21 >
{72} 19CV02429- Part 6 G
Attachments: Notice of Motion to Vacate
Judgment Declaration Filed.pdf, Proposed Orde...
ce en nn
South County Records 1/15/21 >
{70} 19CV02429 - Part 5 G
Attachments: Order on Court Fee Waiver
Received. pa Proposed Order Received.dpa, Cle...
South County Records 45/21
{70} 19CVO2429- Part 4 @
Attachments: Notice of Non-availability.pdf,
General Denial Filed.pdf, Request for Entry of De...
__—_—. _.
South County Records in 5/21 &
%,
{fo} 19CV02429- Part 3 Gbe
Attachments: Proof of Publication Filed.pdf, Proof
of Publication. pat
—
South County Records | 4/15/21 sy
e
7:15 asl = Cc
Q CEE @ Cancel
From To Message
coe _— wor een ey
South County Records 4/15/21
2
{7} 19CV02429 - Part 13
Attachments: Document Filed.pdf, Notice of Jury
Deposit.pdf, Minute Order.pdf
South County Records 4/15/21 %>
4b
{79} 19CV02429 - Part 12 Gg
Attachments: Minute Order.pdf, Document
Filed. pal, Document Filed 1.pdf, Document
C Filed...
South County Records 415/21 >
(79) 19CV02429- Part 11 @
Attachments: Case Management Statement.pdf,
Minute Order.pdf, Case Management ( Order Filed...
—-
Southh County Re
Records Nn 5/21
ABOY
(9) 19CV02429- Part 10
Attachment: Motion.pdf
South County Records 415/21 >
(2) 19CV02429- Part 9 Go
Attachments: Answer to Complaint Filed.pdf, Proof
of Service Filed.pdf
South County Records 4/15/21 %
’
9) 19CV02429- Part 8 G
Attachments: Minute Order.pdf, Case
Management Order Filed.pdf, Minute Order 1.pdf
_
a at ae hea
Edit
ty
oo
7:15 wii SO)
Q GEST @® Cancel
From To Message
— —
~
South County Records 15/21 >
19CV02429 - Part 19 GYG
Attachments: Opposition.pdf, Proof of Service
Fede
South County Records 415/21 >
Ge} 19CV02429 - Part 18 @
Attachment: Motion Filed.pdf
South County Records 4/15/21 >D
19CV02429 - Part 17 Gg
Attachment: DeclarationAffidavit.pdf
5, >
South County Records 4/15/21
19CV02429 - Part 16 eC
Attachments: Motion.pdf, DeclarationAffidavit.pdf,
Motion 1.pdf
aa
South County Records “angj21 > i
19CV02429 - Part 15 G
Fed Dectaatonacetpt
Attachments: Case Management Statement .
~ _ a ee
South County Records 4/15/21 >
19CV02429 - Part 14
Attachments: Notice of Ruling Filed.pdf, Case Is
Management Statement pdf, Minute Order.paf, N...
_—_-Sauth CauntDanarde__ ADELA.
Edit
OO
7:15 alll “> )
Q CEA @ Cancel
From To Message
pee
South County Records 4/15/21
{70} 19CV02429 - Part 25 G
This is the final part
South County Records 1/15/21 >
{72) 19CV02429 - Part 24 G
Attachments: Notice Entry of Order.pdf, Motion
Filed. Pat, Proof of Service by Mail Filed.pal, OPP...
a — a
South County Records 415/21 - 3
L
{70} 19CV02429 -Part 23 G
Attachments: Proposed Order.pdf, Minute
Order. pat
~
South County Records | 4/15/21
2} 19CV02429- Part 22 @
Attachments: Reply.pdf, Reply 1.pdf
South County Records 1/15/21 >
2] 19CV02429 - Part 21 G
Attachment: Objection Filed.pdf
South County Records 4/15/21 5
DEFENDANT’S OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST FOR TERMINATING
SANCTIONS VIA EX PARTE HEARING; REPLY TO PLAINTIFF’S “REPLY BRIEF...”
MEM: RAND POINTS AND AUTHORITIES:
1. Plaintiff's desire no record of their discovery questions exist pre-trial.
MARK COFFIN already has used the ‘non-existent attachment trick’ on
BERRY: He emailed a Notice of Termination of Tenancy to Defendant JESSICA
BERRY on September 26, 2017, and referenced a copy of her lease was attached.
It was not. (EXHIBIT 1) At trial, COFFIN had replaced BERRY’S legitimate
lease with one of his own creation, turning BERRY’S ‘month-2-month’ into a set
10
“term” lease, (it only gave BERRY 10 days). BERTRAND had used COFFIN’S
ll
term lease to justify the necessity of removing BERRY from his property via Un-
12
lawful Detainer. This 1st of the 6 Plaintiffs lawsuits was served to BERRY on
13
her 45th birthday, after her decade of loyal servitude; timed suspiciously as re-
14
imbursements of $50,000. BERTRAND contractually owed to BERRY came due.
15
16
2. MARK COFFIN says that JESSICA BERRY has violated 3 separate court or-
17
ders, and is now in contempt of Court. But JESSICA BERRY was never provid-
18
19 ed the discovery questions COFFIN seeks, and has motioned (EXHIBIT 2) for a
20 court appointed MASTER to oversee what this is: a defrauded discovery process.
21
22 3. JESSICA BERRY did commit to providing Plaintiffs with discovery answers
23 in a timely fashion; she stated so with honest intention; but naturally this
24 would have to be predicated on her first receiving Plaintiffs questions.
1
25
26 4. JESSICA BERRY completed discovery for 19CV02357 & 19CV02429 at JAN ! |
27 KAESTER’s office. Regardless of assignment, he did advise BERRY on both cas-
28 es. BERRY completed hundreds of pages of answers, and presented thousands
Page 3 of 15
DEFENDANT’S OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST FOR TERMINATING
SANCTIONS VIA EX PARTE HEARING; REPLY TO PLAINTIFF’S “REPLY BRIEF...” :
of documents; 2X the normal amount of normal maximum discovery limits,
i
has already been turned over to Plaintiffs by JESSICA BERRY.
|!
1
5. JAN KAESTNER advised JESSICA BERRY on the format of how her answers
must be presented. For Admissions, KAESTNER’S instructions did not entail i
BERRY should be typing the Plaintiffs questions prior to her answering them.
6. The Discovery demanded of Plaintiffs by KAESTNER is grossly negli-
10
gent in that it features questions that are factually incorrect - and those :
11
to the advantage of Plaintiffs. KAESTNER’S hastily prepared Discovery
12
supports what has ultimately transpired; Plaintiffs providing nothing.
13 i
i
14
't
7. JESSICA BERRY realized later her answers could be manipulated if Plain-
15 1
tiffs changed the order of their questions. KAESTNER refused to acknowledge , I
16
this glaring vulnerability. Then KASTNER refused to provide BERRY with her !
17
own case files. (EXHIBIT 3). BERRY understandably lost faith in KAESTNER'S,
18
representation. His collusion against BERRY cemented when he rejected guar-
19 '
anteed payment of his fees by the Labor Commissioner, and announced that he: i
20
|
21 would instead attach a lien (amount still undisclosed) to what BERRY recovers.
