Preview
1 LEE A. SHERMAN, Esq. (SBN 172198)
SARAH C. VARISCO, Esq. (SBN 320200)
2 CALLAHAN, THOMPSON, SHERMAN
& CAUDILL, LLP
3 2601 Main Street, Suite 800
Irvine, California 92614
4 Tel: (949) 261-2872
Fax: (949) 261-6060
5 Email: lsherman@ctsclaw.com 1/12/2021
svarisco@ctsclaw.com
6
Attorneys for Defendant,
7 XI FIN LIN, LISA LIN LIAO,
LIN LI, DA QING ZHENG, &
8 AMAZING WOK
9 SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA
10 COUNTY OF SAN MATEO
11
12 RON EICHMAN Case No.: 20-CIV-02474
13 JUDGE: Hon. Nancy L. Fineman
DEPARTMENT: 4
14 Plaintiff, COMPLAINT DATE: 6/15/2020
15 vs. DECLARATION OF SARAH C. VARISCO
IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT’S
16 XI FIN LIN, LISA LIN LIAO, LIN LI, DA MOTION TO COMPEL RESPONSES
QING ZHENG, AMAZING WOK; DOES 1 AND FURTHER RESPONSES TO
17 TO 20 DEFENDANT’S SPECIAL
INTERROGATORIES, SET ONE AND
18 REQUEST FOR SANCTIONS IN THE
AMOUNT OF $2,345.00
19 Defendant. March 9, 2021
Date: February 16, 2021
20 Time: 8:30 a.m.2:00 pm
Dept.: 4
21
[Filed concurrently with Motion to Compel
22 Further Responses; Separate Statement;
and [Proposed] Order]
23
DISCOVERY CUT OFF: NONE
24 MOTION CUT OFF: NONE
MSC DATE: NONE
25 TRIAL DATE: NONE
26
27
28
-1-
DECLARATION OF SARAH C. VARISCO IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO COMPEL RESPONSES AND
FURTHER RESPONSES TO SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES, SET ONE AND REQUEST FOR SANCTIONS
1 DECLARATION OF SARAH C. VARISCO
2
I, Sarah C. Varisco, hereby declare as follows:
3
1. I am an attorney duly licensed to practice law in the State of California and I am an associate
4
attorney with Callahan, Thompson, Sherman & Caudill, LLP, counsel for Defendant Amazing Wok
5
6 (hereinafter “Defendant”) in this matter. I have personal knowledge of the matters set forth herein
7 and could competently testify to such matters if ordered to do so.
8 2. As a result of having to bring this motion to compel, I spent 2.2 hours drafting this motion
9 and all accompanying documents.
10
3. My billing rate for cases of this nature is $350.00 an hour.
11
4. I estimate I will spend an additional 2.5 hours reviewing any opposition papers and drafting
12
a reply, 1.0 hours for preparing for the hearing on this individual motion and an additional 1.0 hours
13
14 for attending the hearing on this individual motion. Thus, the total estimated amount of attorneys’
15 fees and costs spent on this motion and Defendant’s sanctions request is $2,345.00.
16 5. My office served Special Interrogatories, Set One upon Plaintiff on August 26, 2020.
17
Attached at Exhibit A is a true and correct copy of Interrogatories 10-12, 14-15, 17-18, and 20-35
18
and the Proof of Service for Special Interrogatories, Set One. Responses were therefore due on
19
September 29, 2020.
20
6. On October 1, 2020 I emailed Plaintiff Ron Eichman’s (hereinafter “Plaintiff”) counsel
21
22 inquiring as to Plaintiff’s discovery responses that were past due. Attached at Exhibit B is a true
23 and correct copy of my October 1, 2020 email to Plaintiff’s counsel.
24 7. It is my understanding Plaintiff’s counsel’s office reached out to my office and asked for a
25
three-week extension to respond to discovery. I therefore followed up regarding the three-week
26
extension in an email. (See Exhibit B.) Plaintiff’s counsel’s office confirmed the three-week
27
extension and waiver of objections on October 6, 2020. (Id.) Thus, responses were due on October
28
-2-
DECLARATION OF SARAH C. VARISCO IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO COMPEL RESPONSES AND
FURTHER RESPONSES TO SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES, SET ONE AND REQUEST FOR SANCTIONS
22, 2020. (Id.)
1
2 8. On October 22, 2020 Plaintiff’s counsel’s office asked for a second extension of one day.
3 Attached at Exhibit C is a true and correct copy of the correspondence between myself and
4 Plaintiff’s counsel’s office dated October 22-23, 2020. I granted this extension. (Id.)
5
9. On October 23, 2020, Plaintiff served his discovery responses. Attached at Exhibit D is a
6
true and correct copy of Plaintiff’s response to Special Interrogatories, Set One, numbers 10-12, 14-
7
15, 17-18 and 20-35. No verification form was provided.
8
10. As the responses were unverified, I sent Plaintiff’s counsel an email asking for Plaintiff’s
9
10 verification forms. Attached at Exhibit E is a true and correct copy of email correspondence between
11 myself and Plaintiff’s counsel’s office dated October 23, 2020. Plaintiff’s counsel’s office noted the
12 verification forms were out to their client. (Id.)
13
11. Attached at Exhibit F is a true and correct copy of Defendant’s meet and confer letter dated
14
October 30, 2020.
15
12. On November 6, 2020, Plaintiff’s counsel’s office asked for an extension to November 13,
16
17 2020 to provide supplemental discovery responses. I agreed to this extension. Attached at Exhibit
18 G is a true and correct copy of correspondence between myself and Plaintiff’s counsel’s office dated
19 November 6, 2020.
20 13. On November 12, 2020, I emailed Plaintiff’s counsel’s office regarding Plaintiff’s
21
verification forms. Attached at Exhibit H is a true and correct copy of my November 12, 2020 email.
22
14. No supplemental responses were received on November 13, 2020.
23
15. On November 16, 2020 I emailed Plaintiff’s counsel’s office as no supplemental discovery
24
25 responses were received. Attached at Exhibit I is a true and correct copy of my email dated
26 November 16, 2020.
27 16. On November 18, 2020 I emailed Plaintiff’s counsel’s office regarding Plaintiff’s
28
supplemental discovery responses and verification forms. Attached at Exhibit J is a true and correct
-3-
DECLARATION OF SARAH C. VARISCO IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO COMPEL RESPONSES AND
FURTHER RESPONSES TO SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES, SET ONE AND REQUEST FOR SANCTIONS
copy of my November 18, 2020 email.
1
2 17. On November 23, 2020 I emailed Plaintiff’s counsel’s office again regarding Plaintiff’s
3 supplemental discovery responses. Attached at Exhibit K is a true and correct copy of my November
4 23, 2020 email.
5
18. On November 24, 2020, I again emailed Plaintiff’s counsel’s office regarding Plaintiff’s
6
supplemental discovery responses. Plaintiff’s counsel’s office responded indicating we should
7
receive responses that day. Attached at Exhibit L is a true and correct copy of correspondence
8
between myself and Plaintiff’s counsel’s office dated November 24, 2020.
9
10 19. Attached at Exhibit M is a true and correct copy of Plaintiff’s Supplemental Discovery
11 Responses to Special Interrogatories, Set One, numbers 10-12, 14-15, 17-18 and 20-35. No
12 verification form was provided.
13
20. On November 30, 2020 I emailed Plaintiff’s counsel’s office regarding Plaintiff’s
14
verification forms. Attached at Exhibit N is a true and correct copy of my November 30, 2020 email.
15
21. Attached at Exhibit O is a true and correct copy of Defendant’s December 2, 2020 meet and
16
17 confer letter.
18 22. On December 14, 2020 and December 15, 2020 I emailed Plaintiff’s counsel’s office
19 regarding Defendant’s December 2, 2020 letter. Attached at Exhibit P is a true and correct copy of
20 my emails dated December 14, 2020 and December 15, 2020.
21
23. On December 21, 2020 I emailed Plaintiff’s counsel’s office regarding Plaintiff’s
22
verification forms. Attached at Exhibit Q is a true and correct copy of my December 21, 2020 email.
23
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is
24
25 true and correct. This declaration is executed on this 12TH day of January 2021, in Newport Beach,
26 California.
27 S/ Sarah C. Varisco __________________
Sarah Varisco, Declarant
28
-4-
DECLARATION OF SARAH C. VARISCO IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO COMPEL RESPONSES AND
FURTHER RESPONSES TO SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES, SET ONE AND REQUEST FOR SANCTIONS
EXHIBIT A
1 LEE A. SHERMAN, Esq. (SBN 172198)
SARAH C. VARISCO, Esq. (SBN 320200)
2 CALLAHAN, THOMPSON, SHERMAN
& CAUDILL, LLP
3 2601 Main Street, Suite 800
Irvine, California 92614
4 Tel: (949) 261-2872
Fax: (949) 261-6060
5 Email: lsherman@ctsclaw.com
svarisco@ctsclaw.com
6
Attorneys for Defendants,
7 AMAZING WOK, XI FIN LIN
AND LISA LIN LIAO
8
9 SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA
10 COUNTY OF SAN MATEO
11
12 RON EICHMAN, Case No.: 20-CIV-02474
13
DEFENDANT AMAZING WOK’S
14 Plaintiff, SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES, SET
ONE TO PLAINTIFF RON EICHMAN
15 vs.
JUDGE: Hon. John "Jack" L. Grandsaert
16 XI FIN LIN, LISA LIN LIAO, LIN LI, DA DEPARTMENT: 11
QING ZHENG, AMAZING WOK; DOES 1 COMPLAINT DATE: 6/15/2020
17 TO 20
DISCOVERY CUT OFF: NONE
18 MOTION CUT OFF: NONE
MSC DATE: NONE
19 Defendants. TRIAL DATE: NONE
20
21
PROPOUNDING PARTY: Defendant AMAZING WOK
22
RESPONDING PARTY: Plaintiff RON EICHMAN
23
SET NUMBER: ONE
24
INSTRUCTIONS
25
Pursuant to the Code of Civil Procedure section 2030.010 et seq., Defendant AMAZING
26
WOK (“Defendant” or “Propounding Party”) requests that Plaintiff RON EICHMAN (“Plaintiff” or
27
“Responding Party”) answer, under oath, separately and fully, and within thirty (30) days, the
28
following specially prepared interrogatories.
