Preview
v
oh
w
be
>
cay
pe
ds
=
wy HNY YN DY NYPD @ BB we ea soa wm ow a a
ononk o8 NS = G0 ON ODO RF ORD =
oo ODN OH RF WN
2/16/2017 3:28:45 PM
Chris Daniel - District Clerk
Envelope Ae acne
2017-11006 / Court: 215 . By: CUERG, NELSON
Filed: 2
Steven Roth FILED ia wy y 2a pe
1901 Ay f the St Superior Fatt of Calc orn
Second Floor unty of Los Ang p? i”
Los Angeles, CA 90067 MAR 11 2014 fest
Phone: 310-441-7300 Officer/Clerk
Email: steven. rth Qumi- consular nO Da Deny
By. Myra Beltran
In Pro Per
SUPERIOR COURT FOR THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
p73 Lite OVEN Eo
ies BCS39195
STEVEN ROTH, an individual, COMPLAINT FOR:
(1) Tortious Interference With Contract
aS
Plaintiff,
Vv. .
NEIL RAPHAEL FINESTONE, an DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL wo
Individual, and DOES 1 — 5, inclusive. ag
Defendants. -
3
THE PARTIES
1. Plaintiff Steven Roth is an adult individual at all relevant times doing
business in Los Angeles County, California.
2. Defendant Neil Raphael Finestone is an adult individual at all relevant times
doing business in Los Angeles County, California, with his principal place of business
located at 9100 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 720E, Beverly Hills, CA 90212.
MEER HS
RRR 5
a a a
3. Plaintiff does not know the true names or capacities, wig igikand 3 p 8
2? = so
corporate, associate, or otherwise, of Defendant Does 1 through 5. Pilfsfatit b Caitgraia »
ao Qo
Code of Civil Procedure §474, Plaintiff sues these Defendants under the fittioussa e a
“Doe.” Plaintiff alleges on information and belief that each of the Doe Defendants 2 3 &
en
legally responsible in some manner for Plaintiff's damages. If and when Plaintiff leans,
= a
e8aaq z
COMPLAINT BRS ® g 3
RECORDER'S MEMORANDUM
This instrument is of poor quality
al the time of imagingo Ont Oak WN =
MPN HN HH DYN HK BB Be BoB Ba a aw aw ow a
on oak © NH + GO ODN DHA BOND @= GO
their real names and identities, Plaintiff wilhask the court for permission to amend this
complaint to sue them under their real names.
4. Each Defendant is the agent, servant, joint venture, employee or
representative of the other Defendant, and was at all times acting within the purpose and
scope of that agency. Each Defendant ratified and approved the acts of its agent.
JURISDICTION AND VENUE
5. Defendants’ wrongful acts and omissions causing Plaintiff's injury and loss
occurred in Los Angeles County, California, within this judicial district. Plaintiff is
seeking damages in excess of the minimum jurisdictional limits of this court. Venue is
proper in Los Angeles County and in this judicial district because Defendant does business
here, and Plaintiff's claims arose here.
FACTUAL BACKGROUND
6. On October 17, 2011, Plaintiff was retained by Mr. Zein Obagi and Ms.
Samar Obagi to act as a consultant in connection with a pension program (“Plans”) the
Obagis’ corporations adopted in December of 2005, in which the Obagis funded millions
of dollars through 2009. Mr. Obagi was the trustee of the Plans and approximately 85% of
the Plans’ benefits were attributable to Mr. and Mrs. Obagi as plan participants.
7. The majority of the Plan contributions were invested into a series of six (6)
American General Life (“AIG”) Indexed Universal Life insurance policies (“Policies”)',
with combined death benefits of approximately $10 million. The Policies had been sold to
the Plans under the false pretense that the Policies were required and would provide
greater net retirement income and tax savings for Mr. and Mrs. Obagi compared to other
' Three of the Policies insured Mrs. Obagi. The remaining three insured Mr. Obagi.
COMPLAINT2
wl
pe
me
BO
5
ae
oon Oak wry =
NNN NY DH NY DY HH BS BABA Basa an aw a a
on oank © N 35+ GG ON DG BwWwNH = OO
available options bearing comparable risk. These representations were false when made
and were made to the Obagis by the life insurance agents and the tax attorney
(“Promoters”) who recommended the Policies and shared in the significant compensation
generated from the sales. On information and belief, the compensation generated was at
least $700,000.00.
8. In contemplation of the Obagis filing a lawsuit (“Lawsuit”), Plaintiff was
hired to lend his expertise to investigate the Plans and related AIG Policies to calculate the
amount of and assist to seek redress for the losses the Obagis suffered as a result of the
misrepresented Plan, and the Policies in particular. The gravamen of the Obagis' claim
was that the Policies’ death benefits were: 1) unneeded; 2) undesired; 3) only agreed to as
the Promoters stated they were required; and 4) resulted in costs that were so great that any
retirement income gain the Policies were to confer compared to comparable alternatives
for the Obagis’ stated retirement objective was erroneous. Plaintiff's contract with the
Obagis (“Contract”) provided that Plaintiff was to be compensated for investigating the
claims as well as assisting any attorneys that would be retained to advance the Obagis’
claims through the conclusion of any lawsuit or settlement process.
9. In February of 2013, Plaintiff completed his analysis of the Plans and
informed the Obagis, through their personal attorney Michael Morris, that they could
mitigate their damages by reducing the death benefits of the policies. At the Obagis’
request, Plaintiff then referred them to a well-respected and highly successful plaintiff's
law firm to evaluate their claims and to discuss the law firm representing them to advance
any claims.
10. In or before April 2013, defendant Neil Finestone (“Finestone”), a
commission-based insurance agent, was introduced to the Obagis through Michael Morris.
Mrs. Obagi told Plaintiff that Finestone was going to act as the Obagis’ insurance agent
COMPLAINTPy
aa
ad
ay
=
on OD HM FW ND
1
12
13
14
45
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
and would assist with the reduction of the Policies. On information and belief, at that time,
Finestone was informed of the details and legal theories of the contemplated litigation,
including those related to the Policies and anticipated claims against AIG and the
Promoters in connection thereto, as well as to the details of Plaintiff's contract with the
Obagis.
11. On June 14, 2013, at 2:00pm, a meeting took place between Plaintiff, the
Obagis, and one of the attorneys at the law firm referred by plaintiff mentioned in
paragraph 9 regarding pursuing the claims related to the Plans and the Policies. The
Obagis retained the law firm soon after the meeting. At the June 14 meeting, the Obagis
were advised that the Policies should promptly be reduced to the minimum death benefits
pursuant to the legal requirement that the Obagis mitigate their damages. At that time, the
Obagis agreed and stated that they were having Finestone handle the Policies’ reductions.
During this meeting, the Obagis were also advised to not explore or apply for any
additional life insurance, as doing so would be contrary to their interest and would harm
their claims. The Obagis agreed and stated that they had no interest in the Policies’ death
benefits or obtaining additional life insurance.
12. On August 2, 2013, at 3:00pm, Plaintiff and one of the attorneys from the
firm the Obagis retained to bring their lawsuit against the Promoters and AIG (“Lawsuit”)
met with Mrs. Obagi and Finestone at the Obagis’ Beverly Hills office. During the
meeting, the legal theories for the Lawsuit, including the critically important need to have |
reduced the Policies to the minimums and to not inquire about or apply for additional life
insurance was again discussed. At that time, to Plaintiff’s and the attorney’s surprise,
Finestone stated that he had still not reduced the Policies. Finestone was then specifically
reminded of the devastating impact that maintaining higher than required death benefits
would have on the Lawsuit, as well as the needless cost being incurred by the Obagis for
the charges for the excess insurance. In response, Finestone stated that he was “in the
COMPLAINT
-4-=
on Oo a FF WwW PD
11
12
13
14
15
16
7
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
process of getting the policies reduced””. At this meeting, Finestone was also told to not
pursue or otherwise request information about obtaining additional life insurance on either
Mr. or Mrs. Obagi.
13. During the August 2, 2013 meeting, Plaintiff informed Finestone of the
existence and details of Plaintiffs contract with the Obagis in connection with the Lawsuit,
and Plaintiff stressed the urgent need that Finestone promptly handle the policy reductions
and cooperate with the attorneys bringing the Lawsuit, which included running all ideas,
intended actions and communications relating to the Plan, Policies and the Obagis through
the attorneys before doing anything.
14, / On November 4, 2013, at 3:00pm, another meeting was held at the Obagis’
Beverly Hills office between Mrs. Obagi, Finestone, Plaintiff and one of the attorneys from
the firm. During the meeting, the following occurred: 1). Finestone was again told the
legal theories of the case in detail, emphasizing the importance of the Obagis having
reduced the Policies and not exploring or pursuing additional life insurance; 2) Plaintiff
and the attorney asked Finestone if the Policies had been reduced pursuant to the prior
agreement three months earlier that Finestone would process the reductions to the
minimum amounts of coverage allowed by AIG; 3) notwithstanding the prior agreement,
Finestone stated that the Policies had still not been reduced, and; 4) Finestone stated to
Plaintiff and the attorney at that time that he “had other matters to discuss with Mrs.