22
23 8. August 5, 2020 via email (COFFINS EXHIBIT C) and again on August 7 |
24
25
(COFFIN’S EXHIBIT D) BERRY requests a copy of all Plaintiffs discovery to be
“emailed” from the office of MARK COFFIN; specifically she requests a copy of | I
|
26 Plaintiffs prior discovery demanded, and also a copy of the additional current | |1
27 questions. BERRY also requests a copy of what answers KAESTNER had pro-
28 vided to Plaintiffs on her behalf. BERRY expressed openly she was having prob-:
lems with the validity of KAESTNER’S representation. BERRY confirmed her
Page4 of 15
DEFENDANT’S OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S REQUEST FOR TERMINATING
SANCTIONS VIA EX PARTE HEARING; REPLY TO PLAINTIFF’S “REPLY BRIEF...”
awareness of COFFIN’S frauds. Plaintiffs ignored 8 requests for the Sup-
plemental Discovery Questions from BERRY. (Evidenced 3/23 hearing.)
9. BERRY filed her initial discovery requests from Plaintiffs simultaneously to
serving them with the Clerk of the Court, fearing Plaintiffs would avoid doing
this work; fears which have materialized. Puzzling is why this Court has not
allowed her to impose sanctions against uncooperative Plaintiffs, who’s discov-
ery was due almost a year ago.
10
i
10. Court has already twice penalized BERRY with monetary sanctions for its
12
perceived smaller Discovery transgressions; but BERRY propound hundreds
13
of pages of responses, and gave thousands of documents to Plaintiffs.
14
15
11. September 11th MARK COFFIN emails to BERRY that “quite a bit of writ-
16
ten discovery has been propounded and responded to by [BERTRAND &
17
18 DOROTHY)” (COFFIN’S EXHIBIT E). Yet not a single legitimate answer has
19 been provided to BERRY in 8 sets of Discovery demands. (see COFFIN’s discov- 1
20 ery provided which was in the last ex parte opposition from BERRY.)
21
22 12. Scott Jaske made declaration as to mailing BERRY the Supplemental Dis-
23 covery questions on “July 27, 2020.” He lies. Just like BERTRAND, this as-
24 sistant has taken remarkable steps to hide his patterned abuse of women.
25
26 13. Scott Garcia is evidenced in his paperwork for case 17CV04551 as NOT pro! i
27 viding the legally required service to JESSICA BERRY. (EXHIBIT 4) Thus en-
28 suring a fraudulent, quality of life-reducing judgement filed by MARK COFFIN
on December 14, 2017 would not be appealed by BERRY. (EXHIBIT 5).
Page5 of 15
DEFENDANT’S OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST FOR TERMINATING
SANCTIONS VIA EX PARTE HEARING; REPLY TO PLAINTIFF’S “REPLY BRIEF...”
14. BERRY, headhunted for her last 3 positions, is now denied housing, credit,
& gainful employment. COFFIN’S fraud has undermined her ability to recover. !
1
15. Th in each of Plaintiffs law JESSICA
1
BE. lus their a re £ idation, are extensions of |
DAVID BERTRAND’S original crime of Theft by Deception - which is
prosecutable via a 4 year statute of limitations, with 6 months left.
10
ui
Winning this Action by default has been COFFIN’S strategy from incep-
12
tion. His motions to terminate have been timed to coincide with BERRY resi-
13 1
dential moves, an instability being created by Plaintiffs criminal acts. DAVID
14
BERTRAND never prosecuted although his guilt (Grand Theft / sexual assault)
15
is proven with 5 forms of tangible evidence. BERRY was denied any assistance
16
normally given to a victim of crime. BERTRAND’S heir is a chief local authori-
17
ty. The HONORABLE JUDGE COLLEEN STERNE should not suffer the same
18
19 fate as BERRY; being targeted by a predator (for personal attraction & having a
20 superior work ethic), and then summarily egregiously lied to & played for a fool.
—
21
22 DATE: MARCH 30, 2021
23 Jessica A. Berry, in Pro Per
24 |
25 NOTE: Attached is KAESTNERS discovery demanded from Plaintiffs
|
26 which shi is lack of pro: on to this cause.. his hast:
27 mis-titl ies in this action and referen is client is NOT BERRY
28 (EXHIBIT 7)
Page 6 of 15
DEFENDANT’S OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST FOR TERMINATING
SANCTIONS VIA EX PARTE HEARING; REPLY TO PLAINTIFF’S “REPLY BRIEF...”
FA T CKGROUND - RELATED POINTS OF INTEREST:
1. This Action is essentially Plaintiffs suing JESSICA BERRY for the crimes
they have committed against her. 5 forms of tangible evidence and recordings
of Plaintiffs exist where, in their own voices, they prove this lawsuit meritless.
2. DAVID BERTRAND’s ex-girlfriend/PT secretary, DOROTHY CHURCHILL -
JOHNSON, and his long time tenant, LMFT Therapist BARBARA PALO-
10
MAREZ, promoted BERRY trust BERTRAND at his word. (EXHIBITS 8 & 9)
ul
12
3. All BERTRAND’S constituents have profited tens of thousands from crimes
13
against BERRY; including book keeper KATHY HIRSCH and attorney COFFIN.
14
15
4. ALL participated in meetings focused on how best to exploit BERRY. Typed’
16
“minutes” of these meetings also “CC” therapist PALOMAREZ.
17
18
19 5. PALOMAREZ’S advisement normalized and minimized BERTRAND’S finan-
20 cial and sexual abuse of BERRY. In 2017, there were 37 times BERRY texts her
21 about being abused; ..that BERRY is “crying every day,” that “nothing is worth
22 this...”, further stating “I need to quit”. (Text evidence available for trial)
|
23
24 6. PALOMAREZ instructs BERRY must adhere to BERTRAND’s plan and re- |
it
25 quests; BERRY suffering BERTRAND’S emotional, sexual, and financial abuse :
26 while providing 100/hr work weeks 7 paying his business expenses per his plan.
27
28 7. BERRY had zero days off in the last 3 years; hospitalized twice with exhaus-
tion. Now she makes regular trips to the ER with panic attacks and depression.
Page 7 of 15
DEFENDANT’S OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S REQUEST FOR TERMINATING’
SANCTIONS VIA EX PARTE HEARING; REPLY TO PLAINTIFF’S “REPLY BRIEF...” |
DECLARATIONS OF JESSICA BERRY OPPOSING COFFIN EX PARTE:
I, JESSICA BERRY, the Defendant in this action, do declare and evidence: I
1. Attached as EXHIBIT 1 is a true and correct copy of COFFIN pretending to
provide an attachment which was not actually included: this, a patterned trick.
10
2. Attached as EXHIBIT 2 is a true and correct copy of BERRY’S Motion to
il
have a Court appoint a Master & informing the Court about lawyer collusion.
12
13
3. Attached as EXHIBIT 3 is a true and correct copy of emails w/ KAESTNER
14
where he displays constantly making excuses and never provides anything.
15
16
4, Attached as EXHIBIT 4 is a true and correct copy of Jeske’s “lack of servic
17 i
18
19 5. Attached as EXHIBIT 5 is a true and correct copy of a COFFIN court filing.
20
21 6. Attached as EXHIBIT 6 is a true and correct copy of minutes of 17CV04551
22 which factually oppose COFFIN’S fraudulent judgement filing against BERRY.
!
23
24 7. Attached as EXHIBIT 7 is a true and correct copy of KAESTNER’S Discovery
25 Demanded of Plaintiffs; it references he is working for an alternate client.
26 =
27 DATE: MARCH 30, 2021 a
28 Jessica A. Berry, in Pro Per
Page 8 of 15
EXHIBIT 1
Coffin's last trick of a missing “attachmen
|
‘|
CO
@0@000 AT&T 7:53 PM % =>
<@
Mark
— Fomine eae ny Fee MaNS eae a LEYS YES YUN rroase weur er EeL ene
Gated October5, 2016. The lease Provides for
a one (1) year term. which will expireon
‘Thursday October5, 2017,
‘The purpose of this letteris to inform you that Mr. Bertrand will not be extending the 11:23 AM
term of the lease, and would therefore like you to vacate the premises on or before October 5.