-1-
DEFENDANT AMAZING WOK’S SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES, SET ONE TO PLAINTIFF RON EICHMAN
1 In answering these interrogatories, YOU are required to furnish all information that is
2 available to YOU, including information in the possession, custody, or control of YOUR attorneys,
3 investigators, or anyone employed by YOU or working on YOUR behalf.
4 For any interrogatory or part of an interrogatory which YOU refuse to answer under a claim
5 of privilege, submit a sworn or certified statement from YOUR counsel or one of YOUR employees
6 in which YOU identify the nature of the information withheld; specify the grounds of the claimed
7 privilege and the paragraph of these interrogatories to which the information is responsive; and
8 identify each person to whom the information, or any part thereof, has been disclosed.
9 DEFINITIONS
10 1. “YOU” and “YOUR” shall mean Plaintiff RON EICHMAN and will include his
11 attorneys, agents and those acting on his behalf.
12 2. “PERSON(S)” includes any natural person, firm, association, organization,
13 partnership, business, trust, corporation, governmental or public entity, or any other form of legal
14 entity.
15 3. “DOCUMENT” or “DOCUMENTS” shall mean all documents, electronically stored
16 information, and tangible things, including without limitation all writings (as defined in section 250
17 of the California Evidence Code) and all other means of recording information, whether written,
18 transcribed, taped, filmed, microfilmed, or in any other way produced, reproduced, or recorded, and
19 including but not limited to: originals, drafts, computer-sorted and computer-retrievable
20 information, copies and duplicates that are marked with any notation or annotation or otherwise
21 differ in any way from the original, correspondence, memoranda, reports, notes, minutes, contracts,
22 agreements, books, records, checks, vouchers, invoices, purchase orders, ledgers, diaries, logs,
23 calendars, computer printouts, computer disks, card files, lists of persons attending meetings or
24 conferences, sketches, diagrams, calculations, evaluations, analyses, directions, work papers, press
25 clippings, sworn or unsworn statements, requisitions, manuals or guidelines, audit work papers,
26 financial analyses, tables of organizations, charts, graphs, indices, advertisements and promotional
27 materials, audited and unaudited financial statements, trade letters, trade publications, newspapers
28 and newsletters, photographs, emails, electronic or mechanical records, facsimiles, telegram and
-2-
DEFENDANT AMAZING WOK’S SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES, SET ONE TO PLAINTIFF RON EICHMAN
1 telecopies, and audiotapes. Each draft, annotated, or otherwise non-identical copy is a separate
2 DOCUMENT within the meaning of this term. DOCUMENTS shall also include any removable
3 stick notes, flags, or other attachments affixed to any of the foregoing, as well as the files, folder
4 tabs, and labels appended to or containing any documents. DOCUMENTS expressly include all
5 ELECTRONIC RECORDS.
6 4. “ELECTRONIC RECORDS” shall mean the original (or identical duplicate when
7 the original is not available) and any non-identical copies (whether non-identical because of notes
8 made on copies or attached comments, annotations, marks, transmission notations, or highlighting
9 of any kind) of writings of every kind and description inscribed by mechanical, facsimile, electronic,
10 magnetic, digital, or other means. ELECTRONIC RECORDS includes, by way of example and not
11 by limitation, computer programs (whether private, commercial, or work-in-progress), programming
12 notes and instructions, activity listings of email transmittals and receipts, output resulting from the
13 use of any software program (including word processing documents, spreadsheets, database files,
14 charts, graphs and outlines), electronic mail, and any and all miscellaneous files and file fragments,
15 regardless of the media on which they reside and regardless of whether said ELECTRONIC
16 RECORDS exists in an active file, deleted file, or file fragment. ELECTRONIC RECORDS includes
17 without limitation any and all items stored on computer memories, hard disks, diskettes cartridges,
18 network drives, network memory storage, archived tapes and cartridges, backup tapes, floppy disks,
19 CD-ROMs, removable media, magnetic tapes of all types, microfiche, and any other media used for
20 digital data storage or transmittal. ELECTRONIC RECORDS also includes the file, folder tabs, and
21 containers and labels appended to or associated with each original and non-identical copy.
22 5. “COMMUNICATION(S)” means any oral, written, or electronic transmission of
23 information, including but not limited to meetings, discussions, conversations, telephone calls,
24 telegrams, memoranda, letters, telecopies, telexes, conferences, messages, notes, seminars, social
25 media postings, and direct messages.
26 6. “RELATING TO,” “RELATED TO” or “RELATE(S) TO” means constituting,
27 containing, concerning, embodying, reflecting, referencing, identifying, stating, mentioning,
28 discussing, describing, evidencing, or in any other way being relevant to that given subject matter.
-3-
DEFENDANT AMAZING WOK’S SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES, SET ONE TO PLAINTIFF RON EICHMAN
1 7. “IDENTIFY” when used in reference to a document means provide the date, identity
2 of the author, type of document, summary of pertinent contents and Bates Number(s).
3 8. “IDENTIFY” when used in reference to a person, firm, or other entity requires that
4 you state for each person their name and last known residential or employment address and telephone
5 numbers (residential and business), and their status and affiliation with Responding Party at all times
6 relevant hereto; for a firm or other entity, please state its name, last known address, telephone
7 number, and relationship with Responding Party.
8 9. “INCIDENT” means the accident, injury or other occurrence or breach of contract
9 that occurred on or about August 19, 2018 at the SUBJECT PREMISES, as alleged in YOUR
10 operative complaint, and the circumstances and events surrounding that alleged incident.
11 10. “SUBJECT PREMISES” will mean the real property located at 1653 Laurel St., San
12 Carlos, CA 94070, where YOU allege that the INCIDENT occurred.
13 SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES
14 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 1:
15 If you were carrying any items with YOU as you walked toward YOUR dinner table at the
16 SUBJECT PREMISES, describe each item with particularity.
17 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 2:
18 Describe with particularity the shoes YOU were wearing at the time of the INCIDENT,
19 indicating the type, style, size and material composition of the heel and sole.
20 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 3:
21 Describe with particularity the clothing YOU were wearing at the time of the INCIDENT,
22 indicating the style, type and manner of each item of clothing YOU wore.
23 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 4:
24 If there were any obstructions to YOUR view as YOU approached the scene of the
25 INCIDENT, describe in detail each obstruction.
26 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 5:
27 Describe with particularity the lighting conditions at the time of the INCIDENT, including
28 the amount of natural light and/or the amount of artificial light.
-4-
DEFENDANT AMAZING WOK’S SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES, SET ONE TO PLAINTIFF RON EICHMAN
1 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 6:
2 Describe the surface condition of the area where the INCIDENT occurred.
3 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 7:
4 Describe the extent of YOUR vision just before the INCIDENT.
5 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 8:
6 If YOU have ever slipped or fallen in the ten (10) years prior to the INCIDENT, describe
7 each slip and fall with particularity, including the date of the slip or fall and the location of each slip
8 or fall.
9 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 9:
10 Describe with particularity all actions YOU took in attempt to avoid the INCIDENT.
11 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 10:
12 If YOU contend that YOU have suffered any general damage as a result of the INCIDENT,
13 state with specificity all FACTS which support that contention. (For purposes of these
14 interrogatories “FACTS” shall mean information to support your contention, witnesses with
15 knowledge of the facts to support your contention and the identity of documents that support your
16 contention.)
17 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 11:
18 If YOU contend that YOU have suffered physical injuries as a result of the INCIDENT, state
19 with specificity all FACTS which support that contention, including a description of each injury,
20 when each injury first occurred, the causal relation between the INCIDENT and each physical injury.
21 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 12:
22 If YOU contend that YOU have suffered emotional distress as a result of the INCIDENT,
23 state with specificity all FACTS which support that contention, including a description of the
24 emotional distress, when the emotional distress first occurred and the causal relation between the
25 INCIDENT and the emotional distress.
26 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 13:
27 If YOU contend that YOU have suffered emotional distress as a result of the INCIDENT,
28 state the name and address of each healthcare provider who treated or examined YOU for emotional
-5-
DEFENDANT AMAZING WOK’S SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES, SET ONE TO PLAINTIFF RON EICHMAN
1 distress, the date(s) of treatment or examination, and the type of treatment or examination given to
2 YOU.
3 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 14:
4 State all FACTS to support YOUR contention that Defendants negligently allowed the
5 SUBJECT PREMISES to be unsafe to traverse by customers as alleged in paragraph 15 of YOUR
6 complaint, a true and correct copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit 1
7 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 15:
8 State all FACTS to support YOUR contention that Defendants nor its employees made any
9 effort to warn Plaintiff, or place signs up alerting patrons of the liquid on the floor as alleged in
10 paragraph 13 of YOUR complaint, a true and correct copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit 1
11 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 16:
12 Where did YOU go when YOU left the SUBJECT PROPERTY after the INCIDENT?
13 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 17:
14 State with particularity all FACTS leading up to the INCIDENT from the time you arrived
15 at the SUBJECT PREMISES until you slipped and fell on August 19, 2018.
16 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 18:
17 State with particularity all FACTS of what YOU did after YOU slipped and fell at the
18 SUBJECT PREMISES on August 19,2018 until you left the SUBJECT PREMISES.
19 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 19:
20 State with particularity how YOU know an employee spilled two full glasses of liquid and
21 that the liquid remained on the floor of the SUBJECT PREMISES as alleged in paragraph 12 of
22 YOUR complaint, a true and correct copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit 1.
23 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 20:
24 State all FACTS to support YOUR contention that Defendants were negligent as alleged in
25 paragraph 16 of YOUR complaint, a true and correct copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit 1.
26 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 21:
27 State all FACTS to support YOUR claim that as a proximate result of the negligence of
28 Defendants, YOU have injured your health as alleged in paragraph 17 of YOUR complaint, a true
-6-
DEFENDANT AMAZING WOK’S SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES, SET ONE TO PLAINTIFF RON EICHMAN
1 and correct copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit 1.