Obagi” once Plaintiff and the attorney left. Finestone had clearly not honored the prior
agreement to reduce the policies and run all ideas, intended actions and communications
relating to the Plan, Policies and the Obagis by Plaintiff and the attorneys before doing
anything. Rather, it had now come to Plaintiff and the attorneys’ attention that Finestone
2 A policy reduction is typically processed within days, or at most, within two to four weeks from
the date an insurance company receives the reduction request.
COMPLAINTds
was holding private meetings with Mrs. Obagi, the topic and content of which he was
keeping from Plaintiff and the attorneys.
15. As aresult of Finestone’s lack of transparency discovered in the November
4, 2013 meeting, shortly thereafter, it was requested that Finestone produce to Plaintiff and
the attorneys a complete copy of his file including all communications related to the
Policies.
16. On November 25, 2013, Plaintiff received documents provided by Finestone.
Among the documents was a new AIG $26,501,230 Indexed Universal Life insurance
proposal illustration dated November 4, 2013 on the life of Mrs. Obagi, which lists on
the cover page as “Presented by Neil Finestone”. The proposal illustration called for a
$6,350,841.35 initial premium payment, which was millions of dollars more than the
combined cash values of the existing AIG Policies the Obagis were preparing to sue over
for causing them financial harm. Plaintiff was shocked and dismayed by the discovery, as
he immediately realized that the illustration, which was for new insurance in an amount of
more than double of what was inforce on both Mr. and Mrs. Obagi with AIG, would
likely compromise or destroy the Obagis’ Lawsuit. Moreover, the illustration was
prepared by Carrie Burkhead, the very AIG employee Plaintiff dealt with when
investigating the Obagi’s claims. Finestone’s actions created and gave AIG evidence that
was diametrically contrary to the claims the Obagis were in the throes of bringing.
Included in the documents Finestone produced was a complete copy of Plaintiff's contract
with the Obagis.
17. Finestone concealed from Plaintiff and the attorneys hired to pursue the
Lawsuit that he had requested and obtained this illustration, and that he proceeded to pitch
it to Mrs. Obagi once Plaintiff and the attorney had left the November 4, 2013 meeting, Id
qi4
COMPLAINTer}
© oN DO HD FWD =
NNMNHMNHY NY YH DN BB BB Ba Be Be Be Bw a os
BNSBRBRSBBRSFSEarRAiaaRTEBERAS
18. ‘On December 10, 2013, Plaintiff received confirmation from AIG personnel
that Finestone specifically requested the November 4, 2013, $26,501,230 life insurance
proposal on Mrs. Obagi.
19. On or about December 12, 2013, the attorneys informed Plaintiff that they
had withdrawn from representing the Obagis in the Lawsuit.
20. Finestone earns his living selling insurance and was at all relevant times an
appointed agent of the would-be defendant AIG. Finestone should have but did not :
disclose to Plaintiff and the attorneys that he was a currént appointed agent and
representative of AIG and his resulting conflict of interest, facts unknown to Plaintiff and
the attorneys at the relevant time.
21. Finestone further concealed that his true intentions were to promptly sell the
Obagi’s tens of millions of dollars of insurance so he could receive substantial
commissions, knowing full well that doing so would make Plaintiffs performance under
his contract with the Obagis impossible, while simultaneously harming the Obagis rights
and claims.
22. Asa direct result of the aforementioned events, Plaintiff has been prevented
from performing under his contract with the Obagis and has been deprived the
compensation he would have otherwise have received, which is at least $200,000.
7
W
Mu
COMPLAINT
-7-2
Ww
a
ho
2
db
Oo ON Oak OND =
NNN DY NHN NY HY SF SF BA BB BiB Bw am Se
BNBSBBABRBESKRSSGaRARSaAaRSBKRASN
FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION
(Tortious Interference With Contract)
Against All Defendants
23. Plaintiff hereby refers to paragraphs 1 through 23, inclusive hereof, and
incorporates same herein by reference. This cause of action is asserted against all
Defendants.
24. Finestone had actual knowledge of the existence and the terms and
conditions of the Contract between Plaintiff and the Obagis. Jd 410, 15, and 18
25. Finestone and Plaintiff have had previous issues on prior matters over the
years where they had common clients. These issues resulted in embarrassment to
Finestone and provide motive for Finestone’s personal animosity towards Plaintiff. By
way of example, in one matter, Finestone was terminated from being the retained expert in
a pending lawsuit for his inability to provide any opinions or analysis to the lawyers in that
case. With Finestone’s awareness, Plaintiff was retained to replace Finestone and the case
was subsequently successfully settled to the client’s and client’s law firm’s satisfaction. In
another matter, Plaintiff became aware that Finestone had failed to disclose to a client the
existence of a discretionary and negotiable $25,000 fee that the client had being charged in
which Finestone shared. This omission was both a violation of Finestone’s fiduciary duty
to the client and of California Insurance Code 10113.2(14)(e).
26. Finestone intentionally induced and caused Obagi to breach the Contract and
he made performance of the Contract impossible by, among other wrongdoing, not
reducing the Policies and instead attempting to sell the Obagis more than double of the
same type of AIG life insurance policies at issue, thus providing AIG and the Promoters
with a well-documented defense to the gravamen of the Lawsuit that the Obagis’ didn’t
want or need the large amounts of life insurance provided by the Policies.
COMPLAINT®
ww
ee
~
8d
e
ee
db
27. _ Plaintiff's experience with Finestone over the years has been that Finestone
never met a high-commission insurance product he didn’t like, and that he conceals
material facts from customers and others, such as he did here by not disclosing to Plaintiff
and the attorneys that he presently represented AIG’, the would-be defendant in the Obagi
Lawsuit. In that connection, on several occasions from in or about November and
December 2013, Finestone told Plaintiff and the attorneys handling the Lawsuit that he
“didn’t agree with the Lawsuit”. However, he failed to disclose his intentions to sabotage
the case, and the actions he undertook which did just that. Finestone’s true motives were
the pursuit of his personal gain and allegiance to AIG. Such conduct is underhanded,
despicable, and constitutes an “unfair business practice/unfair competition” under
California Business and Professions Code §17200.
28. Asadirect result of Finestone’s actions detailed herein, Plaintiff was
prevented from performing the consulting work he otherwise would have performed and
from receiving the resulting compensation listed in the prayer of this complaint. Plaintiff
was also subjected to embarrassment and upset with the attorneys he referred to the
Obagis, who told Plaintiff that they were unhappy with having spent many hours and
conducted several meetings only to have to withdraw after taking the case. Before
engaging in the acts alleged herein, Finestone knew from Plaintiff, and presumably from
Michael Morris, Mrs. Obagi and others that Plaintiff had a good reputation with the
attorneys the Obagis hired for the Lawsuit, and that Plaintiff's relationship with the
attorney’s firm was important and valuable to Plaintiff and his business.
29. Finestone did such acts complained about herein intentionally or recklessly
to harm Plaintiff and frustrate Plaintiff's rights.
3According to the California Department of Insurance’s agent license check website, Finestone has
been an appointed AIG life insurance agent since at least 2003.
http://www. insurance.ca. gov/license-status/index.cfm
COMPLAINT
-9-oMmnNt ODO kW ND =
RMN NNYN NN HN B= BB Be Ba aw a aw a
oN Oak Oo HN BS GO AN DAF WH = GD
30. Finestone knew that the interference described herein was certain or
substantially certain to occur as a result of his actions.
31. | Finestone’s wrongful and intentional interference, did, in fact, disrupt the
contractual relationship between Plaintiff and the Obagis, in that Plaintiff was prevented °
from performing the further consulting work he otherwise would have performed in
connection with the Lawsuit and from receiving the resulting compensation he would have
received, which is calculated to be at.least $200,000.
32. Asa direct and proximate result of Finestone’s intentional and wrongful
interference with the Contract, Plaintiff was damaged.
33. The acts of Defendants were done for Finestone’s own monetary gain and in
conscious disregard of Plaintiff's rights with the intent to cause injury and harm to the
Plaintiff. By reason of these acts, Plaintiff is entitled to an award of punitive and
exemplary damages.
REQUEST FOR JUDGMENT
Plaintiff prays for judgnient against all Defendants as follows:
1. On the first cause of action for damages in the sum of not less than
$200,000.00, according to proof, together with interest thereon as provided by law;
2. For an award of punitive and exemplary damages in an amount to be
determined by the trier-of-fact;
Mt
4
Mt
I
COMPLAINT
-10-onoanrk wr =
14
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3. For the costs of suit incurred herein; and
4. For any further relief the court deems appropriate.
Dated: February 13, 2012.
Sil aE
Steven Roth
Plaintiff In Pro Per
COMPLAINT
-ll-CM-01
Pa
ATTORNEY OR PARTY WITHO!