Please plan to remove your personal belongings by that date, and leave the premises in clean
condition.
The lease provides for an altemative to monetary rent, in the form of your performance of
services for Mr, Hertrand. 1 understand that you have requested additional compensation for
yout services from Mr. Bertrand, over and above the rental valu. 1 will write to you separately
‘concerning that issue. Also, in the event that you and Mr. Bertrand reach an understanding that
would extend your lease period, please be aware that such an agreement must be memorialized in
writing and signed before October5, 2017.
Please feel frce to contact me in writing at the address or at the email listed above. if you
have any questions about this letter or the lease.
Very truly yours,
Mo. et
AIO’ GUCLOSRE
——— oo
Jessica
Please see the attached letter
regarding termination of your 11:23 AM
lease at 3524 Madera Street on
October 5, 2017.
Mark Coffin
t
EXHIBIT 2
Defendant JESSICA BERRY requests a court Master for discovery
Ly
JESSICA BERRY
P.O. Box 432
Solvang, Ca. 93464
Tel: (805) 453-0106
e-mail: BerryJessica037@gmail.com
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SANTA BARBARA-ANACAPA DIVISION
Lead case: 19CV02357 / rel: 19CV02429
DAVID BERTRAND, An Individual,
10
RESPONDENT’S MOTION OF
il Appellant OPPOSITION TO ATTORNEY’S
NOTICE TO WITHDRAW REP-
12 VS. RESENTATION: JAN KAEST-
13 NER HAS UNDERMINED THE
DISCOVERY PROCESS
14 - JESSICA BERRY, An Individual
15 REQUEST JUDICIAL NOTICE:
Respondent (1)A SIGNIFICANT CONFLICT
16 OF INTEREST EXISTS BE-
17 TWEEN PARTIES & AUTHOR-
ITIES ON THESE MATTERS
18 (2) RETALIATORY LAWSUITS
are ILLEGAL, Labor Code 98.6
19
(3) RESPONDENT HAS LEGAL
20 MENTAL DISASBILITY
(4) THE CA DEPT. OF LABOR IS
21
OBLIGATED TO PROVIDE
22 LEGAL COUNCIL w/o BIAS- |
FOR RESPONDENT in TRIAL i
(5) MARK COFFIN PRIOR DE-
24 FRAUDED THE SB COURTS |! |
25
(6) KAESTNER’S FIRM STOLE
RESPONDENTS IDENTITY
|i
26 (7) COFFIN & KAESTNER DID
COLLUDE AGAINST BERRY |:
27
28 Hon. C. Sterne - Dept. 5
Hearing Date: January 4, 2021
Page lof 5
APPLICATION FOR EX-PARTE ORDER RE: MOTION TO COMPEL PLAINTIFF RESPONSE
JESSICA BERRY
P.O. BOX 432
SOLVANG, CA. 93464
(805) 453-0106
Berryjessica037@gmail.com
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SANTA BARBARA-ANACAPA DIVISION
DAVID BERTAND, An Individual; CASE #: 19CV02429
10 DOROTHY CHURCHILL-JOHNSON, (RELATED: 19CV02357)
an individual,
il *EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR
Plaintiffs, ORDERS: MOTION TO COMPEL
12 PLAINTIFFS RESPONSES TO
vs. DISCOVERY;
13 MEMORANDUM OF POINTS
14 JESSICA BERRY, An Individual, AND AUTHORITIES; &
and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, DECLARATION OF DEFENDANT |
15 JESSICA BERRY IN SUPPORT
OF MOTION TO COMPEL
16 Defendant PLAINTIFFS RESPONSES TO
DISCOVERY, INCLUDING:
17 *REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION
OF DOCUMENTS - SET ONE
18 *REQUESTS FOR ADMISSIONS -
SET ONE
19
*MOTION TO DEEM BOTH
20 PLAINTIFFS ADMISSIONS AS
“ADMITTED”
21
*DEFENDANT JESSICA BERRY
22 REQUEST THE COURT ORDER
FOR MONETARY SANCTIONS
23 PAID BY PLAINTIFFS IN THE
AMOUNT OF $3700 (CCP2023.03)
24
25
Hearing: January 22, 2021
26 Judge: C. Sterne
Dept: 5 @ 8:45 AM
27 Trial: Mareh 8, 2021
28
PROPOUNDING PARTY: JESSICA BERRY
RESPONDING PARTY: DAVID G. BERTRAND
Page lof 5
PROPOSED ORDER RE: MOTION TO COMPEL RESPONSE & DEEM “ADMITTED”
JESSICA BERRY
P.O. BOX 432
SOLVANG, CA. 93464
(805) 453-0106
Berryjessica037@gmail.com
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF SANTA BARBARA-ANACAPA DIVISION
10
DAVID BERTAND, An Individual; CASE #: 19CV02429
11 DOROTHY CHURCHILL-JOHNSON, (RELATED: 19CV02357)
12 an individual,
*EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR
13 Plaintiffs,
ORDERS: MOTION TO COMPEL
PLAINTIFFS RESPONSES TO
14 vs. DISCOVERY AND PRODUCTION
OF DOCUMENTS SET ONE;
15 JESSICA BERRY, An Individual, DEFENDANT JESSICA BERRY
and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, REQUEST FOR MONETARY
16 SANCTIONS IN THE AMOUNT
OF $3700 (CCP2023.03)
17 Defendant
*MOTION TO DEEM PLAINTIFF
18 REQUEST FOR ADMISSIONS -
19
SET ONE, EACH AS “ADMITTED”
20 *RESPECTFULLY, DEFENDANT
JESSICA BERRY REQUESTS OF
21 THE COURT REMOVE FRAUD
PERPETRATED BY PLAINTIFFS
22 WHO HAVE MANIPULATED THE
DISCOVERY QUESTIONS ASKED
23 BY THEIR DISCOVERY SO THEY
ARE NO LONGER CORRELATED
24 WITH ANSWERS PROVIDED BY
DEFENDANT JESSICA BERRY
25
Hearing: January 22, 2021
26 Judge: C. Sterne
Dept: 5 @ 8:45 AM
27 Trial: March 8, 2021
28
Page 1 of 3
EXHIBIT 3
Defendant JESSICA BERRY emails with attorney JAN KAESTNER; he is full
of excuses as to why he has done nothing for BERRY; his every act serves
to advantage the opposition.