2 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 22:
3 State all FACTS to support YOUR claim that as a proximate result of the negligence of
4 Defendants, YOU have injured your strength as alleged in paragraph 17 of YOUR complaint, a true
5 and correct copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit 1.
6 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 23:
7 State all FACTS to support YOUR claim that as a proximate result of the negligence of
8 Defendants, YOU have injured your wellbeing as alleged in paragraph 17 of YOUR complaint, a
9 true and correct copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit 1.
10 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 24:
11 State all FACTS to support YOUR claim that as a proximate result of the negligence of
12 Defendants, YOU have injured your left knee as alleged in paragraph 17 of YOUR complaint, a true
13 and correct copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit 1.
14 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 25:
15 State all FACTS to support YOUR claim that as a proximate result of the negligence of
16 Defendants, YOU have suffered a meniscus tear as alleged in paragraph 17 of YOUR complaint, a
17 true and correct copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit 1.
18 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 26:
19 State all FACTS to support YOUR claim that as a proximate result of the negligence of
20 Defendants, YOU will continue to suffer severe mental, physical and nervous pain and suffering as
21 alleged in paragraph 17 of YOUR complaint, a true and correct copy of which is attached hereto as
22 Exhibit 1.
23 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 27:
24 State all FACTS to support YOUR claim that as a proximate result of the negligence of
25 Defendants, YOU have suffered great pain as alleged in paragraph 18 of YOUR complaint, a true
26 and correct copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit 1.
27 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 28:
28 State all FACTS to support YOUR claim that as a proximate result of the negligence of
-7-
DEFENDANT AMAZING WOK’S SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES, SET ONE TO PLAINTIFF RON EICHMAN
1 Defendants, YOU have suffered inconvenience as alleged in paragraph 18 of YOUR complaint, a
2 true and correct copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit 1.
3 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 29:
4 State all FACTS to support YOUR claim that as a proximate result of the negligence of
5 Defendants, YOU have suffered embarrassment as alleged in paragraph 18 of YOUR complaint, a
6 true and correct copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit 1.
7 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 30:
8 State all FACTS to support YOUR claim that as a proximate result of the negligence of
9 Defendants, YOU have suffered mental anguish as alleged in paragraph 18 of YOUR complaint, a
10 true and correct copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit 1.
11 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 31:
12 State all FACTS to support YOUR claim that as a proximate result of the negligence of
13 Defendants, YOU have been deprived of ordinary pleasures of life as alleged in paragraph 18 of
14 YOUR complaint, a true and correct copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit 1.
15 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 32:
16 State all FACTS to support YOUR claim that as a proximate result of the negligence of
17 Defendants, YOU have suffered a loss of well-being as alleged in paragraph 18 of YOUR complaint,
18 a true and correct copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit 1.
19 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 33:
20 State all FACTS to support YOUR claim that as a proximate result of the negligence of
21 Defendants, YOU have suffered equanimity as alleged in paragraph 18 of YOUR complaint, a true
22 and correct copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit 1.
23 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 34:
24 State all FACTS to support YOUR claim that as a proximate result of the negligence of
25 Defendants, YOUR overall health, strength and vitality have been impaired as alleged in paragraph
26 18 of YOUR complaint, a true and correct copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit 1.
27 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 35:
28 If it is YOUR contention that YOU will continue to suffer future damages, state all FACTS
-8-
DEFENDANT AMAZING WOK’S SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES, SET ONE TO PLAINTIFF RON EICHMAN
1 to support YOUR contention.
2
3 DATED: August 26, 2020 CALLAHAN, THOMPSON, SHERMAN &
CAUDILL, LLP
4
5 By /s/ Sarah Varisco
LEE A. SHERMAN
6 SARAH C. VARISCO
Attorneys for Defendants,
7 AMAZING WOK, XI FIN LIN
AND LISA LIN LIAO
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
-9-
DEFENDANT AMAZING WOK’S SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES, SET ONE TO PLAINTIFF RON EICHMAN
PROOF OF SERVICE
1
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
2 )
COUNTY OF ORANGE )
3
I am employed in the County of Orange, State of California, I am over the age of 18 years and not
4 a party to the within action; my business address is 2601 Main Street, Suite 800, Irvine, California.
5 On this date, August 26, 2020, I served the foregoing document described as:
6 DEFENDANT AMAZING WOK’S SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES, SET ONE TO
PLAINTIFF RON EICHMAN
7
I enclosed a true copy of said documents in a sealed envelope or package addressed to the persons
8 noted below.
9 X (By electronic service) Based on a court order or an agreement of the parties to accept
service by electronic transmission, I caused the documents to be sent to the persons at the electronic
10 notification addresses listed below.
11 Executed on August 26, 2020, at Irvine, California.
12 I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the above is true
and correct. I further declare that I am employed in the office of a member of the bar of this court
13 at whose direction the service was made.
14 /s/ Nikki Trumbo
NIKKI TRUMBO
15
SERVICE LIST
16
Case Name : Eichman v. Lin
17 Court : San Mateo
Case Number : 20-CIV-02474
18
Christopher W. Goodroe, Esq. Attorney for Plaintiff,
19 The Barnes Firms, lc RON EICHMAN
555 12th Street Suite 1470
20 Oakland, CA 94607
Phone: 800-800-0000
21 Fax: 888-800-7050
Email: chris.goodroe@thebarnesfirm.com
22
David A. Harris, Attorney Attorney for Plaintiff,
23 Law Offices of Santana & Vierra Lin Li, Da Qing Zheng
Employees of Liberty Mutual Group, Inc.
24 255 California Street, Suite 900
San Francisco, CA 94111
25 Phone: (628) 220-6050
Email: David.Harris01@LibertyMutual.com
26
27
28
-1-
EXHIBIT B
From: Sarah C. Varisco
To: Kimberly Harding
Cc: Chris Goodroe; Lee A. Sherman; Nikki Trumbo; Lizbeth J. Vergara
Subject: Re: 19-01754-CA Eichman,Ron v. Amazing Wok: Eichman v. Amazing Wok Discovery Responses
Date: Tuesday, October 06, 2020 1:58:33 PM
Attachments: image001.png
image002.png
image003.png
Thank you for the confirmation. We will look at our calendar and get back to you shortly.
Best,
Sarah
Sent from my iPhone
On Oct 6, 2020, at 13:53, Kimberly Harding
wrote:
Confirmed for the discovery. I am looking at our calendar now, we
may have to move the deposition into early December. Do you have
any dates that do not work for your office.
From: Sarah C. Varisco
Sent: Monday, October 5, 2020 1:25 PM
To: Chris Goodroe ; Kimberly Harding
Cc: Lee A. Sherman ; Nikki Trumbo
; Lizbeth J. Vergara
Subject: RE: Eichman v. Amazing Wok Discovery Responses
Good Afternoon,
I am following up on the email below so we can move forward accordingly. Please
advise.
Best,
Sarah
From: Sarah C. Varisco
Sent: Thursday, October 01, 2020 4:20 PM
To: 'chris.goodroe@thebarnesfirm.com' ;
'Kimberly.Harding@thebarnesfirm.com'
Cc: Lee A. Sherman ; Nikki Trumbo
; Lizbeth J. Vergara
Subject: RE: Eichman v. Amazing Wok Discovery Responses
Good Afternoon,
It is my understanding Ms. Harding reached out to our office today asking for a three
week extension on the discovery responses. We agree to a three week extension
provided all objections are waived as responses were due on 9/29. Thus, please provide
responses, without objections, by 10/22/2020. Furthermore, are you agreeable to
moving the deposition date back to November 12th? Please let us know at your earliest
convenience so we can plan accordingly. Thank you.
Best,
Sarah
From: Sarah C. Varisco
Sent: Thursday, October 01, 2020 11:45 AM
To: chris.goodroe@thebarnesfirm.com
Cc: Lee A. Sherman ; Nikki Trumbo
; Lizbeth J. Vergara
Subject: Eichman v. Amazing Wok Discovery Responses
Good Morning Mr. Goodroe,
Plaintiff’s discovery responses were due to our office on 9/29. Please advise if they
were mailed. If so, can you also please provide our office with an electronic copy. We
are trying to work as paperless as possible during COVID. Thank you.
Best,
Sarah
Sarah C. Varisco / Associate
2601 Main Street, Suite 800, Irvine, California 92614
Tel: 949/261-CTSC(2872)· Fax:949/261-6060
E-mail: svarisco@ctsclaw.com · Website: ctsclaw.com
NOTICE: This e-mail and any attachments contain information from the law firm of Callahan, Thompson, Sherman &
Caudill, LLP, and are intended solely for the use of the named recipient or recipients. This e-mail may contain privileged
attorney/client communications or work product. Any dissemination of this e-mail by anyone other than an intended
recipient is strictly prohibited. If you are not a named recipient, you are prohibited from any further viewing of the e-
mail or
any attachments or from making any use of the e-mail or attachments. If you believe you have received this e-mail in
error,
please notify the sender immediately and permanently delete the e-mail, any attachments, and all copies thereof from
any
drives or storage media and destroy any printouts of the e-mail or attachments. Thank you .
EXHIBIT C
From: Sarah C. Varisco
To: Kimberly Harding
Cc: Chris Goodroe; Lee A. Sherman; Nikki Trumbo; Lizbeth J. Vergara
Subject: RE: 19-01754-CA Eichman,Ron v. Amazing Wok: Eichman v. Amazing Wok Discovery Responses
Date: Friday, October 23, 2020 9:00:00 AM
Please forward them, without objections, as soon as possible this morning. Thank you.
Best,
Sarah
From: Kimberly Harding
Sent: Thursday, October 22, 2020 6:32 PM
To: Sarah C. Varisco
Cc: Chris Goodroe ; Lee A. Sherman
; Nikki Trumbo ; Lizbeth J. Vergara
Subject: RE: 19-01754-CA Eichman,Ron v. Amazing Wok: Eichman v. Amazing Wok Discovery
Responses
Ms. Varisco,
I am requesting a one day extension for discovery, I have one last thing
to get from my client. I can get them to you in the morning.