‘ATTORNEY (Name, St: “wmber, and address): ONLY
| Steven Roth, In pro Fer Superior Court of California
1901 Avenue of the Stars #200 County of Los Angeles
Los Angeles, CA 90067
reveprone no: 310.503.3827 erxno: (866)460-2889 MAR 11 2014
ATTORNEY FOR (Nema): In Pro Per
Sherri R. Carter, Exgcutive Officer/Clerk
|SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF Los. Angeles 0) ahjece LOT. Deputy
stReeraooress: 11] N. Hill Street
“| saauing aboress: 111 N: Hill Street Myina Belian
cry anozpcooe: Los Angeles, CA 90012
eranch awe: Central
CASE NAME:
Steven Roth V Neil Finestone Rrheqi9 5
CIVIL CASE cover SHEET Complex Case Designation casennueer: ewes
amount’ anon (J counter [7] Joinder —
demanded demanded is Filed with first appearance by defendant .
exceeds $25,000) _ $25,000 or less) (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.402) DEPT:
items 1-6 below must be completed (see instructions on page 2).
“}1. Check one box below for the case type that best describes this case:
Auto Tort Contract Provisionally Complex Civil Litigation
‘Auto (22) Breach of contracwarranty (06) _ (Cal. Rulas of Court, rules 3.400~3.403) '
Uninsured motorist (46) Rule 3.740 collections (09) J antitrusutrade regulation (03)
Other PUPDWD (Personal Injury/Property [__] Other collections (09) Construction defect (10)
Damage/Wrongful Death) Tort (1 insurance coverage (18) C1 mass tort (40)
Asbestos (04) (1 other contract (37) [2] securities ttigation (28)
Product liability (24) Real Property [CD Environmenta/Toxic tort (30) eg.
[J Medica! malpractice (45) Eminent domain/inverse Insurance coverage claims arising from the we |
C2} otter Puen (23) condemnation (14) above listed provisionally complex case So!
Non-PUPDAWD (Other) Tort [} wrongfut eviction (33) ‘ypes (41) Eo
Business torvunfair business practice (07) L_| other real property (26) Enforcement of Judgment Bp
[J civit rights (08) Unlawful Detainer [71 Enforcement of judgment (20) 4
[J betamation (13) Commercial (31) Miscellaneous Civil Complaint ,
[2] Fraua (16) Residential (32) C2 rico @7)
2) intetiectual property (19) C1 brugs (38) Other complaint (not specified above) (42)
Professional negligence (25) dudicial Review Miscellaneous Civil Petition
Other non-PYPDAWD tort (35) Asset forfeiture (05) Partnership and corporate govemance (21)
mployment LJ Pettionre: arbitration award (11) [=] other petition (not speciied above) (43)
eS Wrongful terinination (36) [J wit of mandate (02)
Other employment (15) [1 other judiciat review (39)
2. This case [_]is is not
complex under rule 3.400 of the California Rules of Court. If the case is complex, mark the
factors requiring exceptional judicial management: ‘
al] Large number of separately represented parties af] Large number of witnesses.
b. oO Extensive motion practice raising difficult or novel e. oO Coordination with related actions pending in one or more courts
issues that will be time-consuming to resolve in other counties, states, or countries, or in a federal court
c. J Substantial amount of documentary evidence ¢, (2) substantial postjudgment judicial supervision
3. Remedies sought (check all that apply): a.
4:Number of causes of action (specify):
S..This case Os isnot aclass action suit.
6. af there are any known related cases, file and serve a notice of related case. (You may use form CM-015,)
Date: March 11, 2014 . : SGA
Steven Roth, Plaintiff in Pro Per
(SIGNATURE OF PARTY OR ATTORNEY FOR PARTY)
NOTICE
{TYPE OR PRINT NAME)
Plaintiff must file this cover sheet with the first paper filed in the action or proceeding (except small claims cases or cases filed
#.Under the Probate Code, Family Code, or Welfare and Institutions Code). (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.220.) Failure to file may result
gin sanctions.
‘*-File this cover sheet in addition to any cover sheet required by local court rule. a
s-if this case is complex under rule 3.400 et seq. of the California Rules of Court, you must serve a copy of this cover sheet on all
, other parties to the action or proceeding.
Unless this is a collections case under rule 3.740 or a complex case, this cover sheet will be used for statistical purposes only. tora
ae
Form Adopled for CIVIL CASE COVER SHEET
monetary b.[_] nonmonetary; declaratory or injunctive relief c. [punitive
‘Mandatory Use
Judidal Caunal of Catifomia
‘Cal Rules of Court, rules 2.30, 3.220, 3.400-3.403, 3.740,
Cal, Standar
‘CM-O10 (Rev. July 1, 2007]
rds of Judicial Administration, std, 3.10
-courtinto.ca:
ww ‘gov~ 3 . CM-010
. INSTRUCTIONS ON HOW TO COMPLETE THE COVER SHEET
To Plaintiffs and Others Filing First Papers. If you are filing a first paper (for example, a complaint) in a civil case, you must
complete and file, along with your first paper, the Civil Case Cover Sheet contained on page 1. This information will be used to compile
statistics about the types and numbers of cases filed. You must complete items 1 through 6 on the sheet. In item 1, you must check
«one box for the case type that best describes the case. If the case fits both a general and a more specific type of case listed in item 4,
" check the more specific one. If the case has multiple causes of action, check the box that best indicates the primary cause of action.
To assist you in completing the sheet, examples of the cases that belong under each case type in item 1 are provided below. A cover
-sheet must be filed only with your initial paper. Failure to file a cover sheet with the first paper filed in a civil case may subject a party,
its counsel, or both to sanctions under rules 2.30 and 3.220 of the California Rules of Court.
To Parties in Rule 3.740 Collections Cases. A "collections case" under rule 3:740 is defined as an action for recovery of money
owed in a sum stated to be certain that is not more than $25,000, exclusive of interest and attorney's fees, arising from a transaction in
which property, services, or money was acquired on credit. A collections case does not include an action seeking the following: (1) tort
damages, (2) punitive damages, (3) recovery of real property, (4) recovery of personal property, or (5) a prejudgment writ of
“attachment. The identification of a case as a rule 3.740 collections case on this form means that it will be exempt from the general
* time-for-service requirements and case management rules, unless a defendant files a responsive pleading. A rule 3.740 collections
* case will be subject to the requirements for service and obtaining a judgment in rule 3.740.
To Parties in Complex Cases. In complex cases only, parties must also use the Civil Case Cover Sheet to designate whether the
case is complex. If a plaintiff believes the case is complex under rule 3.400 of the California Rules of Court, this must be indicated by
completing the appropriate boxes in items 1 and 2. If a plaintiff designates a case as complex, the cover sheet must be served with the
complaint on all parties to the action. A defendant may file and serve no later than the time of its first appearance a joinder in the
plaintiffs designation, a counter-designation that the case is not complex, or, if the plaintiff has made no designation, a designation that
the case is complex.
CASE TYPES AND EXAMPLES
Auto Tort Contract Provisionally Complex Civil Litigation (Cal.
‘Auto (22)-Personal Injury/Property Breach of ContraclWarranty (06) Rules of Court Rules 3.400-3.403)
Damage/rongful Death Breach of Rental/Lease Antitrust/Trade Regulation (03)
Uninsured Motorist (46) (if the Contract (not unlawful detainer Construction Defect (10)
case involves an uninsured or wrongful eviction) Claims Involving Mass Tort (40)
motorist claim subject to ContraclWarranty Breach—Seller Securities Litigation (28)
arbitration, check this item Plaintiff (not fraud or negligence) Environmental/Toxic Tort (30)
instead of Auto) Negligent Breach of Contac : Insurance Coverage Clas,
DAWD farranty (arising from isi complex
Property Damage virenatul Roath) Other Breach of ContraclWarranty case type listed above) (41)
Tort Collections (e.g., money owed, apen Enforcement of Judgment
Asbestos (04) Pook accounts) (09) Enforcement o amen Be a
‘Asbestos Property Dam: collection Case-Seller Plaintiff tract of Judgment (Out of
Asbestos Personal injury Other Promissory Note/Collections County)
Wrongful Death Case Confession of Judgment (non-
Product Liability (not asbestos or Insurance Coverage (not provisionally domestic relations)
toxic/environmental) (24) complex) (18) Sister State Judgment
Medical Malpractice (45) Auto Subrogation Administrative Agency Award
Medical Malpractice— . Other Coverage (not unpaid taxes)
Physicians & Surgeons Other Contract (37) Petition/Certification of Entry of
Other Professional Health Care Contractual Fraud Judgment on Unpaid Taxes
Malpractice Other Contract Dispute Ofer Enforcement of Judgment
‘Other PUPDIWD (23) Real Property ‘ase
Premises Liability (e.g., slip Eminent Domain/inverse Miscellaneous Civil Comptaint
and fall) Condemnation (14) RICO (27)
Intentional Bodily Injury/PDAWD- Wrongfut Eviction (33) Other Snore) ane (not specified
{eg.. assault, vandalism) Other Real Property (e.g., quiet title) (26)
Intentional Infietion of Sniiat Posen cai eal ronan Dect Retief Ony
Emotional Distress Mortgage Foreclosure njune ive Relief Only (non-
Negligent infliction of Quiet Title Mec! harassment)
omer malonal Distress gine: Real Rroperty (not eminent ‘Other Commercial Complaint
Non-PUPDIWD (Other) Tort . foreclosure) ome a (ron-torinan-complex)
Business Tort/Unfair Business Unlawful Detainer ranttonhon a
on Practice (07) Commercial (31) Miscellanecus con eee
‘Ceivit Rights (e.9., discrimination, Residential (32) Partnership and Corporate
44) false arrest) (not civil Drugs (38) (if the case involves illegal Governance (21)
harassment) (08) drugs, check this item; otherwise, Other Petition (not specified
sDefamation (e.g., slander, libel) report as Commercial or Residential) above) (43)
«t Judicial Review inl Favacement
Fraud (16) Asset Forfeiture (05) Workplace Violence
wet Property (19) Petition Re: Arbitration Award (11) Elder/Dependent Adult
fessional Negligence (25) ‘Writ of Mandate (02) “Abuse
Legal Malpractice Writ-Administrative Mandamus Election Contest
Other Professional Malpractice Writ-Mandamus on Limited Court Patiion for Name Che:
BA emer ot medical or lege, Case Matter - Petiton for Rellet From Cate
Enigioyine Nor-PUPDAND Tort (35) Writ-Other Limited Court Case Claim
rongful Termination (36) other ea eview (3 39) Other Civil Petition
fer Employment (15) Review of Health Officer Order
is Notice of Appeal-Labor
Commissioner Appeals
‘CM-010 fRav. July 1, 2007] Page2ota
CIVIL CASE COVER SHEETeo 4 BC539135
‘SHORT TITLE ‘CASE NUMBER
* ” STEVEN ROTH V NEIL FINESTONE
CIVIL CASE COVER SHEET ADDENDUM AND
STATEMENT OF LOCATION
(CERTIFICATE OF GROUNDS FOR ASSIGNMENT.TO COURTHOUSE LOCATION)
This form is required pursuant to Local Rule 2.0 in all new civil case filings in the Los Angeles Superior Court.