‘|
No Service 7:33 PM a>
Q CEI © Cancel
— a
@ Jan Kaestner 8/5/20 @
(2) You really going to let Coffin pass the liabilit GE
Jessica, We have spoken about this extensively...
cannot respond to you when you do not clarify what
you are referring to, particularly when you imply that
[am not on your team. If 1am not on your team, | am
out of the case.. “very simple. Original Messag...
ene a —
Jan Kaestner 7/31/20 oO
(to) Deposition @
What do you mean “You guys”? From: Jessi Ber
Sent: Friday, July 31, 2020 11:00 AM
To: Jan Kaestner
Subject: Re: Deposition | will need to0 get an exact c..
oe — —
Jan Kaestner 7/31/20
{to} RE: Moving this weekend
As we discussed last week when you were here, if
you have a question, you must ask me the question. |
am not good at guessing what other people are
thinking Original Message From: Jessi Ber
Sent: Friday, July 31, 2
-No Service 7:33 PM a)
; GEE v Cancel
ae
@ Jan Kaestner 8/21/20 @
(to) Please email the substitution form
Jessica, You were present at the hearing and this is
exactly why you need an attorney to help you with
your legal matters. | hope that you are actively
seeking to find one that is willing to assume
representation in your matters. Both matters were
— ee cee nen
Jan Kaestner 8/21/20
{to} RE:Return of your file-Substitution
Jessica, Correction, the last time you sat in my office
crying you apologized for your emails and lack of
trust in me and told me that you were ready to settle
your case. Since then, you have again changed your 1
position and stated that tyou want GG&F off the cas..
ee os — ne — vent
I
Jan Kaestner “8/9/20 |
|
|
{to} RE: Jessica Berry Deposition Notice of requirem
Jessica, You promised to sign the Substitution weeks
ago. Until you sign and file the Substitution, | am still
your attorney and you should stop communicating
directly with Coffin until you do so Original
Message eee
From: Jessi Ber
Sent: Wednesday, September 2, 2020 3:32 PM
To: Mark Coffin
Cc: Jan Kaestner ...
Jan Kaestner 9/2/20
RE: DISCOVERY DEMANDED FOR 19CV02429 -...
Test-Did you get this email? Original
Message ----- From: Jessi Ber
Sent: Wednesday,
September 2, 2020 2:48 PM To: Jan Kaestner
Subject: DISCOVERY DEM...
i __.
Be
No Service 7:32 PM =)
Q CEI v Cancel
Te SE === co I aa
@ Jan kaestner 9/18/20
(to) RE: Sick outside &
Wish you knew that | was From: Jessi Ber
Sent: Friday, September 18, 2020 2:29 PM
To: Jan Kaestner
Subject: Sick outside...
an ~
@ Jan Kaestner 9/17/20
a
{to} RE: | found where they made the first fake re &
Jessica, You missed the deposition today and will
have to explain that to the judge on Monday. jek
From: Jessi Ber
Sent: Thursday, September 17, 2020 4:23 PM
To: Jan Kaestner | ..
a a ee ~
e Jan Kaestner 9/16/20 |
(to) RE: Your Deposition on 9/17 or
OD
Jessica, You are clearly not well enough to sit for a
deposition tomorrow. However, you need to stop
everything that you are doing...you are your very own
worst enemy at this point. From: Jessi Ber
..
No Service 7:32 PM a>
Q CEE v Cancel
a _ oa
Jan Kaestner 9/22/20
{to} RE: Perhaps DAVID needs to know that there is
Jessica, Please give me a date upon which you agree
to have your deposition taken or Coffin will get
sanctions against you again. | also need you provide
a date when you will sign verifications regarding
supplemental responses for Coffin or he will get sa..
ane a
Jan Kaestner 9/21/20
(fo) RE: BTW - you are not authorized to agree to an
Jessica, That is pretty much always the case an
attorney cannot bind client to anything but timing
concessions without client consent Original
Message From: Jessi Ber
Sent: Monday, Septe...
Jan Kaestner 9/21/20
(70) RE: If you are only acting to facilitate Coffin’s fr
Jessica, The reason your motion wasn't heard today
is because you need to place a hearing date on it as
well as file and serve it 16 court days before the
hearing, to give Coffin an opportunity to file an
opposition. | don't collude with Coffin but | do have
No Service 7:32 PM a)
Q CEE v Cancel
— eee a oe
a
@ Jan Kaestner 9/25/20
(to) RE: Email me the discovery PLEASE
Jessica, After | told you | was going to print all of our
discovery and hand everything to you-You jumped in
your car and drove away. Since then you have
refused to accept our phone calls. | provided Mark
Coffin with the dates of October 17,7, B&S
&99 for your d...
—-——___—. a —
Jan Kaestner. "9/24/20
(ro) RE: Just know that | am sorry for what comes n
Jessica, Per your instructions yesterday afternoon, |
am providing Mark Coffin with October 7, 8 & 9 as il
dates for your deposition. Please plan on appearing
one of these dates. We will also be providing
supplemental discovery t that require your verificatio...
— a — —— —
Jan Kaestner 9/22/20 vil
ao
(to) RE: Final Meet and Confer before Motion to & o
Jessica, We have discussed this multiple times...|
represent you only in the Labor Department Appeal
You are always free to retain an attorney to help you
in the other matters against Bertrand & Coffin. The
only way Coffin can get sanctions is if vou refuse to
|
No Service 7:32 PM =>
Q FORE ees v Cancel
cen a = =
=m I = oo a
Jan Kaestner 10/12/20 é
(to} RE: NO MORE LIES - where is discovery?
Are you receiving my emails today? If you respond
"Yes" | will send you all of Bertrand's responses, but
you must sign the verifications today. ----- Original
Message ee From: Jessi Ber
Sent Oday Octos
WANK)
Jan Kaestner
(to) RE: Serious
be ans Xo) 0/12/20
Ms. Berry, We can no longer tolerate the abuse that
you regularly heap upon this firm. We will be filing a i
motion to be relieved as your counsel, as soon as |
possible. jek eee Original Message ween From: Jessi hi
|
Ber Sent: Monday, Oct...
_ _
'
Jan Kaestner 10/12/20 s,!
(fo) RE: YOU ARE BEING GROSSLY NEGLIGENT IN Y
Jessica, When we spoke last week you promised to
sign verifications so that Makr Coffin can't get
further sanctions against you. As for putting
documents “into evidence" that happens at trial, not
beforehand. Please sign the verifications today. ---
No Service 7:32 PM «>
Q FORE eesuce b Cancel
@ Jan Kaestner 10/15/20 2
“
(fo) RE: WHEN DID THIS B.S. GET DECIDED AN i
| just sent the Bertrand responses-please confirm
your receipt of them From: Jessi Ber
Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2020 7:38 AM
To: Jan Kaestner " ..