EXHIBIT D
1 Christopher W. Goodroe, Esq. (224386)
THE BARNES FIRM, L.C.
2 555 12th Street, Suite 1470
Oakland, CA 94607
3 Telephone: (800) 800-0000
Facsimile: (888) 800-7050
4 Email: chris.goodroe@thebarnesfirm.com
5 Attorney for Plaintiff
RON EICHMAN
6
7
8 SUPERIOR COURT FOR THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
9 COUNTY OF SAN MATEO - UNLIMITED
10
RON EICHMAN, ) Case No.: 20-CIV-02474
11 )
Plaintiff(s), ) PLAINTIFF RON EICHMAN’S
12 ) RESPONSES TO DEFENDANT
) AMAZING WOK’S SPECIAL
13 vs. ) INTERROGATORIES, SET ONE
)
14 XI FIN LIN, LISA LIN LIAO, LIN LI, DA )
QING ZHENG, AMAZING WOK; DOES 1 )
15 )
TO 20, )
16 )
Defendant(s). )
17 )
)
18 )
19
20 PROPOUNDING PARTY: DEFENDANT, AMAZING WOK
21 RESPONDING PARTY: PLAINTIFF, RON EICHMAN
22 SET NO.: ONE (1)
23 Plaintiff RON EICHMAN, pursuant to the provisions of Code of Civil Procedure
24 §2030.220 et seq, hereby responds to Defendant AMAZING WOK’s Special Interrogatories,
25 General Set One (1), as follows:
26 PRELIMINARY STATEMENT
27 These responses are made solely for the purpose of, and in relation to, this action. Each
28 response is given subject to all appropriate objections (including, but not limited to, objections
PLAINTIFF RON EICHMAN’S RESPONSES TO DEFENDANT AMAZING WOK’S SPECIAL
INTERROGATORIES, SET ONE 1
1 concerning competency, relevancy, materiality, propriety and admissibility which would require
2 the exclusion of any statement contained herein if the interrogatory or request was asked of, or
3 any statement contained herein was made by, a witness present and testifying in court). All such
4 objections and grounds therefore are reserved and may be interposed at the time of trial.
5 The party on whose behalf the responses are given has not yet completed its investigation
6 of the facts relation to this action, has not yet completed its discovery in this action, and has not
7 yet completed its preparation for trial. Consequently, the following responses are given without
8 prejudice to the Responding Party’s right to produce, at the time of trial, subsequently discovered
9 evidence, relating to the proof of facts subsequently discovered to be material.
10 Except for facts explicitly admitted herein, no admission of any nature whatsoever is to
11 be implied or inferred. The facts that an interrogatory or request herein has been answered should
12 not be taken as an admission, or a concession of the existence, of any facts set forth or assumed
13 by such interrogatory or request, or that such response constitutes evidence of any fact thus set
14 forth or assumed. All responses must be construed as given on the basis of present recollection.
15 GENERAL OBJECTIONS
16 1. These Responses and Objections (hereinafter also referred to as "Responses") are
17 made solely for the purpose of this action.
18 2. Each Response is subject to all objections as to competence, relevance, materiality,
19 propriety and admissibility, and any and all other objections and grounds that would require
20 exclusion of the Response, or any part thereof, if any of these Requests were made of, or any
21 statements contained herein were made by, witnesses present and testifying in Court, all of which
22 objections and grounds are reserved and may be interposed at the time of trial.
23 3. The following Responses are based on information presently known and available
24 to Plaintiff. Plaintiff reserves the right to supplement these Responses with subsequently
25 discovered information and/or to introduce such information at trial.
26 4. To the extent that part or all of any Document demand calls for information which
27 constitutes material prepared in anticipation of litigation or for trial, or for information or material
28 covered by the work product doctrine, or which constitutes information which is protected from
PLAINTIFF RON EICHMAN’S RESPONSES TO DEFENDANT AMAZING WOK’S SPECIAL
INTERROGATORIES, SET ONE 2
1 disclosure by virtue of a privilege, including, but not limited to, attorney-client privilege, Plaintiff
2 objects to each and every such document demand and, hence will not supply or render any
3 information or material protected from discovery by virtue of the work-product doctrine, or any
4 privilege, including, but not limited to, the attorney-client privilege.
5 5. Any Response herein stating that Plaintiff will produce the documents requested
6 does not constitute admission that any such documents actually exist. By so responding, Plaintiff
7 represents that she will make a search for such documents in his possession, custody or control
8 and that, if such documents are located, they will be produced.
9 6. The above stated objections are hereby made applicable to each and all of these
10 Responses and are incorporated by reference as if fully set forth in each Response to each
11 document demand.
12 Without waiving any of the foregoing objections, Plaintiff further responds to these
13 Interrogatories as follows:
14 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 1:
15 If you were carrying any items with YOU as you walked toward YOUR dinner table at
16 the SUBJECT PREMISES, describe each item with particularity.
17 RESPONSE TO SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 1:
18 Plaintiff was not carrying any items.
19 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 2:
20 Describe with particularity the shoes YOU were wearing at the time of the INCIDENT,
21 indicating the type, style, size and material composition of the heel and sole.
22 RESPONSE TO SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 2:
23 Plaintiff was wearing new Nike athletic shoes.
24 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 3:
25 Describe with particularity the clothing YOU were wearing at the time of the INCIDENT,
26 indicating the style, type and manner of each item of clothing YOU wore.
27 ///
28 ///
PLAINTIFF RON EICHMAN’S RESPONSES TO DEFENDANT AMAZING WOK’S SPECIAL
INTERROGATORIES, SET ONE 3
1 RESPONSE TO SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 3:
2 Plaintiff does not recall the exact clothing he was wearing, he believes it to be a pair of
3 shorts and a collared shirt.
4 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 4:
5 If there were any obstructions to YOUR view as YOU approached the scene of the
6 INCIDENT, describe in detail each obstruction.
7 RESPONSE TO SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 4:
8 Plaintiff had no obstructions to his view.
9 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 5:
10 Describe with particularity the lighting conditions at the time of the INCIDENT, including
11 the amount of natural light and/or the amount of artificial light.
12 RESPONSE TO SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 5:
13 Plaintiff recalls that there was mainly artificial light with some natural light from
14 windows in the front entrance.
15 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 6:
16 Describe the surface condition of the area where the INCIDENT occurred.
17 RESPONSE TO SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 6:
18 The restaurant flooring surface is composed of flat, smooth, slick, polished, large tiles that are
19 light in color. These tiles were covered in clear liquid.
20 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 7:
21 Describe the extent of YOUR vision just before the INCIDENT.
22 RESPONSE TO SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 7:
23 Plaintiff’s vision was normal, and unobstructed.
24 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 8:
25 If YOU have ever slipped or fallen in the ten (10) years prior to the INCIDENT, describe
26 each slip and fall with particularity, including the date of the slip or fall and the location of each
27 slip or fall.
28
PLAINTIFF RON EICHMAN’S RESPONSES TO DEFENDANT AMAZING WOK’S SPECIAL
INTERROGATORIES, SET ONE 4
1 RESPONSE TO SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 8:
2 Plaintiff has not.
3 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 9:
4 Describe with particularity all actions YOU took in attempt to avoid the INCIDENT.
5 RESPONSE TO SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 9:
6 Plaintiff was unaware of an incident to avoid.
7 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 10:
8 If YOU contend that YOU have suffered any general damage as a result of the
9 INCIDENT, state with specificity all FACTS which support that contention. (For purposes of
10 these interrogatories “FACTS” shall mean information to support your contention, witnesses with
11 knowledge of the facts to support your contention and the identity of documents that support your
12 contention.)
13 RESPONSE TO SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 10:
14 Plaintiff went with his parents to the Amazing Wok to meet his sister and in laws, his sister and
15 his brother in law were already at the table in the restaurant, they were seated at the large circular table in
16 the middle of the restaurant. Plaintiff let his father and mother in through the front door, they went to the
17 right of the table, client ultimately went to the left side of the table where he slipped on a puddle of clear
18 liquid in the common area of the restaurant causing him to slip and fall down due to a dangerous
19 condition. Directly after the incident, Plaintiff’s sister told Plaintiff that she witnessed a waitress spill
20 some glasses of ice water on the floor two minutes or so before and had not put anything down to clean it
21 up. There were no warning signs, no signage placed alerting of a spill, and there was no staff present to
22 alert the client to the hazardous material on the floor. After the fall, Plaintiff had to be helped up by
23 restaurant employees, then restaurant employees put down towels to absorb the liquid Plaintiff slipped
24 on. Plaintiff was able to eat his meal but he was in pain, his knee was bothering him tremendously. Later
25 that evening Plaintiff’s pain became unbearable, and he proceeded to the emergency room where he was
26 evaluated, given pain medication, crutches, and scheduled for an appointment with an orthopedic
27 specialist, where they diagnosed him with a medial meniscus tear. Plaintiff required surgery and months
28 of healing, which gravely impacted his mobility, health, and his overall emotional well-being. As a result
PLAINTIFF RON EICHMAN’S RESPONSES TO DEFENDANT AMAZING WOK’S SPECIAL
INTERROGATORIES, SET ONE 5
1 of this incident, Plaintiff still suffers from residual pain, residual nerve pain, stiffness, difficulty standing
2 for long periods, difficulty walking. In addition, he has experienced diminished strength, agility, vitality,
3 and mental anguish.
4 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 11:
5 If YOU contend that YOU have suffered physical injuries as a result of the INCIDENT,
6 state with specificity all FACTS which support that contention, including a description of each
7 injury, when each injury first occurred, the causal relation between the INCIDENT and each
8 physical injury.