Item I. Check the types of hearing and fill in the estimated length of hearing expected for this case:
yury TRIAL? WZ] yes ctass action? L] ves uimmep case? Loves Time estimaTeo FOR TRIAL 7___C1 Hours/ © pays
* Item Il. Indicate the correct district and courthouse location (4 steps — If you checked “Limited Case’, skip to Item III, Pg. 4):
Step 1: After first completing the Civil Case Cover Sheet form, find the main Civil Case Cover Sheet heading for your
case in the left margin below, and, to the right in Column A, the Civil Case Cover Sheet case type you selected.
Step 2: Check one Superior Court type of action in Column B below which best describes the nature of this case.
Step 3: In Column C, circle the reason for the court location choice that applies to the type of action you have
checked. For any exception to the court location, see Local Rule 2.0.
Applicable Reasons for Choosing Courthouse Location (see Column C below) 2
4. Class actions must be filed in the Stanley Mosk Courthouse, central district. 6. Location of property or permanently garaged vehicle. uw
2. May be filed in central (other county, or no bodily injury/property damage). 7. Location where petitioner resides. . =
3. Location where cause of action arose. - 8. Location wherein defendant/respondent functions wholly. a
4. Location where bodily injury, death or damage occurred. 9. Location where one or more of re parties reside.
5. Location where performance required or defendant resides. 10. Location of Labor Commissioner Office
Step 4: Fill in the information requested on page 4 in Item Ill; complete Item IV. Sign the declaration.
As, . vos B. a . Cc
Civil Case Cover Sheet . Type of Action . Applicable Reasons -
Category No. , . (Check onlyone)) . See Step 3 Above
er Auto (22) © A7100 Motor Vehicle - Personal Injury/Property Damage/Wrongful Death 1.,2..4.
as
©
< Uninsured Motorist (46) | 0 A7110 Personal Injury/Property Damage/Wrongful Death - Uninsured Motorist | 1.,2., 4.
D A6070 Asbestos Property Dama 2.
Asbestos (04) erty nese
2 e D_ A7221 Asbestos - Personal Injury/Wrongful Death 2.
o ~
evs Product Liability (24) O A7260 Product Liability (not asbestos or toxic/environmental) 4,234.4. 8.
as =
4.3
2 1 A7210. Medical Malpractice - Physicians & Surgeons 144,
ae Medical Malpractice (45) me vs ‘ae .
3 2 G._A7240 Other Professional Health Care Malpractice 1.44.
s
S
a= 1 A7250 Premises Liability (e.g., stip and fall) 14
ee Personal injury (1 A7230 Intentional Bodily Injury/Property Damage/Wrongful Death (e.g. Jaa
£8 Property Damage assault, vandalism, etc.) oe
a ‘Wrong Death D_A7270 intentional infliction of Emotional Distress 14,3,
be 1 A7220 Other Personal Injury/Property Damage/Wrongful Death 14.
LACIV 109 (Rev. 03/11) . CIVIL CASE COVER SHEET ADDENDUM Local Rule 2.0
LASC Approved 03-04 AND STATEMENT OF LOCATION Page 1 of 4‘SHORT TIT
“ STEVEN ROTH V NEIL FINESTONE
CASE NUMBER.
A lees B. c
Civil Case Cover Sheet . ‘Type of Action ' Applicable Reasons -
Category No. (Check only one) See Step 3 Above
Business Tort (07) @ AG6029 Other Commercial/Business Tort (not fraud/breach of contract) 1,3.
2s
Be Civil Rights (08) 1 A605. Civil Rights/Discrimination 1.,2.,3.
ag
34 Defamation (13) 1 A6010 Defamation (slanderflibe!) 442,38
32 -
= ? Fraud (16) 1 A6013: Fraud (no contract) 1.2.63,
5s
BS 0 A6017 Legal Malpractice 1,243."
eo Professional Negligence (25) °9 . . a
ee 1 A6050 Other Professional Malpractice (not medical or legal) 1,243.
2o
Other (35) A6025 Other Non-Personal Injury/Property Damage tort 2.3.
5 Wrongful Termination (368) | 0 A6037 Wrongful Termination
5
2 © A6024 Other Employment Complaint Case 1, 2., 3.
& Other Employment (15) .
wi 0D A6109 Labor Commissioner Appeals 10.
‘G A6004 Breach of Rental/Lease Contract (not unlawful detainer or wrongful °
eviction) 2.8,
Breach oF eo Warranty © A6008 Contrac¥Warranty Breach -Seller Plaintiff (no fraud/negligence) 2.5.
(not insurance) 1 AG019 Negligent Breach of ContractMWarranty (no fraud) 1428,
1D A6028 Other Breach of ContrattiWarranty (not fraud or negligence) 1,245.
& 1 A602 Collections Case-Seller Plaintiff 2.5.6.
g Collections (09)
8 O A6012 Other Promissory Note/Collections Case 2., 5.
insurance Coverage (18) O A6015 Insurance Coverage (not complex)
1 A6009 Contractual Fraud 1.2.3.5.
Other Contract (37) 1 6031 Tortious Interference 4.2.3.5.
1 A6027 Other Contract Dispute(not breach/insurance/fraud/negligence) 1a, 2a 3.8.
Eminent arias 1D A7300 Eminent Domain/Condemnation * Number of parcels, 2
e Wrongful Eviction (33) | 0 A6023 Wrongful Eviction Case 2.6,
S
£
é O A6018 Mortgage Foreclosure a
s Other Real Property (28) | C1 A6032 Quiet Title
~ 1D AS8060 Other Real Property (not eminent domain, landlord/tenant, foreclosure) sy
Be = =
ce | Unawul Detar rCommercial | ry Ago21 Unlawful Detainer-Commercial (not drugs ot wrongful eviction) 2.6.
ed
= - -
a Unlawful Detainer-Residential | 4 ,g020 Unlawful Detainer-Residential (not drugs or wrongful eviction) 2.6.
'
a Untawtul Detainer- .
5 ate elaine) | AB020F Uniawiul Detainer-Post-Forectosure 2.6.
Ss
= Unlawful Detainer-Drugs (38) | 0 A6022_ Unlawful Detainer-Drugs 2.6.
4
LACIV 109 (Rev. 03/11) CIVIL CASE COVER SHEET ADDENDUM Local Rule 2.0
LASC Approved 03-04
AND STATEMENT OF LOCATION
Page 2 of 4‘SHORT TITLE: ‘CASE NUMBER
STEVEN ROTH V NEIL FINESTONE
“A . “Bo, c
Civil Case Cover Sheet, - cad toy ‘Type of Action ~ . * | Applicable Reasons -
Category No, _ |. . (Check only one). See Step 3 Above
Asset Forfeiture (05) 0 A6108 Asset Forfeiture Case 2.6.
2 Petition re Arbitration (11) 0 A6115 Petition to Compel/Confirm/Vacate Arbitration 2,5.
s
3
e © A6151 Writ - Administrative Mandamus 2.8.
3
3 Writ of Mandate (02) A6152 Writ - Mandamus on Limited Court Case Matter 2.
3 D_A6153 Writ - Other Limited Court Case Review 2
Other Judicial Review (39) | A6150 Other Writ /Judicial Review 2,8.