— aa a ee
Jan Kaestner 10/15/20. Z
(fo) RE: Bertrand Discovery @&
Jessica, You have never confirmed that you receive
any of my emails. The second to last time you were |
here, y
Preview
DEFENDANT’S OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST FOR TERMINATING SANCTIONS VIA EX PARTE HEARING; REPLY TO PLAINTIFF’S “REPLY BRIEF JESSICA BERRY Tel: (805) 453-0106 “it eee se -mail: BerryJessica037@gmail.com APR a2 2021 tc Darr BY. es (ee ( i i SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SANTA BARBARA-ANACAPA DIVISION 10 ll DAVID BERTRAND, An Individual, Case No. 19CV02429 DOROTHY CHURCHILL - JOHN- Dept. 5. Hon. JUDGE C. STERNE 12 SON, An Individual 13 DEFENDANT'S OPPOSITION TO Plaintiffs PLAINTIFF'S EX PARTE RE- 14 QUEST FOR TERMINATING 15 VS. SANCTIONS; JESSICA BERRY’S REPLY TO PLAINTIFF'S “RE- 16 PLY BRIEF FOR MOTION FOR 17 JESSICA BERRY, and TERMINATING SANCTIONS” DOES 1-100, inclusive 18 PLAINTIFFS EXHIBITS SHOW 19 Defendant, DISCOVERY QUESTIONS WERE NEVER GIVEN TO DEFENDANT 20 21 THIS ACTION IS RETALIATO- RY, IN VIOLATION OF CA LA- 22 BOR BOARD CODE 98.6: 23 DEFENDANT REQUESTS FOR 24 FULL DISMISSAL AND A $10K- CIVIL PENALTY ASSESSED 25 AGAINST DAVID BERTRAND. 26 Hearing Date: APRIL 5, 2021 27 Trial Date: April 20, 2021 28 Related Case: 19CV02357 Page I of 15 DEFENDANT’S OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFFS REQUEST FOR TERMINATING SANCTIONS VIA EX PARTE HEARING; REPLY TO PLAINTIFF’S “REPLY BRIEF...” DEFENDANT'S OPPOSITION TO TERMINATING SANCTIONS: PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that on APRIL 5, 2021, or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard in Department 5 of the above entitled Court, Located at 1100 Anacapa Street, Santa Barbara, CA 93101, Defendant JESSICA BERRY. will and hereby does oppose Plaintiffs Ex Parte for terminating sanctions. Plain- tiffs are just pretending BERRY was uncooperative with the discovery process. BERRY vehemently denies these allegations. COFFIN has derailed Discovery. 10 Defendant BERRY will use COFFIN’S EXHIBITS and email correspon- u dence with colluding attorneys COFFIN and KAESTNER to demonstrate these 12 men to be patterned liars and bad actors. Additionally, BERTRAND & Jaske/ 13 Garcia are evidenced by the Court as patterned abusers of women. 14 COFFIN argues the point that BERRY could have ordered a copy of Discov- 15 ery from the records dept. BERRY ordered those 1/15/2021 and found no discov- 16 ery questions. Instead, she found minutes of court hearings not matching with 17 the reality of what had transpired, and her paperwork filed with exhibits miss- 18 19 ing; others were photo-copied until illegible prior to being scanned into records. 20 BERTRAND has been advantaged by a 30-year career in our governments 21 bureaucracy. COFFIN’S fraudulent documents forward a specific strategy: here 22 he is attempting to offset a Labor Board Award his client has owed BERRY for 2 23 years. If this case is won by default, COFFIN can validate his fraudulent hand 24 dated lease; it was specifically designed to give this Court justification for over- I 25 turning BERRY’S now 6-figure Award. COFFIN & Plaintiffs then would cele- 1 26 brate a massive financial windfall, (the result of their crimes), by demanding i 27 millions in legal fees from the CA Office of the Labor Com; 1ss10ni 28 DATE: MARCH 30, 2021 éssica A. Berry, in Pro/Per Page 2 of 15 ii 7:15 afl! -ov Q CEI © Cancel From To Message mee ane ee en a a ee South County Records 15/21 Z {F] 19CV02429- Part 7 G Attachments: Minute Order.pdf, Case Management Order Filed. pdt, Opposition. pdt ao —— a South County Records 45/21 > {72} 19CV02429- Part 6 G Attachments: Notice of Motion to Vacate Judgment Declaration Filed.pdf, Proposed Orde... ce en nn South County Records 1/15/21 > {70} 19CV02429 - Part 5 G Attachments: Order on Court Fee Waiver Received. pa Proposed Order Received.dpa, Cle... South County Records 45/21 {70} 19CVO2429- Part 4 @ Attachments: Notice of Non-availability.pdf, General Denial Filed.pdf, Request for Entry of De... __—_—. _. South County Records in 5/21 & %, {fo} 19CV02429- Part 3 Gbe Attachments: Proof of Publication Filed.pdf, Proof of Publication. pat — South County Records | 4/15/21 sy e 7:15 asl = Cc Q CEE @ Cancel From To Message coe _— wor een ey South County Records 4/15/21 2 {7} 19CV02429 - Part 13 Attachments: Document Filed.pdf, Notice of Jury Deposit.pdf, Minute Order.pdf South County Records 4/15/21 %> 4b {79} 19CV02429 - Part 12 Gg Attachments: Minute Order.pdf, Document Filed. pal, Document Filed 1.pdf, Document C Filed... South County Records 415/21 > (79) 19CV02429- Part 11 @ Attachments: Case Management Statement.pdf, Minute Order.pdf, Case Management ( Order Filed... —- Southh County Re Records Nn 5/21 ABOY (9) 19CV02429- Part 10 Attachment: Motion.pdf South County Records 415/21 > (2) 19CV02429- Part 9 Go Attachments: Answer to Complaint Filed.pdf, Proof of Service Filed.pdf South County Records 4/15/21 % ’ 9) 19CV02429- Part 8 G Attachments: Minute Order.pdf, Case Management Order Filed.pdf, Minute Order 1.pdf _ a at ae hea Edit ty oo 7:15 wii SO) Q GEST @® Cancel From To Message — — ~ South County Records 15/21 > 19CV02429 - Part 19 GYG Attachments: Opposition.pdf, Proof of Service Fede South County Records 415/21 > Ge} 19CV02429 - Part 18 @ Attachment: Motion Filed.pdf South County Records 4/15/21 >D 19CV02429 - Part 17 Gg Attachment: DeclarationAffidavit.pdf 5, > South County Records 4/15/21 19CV02429 - Part 16 eC Attachments: Motion.pdf, DeclarationAffidavit.pdf, Motion 1.pdf aa South County Records “angj21 > i 19CV02429 - Part 15 G Fed Dectaatonacetpt Attachments: Case Management Statement . ~ _ a ee South County Records 4/15/21 > 19CV02429 - Part 14 Attachments: Notice of Ruling Filed.pdf, Case Is Management Statement pdf, Minute Order.paf, N... _—_-Sauth CauntDanarde__ ADELA. Edit OO 7:15 alll “> ) Q CEA @ Cancel From To Message pee South County Records 4/15/21 {70} 19CV02429 - Part 25 G This is the final part South County Records 1/15/21 > {72) 19CV02429 - Part 24 G Attachments: Notice Entry of Order.pdf, Motion Filed. Pat, Proof of Service by Mail Filed.pal, OPP... a — a South County Records 415/21 - 3 L {70} 19CV02429 -Part 23 G Attachments: Proposed Order.pdf, Minute Order. pat ~ South County Records | 4/15/21 2} 19CV02429- Part 22 @ Attachments: Reply.pdf, Reply 1.pdf South County Records 1/15/21 > 2] 19CV02429 - Part 21 G Attachment: Objection Filed.pdf South County Records 4/15/21 5 DEFENDANT’S OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST FOR TERMINATING SANCTIONS VIA EX PARTE HEARING; REPLY TO PLAINTIFF’S “REPLY BRIEF...” MEM: RAND POINTS AND AUTHORITIES: 1. Plaintiff's desire no record of their discovery questions exist pre-trial. MARK COFFIN already has used the ‘non-existent attachment trick’ on BERRY: He emailed a Notice of Termination of Tenancy to Defendant JESSICA BERRY on September 26, 2017, and referenced a copy of her lease was attached. It was not. (EXHIBIT 1) At trial, COFFIN had replaced BERRY’S legitimate lease with one of his own creation, turning BERRY’S ‘month-2-month’ into a set 10 “term” lease, (it only gave BERRY 10 days). BERTRAND had used COFFIN’S ll term lease to justify the necessity of removing BERRY from his property via Un- 12 lawful Detainer. This 1st of the 6 Plaintiffs lawsuits was served to BERRY on 13 her 45th birthday, after her decade of loyal servitude; timed suspiciously as re- 14 imbursements of $50,000. BERTRAND contractually owed to BERRY came due. 15 16 2. MARK COFFIN says that JESSICA BERRY has violated 3 separate court or- 17 ders, and is now in contempt of Court. But JESSICA BERRY was never provid- 18 19 ed the discovery questions COFFIN seeks, and has motioned (EXHIBIT 2) for a 20 court appointed MASTER to oversee what this is: a defrauded discovery process. 