9 RESPONSE TO SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 11:
10 Plaintiff went with his parents to the Amazing Wok to meet his sister and in laws, his sister and
11 his brother in law were already at the table in the restaurant, they were seated at the large circular table in
12 the middle of the restaurant. Plaintiff let his father and mother in through the front door, they went to the
13 right of the table, client ultimately went to the left side of the table where he slipped on a puddle of clear
14 liquid in the common area of the restaurant causing him to slip and fall down due to a dangerous
15 condition. Directly after the incident, Plaintiff’s sister told Plaintiff that she witnessed a waitress spill
16 some glasses of ice water on the floor two minutes or so before and had not put anything down to clean it
17 up. There were no warning signs, no
Preview
1 LEE A. SHERMAN, Esq. (SBN 172198) SARAH C. VARISCO, Esq. (SBN 320200) 2 CALLAHAN, THOMPSON, SHERMAN & CAUDILL, LLP 3 2601 Main Street, Suite 800 Irvine, California 92614 4 Tel: (949) 261-2872 Fax: (949) 261-6060 5 Email: lsherman@ctsclaw.com 1/12/2021 svarisco@ctsclaw.com 6 Attorneys for Defendant, 7 XI FIN LIN, LISA LIN LIAO, LIN LI, DA QING ZHENG, & 8 AMAZING WOK 9 SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA 10 COUNTY OF SAN MATEO 11 12 RON EICHMAN Case No.: 20-CIV-02474 13 JUDGE: Hon. Nancy L. Fineman DEPARTMENT: 4 14 Plaintiff, COMPLAINT DATE: 6/15/2020 15 vs. DECLARATION OF SARAH C. VARISCO IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT’S 16 XI FIN LIN, LISA LIN LIAO, LIN LI, DA MOTION TO COMPEL RESPONSES QING ZHENG, AMAZING WOK; DOES 1 AND FURTHER RESPONSES TO 17 TO 20 DEFENDANT’S SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES, SET ONE AND 18 REQUEST FOR SANCTIONS IN THE AMOUNT OF $2,345.00 19 Defendant. March 9, 2021 Date: February 16, 2021 20 Time: 8:30 a.m.2:00 pm Dept.: 4 21 [Filed concurrently with Motion to Compel 22 Further Responses; Separate Statement; and [Proposed] Order] 23 DISCOVERY CUT OFF: NONE 24 MOTION CUT OFF: NONE MSC DATE: NONE 25 TRIAL DATE: NONE 26 27 28 -1- DECLARATION OF SARAH C. VARISCO IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO COMPEL RESPONSES AND FURTHER RESPONSES TO SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES, SET ONE AND REQUEST FOR SANCTIONS 1 DECLARATION OF SARAH C. VARISCO 2 I, Sarah C. Varisco, hereby declare as follows: 3 1. I am an attorney duly licensed to practice law in the State of California and I am an associate 4 attorney with Callahan, Thompson, Sherman & Caudill, LLP, counsel for Defendant Amazing Wok 5 6 (hereinafter “Defendant”) in this matter. I have personal knowledge of the matters set forth herein 7 and could competently testify to such matters if ordered to do so. 8 2. As a result of having to bring this motion to compel, I spent 2.2 hours drafting this motion 9 and all accompanying documents. 10 3. My billing rate for cases of this nature is $350.00 an hour. 11 4. I estimate I will spend an additional 2.5 hours reviewing any opposition papers and drafting 12 a reply, 1.0 hours for preparing for the hearing on this individual motion and an additional 1.0 hours 13 14 for attending the hearing on this individual motion. Thus, the total estimated amount of attorneys’ 15 fees and costs spent on this motion and Defendant’s sanctions request is $2,345.00. 16 5. My office served Special Interrogatories, Set One upon Plaintiff on August 26, 2020. 17 Attached at Exhibit A is a true and correct copy of Interrogatories 10-12, 14-15, 17-18, and 20-35 18 and the Proof of Service for Special Interrogatories, Set One. Responses were therefore due on 19 September 29, 2020. 20 6. On October 1, 2020 I emailed Plaintiff Ron Eichman’s (hereinafter “Plaintiff”) counsel 21 22 inquiring as to Plaintiff’s discovery responses that were past due. Attached at Exhibit B is a true 23 and correct copy of my October 1, 2020 email to Plaintiff’s counsel. 24 7. It is my understanding Plaintiff’s counsel’s office reached out to my office and asked for a 25 three-week extension to respond to discovery. I therefore followed up regarding the three-week 26 extension in an email. (See Exhibit B.) Plaintiff’s counsel’s office confirmed the three-week 27 extension and waiver of objections on October 6, 2020. (Id.) Thus, responses were due on October 28 -2- DECLARATION OF SARAH C. VARISCO IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO COMPEL RESPONSES AND FURTHER RESPONSES TO SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES, SET ONE AND REQUEST FOR SANCTIONS 22, 2020. (Id.) 1 2 8. On October 22, 2020 Plaintiff’s counsel’s office asked for a second extension of one day. 3 Attached at Exhibit C is a true and correct copy of the correspondence between myself and 4 Plaintiff’s counsel’s office dated October 22-23, 2020. I granted this extension. (Id.) 5 9. On October 23, 2020, Plaintiff served his discovery responses. Attached at Exhibit D is a 6 true and correct copy of Plaintiff’s response to Special Interrogatories, Set One, numbers 10-12, 14- 7 15, 17-18 and 20-35. No verification form was provided. 8 10. As the responses were unverified, I sent Plaintiff’s counsel an email asking for Plaintiff’s 9 10 verification forms. Attached at Exhibit E is a true and correct copy of email correspondence between 11 myself and Plaintiff’s counsel’s office dated October 23, 2020. Plaintiff’s counsel’s office noted the 12 verification forms were out to their client. (Id.) 13 11. Attached at Exhibit F is a true and correct copy of Defendant’s meet and confer letter dated 14 October 30, 2020. 15 12. On November 6, 2020, Plaintiff’s counsel’s office asked for an extension to November 13, 16 17 2020 to provide supplemental discovery responses. I agreed to this extension. Attached at Exhibit 18 G is a true and correct copy of correspondence between myself and Plaintiff’s counsel’s office dated 19 November 6, 2020. 20 13. On November 12, 2020, I emailed Plaintiff’s counsel’s office regarding Plaintiff’s 21 verification forms. Attached at Exhibit H is a true and correct copy of my November 12, 2020 email. 22 14. No supplemental responses were received on November 13, 2020. 23 15. On November 16, 2020 I emailed Plaintiff’s counsel’s office as no supplemental discovery 24 25 responses were received. Attached at Exhibit I is a true and correct copy of my email dated 26 November 16, 2020. 27 16. On November 18, 2020 I emailed Plaintiff’s counsel’s office regarding Plaintiff’s 28 supplemental discovery responses and verification forms. Attached at Exhibit J is a true and correct -3- DECLARATION OF SARAH C. VARISCO IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO COMPEL RESPONSES AND FURTHER RESPONSES TO SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES, SET ONE AND REQUEST FOR SANCTIONS copy of my November 18, 2020 email. 1 2 17. On November 23, 2020 I emailed Plaintiff’s counsel’s office again regarding Plaintiff’s 3 supplemental discovery responses. Attached at Exhibit K is a true and correct copy of my November 4 23, 2020 email. 5 18. On November 24, 2020, I again emailed Plaintiff’s counsel’s office regarding Plaintiff’s 6 supplemental discovery responses. Plaintiff’s counsel’s office responded indicating we should 7 receive responses that day. Attached at Exhibit L is a true and correct copy of correspondence 8 between myself and Plaintiff’s counsel’s office dated November 24, 2020. 9 10 19. Attached at Exhibit M is a true and correct copy of Plaintiff’s Supplemental Discovery 11 Responses to Special Interrogatories, Set One, numbers 10-12, 14-15, 17-18 and 20-35. No 12 verification form was provided. 13 20. On November 30, 2020 I emailed Plaintiff’s counsel’s office regarding Plaintiff’s 14 verification forms. Attached at Exhibit N is a true and correct copy of my November 30, 2020 email. 15 21. Attached at Exhibit O is a true and correct copy of Defendant’s December 2, 2020 meet and 16 17 confer letter. 18 22. On December 14, 2020 and December 15, 2020 I emailed Plaintiff’s counsel’s office 19 regarding Defendant’s December 2, 2020 letter. Attached at Exhibit P is a true and correct copy of 20 my emails dated December 14, 2020 and December 15, 2020. 21 23. On December 21, 2020 I emailed Plaintiff’s counsel’s office regarding Plaintiff’s 22 verification forms. Attached at Exhibit Q is a true and correct copy of my December 21, 2020 email. 23 I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is 24 25 true and correct. This declaration is executed on this 12TH day of January 2021, in Newport Beach, 26 California. 27 S/ Sarah C. Varisco __________________ Sarah Varisco, Declarant 28 -4- DECLARATION OF SARAH C. VARISCO IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO COMPEL RESPONSES AND FURTHER RESPONSES TO SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES, SET ONE AND REQUEST FOR SANCTIONS EXHIBIT A 1 LEE A. SHERMAN, Esq. (SBN 172198) SARAH C. VARISCO, Esq. (SBN 320200) 2 CALLAHAN, THOMPSON, SHERMAN & CAUDILL, LLP 3 2601 Main Street, Suite 800 Irvine, California 92614 4 Tel: (949) 261-2872 Fax: (949) 261-6060 5 Email: lsherman@ctsclaw.com svarisco@ctsclaw.com 6 Attorneys for Defendants, 7 AMAZING WOK, XI FIN LIN AND LISA LIN LIAO 8 9 SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA 10 COUNTY OF SAN MATEO 11 12 RON EICHMAN, Case No.: 20-CIV-02474 13 DEFENDANT AMAZING WOK’S 14 Plaintiff, SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES, SET ONE TO PLAINTIFF RON EICHMAN 15 vs. JUDGE: Hon. John "Jack" L. Grandsaert 16 XI FIN LIN, LISA LIN LIAO, LIN LI, DA DEPARTMENT: 11 QING ZHENG, AMAZING WOK; DOES 1 COMPLAINT DATE: 6/15/2020 17 TO 20 DISCOVERY CUT OFF: NONE 18 MOTION CUT OFF: NONE MSC DATE: NONE 19 Defendants. TRIAL DATE: NONE 20 21 PROPOUNDING PARTY: Defendant AMAZING WOK 22 RESPONDING PARTY: Plaintiff RON EICHMAN 23 SET NUMBER: ONE 24 INSTRUCTIONS 25 Pursuant to the Code of Civil Procedure section 2030.010 et seq., Defendant AMAZING 26 WOK (“Defendant” or “Propounding Party”) requests that Plaintiff RON EICHMAN (“Plaintiff” or 27 “Responding Party”) answer, under oath, separately and fully, and within thirty (30) days, the 28 following specially prepared interrogatories. -1- DEFENDANT AMAZING WOK’S SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES, SET ONE TO PLAINTIFF RON EICHMAN 1 In answering these interrogatories, YOU are required to furnish all information that is 2 available to YOU, including information in the possession, custody, or control of YOUR attorneys, 3 investigators, or anyone employed by YOU or working on YOUR behalf. 4 For any interrogatory or part of an interrogatory which YOU refuse to answer under a claim 5 of privilege, submit a sworn or certified statement from YOUR counsel or one of YOUR employees 6 in which YOU identify the nature of the information withheld; specify the grounds of the claimed 7 privilege and the paragraph of these interrogatories to which the information is responsive; and 8 identify each person to whom the information, or any part thereof, has been disclosed. 9 DEFINITIONS 10 1. “YOU” and “YOUR” shall mean Plaintiff RON EICHMAN and will include his 11 attorneys, agents and those acting on his behalf. 12 2. “PERSON(S)” includes any natural person, firm, association, organization, 13 partnership, business, trust, corporation, governmental or public entity, or any other form of legal 14 entity. 