5 Antitrust/Trade Regulation (03) | A6003 AntitrustTrade Regulation 1, 2, 8.
= Construction Defect (10) | (1 6007 Construction Defect 14.2.3.
s
® - -
2 Claims iverson Mass Tort | 4 46008 Claims Involving Mass Tort 12,8.
eS
Q Securities Litigation (28) | ( A6035 Securities Litigation Case 1.,2.,8.
a
5 Toxic Tort i i
2 Environmental (30) O A6036 Toxic TorvEnvironmental 1,,2..3..8.
2 Insurance Coverage Claims
a from Complex Case (41) A614 Insurance Coverage/Subrogation (complex case only)
1D A6141 Sister State Judgment
& =e 1 A6160 Abstract of Judgment
5
EE Enforcement 0 A6107 Confession of Judgment (non-domestic relations)
53 of Judgment (20) 1 AG140. Administrative Agency Award (not unpaid taxes)
as A614 Petition/Certificate for Entry of Judgment on Unpaid Tax
DD A6112 Other Enforcement of Judgment Case
RICO (27) 1 A6033 Racketeering (RICO) Case 1.,2.,8,°
o .
3
3 C1 A6030 Declaratory Relief Only 1.,2.,8.
2 1D A6040 injunctive Relief Only (not domestic/harassment) 2,8.
3 Other Complaints
g (Not Specified Above) (42) | AG011 Other Commercial Complaint Case (non-tor¥non-complex) 1,,2,,8.
1 A6000 Other Civil Complaint (non-tortnon-complex)
an, = = =
° Partnership romreaen (A613 Partnership and Corporate Governance Case’ 2.8.
A
wo Q A6121 Civil Harassment 2., 3.9.
3-5 Q A6123 Workplace Harassment 2.3.9.
ee
ES other Petitions C1 A6124. Elder/Dependent Adult Abuse Case 2.3.9.
(Not Specified Above) 1 A6190 Election Contest 2.
oO (43) a
aS 1D A6110 Petition for Change of Name 2.7.
© 1 A6170 Petition for Relief from Late Claim Law 2.,3..4., 8.
oad A6100 Other Civil Petition 2.9.
ts
LACIV 109 (Rev. 03/11) CIVIL CASE COVER SHEET ADDENDUM Local Rule 2.0
LASC Approved 03-04 AND STATEMENT OF LOCATION Page 3 of 4fe
SHORT TITLE: CASE NUMBER.
STEVEN ROTH V NEIL FINESTONE
Item III. Statement of Location: Enter the address of the accident, party's residence or place of business, performance, or other
circumstance indicated in Item II., Step 3 on Page 1, as the proper reason for filing in the court location you selected.
‘ADDRESS:
REASON: Check the appropriate boxes forthe numbers shown | NeilFinestone —- '
under Column C for the type of action that you have selected for | 9100 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 720E, Beverly Hills, CA 90212
this case.
@1. 02. 3. 04. 05. 06. 07. 08. O9. 010.
cerry: STATE: ZIP CODE:
LOS ANGELES CA 90212
Item IV. Declaration of Assignment: | declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true
and correct and that the above-entitled matter is properly filed for assignment to the STANLEY MOSK courthouse in the
CENTRAL District of the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles [Code Civ. Proc., § 392 et seq., and Local
Rule 2.0, subds. (b), (c) and (d)}.
Dated: 3-11-2014 SFM # A
(SIGNATURE OF ATTORNEYIFILING PARTY)
PLEASE HAVE THE FOLLOWING ITEMS COMPLETED AND READY TO BE FILED IN ORDER TO PROPERLY
COMMENCE YOUR NEW COURT CASE:
1. _ Original Complaint or Petition.
2. If filing a Complaint, a completed Summons form for issuance by the Clerk.
3. Civil Case Cover Sheet, Judicial Council form CM-010.
4
eM Case Cover Sheet Addendum and Statement of Location form, LACIV 109, LASC Approved 03-04 (Rev.
1).
a
Payment in full of the filing fee, unless fees have been waived.
Asigned order appointing the Guardian ad Litem, Judicial Council form CIV-010, if the plaintiff or petitioner is a
minor under 18 years of age will be required by Court in order to issue a summons.
‘
7. Additional copies of documents to be conformed by the Clerk. Copies of the cover sheet and this addendum
a must be served along with the summons and complaint, or other initiating pleading in the case.
LAGIV 109 (Rev. 03/11) CIVIL CASE COVER SHEET ADDENDUM Local Rule 2.0
LASC Approved 03-04 AND STATEMENT OF LOCATION Page 4 of 4. 5 2116/2017 3:28:45 PM
Chris Daniel - District Cl is County
B vi ae WITHOS g i Ee See 17-1100 6 IC _ rt: 4 one conic
Da . Browne. SBN 9357 - , 7 212
21900 Burbank Blvd., Suite 20 t ourt: Filed: 2/15/2017 2:12:22 PM
Woodland Hills. CA 91367 J '
yore xo. 818 276-1925 . Faxnc ;Osboner 818 702-0910
Fite). ADORESE (Goroee dmbrownelaw@amail.com
ATOR EY FOR temo! defendant Neil Finestone
SUPERIOR GOURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
s U11N. Hill St.
MAILING ADDRESS:
crvanpapcooe Los Angeles. CA 90012
Srevornanc Stanley Mosk Courthouse |
SHORT THLE: : i |
Roth v. Finestone |
+
|
1
|
|
1
t . .
_COMMISSION TO TAKE DEPOSITION OUTSIDE CALIFORNIA ! BC539135
[| ORDERED BY COURT [4] ISSUED BY THE CLERK OF THE COURT >
1, The Superior Court of California hereby authorizes the deposition. upon oral examination, of {identity of deponent):
Carzie Burkhead
2. The deposition is to be taken in (state of the United States. territory, or insular possession subject to its Jorisdiction):
Texas
3. The dezosition will be conducted {check one):
a. LY) Under the supervision of a persen who is authorized to administer oaths by the laws of the United States or those of the
place where the examination is to be held and who is not othenwise disqualified under California Code of Civil Procedure
sections 2025.320 and 2025.340(>}(f}): or
db. Before (name of appointee}:
who is appointed to administer oaths and to take testimony.
4. The documents or inings to be produced at the time and place of the deposition are
described in Attachment4 __) none,
5. Additional terms required by the foreign jurisdiction to initiate the process are contained in Attachment 5. Number of pages
attached:
€. Unger California Coce of Civil Procedure section 2026.00, Cadfornia authorizes that a commission to take an out-of-state
deposit.on may be issued by the clerk of the court or, if the foreign jurisdiction requires it, by order of the court
7. The Superior Court of the State of California hereby requests tnat prosess issue in the above-referenced place where the
examination is to be held, requiring the attendance and enforcing the obligations of the deponent to produce documents and
answer questions.
SHERRI. CARTER
dategany FO 200
gS Judge
. OR
2 Clerk, by 7
Paget oft
COMMISSION TO TAKE
DEPOSITION OUTSIDE CALIFORNIA
Form Agaro.
Proc. § 2028 0104)
ewe bourtin‘o. 2,900VME OLED COPY,
ORIGINAL FILED
Soparior Court Gt Califsraty
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA Reserved for CREE Fe Stamp
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES JAN 30 2017
"COURTHOUSE ADDRESS 477 Wf HILL STREET, LOS ANGELES, CA 90012
PLAINTIFF:
: “Rete.
DEFENDANT. ~
cu NES TO NET CASE NUMBER
CIVIL DEPOSIT Bcs 34138y
Clerk: Prepare a form for each depositor paying separately.
Shorr’ R, Carter, Executive Otticer/Cta-k
By. Charile , Corman. Deputy
PLEASE REPORT TO THE CLERK'S OFFICE/CASHIER: ZB
OD Room 102, Central Civil [] Clerk's Office, Room IE Department Number
¥_| Distribution Codes Amt, Due x Distribution Codes Amt, Due
t_ | OAILY JURY FEES y 74 | DEPOSIT IN TRUST
Dates__ . —
# of dayis) xs
72 | JURY FEES ~ 101 FIRST PAPERS
(General Jurisdiction)
Trial Date: 7 a
{lniuar Depos') $
REPORTER'S FEES FIRST PAPERS
: 101 | Limited over $10,000
Dates -
141 | With declaration Limited to $10,000
(Per B&P 6322.1(a))
Hot% days) XS, 190 | Limited to $10,600.
253 | Half day
252 _| Full bay
721 | SANCTIONS ORDERED ON 2iT_|RECLASSIFIGATION FEE
Bate: oe
213 | MOTIONIAPPLICATION TO CONTINUE HEARING 180 | COMPLEX LITIGATION TRIAL Plant
200 | MOTIOWAPPLICATION TO CONTINUE TRIAL
MOTIONAPPLICATION TO CONTINUE 151_| COMPLEX LITIGATION/Defendant
EO $5015 Se"
Tobe pad via: Ccash i check 1 Certinted Check/Money Order [1] Credit Card
Clon or before: __ C1 Forthwith
Payment will be made by (] Plaintiff __ Ch@efendant + INS TON
SHERRI R. CARTER, Executive Officer/Clerk
DATED: |. Sm, 2ZOFL— BY:
Deputy Clerk
TO BE CONPLETED BY DEPOSITOR CASHIER'S VALIDATION
Depositor’s Name: BNWT Mv \e f 55 Owns” Ld OFFIUE- :
1 Plaintiff in Pro Per () Defendant in Pro Per
ExXGounse! for £1 Praintit
Name of Parly
Wy Gerendant_ NEM Riwes Tove
Name of Party
Address of depositor Sorre
Z|la400 SB oRpBAWL, BWD ial
Street oo Q \\ a ABC /
City/State/Zip
LACIV 083 (Rev, 07/15)
LASC Approved 03-04 CIVIL DEPOSIT
Distribution: Original - Case File Copy ~ Customer[TO)3OS5S 235
«
4
ae be Mg2/16/2017 3:28:45 PM
Chris Daniel - District Clerk
Harris County
Envelope No: 15368415
- } i K tf st vy t : By: CUERO, NELSON
201 7 BOE? . 21 5 Filed: 2/15/2017 2:12:22 PM
SUBPOENA FOR WITNESS DEPOSITION/SUBPOENA DUCES TECUM
PURSUANT TO TEXAS RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 176 AND 201
CAUSE NO. IN THE JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF
HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS
STEVEN ROTH ys, NEIL RAPHAEL FINESTONE, etal.