21 22 3. JESSICA BERRY did commit to providing Plaintiffs with discovery answers 23 in a timely fashion; she stated so with honest intention; but naturally this 24 would have to be predicated on her first receiving Plaintiffs questions. 1 25 26 4. JESSICA BERRY completed discovery for 19CV02357 & 19CV02429 at JAN ! | 27 KAESTER’s office. Regardless of assignment, he did advise BERRY on both cas- 28 es. BERRY completed hundreds of pages of answers, and presented thousands Page 3 of 15 DEFENDANT’S OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST FOR TERMINATING SANCTIONS VIA EX PARTE HEARING; REPLY TO PLAINTIFF’S “REPLY BRIEF...” : of documents; 2X the normal amount of normal maximum discovery limits, i has already been turned over to Plaintiffs by JESSICA BERRY. |! 1 5. JAN KAESTNER advised JESSICA BERRY on the format of how her answers must be presented. For Admissions, KAESTNER’S instructions did not entail i BERRY should be typing the Plaintiffs questions prior to her answering them. 6. The Discovery demanded of Plaintiffs by KAESTNER is grossly negli- 10 gent in that it features questions that are factually incorrect - and those : 11 to the advantage of Plaintiffs. KAESTNER’S hastily prepared Discovery 12 supports what has ultimately transpired; Plaintiffs providing nothing. 13 i i 14 't 7. JESSICA BERRY realized later her answers could be manipulated if Plain- 15 1 tiffs changed the order of their questions. KAESTNER refused to acknowledge , I 16 this glaring vulnerability. Then KASTNER refused to provide BERRY with her ! 17 own case files. (EXHIBIT 3). BERRY understandably lost faith in KAESTNER'S, 18 representation. His collusion against BERRY cemented when he rejected guar- 19 ' anteed payment of his fees by the Labor Commissioner, and announced that he: i 20 | 21 would instead attach a lien (amount still undisclosed) to what BERRY recovers. 22 23 8. August 5, 2020 via email (COFFINS EXHIBIT C) and again on August 7 | 24 25 (COFFIN’S EXHIBIT D) BERRY requests a copy of all Plaintiffs discovery to be “emailed” from the office of MARK COFFIN; specifically she requests a copy of | I | 26 Plaintiffs prior discovery demanded, and also a copy of the additional current | |1 27 questions. BERRY also requests a copy of what answers KAESTNER had pro- 28 vided to Plaintiffs on her behalf. BERRY expressed openly she was having prob-: lems with the validity of KAESTNER’S representation. BERRY confirmed her Page4 of 15 DEFENDANT’S OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S REQUEST FOR TERMINATING SANCTIONS VIA EX PARTE HEARING; REPLY TO PLAINTIFF’S “REPLY BRIEF...” awareness of COFFIN’S frauds. Plaintiffs ignored 8 requests for the Sup- plemental Discovery Questions from BERRY. (Evidenced 3/23 hearing.) 9. BERRY filed her initial discovery requests from Plaintiffs simultaneously to serving them with the Clerk of the Court, fearing Plaintiffs would avoid doing this work; fears which have materialized. Puzzling is why this Court has not allowed her to impose sanctions against uncooperative Plaintiffs, who’s discov- ery was due almost a year ago. 10 i 10. Court has already twice penalized BERRY with monetary sanctions for its 12 perceived smaller Discovery transgressions; but BERRY propound hundreds 13 of pages of responses, and gave thousands of documents to Plaintiffs. 14 15 11. September 11th MARK COFFIN emails to BERRY that “quite a bit of writ- 16 ten discovery has been propounded and responded to by [BERTRAND & 17 18 DOROTHY)” (COFFIN’S EXHIBIT E). Yet not a single legitimate answer has 19 been provided to BERRY in 8 sets of Discovery demands. (see COFFIN’s discov- 1 20 ery provided which was in the last ex parte opposition from BERRY.) 21 22 12. Scott Jaske made declaration as to mailing BERRY the Supplemental Dis- 23 covery questions on “July 27, 2020.” He lies. Just like BERTRAND, this as- 24 sistant has taken remarkable steps to hide his patterned abuse of women. 25 26 13. Scott Garcia is evidenced in his paperwork for case 17CV04551 as NOT pro! i 27 viding the legally required service to JESSICA BERRY. (EXHIBIT 4) Thus en- 28 suring a fraudulent, quality of life-reducing judgement filed by MARK COFFIN on December 14, 2017 would not be appealed by BERRY. (EXHIBIT 5). Page5 of 15 DEFENDANT’S OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST FOR TERMINATING SANCTIONS VIA EX PARTE HEARING; REPLY TO PLAINTIFF’S “REPLY BRIEF...” 14. BERRY, headhunted for her last 3 positions, is now denied housing, credit, & gainful employment. COFFIN’S fraud has undermined her ability to recover. ! 1 15. Th in each of Plaintiffs law JESSICA 1 BE. lus their a re £ idation, are extensions of | DAVID BERTRAND’S original crime of Theft by Deception - which is prosecutable via a 4 year statute of limitations, with 6 months left. 10 ui Winning this Action by default has been COFFIN’S strategy from incep- 12 tion. His motions to terminate have been timed to coincide with BERRY resi- 13 1 dential moves, an instability being created by Plaintiffs criminal acts. DAVID 14 BERTRAND never prosecuted although his guilt (Grand Theft / sexual assault) 15 is proven with 5 forms of tangible evidence. BERRY was denied any assistance 16 normally given to a victim of crime. BERTRAND’S heir is a chief local authori- 17 ty. The HONORABLE JUDGE COLLEEN STERNE should not suffer the same 18 19 fate as BERRY; being targeted by a predator (for personal attraction & having a 20 superior work ethic), and then summarily egregiously lied to & played for a fool. — 21 22 DATE: MARCH 30, 2021 23 Jessica A. Berry, in Pro Per 24 | 25 NOTE: Attached is KAESTNERS discovery demanded from Plaintiffs | 26 which shi is lack of pro: on to this cause.. his hast: 27 mis-titl ies in this action and referen is client is NOT BERRY 28 (EXHIBIT 7) Page 6 of 15 DEFENDANT’S OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF’S REQUEST FOR TERMINATING SANCTIONS VIA EX PARTE HEARING; REPLY TO PLAINTIFF’S “REPLY BRIEF...” FA T CKGROUND - RELATED POINTS OF INTEREST: 1. This Action is essentially Plaintiffs suing JESSICA BERRY for the crimes they have committed against her. 5 forms of tangible evidence and recordings of Plaintiffs exist where, in their own voices, they prove this lawsuit meritless. 