15 3. “DOCUMENT” or “DOCUMENTS” shall mean all documents, electronically stored 16 information, and tangible things, including without limitation all writings (as defined in section 250 17 of the California Evidence Code) and all other means of recording information, whether written, 18 transcribed, taped, filmed, microfilmed, or in any other way produced, reproduced, or recorded, and 19 including but not limited to: originals, drafts, computer-sorted and computer-retrievable 20 information, copies and duplicates that are marked with any notation or annotation or otherwise 21 differ in any way from the original, correspondence, memoranda, reports, notes, minutes, contracts, 22 agreements, books, records, checks, vouchers, invoices, purchase orders, ledgers, diaries, logs, 23 calendars, computer printouts, computer disks, card files, lists of persons attending meetings or 24 conferences, sketches, diagrams, calculations, evaluations, analyses, directions, work papers, press 25 clippings, sworn or unsworn statements, requisitions, manuals or guidelines, audit work papers, 26 financial analyses, tables of organizations, charts, graphs, indices, advertisements and promotional 27 materials, audited and unaudited financial statements, trade letters, trade publications, newspapers 28 and newsletters, photographs, emails, electronic or mechanical records, facsimiles, telegram and -2- DEFENDANT AMAZING WOK’S SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES, SET ONE TO PLAINTIFF RON EICHMAN 1 telecopies, and audiotapes. Each draft, annotated, or otherwise non-identical copy is a separate 2 DOCUMENT within the meaning of this term. DOCUMENTS shall also include any removable 3 stick notes, flags, or other attachments affixed to any of the foregoing, as well as the files, folder 4 tabs, and labels appended to or containing any documents. DOCUMENTS expressly include all 5 ELECTRONIC RECORDS. 6 4. “ELECTRONIC RECORDS” shall mean the original (or identical duplicate when 7 the original is not available) and any non-identical copies (whether non-identical because of notes 8 made on copies or attached comments, annotations, marks, transmission notations, or highlighting 9 of any kind) of writings of every kind and description inscribed by mechanical, facsimile, electronic, 10 magnetic, digital, or other means. ELECTRONIC RECORDS includes, by way of example and not 11 by limitation, computer programs (whether private, commercial, or work-in-progress), programming 12 notes and instructions, activity listings of email transmittals and receipts, output resulting from the 13 use of any software program (including word processing documents, spreadsheets, database files, 14 charts, graphs and outlines), electronic mail, and any and all miscellaneous files and file fragments, 15 regardless of the media on which they reside and regardless of whether said ELECTRONIC 16 RECORDS exists in an active file, deleted file, or file fragment. ELECTRONIC RECORDS includes 17 without limitation any and all items stored on computer memories, hard disks, diskettes cartridges, 18 network drives, network memory storage, archived tapes and cartridges, backup tapes, floppy disks, 19 CD-ROMs, removable media, magnetic tapes of all types, microfiche, and any other media used for 20 digital data storage or transmittal. ELECTRONIC RECORDS also includes the file, folder tabs, and 21 containers and labels appended to or associated with each original and non-identical copy. 22 5. “COMMUNICATION(S)” means any oral, written, or electronic transmission of 23 information, including but not limited to meetings, discussions, conversations, telephone calls, 24 telegrams, memoranda, letters, telecopies, telexes, conferences, messages, notes, seminars, social 25 media postings, and direct messages. 26 6. “RELATING TO,” “RELATED TO” or “RELATE(S) TO” means constituting, 27 containing, concerning, embodying, reflecting, referencing, identifying, stating, mentioning, 28 discussing, describing, evidencing, or in any other way being relevant to that given subject matter. -3- DEFENDANT AMAZING WOK’S SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES, SET ONE TO PLAINTIFF RON EICHMAN 1 7. “IDENTIFY” when used in reference to a document means provide the date, identity 2 of the author, type of document, summary of pertinent contents and Bates Number(s). 3 8. “IDENTIFY” when used in reference to a person, firm, or other entity requires that 4 you state for each person their name and last known residential or employment address and telephone 5 numbers (residential and business), and their status and affiliation with Responding Party at all times 6 relevant hereto; for a firm or other entity, please state its name, last known address, telephone 7 number, and relationship with Responding Party. 8 9. “INCIDENT” means the accident, injury or other occurrence or breach of contract 9 that occurred on or about August 19, 2018 at the SUBJECT PREMISES, as alleged in YOUR 10 operative complaint, and the circumstances and events surrounding that alleged incident. 11 10. “SUBJECT PREMISES” will mean the real property located at 1653 Laurel St., San 12 Carlos, CA 94070, where YOU allege that the INCIDENT occurred. 13 SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES 14 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 1: 15 If you were carrying any items with YOU as you walked toward YOUR dinner table at the 16 SUBJECT PREMISES, describe each item with particularity. 17 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 2: 18 Describe with particularity the shoes YOU were wearing at the time of the INCIDENT, 19 indicating the type, style, size and material composition of the heel and sole. 20 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 3: 21 Describe with particularity the clothing YOU were wearing at the time of the INCIDENT, 22 indicating the style, type and manner of each item of clothing YOU wore. 23 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 4: 24 If there were any obstructions to YOUR view as YOU approached the scene of the 25 INCIDENT, describe in detail each obstruction. 26 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 5: 27 Describe with particularity the lighting conditions at the time of the INCIDENT, including 28 the amount of natural light and/or the amount of artificial light. -4- DEFENDANT AMAZING WOK’S SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES, SET ONE TO PLAINTIFF RON EICHMAN 1 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 6: 2 Describe the surface condition of the area where the INCIDENT occurred. 3 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 7: 4 Describe the extent of YOUR vision just before the INCIDENT. 5 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 8: 6 If YOU have ever slipped or fallen in the ten (10) years prior to the INCIDENT, describe 7 each slip and fall with particularity, including the date of the slip or fall and the location of each slip 8 or fall. 9 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 9: 10 Describe with particularity all actions YOU took in attempt to avoid the INCIDENT. 11 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 10: 12 If YOU contend that YOU have suffered any general damage as a result of the INCIDENT, 13 state with specificity all FACTS which support that contention. (For purposes of these 14 interrogatories “FACTS” shall mean information to support your contention, witnesses with 15 knowledge of the facts to support your contention and the identity of documents that support your 16 contention.) 17 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 11: 18 If YOU contend that YOU have suffered physical injuries as a result of the INCIDENT, state 19 with specificity all FACTS which support that contention, including a description of each injury, 20 when each injury first occurred, the causal relation between the INCIDENT and each physical injury. 21 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 12: 22 If YOU contend that YOU have suffered emotional distress as a result of the INCIDENT, 23 state with specificity all FACTS which support that contention, including a description of the 24 emotional distress, when the emotional distress first occurred and the causal relation between the 25 INCIDENT and the emotional distress. 26 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 13: 27 If YOU contend that YOU have suffered emotional distress as a result of the INCIDENT, 28 state the name and address of each healthcare provider who treated or examined YOU for emotional -5- DEFENDANT AMAZING WOK’S SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES, SET ONE TO PLAINTIFF RON EICHMAN 1 distress, the date(s) of treatment or examination, and the type of treatment or examination given to 2 YOU. 3 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 14: 4 State all FACTS to support YOUR contention that Defendants negligently allowed the 5 SUBJECT PREMISES to be unsafe to traverse by customers as alleged in paragraph 15 of YOUR 6 complaint, a true and correct copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit 1 7 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 15: 8 State all FACTS to support YOUR contention that Defendants nor its employees made any 9 effort to warn Plaintiff, or place signs up alerting patrons of the liquid on the floor as alleged in 10 paragraph 13 of YOUR complaint, a true and correct copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit 1 11 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 16: 12 Where did YOU go when YOU left the SUBJECT PROPERTY after the INCIDENT? 13 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 17: 14 State with particularity all FACTS leading up to the INCIDENT from the time you arrived 15 at the SUBJECT PREMISES until you slipped and fell on August 19, 2018. 16 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 18: 17 State with particularity all FACTS of what YOU did after YOU slipped and fell at the 18 SUBJECT PREMISES on August 19,2018 until you left the SUBJECT PREMISES. 19 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 19: 20 State with particularity how YOU know an employee spilled two full glasses of liquid and 21 that the liquid remained on the floor of the SUBJECT PREMISES as alleged in paragraph 12 of 22 YOUR complaint, a true and correct copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit 1. 23 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 20: 24 State all FACTS to support YOUR contention that Defendants were negligent as alleged in 25 paragraph 16 of YOUR complaint, a true and correct copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit 1. 26 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 21: 27 State all FACTS to support YOUR claim that as a proximate result of the negligence of 28 Defendants, YOU have injured your health as alleged in paragraph 17 of YOUR complaint, a true -6- DEFENDANT AMAZING WOK’S SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES, SET ONE TO PLAINTIFF RON EICHMAN 1 and correct copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit 1. 