Plaintiff Defendant
TO ANY SHERIFF OR CONSTABLE OF THE STATE OF TEXAS OR OTHER PERSON AUTHORIZED TO SERVE
AND EXECUTE SUBPOENAS AS PROVIDED IN RULE 176 T.R.C.P.
YOU ARE HEREBY COMMANDED TOSUMMON CARRIE BURKHEAD
, Address
located in or near the City/Town of County, Texas, to appear
before , Notary Public/Court Reporter, at the
offices of
EDISON McDOWELL & HETHERINGTON, LLP located
at First City Tower, 1001 Fannin, Ste. 2700 in the City/Town of.
HOUSTON , HARRIS County, Texas, on the 10th day of
MARCH 20 17 at 10:30A . M,, in order to give deposition as a witness
on behalf of the Plaintiff/Defendant in the above styled Civil Action, to attend from day to day until lawfully discharged.
SAID ABOVE NAMED WITNESS IS FURTHER COMMANDED to produce at said time and place set forth above, the
following books, papers, documents, or other tangible things, to wit:
DONOT FAIL to return this writ to said Court, with return thereon, showing the manner of execution.
ISSUED this the 15th day of FEBRUARY AD., 20 17
CHRIS DANIEL, District Clerk
Harris County, Texas
201 Caroline, Houston, Texas 77002
By:
__ Deputy District Clerk
Issued At Request Of Plaintiff/Defendant, DEFENDANT C/O McFALL, BREITBEIL & EIDMAN, PC
Phone Number: (713) 590-9300
Address: 4400 POST OAK PARKWAY, STE. 2850, HOUSTON, TX 77027
OFFICER'S RETURN ON BACK
CIVCPO2 Revised 2/17/2000SUBPOENA FOR WITNESS DEPOSITION
SUBPOENA DUCES TECUM.
RETURN
Came to hand the day of 20 at o'clock __.M., and
executed the day of . 20 ,at o’clock .M.,
by delivering to the within named in
person at ' in
County, Texas, a true copy of this Subpoena, and tendering said witness the sum of $
By Deputy:
Sheriff/Constable
County, Texas
OR
By: ‘
Person who is not a party to the suit, and is not Jess than 18 years of age.
ACCEPTANCE OF SERVICE OF SUBPOENA BY WITNESS PER RULE 176 T.R.C.P.
I, the undersigned witness named in the Subpoena acknowledge receipt of a copy thereof, and hereby accept service of the
attached subpoena, and will appear in said court on said date and time directed in this subpoena.
Rule 176.8(a) Contempt. Failure by any person without adequate excuse to obey a subpoena served upon that person may
be deemed a contempt of the court from which the subpoena is issued or a district court in the county in which the subpoena
is served, and may be punished by fine or confinement, or both.
SIGNATURE OF WITNESS DATE
FETC IEEE IEE IE IGT AIAG TCT TTI ATI II III TI IIIT IRI AIT TAI I AI AI AAI AD AAS A AAAS SAI A AAA
erry
Not executed as to the witness _-
for the following reasons:
FEE FOR SERVICE OF SUBPOENA: $
CIVCPO2 Revised 2/17/2000
Preview
v oh w be > cay pe ds = wy HNY YN DY NYPD @ BB we ea soa wm ow a a ononk o8 NS = G0 ON ODO RF ORD = oo ODN OH RF WN 2/16/2017 3:28:45 PM Chris Daniel - District Clerk Envelope Ae acne 2017-11006 / Court: 215 . By: CUERG, NELSON Filed: 2 Steven Roth FILED ia wy y 2a pe 1901 Ay f the St Superior Fatt of Calc orn Second Floor unty of Los Ang p? i” Los Angeles, CA 90067 MAR 11 2014 fest Phone: 310-441-7300 Officer/Clerk Email: steven. rth Qumi- consular nO Da Deny By. Myra Beltran In Pro Per SUPERIOR COURT FOR THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES p73 Lite OVEN Eo ies BCS39195 STEVEN ROTH, an individual, COMPLAINT FOR: (1) Tortious Interference With Contract aS Plaintiff, Vv. . NEIL RAPHAEL FINESTONE, an DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL wo Individual, and DOES 1 — 5, inclusive. ag Defendants. - 3 THE PARTIES 1. Plaintiff Steven Roth is an adult individual at all relevant times doing business in Los Angeles County, California. 2. Defendant Neil Raphael Finestone is an adult individual at all relevant times doing business in Los Angeles County, California, with his principal place of business located at 9100 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 720E, Beverly Hills, CA 90212. MEER HS RRR 5 a a a 3. Plaintiff does not know the true names or capacities, wig igikand 3 p 8 2? = so corporate, associate, or otherwise, of Defendant Does 1 through 5. Pilfsfatit b Caitgraia » ao Qo Code of Civil Procedure §474, Plaintiff sues these Defendants under the fittioussa e a “Doe.” Plaintiff alleges on information and belief that each of the Doe Defendants 2 3 & en legally responsible in some manner for Plaintiff's damages. If and when Plaintiff leans, = a e8aaq z COMPLAINT BRS ® g 3 RECORDER'S MEMORANDUM This instrument is of poor quality al the time of imagingo Ont Oak WN = MPN HN HH DYN HK BB Be BoB Ba a aw aw ow a on oak © NH + GO ODN DHA BOND @= GO their real names and identities, Plaintiff wilhask the court for permission to amend this complaint to sue them under their real names. 4. Each Defendant is the agent, servant, joint venture, employee or representative of the other Defendant, and was at all times acting within the purpose and scope of that agency. Each Defendant ratified and approved the acts of its agent. JURISDICTION AND VENUE 5. Defendants’ wrongful acts and omissions causing Plaintiff's injury and loss occurred in Los Angeles County, California, within this judicial district. Plaintiff is seeking damages in excess of the minimum jurisdictional limits of this court. Venue is proper in Los Angeles County and in this judicial district because Defendant does business here, and Plaintiff's claims arose here. FACTUAL BACKGROUND 6. On October 17, 2011, Plaintiff was retained by Mr. Zein Obagi and Ms. Samar Obagi to act as a consultant in connection with a pension program (“Plans”) the Obagis’ corporations adopted in December of 2005, in which the Obagis funded millions of dollars through 2009. Mr. Obagi was the trustee of the Plans and approximately 85% of the Plans’ benefits were attributable to Mr. and Mrs. Obagi as plan participants. 7. The majority of the Plan contributions were invested into a series of six (6) American General Life (“AIG”) Indexed Universal Life insurance policies (“Policies”)', with combined death benefits of approximately $10 million. The Policies had been sold to the Plans under the false pretense that the Policies were required and would provide greater net retirement income and tax savings for Mr. and Mrs. Obagi compared to other ' Three of the Policies insured Mrs. Obagi. The remaining three insured Mr. Obagi. COMPLAINT2 wl pe me BO 5 ae oon Oak wry = NNN NY DH NY DY HH BS BABA Basa an aw a a on oank © N 35+ GG ON DG BwWwNH = OO available options bearing comparable risk. These representations were false when made and were made to the Obagis by the life insurance agents and the tax attorney (“Promoters”) who recommended the Policies and shared in the significant compensation generated from the sales. On information and belief, the compensation generated was at least $700,000.00. 8. In contemplation of the Obagis filing a lawsuit (“Lawsuit”), Plaintiff was hired to lend his expertise to investigate the Plans and related AIG Policies to calculate the amount of and assist to seek redress for the losses the Obagis suffered as a result of the misrepresented Plan, and the Policies in particular. The gravamen of the Obagis' claim was that the Policies’ death benefits were: 1) unneeded; 2) undesired; 3) only agreed to as the Promoters stated they were required; and 4) resulted in costs that were so great that any retirement income gain the Policies were to confer compared to comparable alternatives for the Obagis’ stated retirement objective was erroneous. Plaintiff's contract with the Obagis (“Contract”) provided that Plaintiff was to be compensated for investigating the claims as well as assisting any attorneys that would be retained to advance the Obagis’ claims through the conclusion of any lawsuit or settlement process. 9. In February of 2013, Plaintiff completed his analysis of the Plans and informed the Obagis, through their personal attorney Michael Morris, that they could mitigate their damages by reducing the death benefits of the policies. At the Obagis’ request, Plaintiff then referred them to a well-respected and highly successful plaintiff's law firm to evaluate their claims and to discuss the law firm representing them to advance any claims. 10. In or before April 2013, defendant Neil Finestone (“Finestone”), a commission-based insurance agent, was introduced to the Obagis through Michael Morris. Mrs. Obagi told Plaintiff that Finestone was going to act as the Obagis’ insurance agent COMPLAINTPy aa ad ay = on OD HM FW ND 1 12 13 14 45 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 and would assist with the reduction of the Policies. On information and belief, at that time, Finestone was informed of the details and legal theories of the contemplated litigation, including those related to the Policies and anticipated claims against AIG and the Promoters in connection thereto, as well as to the details of Plaintiff's contract with the Obagis. 11. On June 14, 2013, at 2:00pm, a meeting took place between Plaintiff, the Obagis, and one of the attorneys at the law firm referred by plaintiff mentioned in paragraph 9 regarding pursuing the claims related to the Plans and the Policies. The Obagis retained the law firm soon after the meeting. At the June 14 meeting, the Obagis were advised that the Policies should promptly be reduced to the minimum death benefits pursuant to the legal requirement that the Obagis mitigate their damages. At that time, the Obagis agreed and stated that they were having Finestone handle the Policies’ reductions. During this meeting, the Obagis were also advised to not explore or apply for any additional life insurance, as doing so would be contrary to their interest and would harm their claims. The Obagis agreed and stated that they had no interest in the Policies’ death benefits or obtaining additional life insurance. 