2. DAVID BERTRAND’s ex-girlfriend/PT secretary, DOROTHY CHURCHILL - JOHNSON, and his long time tenant, LMFT Therapist BARBARA PALO- 10 MAREZ, promoted BERRY trust BERTRAND at his word. (EXHIBITS 8 & 9) ul 12 3. All BERTRAND’S constituents have profited tens of thousands from crimes 13 against BERRY; including book keeper KATHY HIRSCH and attorney COFFIN. 14 15 4. ALL participated in meetings focused on how best to exploit BERRY. Typed’ 16 “minutes” of these meetings also “CC” therapist PALOMAREZ. 17 18 19 5. PALOMAREZ’S advisement normalized and minimized BERTRAND’S finan- 20 cial and sexual abuse of BERRY. In 2017, there were 37 times BERRY texts her 21 about being abused; ..that BERRY is “crying every day,” that “nothing is worth 22 this...”, further stating “I need to quit”. (Text evidence available for trial) | 23 24 6. PALOMAREZ instructs BERRY must adhere to BERTRAND’s plan and re- | it 25 quests; BERRY suffering BERTRAND’S emotional, sexual, and financial abuse : 26 while providing 100/hr work weeks 7 paying his business expenses per his plan. 27 28 7. BERRY had zero days off in the last 3 years; hospitalized twice with exhaus- tion. Now she makes regular trips to the ER with panic attacks and depression. Page 7 of 15 DEFENDANT’S OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S REQUEST FOR TERMINATING’ SANCTIONS VIA EX PARTE HEARING; REPLY TO PLAINTIFF’S “REPLY BRIEF...” | DECLARATIONS OF JESSICA BERRY OPPOSING COFFIN EX PARTE: I, JESSICA BERRY, the Defendant in this action, do declare and evidence: I 1. Attached as EXHIBIT 1 is a true and correct copy of COFFIN pretending to provide an attachment which was not actually included: this, a patterned trick. 10 2. Attached as EXHIBIT 2 is a true and correct copy of BERRY’S Motion to il have a Court appoint a Master & informing the Court about lawyer collusion. 12 13 3. Attached as EXHIBIT 3 is a true and correct copy of emails w/ KAESTNER 14 where he displays constantly making excuses and never provides anything. 15 16 4, Attached as EXHIBIT 4 is a true and correct copy of Jeske’s “lack of servic 17 i 18 19 5. Attached as EXHIBIT 5 is a true and correct copy of a COFFIN court filing. 20 21 6. Attached as EXHIBIT 6 is a true and correct copy of minutes of 17CV04551 22 which factually oppose COFFIN’S fraudulent judgement filing against BERRY. ! 23 24 7. Attached as EXHIBIT 7 is a true and correct copy of KAESTNER’S Discovery 25 Demanded of Plaintiffs; it references he is working for an alternate client. 26 = 27 DATE: MARCH 30, 2021 a 28 Jessica A. Berry, in Pro Per Page 8 of 15 EXHIBIT 1 Coffin's last trick of a missing “attachmen | ‘| CO @0@000 AT&T 7:53 PM % => <@ Mark — Fomine eae ny Fee MaNS eae a LEYS YES YUN rroase weur er EeL ene Gated October5, 2016. The lease Provides for a one (1) year term. which will expireon ‘Thursday October5, 2017, ‘The purpose of this letteris to inform you that Mr. Bertrand will not be extending the 11:23 AM term of the lease, and would therefore like you to vacate the premises on or before October 5. Please plan to remove your personal belongings by that date, and leave the premises in clean condition. The lease provides for an altemative to monetary rent, in the form of your performance of services for Mr, Hertrand. 1 understand that you have requested additional compensation for yout services from Mr. Bertrand, over and above the rental valu. 1 will write to you separately ‘concerning that issue. Also, in the event that you and Mr. Bertrand reach an understanding that would extend your lease period, please be aware that such an agreement must be memorialized in writing and signed before October5, 2017. Please feel frce to contact me in writing at the address or at the email listed above. if you have any questions about this letter or the lease. Very truly yours, Mo. et AIO’ GUCLOSRE ——— oo Jessica Please see the attached letter regarding termination of your 11:23 AM lease at 3524 Madera Street on October 5, 2017. Mark Coffin t EXHIBIT 2 Defendant JESSICA BERRY requests a court Master for discovery Ly JESSICA BERRY P.O. Box 432 Solvang, Ca. 93464 Tel: (805) 453-0106 e-mail: BerryJessica037@gmail.com SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SANTA BARBARA-ANACAPA DIVISION Lead case: 19CV02357 / rel: 19CV02429 DAVID BERTRAND, An Individual, 10 RESPONDENT’S MOTION OF il Appellant OPPOSITION TO ATTORNEY’S NOTICE TO WITHDRAW REP- 12 VS. RESENTATION: JAN KAEST- 13 NER HAS UNDERMINED THE DISCOVERY PROCESS 14 - JESSICA BERRY, An Individual 15 REQUEST JUDICIAL NOTICE: Respondent (1)A SIGNIFICANT CONFLICT 16 OF INTEREST EXISTS BE- 17 TWEEN PARTIES & AUTHOR- ITIES ON THESE MATTERS 18 (2) RETALIATORY LAWSUITS are ILLEGAL, Labor Code 98.6 19 (3) RESPONDENT HAS LEGAL 20 MENTAL DISASBILITY (4) THE CA DEPT. OF LABOR IS 21 OBLIGATED TO PROVIDE 22 LEGAL COUNCIL w/o BIAS- | FOR RESPONDENT in TRIAL i (5) MARK COFFIN PRIOR DE- 24 FRAUDED THE SB COURTS |! | 25 (6) KAESTNER’S FIRM STOLE RESPONDENTS IDENTITY |i 26 (7) COFFIN & KAESTNER DID COLLUDE AGAINST BERRY |: 27 28 Hon. C. Sterne - Dept. 5 Hearing Date: January 4, 2021 Page lof 5 APPLICATION FOR EX-PARTE ORDER RE: MOTION TO COMPEL PLAINTIFF RESPONSE JESSICA BERRY P.O. BOX 432 SOLVANG, CA. 93464 (805) 453-0106 Berryjessica037@gmail.com SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SANTA BARBARA-ANACAPA DIVISION DAVID BERTAND, An Individual; CASE #: 19CV02429 10 DOROTHY CHURCHILL-JOHNSON, (RELATED: 19CV02357) an individual, il *EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR Plaintiffs, ORDERS: MOTION TO COMPEL 12 PLAINTIFFS RESPONSES TO vs. DISCOVERY; 13 MEMORANDUM OF POINTS 14 JESSICA BERRY, An Individual, AND AUTHORITIES; & and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, DECLARATION OF DEFENDANT | 15 JESSICA BERRY IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO COMPEL 16 Defendant PLAINTIFFS RESPONSES TO DISCOVERY, INCLUDING: 17 *REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS - SET ONE 18 *REQUESTS FOR ADMISSIONS - SET ONE 19 *MOTION TO DEEM BOTH 20 PLAINTIFFS ADMISSIONS AS “ADMITTED” 21 *DEFENDANT JESSICA BERRY 22 REQUEST THE COURT ORDER FOR MONETARY SANCTIONS 23 PAID BY PLAINTIFFS IN THE AMOUNT OF $3700 (CCP2023.03) 24 25 Hearing: January 22, 2021 26 Judge: C. Sterne Dept: 5 @ 8:45 AM 27 Trial: Mareh 8, 2021 28 PROPOUNDING PARTY: JESSICA BERRY RESPONDING PARTY: DAVID G. BERTRAND Page lof 5 PROPOSED ORDER RE: MOTION TO COMPEL RESPONSE & DEEM “ADMITTED” JESSICA BERRY P.O. BOX 432 SOLVANG, CA. 93464 (805) 453-0106 Berryjessica037@gmail.com SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SANTA BARBARA-ANACAPA DIVISION 10 DAVID BERTAND, An Individual; CASE #: 19CV02429 11 DOROTHY CHURCHILL-JOHNSON, (RELATED: 19CV02357) 12 an individual, *EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR 13 Plaintiffs, ORDERS: MOTION TO COMPEL PLAINTIFFS RESPONSES TO 14 vs. DISCOVERY AND PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS SET ONE; 15 JESSICA BERRY, An Individual, DEFENDANT JESSICA BERRY and DOES 1 through 100, inclusive, REQUEST FOR MONETARY 16 SANCTIONS IN THE AMOUNT OF $3700 (CCP2023.03) 17 Defendant *MOTION TO DEEM PLAINTIFF 18 REQUEST FOR ADMISSIONS - 19 SET ONE, EACH AS “ADMITTED” 20 *RESPECTFULLY, DEFENDANT JESSICA BERRY REQUESTS OF 21 THE COURT REMOVE FRAUD PERPETRATED BY PLAINTIFFS 22 WHO HAVE MANIPULATED THE DISCOVERY QUESTIONS ASKED 23 BY THEIR DISCOVERY SO THEY ARE NO LONGER CORRELATED 24 WITH ANSWERS PROVIDED BY DEFENDANT JESSICA BERRY 25 Hearing: January 22, 2021 26 Judge: C. Sterne Dept: 5 @ 8:45 AM 27 Trial: March 8, 2021 28 Page 1 of 3 EXHIBIT 3 Defendant JESSICA BERRY emails with attorney JAN KAESTNER; he is full of excuses as to why he has done nothing for BERRY; his every act serves to advantage the opposition. ‘| No Service 7:33 PM a> Q CEI © Cancel — a @ Jan Kaestner 8/5/20 @ (2) You really going to let Coffin pass the liabilit GE Jessica, We have spoken about this extensively... cannot respond to you when you do not clarify what you are referring to, particularly when you imply that [am not on your team. If 1am not on your team, | am out of the case.. “very simple. Original Messag... ene a — Jan Kaestner 7/31/20 oO (to) Deposition @ What do you mean “You guys”? From: Jessi Ber Sent: Friday, July 31, 2020 11:00 AM To: Jan Kaestner Subject: Re: Deposition | will need to0 get an exact c.. oe — — Jan Kaestner 7/31/20 {to} RE: Moving this weekend As we discussed last week when you were here, if you have a question, you must ask me the question. | am not good at guessing what other people are thinking Original Message From: Jessi Ber Sent: Friday, July 31, 2 -No Service 7:33 PM a) ; GEE v Cancel ae @ Jan Kaestner 8/21/20 @ (to) Please email the substitution form Jessica, You were present at the hearing and this is exactly why you need an attorney to help you with your legal matters. | hope that you are actively seeking to find one that is willing to assume representation in your matters. Both matters were — ee cee nen Jan Kaestner 8/21/20 {to} RE:Return of your file-Substitution Jessica, Correction, the last time you sat in my office crying you apologized for your emails and lack of trust in me and told me that you were ready to settle your case. Since then, you have again changed your 1 position and stated that tyou want GG&F off the cas.. ee os — ne — vent I Jan Kaestner “8/9/20 | | | {to} RE: Jessica Berry Deposition Notice of requirem Jessica, You promised to sign the Substitution weeks ago. Until you sign and file the Substitution, | am still your attorney and you should stop communicating directly with Coffin until you do so Original Message eee From: Jessi Ber Sent: Wednesday, September 2, 2020 3:32 PM To: Mark Coffin Cc: Jan Kaestner ... Jan Kaestner 9/2/20 RE: DISCOVERY DEMANDED FOR 19CV02429 -... Test-Did you get this email? Original Message ----- From: Jessi Ber Sent: Wednesday, September 2, 2020 2:48 PM To: Jan Kaestner Subject: DISCOVERY DEM... i __. Be No Service 7:32 PM =) Q CEI v Cancel Te SE === co I aa @ Jan kaestner 9/18/20 (to) RE: Sick outside & Wish you knew that | was From: Jessi Ber Sent: Friday, September 18, 2020 2:29 PM To: Jan Kaestner Subject: Sick outside... an ~ @ Jan Kaestner 9/17/20 a {to} RE: | found where they made the first fake re & Jessica, You missed the deposition today and will have to explain that to the judge on Monday. jek From: Jessi Ber Sent: Thursday, September 17, 2020 4:23 PM To: Jan Kaestner | .. a a ee ~ e Jan Kaestner 9/16/20 | (to) RE: Your Deposition on 9/17 or OD Jessica, You are clearly not well enough to sit for a deposition tomorrow. However, you need to stop everything that you are doing...you are your very own worst enemy at this point. From: Jessi Ber .. No Service 7:32 PM a> Q CEE v Cancel a _ oa Jan Kaestner 9/22/20 {to} RE: Perhaps DAVID needs to know that there is Jessica, Please give me a date upon which you agree to have your deposition taken or Coffin will get sanctions against you again. | also need you provide a date when you will sign verifications regarding supplemental responses for Coffin or he will get sa.. ane a Jan Kaestner 9/21/20 (fo) RE: BTW - you are not authorized to agree to an Jessica, That is pretty much always the case an attorney cannot bind client to anything but timing concessions without client consent Original Message From: Jessi Ber Sent: Monday, Septe... Jan Kaestner 9/21/20 (70) RE: If you are only acting to facilitate Coffin’s fr Jessica, The reason your motion wasn't heard today is because you need to place a hearing date on it as well as file and serve it 16 court days before the hearing, to give Coffin an opportunity to file an opposition. | don't collude with Coffin but | do have No Service 7:32 PM a) Q CEE v Cancel — eee a oe a @ Jan Kaestner 9/25/20 (to) RE: Email me the discovery PLEASE Jessica, After | told you | was going to print all of our discovery and hand everything to you-You jumped in your car and drove away. Since then you have refused to accept our phone calls. | provided Mark Coffin with the dates of October 17,7, B&S &99 for your d... —-——___—. a — Jan Kaestner. "9/24/20 (ro) RE: Just know that | am sorry for what comes n Jessica, Per your instructions yesterday afternoon, | am providing Mark Coffin with October 7, 8 & 9 as il dates for your deposition. Please plan on appearing one of these dates. We will also be providing supplemental discovery t that require your verificatio... — a — —— — Jan Kaestner 9/22/20 vil ao (to) RE: Final Meet and Confer before Motion to & o Jessica, We have discussed this multiple times...| represent you only in the Labor Department Appeal You are always free to retain an attorney to help you in the other matters against Bertrand & Coffin. The only way Coffin can get sanctions is if vou refuse to | No Service 7:32 PM => Q FORE ees v Cancel cen a = = =m I = oo a Jan Kaestner 10/12/20 é (to} RE: NO MORE LIES - where is discovery? Are you receiving my emails today? If you respond "Yes" | will send you all of Bertrand's responses, but you must sign the verifications today. ----- Original Message ee From: Jessi Ber Sent Oday Octos WANK) Jan Kaestner (to) RE: Serious be ans Xo) 0/12/20 Ms. Berry, We can no longer tolerate the abuse that you regularly heap upon this firm. We will be filing a i motion to be relieved as your counsel, as soon as | possible. jek eee Original Message ween From: Jessi hi | Ber Sent: Monday, Oct... _ _ ' Jan Kaestner 10/12/20 s,! (fo) RE: YOU ARE BEING GROSSLY NEGLIGENT IN Y Jessica, When we spoke last week you promised to sign verifications so that Makr Coffin can't get further sanctions against you. As for putting documents “into evidence" that happens at trial, not beforehand. Please sign the verifications today. --- No Service 7:32 PM «> Q FORE eesuce b Cancel @ Jan Kaestner 10/15/20 2 “ (fo) RE: WHEN DID THIS B.S. GET DECIDED AN i | just sent the Bertrand responses-please confirm your receipt of them From: Jessi Ber Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2020 7:38 AM To: Jan Kaestner " .. — aa a ee Jan Kaestner 10/15/20. Z (fo) RE: Bertrand Discovery @& Jessica, You have never confirmed that you receive any of my emails. The second to last time you were | here, y