2 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 22: 3 State all FACTS to support YOUR claim that as a proximate result of the negligence of 4 Defendants, YOU have injured your strength as alleged in paragraph 17 of YOUR complaint, a true 5 and correct copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit 1. 6 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 23: 7 State all FACTS to support YOUR claim that as a proximate result of the negligence of 8 Defendants, YOU have injured your wellbeing as alleged in paragraph 17 of YOUR complaint, a 9 true and correct copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit 1. 10 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 24: 11 State all FACTS to support YOUR claim that as a proximate result of the negligence of 12 Defendants, YOU have injured your left knee as alleged in paragraph 17 of YOUR complaint, a true 13 and correct copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit 1. 14 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 25: 15 State all FACTS to support YOUR claim that as a proximate result of the negligence of 16 Defendants, YOU have suffered a meniscus tear as alleged in paragraph 17 of YOUR complaint, a 17 true and correct copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit 1. 18 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 26: 19 State all FACTS to support YOUR claim that as a proximate result of the negligence of 20 Defendants, YOU will continue to suffer severe mental, physical and nervous pain and suffering as 21 alleged in paragraph 17 of YOUR complaint, a true and correct copy of which is attached hereto as 22 Exhibit 1. 23 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 27: 24 State all FACTS to support YOUR claim that as a proximate result of the negligence of 25 Defendants, YOU have suffered great pain as alleged in paragraph 18 of YOUR complaint, a true 26 and correct copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit 1. 27 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 28: 28 State all FACTS to support YOUR claim that as a proximate result of the negligence of -7- DEFENDANT AMAZING WOK’S SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES, SET ONE TO PLAINTIFF RON EICHMAN 1 Defendants, YOU have suffered inconvenience as alleged in paragraph 18 of YOUR complaint, a 2 true and correct copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit 1. 3 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 29: 4 State all FACTS to support YOUR claim that as a proximate result of the negligence of 5 Defendants, YOU have suffered embarrassment as alleged in paragraph 18 of YOUR complaint, a 6 true and correct copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit 1. 7 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 30: 8 State all FACTS to support YOUR claim that as a proximate result of the negligence of 9 Defendants, YOU have suffered mental anguish as alleged in paragraph 18 of YOUR complaint, a 10 true and correct copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit 1. 11 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 31: 12 State all FACTS to support YOUR claim that as a proximate result of the negligence of 13 Defendants, YOU have been deprived of ordinary pleasures of life as alleged in paragraph 18 of 14 YOUR complaint, a true and correct copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit 1. 15 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 32: 16 State all FACTS to support YOUR claim that as a proximate result of the negligence of 17 Defendants, YOU have suffered a loss of well-being as alleged in paragraph 18 of YOUR complaint, 18 a true and correct copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit 1. 19 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 33: 20 State all FACTS to support YOUR claim that as a proximate result of the negligence of 21 Defendants, YOU have suffered equanimity as alleged in paragraph 18 of YOUR complaint, a true 22 and correct copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit 1. 23 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 34: 24 State all FACTS to support YOUR claim that as a proximate result of the negligence of 25 Defendants, YOUR overall health, strength and vitality have been impaired as alleged in paragraph 26 18 of YOUR complaint, a true and correct copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit 1. 27 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 35: 28 If it is YOUR contention that YOU will continue to suffer future damages, state all FACTS -8- DEFENDANT AMAZING WOK’S SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES, SET ONE TO PLAINTIFF RON EICHMAN 1 to support YOUR contention. 2 3 DATED: August 26, 2020 CALLAHAN, THOMPSON, SHERMAN & CAUDILL, LLP 4 5 By /s/ Sarah Varisco LEE A. SHERMAN 6 SARAH C. VARISCO Attorneys for Defendants, 7 AMAZING WOK, XI FIN LIN AND LISA LIN LIAO 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -9- DEFENDANT AMAZING WOK’S SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES, SET ONE TO PLAINTIFF RON EICHMAN PROOF OF SERVICE 1 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) 2 ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ) 3 I am employed in the County of Orange, State of California, I am over the age of 18 years and not 4 a party to the within action; my business address is 2601 Main Street, Suite 800, Irvine, California. 5 On this date, August 26, 2020, I served the foregoing document described as: 6 DEFENDANT AMAZING WOK’S SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES, SET ONE TO PLAINTIFF RON EICHMAN 7 I enclosed a true copy of said documents in a sealed envelope or package addressed to the persons 8 noted below. 9 X (By electronic service) Based on a court order or an agreement of the parties to accept service by electronic transmission, I caused the documents to be sent to the persons at the electronic 10 notification addresses listed below. 11 Executed on August 26, 2020, at Irvine, California. 12 I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the above is true and correct. I further declare that I am employed in the office of a member of the bar of this court 13 at whose direction the service was made. 14 /s/ Nikki Trumbo NIKKI TRUMBO 15 SERVICE LIST 16 Case Name : Eichman v. Lin 17 Court : San Mateo Case Number : 20-CIV-02474 18 Christopher W. Goodroe, Esq. Attorney for Plaintiff, 19 The Barnes Firms, lc RON EICHMAN 555 12th Street Suite 1470 20 Oakland, CA 94607 Phone: 800-800-0000 21 Fax: 888-800-7050 Email: chris.goodroe@thebarnesfirm.com 22 David A. Harris, Attorney Attorney for Plaintiff, 23 Law Offices of Santana & Vierra Lin Li, Da Qing Zheng Employees of Liberty Mutual Group, Inc. 24 255 California Street, Suite 900 San Francisco, CA 94111 25 Phone: (628) 220-6050 Email: David.Harris01@LibertyMutual.com 26 27 28 -1- EXHIBIT B From: Sarah C. Varisco To: Kimberly Harding Cc: Chris Goodroe; Lee A. Sherman; Nikki Trumbo; Lizbeth J. Vergara Subject: Re: 19-01754-CA Eichman,Ron v. Amazing Wok: Eichman v. Amazing Wok Discovery Responses Date: Tuesday, October 06, 2020 1:58:33 PM Attachments: image001.png image002.png image003.png Thank you for the confirmation. We will look at our calendar and get back to you shortly. Best, Sarah Sent from my iPhone On Oct 6, 2020, at 13:53, Kimberly Harding wrote: Confirmed for the discovery. I am looking at our calendar now, we may have to move the deposition into early December. Do you have any dates that do not work for your office. From: Sarah C. Varisco Sent: Monday, October 5, 2020 1:25 PM To: Chris Goodroe ; Kimberly Harding Cc: Lee A. Sherman ; Nikki Trumbo ; Lizbeth J. Vergara Subject: RE: Eichman v. Amazing Wok Discovery Responses Good Afternoon, I am following up on the email below so we can move forward accordingly. Please advise. Best, Sarah From: Sarah C. Varisco Sent: Thursday, October 01, 2020 4:20 PM To: 'chris.goodroe@thebarnesfirm.com' ; 'Kimberly.Harding@thebarnesfirm.com' Cc: Lee A. Sherman ; Nikki Trumbo ; Lizbeth J. Vergara Subject: RE: Eichman v. Amazing Wok Discovery Responses Good Afternoon, It is my understanding Ms. Harding reached out to our office today asking for a three week extension on the discovery responses. We agree to a three week extension provided all objections are waived as responses were due on 9/29. Thus, please provide responses, without objections, by 10/22/2020. Furthermore, are you agreeable to moving the deposition date back to November 12th? Please let us know at your earliest convenience so we can plan accordingly. Thank you. Best, Sarah From: Sarah C. Varisco Sent: Thursday, October 01, 2020 11:45 AM To: chris.goodroe@thebarnesfirm.com Cc: Lee A. Sherman ; Nikki Trumbo ; Lizbeth J. Vergara Subject: Eichman v. Amazing Wok Discovery Responses Good Morning Mr. Goodroe, Plaintiff’s discovery responses were due to our office on 9/29. Please advise if they were mailed. If so, can you also please provide our office with an electronic copy. We are trying to work as paperless as possible during COVID. Thank you. Best, Sarah Sarah C. Varisco / Associate 2601 Main Street, Suite 800, Irvine, California 92614 Tel: 949/261-CTSC(2872)· Fax:949/261-6060 E-mail: svarisco@ctsclaw.com · Website: ctsclaw.com NOTICE: This e-mail and any attachments contain information from the law firm of Callahan, Thompson, Sherman & Caudill, LLP, and are intended solely for the use of the named recipient or recipients. This e-mail may contain privileged attorney/client communications or work product. Any dissemination of this e-mail by anyone other than an intended recipient is strictly prohibited. If you are not a named recipient, you are prohibited from any further viewing of the e- mail or any attachments or from making any use of the e-mail or attachments. If you believe you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately and permanently delete the e-mail, any attachments, and all copies thereof from any drives or storage media and destroy any printouts of the e-mail or attachments. Thank you . EXHIBIT C From: Sarah C. Varisco To: Kimberly Harding Cc: Chris Goodroe; Lee A. Sherman; Nikki Trumbo; Lizbeth J. Vergara Subject: RE: 19-01754-CA Eichman,Ron v. Amazing Wok: Eichman v. Amazing Wok Discovery Responses Date: Friday, October 23, 2020 9:00:00 AM Please forward them, without objections, as soon as possible this morning. Thank you. Best, Sarah From: Kimberly Harding Sent: Thursday, October 22, 2020 6:32 PM To: Sarah C. Varisco Cc: Chris Goodroe ; Lee A. Sherman ; Nikki Trumbo ; Lizbeth J. Vergara Subject: RE: 19-01754-CA Eichman,Ron v. Amazing Wok: Eichman v. Amazing Wok Discovery Responses Ms. Varisco, I am requesting a one day extension for discovery, I have one last thing to get from my client. I can get them to you in the morning. EXHIBIT D 1 Christopher W. Goodroe, Esq. (224386) THE BARNES FIRM, L.C. 2 555 12th Street, Suite 1470 Oakland, CA 94607 3 Telephone: (800) 800-0000 Facsimile: (888) 800-7050 4 Email: chris.goodroe@thebarnesfirm.com 5 Attorney for Plaintiff RON EICHMAN 6 7 8 SUPERIOR COURT FOR THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 9 COUNTY OF SAN MATEO - UNLIMITED 10 RON EICHMAN, ) Case No.: 20-CIV-02474 11 ) Plaintiff(s), ) PLAINTIFF RON EICHMAN’S 12 ) RESPONSES TO DEFENDANT ) AMAZING WOK’S SPECIAL 13 vs. ) INTERROGATORIES, SET ONE ) 14 XI FIN LIN, LISA LIN LIAO, LIN LI, DA ) QING ZHENG, AMAZING WOK; DOES 1 ) 15 ) TO 20, ) 16 ) Defendant(s). ) 17 ) ) 18 ) 19 20 PROPOUNDING PARTY: DEFENDANT, AMAZING WOK 21 RESPONDING PARTY: PLAINTIFF, RON EICHMAN 22 SET NO.: ONE (1) 23 Plaintiff RON EICHMAN, pursuant to the provisions of Code of Civil Procedure 24 §2030.220 et seq, hereby responds to Defendant AMAZING WOK’s Special Interrogatories, 25 General Set One (1), as follows: 26 PRELIMINARY STATEMENT 27 These responses are made solely for the purpose of, and in relation to, this action. Each 28 response is given subject to all appropriate objections (including, but not limited to, objections PLAINTIFF RON EICHMAN’S RESPONSES TO DEFENDANT AMAZING WOK’S SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES, SET ONE 1 1 concerning competency, relevancy, materiality, propriety and admissibility which would require 2 the exclusion of any statement contained herein if the interrogatory or request was asked of, or 3 any statement contained herein was made by, a witness present and testifying in court). All such 4 objections and grounds therefore are reserved and may be interposed at the time of trial. 