12. On August 2, 2013, at 3:00pm, Plaintiff and one of the attorneys from the firm the Obagis retained to bring their lawsuit against the Promoters and AIG (“Lawsuit”) met with Mrs. Obagi and Finestone at the Obagis’ Beverly Hills office. During the meeting, the legal theories for the Lawsuit, including the critically important need to have | reduced the Policies to the minimums and to not inquire about or apply for additional life insurance was again discussed. At that time, to Plaintiff’s and the attorney’s surprise, Finestone stated that he had still not reduced the Policies. Finestone was then specifically reminded of the devastating impact that maintaining higher than required death benefits would have on the Lawsuit, as well as the needless cost being incurred by the Obagis for the charges for the excess insurance. In response, Finestone stated that he was “in the COMPLAINT -4-= on Oo a FF WwW PD 11 12 13 14 15 16 7 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 process of getting the policies reduced””. At this meeting, Finestone was also told to not pursue or otherwise request information about obtaining additional life insurance on either Mr. or Mrs. Obagi. 13. During the August 2, 2013 meeting, Plaintiff informed Finestone of the existence and details of Plaintiffs contract with the Obagis in connection with the Lawsuit, and Plaintiff stressed the urgent need that Finestone promptly handle the policy reductions and cooperate with the attorneys bringing the Lawsuit, which included running all ideas, intended actions and communications relating to the Plan, Policies and the Obagis through the attorneys before doing anything. 14, / On November 4, 2013, at 3:00pm, another meeting was held at the Obagis’ Beverly Hills office between Mrs. Obagi, Finestone, Plaintiff and one of the attorneys from the firm. During the meeting, the following occurred: 1). Finestone was again told the legal theories of the case in detail, emphasizing the importance of the Obagis having reduced the Policies and not exploring or pursuing additional life insurance; 2) Plaintiff and the attorney asked Finestone if the Policies had been reduced pursuant to the prior agreement three months earlier that Finestone would process the reductions to the minimum amounts of coverage allowed by AIG; 3) notwithstanding the prior agreement, Finestone stated that the Policies had still not been reduced, and; 4) Finestone stated to Plaintiff and the attorney at that time that he “had other matters to discuss with Mrs. Obagi” once Plaintiff and the attorney left. Finestone had clearly not honored the prior agreement to reduce the policies and run all ideas, intended actions and communications relating to the Plan, Policies and the Obagis by Plaintiff and the attorneys before doing anything. Rather, it had now come to Plaintiff and the attorneys’ attention that Finestone 2 A policy reduction is typically processed within days, or at most, within two to four weeks from the date an insurance company receives the reduction request. COMPLAINTds was holding private meetings with Mrs. Obagi, the topic and content of which he was keeping from Plaintiff and the attorneys. 15. As aresult of Finestone’s lack of transparency discovered in the November 4, 2013 meeting, shortly thereafter, it was requested that Finestone produce to Plaintiff and the attorneys a complete copy of his file including all communications related to the Policies. 16. On November 25, 2013, Plaintiff received documents provided by Finestone. Among the documents was a new AIG $26,501,230 Indexed Universal Life insurance proposal illustration dated November 4, 2013 on the life of Mrs. Obagi, which lists on the cover page as “Presented by Neil Finestone”. The proposal illustration called for a $6,350,841.35 initial premium payment, which was millions of dollars more than the combined cash values of the existing AIG Policies the Obagis were preparing to sue over for causing them financial harm. Plaintiff was shocked and dismayed by the discovery, as he immediately realized that the illustration, which was for new insurance in an amount of more than double of what was inforce on both Mr. and Mrs. Obagi with AIG, would likely compromise or destroy the Obagis’ Lawsuit. Moreover, the illustration was prepared by Carrie Burkhead, the very AIG employee Plaintiff dealt with when investigating the Obagi’s claims. Finestone’s actions created and gave AIG evidence that was diametrically contrary to the claims the Obagis were in the throes of bringing. Included in the documents Finestone produced was a complete copy of Plaintiff's contract with the Obagis. 17. Finestone concealed from Plaintiff and the attorneys hired to pursue the Lawsuit that he had requested and obtained this illustration, and that he proceeded to pitch it to Mrs. Obagi once Plaintiff and the attorney had left the November 4, 2013 meeting, Id qi4 COMPLAINTer} © oN DO HD FWD = NNMNHMNHY NY YH DN BB BB Ba Be Be Be Bw a os BNSBRBRSBBRSFSEarRAiaaRTEBERAS 18. ‘On December 10, 2013, Plaintiff received confirmation from AIG personnel that Finestone specifically requested the November 4, 2013, $26,501,230 life insurance proposal on Mrs. Obagi. 19. On or about December 12, 2013, the attorneys informed Plaintiff that they had withdrawn from representing the Obagis in the Lawsuit. 20. Finestone earns his living selling insurance and was at all relevant times an appointed agent of the would-be defendant AIG. Finestone should have but did not : disclose to Plaintiff and the attorneys that he was a currént appointed agent and representative of AIG and his resulting conflict of interest, facts unknown to Plaintiff and the attorneys at the relevant time. 21. Finestone further concealed that his true intentions were to promptly sell the Obagi’s tens of millions of dollars of insurance so he could receive substantial commissions, knowing full well that doing so would make Plaintiffs performance under his contract with the Obagis impossible, while simultaneously harming the Obagis rights and claims. 22. Asa direct result of the aforementioned events, Plaintiff has been prevented from performing under his contract with the Obagis and has been deprived the compensation he would have otherwise have received, which is at least $200,000. 7 W Mu COMPLAINT -7-2 Ww a ho 2 db Oo ON Oak OND = NNN DY NHN NY HY SF SF BA BB BiB Bw am Se BNBSBBABRBESKRSSGaRARSaAaRSBKRASN FIRST CAUSE OF ACTION (Tortious Interference With Contract) Against All Defendants 23. Plaintiff hereby refers to paragraphs 1 through 23, inclusive hereof, and incorporates same herein by reference. This cause of action is asserted against all Defendants. 24. Finestone had actual knowledge of the existence and the terms and conditions of the Contract between Plaintiff and the Obagis. Jd 410, 15, and 18 25. Finestone and Plaintiff have had previous issues on prior matters over the years where they had common clients. These issues resulted in embarrassment to Finestone and provide motive for Finestone’s personal animosity towards Plaintiff. By way of example, in one matter, Finestone was terminated from being the retained expert in a pending lawsuit for his inability to provide any opinions or analysis to the lawyers in that case. With Finestone’s awareness, Plaintiff was retained to replace Finestone and the case was subsequently successfully settled to the client’s and client’s law firm’s satisfaction. In another matter, Plaintiff became aware that Finestone had failed to disclose to a client the existence of a discretionary and negotiable $25,000 fee that the client had being charged in which Finestone shared. This omission was both a violation of Finestone’s fiduciary duty to the client and of California Insurance Code 10113.2(14)(e). 26. Finestone intentionally induced and caused Obagi to breach the Contract and he made performance of the Contract impossible by, among other wrongdoing, not reducing the Policies and instead attempting to sell the Obagis more than double of the same type of AIG life insurance policies at issue, thus providing AIG and the Promoters with a well-documented defense to the gravamen of the Lawsuit that the Obagis’ didn’t want or need the large amounts of life insurance provided by the Policies. COMPLAINT® ww ee ~ 8d e ee db 27. _ Plaintiff's experience with Finestone over the years has been that Finestone never met a high-commission insurance product he didn’t like, and that he conceals material facts from customers and others, such as he did here by not disclosing to Plaintiff and the attorneys that he presently represented AIG’, the would-be defendant in the Obagi Lawsuit. In that connection, on several occasions from in or about November and December 2013, Finestone told Plaintiff and the attorneys handling the Lawsuit that he “didn’t agree with the Lawsuit”. However, he failed to disclose his intentions to sabotage the case, and the actions he undertook which did just that. Finestone’s true motives were the pursuit of his personal gain and allegiance to AIG. Such conduct is underhanded, despicable, and constitutes an “unfair business practice/unfair competition” under California Business and Professions Code §17200. 