5 The party on whose behalf the responses are given has not yet completed its investigation 6 of the facts relation to this action, has not yet completed its discovery in this action, and has not 7 yet completed its preparation for trial. Consequently, the following responses are given without 8 prejudice to the Responding Party’s right to produce, at the time of trial, subsequently discovered 9 evidence, relating to the proof of facts subsequently discovered to be material. 10 Except for facts explicitly admitted herein, no admission of any nature whatsoever is to 11 be implied or inferred. The facts that an interrogatory or request herein has been answered should 12 not be taken as an admission, or a concession of the existence, of any facts set forth or assumed 13 by such interrogatory or request, or that such response constitutes evidence of any fact thus set 14 forth or assumed. All responses must be construed as given on the basis of present recollection. 15 GENERAL OBJECTIONS 16 1. These Responses and Objections (hereinafter also referred to as "Responses") are 17 made solely for the purpose of this action. 18 2. Each Response is subject to all objections as to competence, relevance, materiality, 19 propriety and admissibility, and any and all other objections and grounds that would require 20 exclusion of the Response, or any part thereof, if any of these Requests were made of, or any 21 statements contained herein were made by, witnesses present and testifying in Court, all of which 22 objections and grounds are reserved and may be interposed at the time of trial. 23 3. The following Responses are based on information presently known and available 24 to Plaintiff. Plaintiff reserves the right to supplement these Responses with subsequently 25 discovered information and/or to introduce such information at trial. 26 4. To the extent that part or all of any Document demand calls for information which 27 constitutes material prepared in anticipation of litigation or for trial, or for information or material 28 covered by the work product doctrine, or which constitutes information which is protected from PLAINTIFF RON EICHMAN’S RESPONSES TO DEFENDANT AMAZING WOK’S SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES, SET ONE 2 1 disclosure by virtue of a privilege, including, but not limited to, attorney-client privilege, Plaintiff 2 objects to each and every such document demand and, hence will not supply or render any 3 information or material protected from discovery by virtue of the work-product doctrine, or any 4 privilege, including, but not limited to, the attorney-client privilege. 5 5. Any Response herein stating that Plaintiff will produce the documents requested 6 does not constitute admission that any such documents actually exist. By so responding, Plaintiff 7 represents that she will make a search for such documents in his possession, custody or control 8 and that, if such documents are located, they will be produced. 9 6. The above stated objections are hereby made applicable to each and all of these 10 Responses and are incorporated by reference as if fully set forth in each Response to each 11 document demand. 12 Without waiving any of the foregoing objections, Plaintiff further responds to these 13 Interrogatories as follows: 14 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 1: 15 If you were carrying any items with YOU as you walked toward YOUR dinner table at 16 the SUBJECT PREMISES, describe each item with particularity. 17 RESPONSE TO SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 1: 18 Plaintiff was not carrying any items. 19 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 2: 20 Describe with particularity the shoes YOU were wearing at the time of the INCIDENT, 21 indicating the type, style, size and material composition of the heel and sole. 22 RESPONSE TO SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 2: 23 Plaintiff was wearing new Nike athletic shoes. 24 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 3: 25 Describe with particularity the clothing YOU were wearing at the time of the INCIDENT, 26 indicating the style, type and manner of each item of clothing YOU wore. 27 /// 28 /// PLAINTIFF RON EICHMAN’S RESPONSES TO DEFENDANT AMAZING WOK’S SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES, SET ONE 3 1 RESPONSE TO SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 3: 2 Plaintiff does not recall the exact clothing he was wearing, he believes it to be a pair of 3 shorts and a collared shirt. 4 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 4: 5 If there were any obstructions to YOUR view as YOU approached the scene of the 6 INCIDENT, describe in detail each obstruction. 7 RESPONSE TO SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 4: 8 Plaintiff had no obstructions to his view. 9 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 5: 10 Describe with particularity the lighting conditions at the time of the INCIDENT, including 11 the amount of natural light and/or the amount of artificial light. 12 RESPONSE TO SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 5: 13 Plaintiff recalls that there was mainly artificial light with some natural light from 14 windows in the front entrance. 15 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 6: 16 Describe the surface condition of the area where the INCIDENT occurred. 17 RESPONSE TO SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 6: 18 The restaurant flooring surface is composed of flat, smooth, slick, polished, large tiles that are 19 light in color. These tiles were covered in clear liquid. 20 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 7: 21 Describe the extent of YOUR vision just before the INCIDENT. 22 RESPONSE TO SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 7: 23 Plaintiff’s vision was normal, and unobstructed. 24 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 8: 25 If YOU have ever slipped or fallen in the ten (10) years prior to the INCIDENT, describe 26 each slip and fall with particularity, including the date of the slip or fall and the location of each 27 slip or fall. 28 PLAINTIFF RON EICHMAN’S RESPONSES TO DEFENDANT AMAZING WOK’S SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES, SET ONE 4 1 RESPONSE TO SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 8: 2 Plaintiff has not. 3 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 9: 4 Describe with particularity all actions YOU took in attempt to avoid the INCIDENT. 5 RESPONSE TO SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 9: 6 Plaintiff was unaware of an incident to avoid. 7 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 10: 8 If YOU contend that YOU have suffered any general damage as a result of the 9 INCIDENT, state with specificity all FACTS which support that contention. (For purposes of 10 these interrogatories “FACTS” shall mean information to support your contention, witnesses with 11 knowledge of the facts to support your contention and the identity of documents that support your 12 contention.) 13 RESPONSE TO SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 10: 14 Plaintiff went with his parents to the Amazing Wok to meet his sister and in laws, his sister and 15 his brother in law were already at the table in the restaurant, they were seated at the large circular table in 16 the middle of the restaurant. Plaintiff let his father and mother in through the front door, they went to the 17 right of the table, client ultimately went to the left side of the table where he slipped on a puddle of clear 18 liquid in the common area of the restaurant causing him to slip and fall down due to a dangerous 19 condition. Directly after the incident, Plaintiff’s sister told Plaintiff that she witnessed a waitress spill 20 some glasses of ice water on the floor two minutes or so before and had not put anything down to clean it 21 up. There were no warning signs, no signage placed alerting of a spill, and there was no staff present to 22 alert the client to the hazardous material on the floor. After the fall, Plaintiff had to be helped up by 23 restaurant employees, then restaurant employees put down towels to absorb the liquid Plaintiff slipped 24 on. Plaintiff was able to eat his meal but he was in pain, his knee was bothering him tremendously. Later 25 that evening Plaintiff’s pain became unbearable, and he proceeded to the emergency room where he was 26 evaluated, given pain medication, crutches, and scheduled for an appointment with an orthopedic 27 specialist, where they diagnosed him with a medial meniscus tear. Plaintiff required surgery and months 28 of healing, which gravely impacted his mobility, health, and his overall emotional well-being. As a result PLAINTIFF RON EICHMAN’S RESPONSES TO DEFENDANT AMAZING WOK’S SPECIAL INTERROGATORIES, SET ONE 5 1 of this incident, Plaintiff still suffers from residual pain, residual nerve pain, stiffness, difficulty standing 2 for long periods, difficulty walking. In addition, he has experienced diminished strength, agility, vitality, 3 and mental anguish. 4 SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 11: 5 If YOU contend that YOU have suffered physical injuries as a result of the INCIDENT, 6 state with specificity all FACTS which support that contention, including a description of each 7 injury, when each injury first occurred, the causal relation between the INCIDENT and each 8 physical injury. 9 RESPONSE TO SPECIAL INTERROGATORY NO. 11: 10 Plaintiff went with his parents to the Amazing Wok to meet his sister and in laws, his sister and 11 his brother in law were already at the table in the restaurant, they were seated at the large circular table in 12 the middle of the restaurant. Plaintiff let his father and mother in through the front door, they went to the 13 right of the table, client ultimately went to the left side of the table where he slipped on a puddle of clear 14 liquid in the common area of the restaurant causing him to slip and fall down due to a dangerous 15 condition. Directly after the incident, Plaintiff’s sister told Plaintiff that she witnessed a waitress spill 16 some glasses of ice water on the floor two minutes or so before and had not put anything down to clean it 17 up. There were no warning signs, no