28. Asadirect result of Finestone’s actions detailed herein, Plaintiff was prevented from performing the consulting work he otherwise would have performed and from receiving the resulting compensation listed in the prayer of this complaint. Plaintiff was also subjected to embarrassment and upset with the attorneys he referred to the Obagis, who told Plaintiff that they were unhappy with having spent many hours and conducted several meetings only to have to withdraw after taking the case. Before engaging in the acts alleged herein, Finestone knew from Plaintiff, and presumably from Michael Morris, Mrs. Obagi and others that Plaintiff had a good reputation with the attorneys the Obagis hired for the Lawsuit, and that Plaintiff's relationship with the attorney’s firm was important and valuable to Plaintiff and his business. 29. Finestone did such acts complained about herein intentionally or recklessly to harm Plaintiff and frustrate Plaintiff's rights. 3According to the California Department of Insurance’s agent license check website, Finestone has been an appointed AIG life insurance agent since at least 2003. http://www. insurance.ca. gov/license-status/index.cfm COMPLAINT -9-oMmnNt ODO kW ND = RMN NNYN NN HN B= BB Be Ba aw a aw a oN Oak Oo HN BS GO AN DAF WH = GD 30. Finestone knew that the interference described herein was certain or substantially certain to occur as a result of his actions. 31. | Finestone’s wrongful and intentional interference, did, in fact, disrupt the contractual relationship between Plaintiff and the Obagis, in that Plaintiff was prevented ° from performing the further consulting work he otherwise would have performed in connection with the Lawsuit and from receiving the resulting compensation he would have received, which is calculated to be at.least $200,000. 32. Asa direct and proximate result of Finestone’s intentional and wrongful interference with the Contract, Plaintiff was damaged. 33. The acts of Defendants were done for Finestone’s own monetary gain and in conscious disregard of Plaintiff's rights with the intent to cause injury and harm to the Plaintiff. By reason of these acts, Plaintiff is entitled to an award of punitive and exemplary damages. REQUEST FOR JUDGMENT Plaintiff prays for judgnient against all Defendants as follows: 1. On the first cause of action for damages in the sum of not less than $200,000.00, according to proof, together with interest thereon as provided by law; 2. For an award of punitive and exemplary damages in an amount to be determined by the trier-of-fact; Mt 4 Mt I COMPLAINT -10-onoanrk wr = 14 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3. For the costs of suit incurred herein; and 4. For any further relief the court deems appropriate. Dated: February 13, 2012. Sil aE Steven Roth Plaintiff In Pro Per COMPLAINT -ll-CM-01 Pa ATTORNEY OR PARTY WITHO! ‘ATTORNEY (Name, St: “wmber, and address): ONLY | Steven Roth, In pro Fer Superior Court of California 1901 Avenue of the Stars #200 County of Los Angeles Los Angeles, CA 90067 reveprone no: 310.503.3827 erxno: (866)460-2889 MAR 11 2014 ATTORNEY FOR (Nema): In Pro Per Sherri R. Carter, Exgcutive Officer/Clerk |SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF Los. Angeles 0) ahjece LOT. Deputy stReeraooress: 11] N. Hill Street “| saauing aboress: 111 N: Hill Street Myina Belian cry anozpcooe: Los Angeles, CA 90012 eranch awe: Central CASE NAME: Steven Roth V Neil Finestone Rrheqi9 5 CIVIL CASE cover SHEET Complex Case Designation casennueer: ewes amount’ anon (J counter [7] Joinder — demanded demanded is Filed with first appearance by defendant . exceeds $25,000) _ $25,000 or less) (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.402) DEPT: items 1-6 below must be completed (see instructions on page 2). “}1. Check one box below for the case type that best describes this case: Auto Tort Contract Provisionally Complex Civil Litigation ‘Auto (22) Breach of contracwarranty (06) _ (Cal. Rulas of Court, rules 3.400~3.403) ' Uninsured motorist (46) Rule 3.740 collections (09) J antitrusutrade regulation (03) Other PUPDWD (Personal Injury/Property [__] Other collections (09) Construction defect (10) Damage/Wrongful Death) Tort (1 insurance coverage (18) C1 mass tort (40) Asbestos (04) (1 other contract (37) [2] securities ttigation (28) Product liability (24) Real Property [CD Environmenta/Toxic tort (30) eg. [J Medica! malpractice (45) Eminent domain/inverse Insurance coverage claims arising from the we | C2} otter Puen (23) condemnation (14) above listed provisionally complex case So! Non-PUPDAWD (Other) Tort [} wrongfut eviction (33) ‘ypes (41) Eo Business torvunfair business practice (07) L_| other real property (26) Enforcement of Judgment Bp [J civit rights (08) Unlawful Detainer [71 Enforcement of judgment (20) 4 [J betamation (13) Commercial (31) Miscellaneous Civil Complaint , [2] Fraua (16) Residential (32) C2 rico @7) 2) intetiectual property (19) C1 brugs (38) Other complaint (not specified above) (42) Professional negligence (25) dudicial Review Miscellaneous Civil Petition Other non-PYPDAWD tort (35) Asset forfeiture (05) Partnership and corporate govemance (21) mployment LJ Pettionre: arbitration award (11) [=] other petition (not speciied above) (43) eS Wrongful terinination (36) [J wit of mandate (02) Other employment (15) [1 other judiciat review (39) 2. This case [_]is is not complex under rule 3.400 of the California Rules of Court. If the case is complex, mark the factors requiring exceptional judicial management: ‘ al] Large number of separately represented parties af] Large number of witnesses. b. oO Extensive motion practice raising difficult or novel e. oO Coordination with related actions pending in one or more courts issues that will be time-consuming to resolve in other counties, states, or countries, or in a federal court c. J Substantial amount of documentary evidence ¢, (2) substantial postjudgment judicial supervision 3. Remedies sought (check all that apply): a. 4:Number of causes of action (specify): S..This case Os isnot aclass action suit. 6. af there are any known related cases, file and serve a notice of related case. (You may use form CM-015,) Date: March 11, 2014 . : SGA Steven Roth, Plaintiff in Pro Per (SIGNATURE OF PARTY OR ATTORNEY FOR PARTY) NOTICE {TYPE OR PRINT NAME) Plaintiff must file this cover sheet with the first paper filed in the action or proceeding (except small claims cases or cases filed #.Under the Probate Code, Family Code, or Welfare and Institutions Code). (Cal. Rules of Court, rule 3.220.) Failure to file may result gin sanctions. ‘*-File this cover sheet in addition to any cover sheet required by local court rule. a s-if this case is complex under rule 3.400 et seq. of the California Rules of Court, you must serve a copy of this cover sheet on all , other parties to the action or proceeding. Unless this is a collections case under rule 3.740 or a complex case, this cover sheet will be used for statistical purposes only. tora ae Form Adopled for CIVIL CASE COVER SHEET monetary b.[_] nonmonetary; declaratory or injunctive relief c. [punitive ‘Mandatory Use Judidal Caunal of Catifomia ‘Cal Rules of Court, rules 2.30, 3.220, 3.400-3.403, 3.740, Cal, Standar ‘CM-O10 (Rev. July 1, 2007] rds of Judicial Administration, std, 3.10 -courtinto.ca: ww ‘gov~ 3 . CM-010 . INSTRUCTIONS ON HOW TO COMPLETE THE COVER SHEET To Plaintiffs and Others Filing First Papers. If you are filing a first paper (for example, a complaint) in a civil case, you must complete and file, along with your first paper, the Civil Case Cover Sheet contained on page 1. This information will be used to compile statistics about the types and numbers of cases filed. You must complete items 1 through 6 on the sheet. In item 1, you must check «one box for the case type that best describes the case. If the case fits both a general and a more specific type of case listed in item 4, " check the more specific one. If the case has multiple causes of action, check the box that best indicates the primary cause of action. To assist you in completing the sheet, examples of the cases that belong under each case type in item 1 are provided below. A cover -sheet must be filed only with your initial paper. Failure to file a cover sheet with the first paper filed in a civil case may subject a party, its counsel, or both to sanctions under rules 2.30 and 3.220 of the California Rules of Court. To Parties in Rule 3.740 Collections Cases. A "collections case" under rule 3:740 is defined as an action for recovery of money owed in a sum stated to be certain that is not more than $25,000, exclusive of interest and attorney's fees, arising from a transaction in which property, services, or money was acquired on credit. A collections case does not include an action seeking the following: (1) tort damages, (2) punitive damages, (3) recovery of real property, (4) recovery of personal property, or (5) a prejudgment writ of “attachment. The identification of a case as a rule 3.740 collections case on this form means that it will be exempt from the general * time-for-service requirements and case management rules, unless a defendant files a responsive pleading. A rule 3.740 collections * case will be subject to the requirements for service and obtaining a judgment in rule 3.740. To Parties in Complex Cases. In complex cases only, parties must also use the Civil Case Cover Sheet to designate whether the case is complex. If a plaintiff believes the case is complex under rule 3.400 of the California Rules of Court, this must be indicated by completing the appropriate boxes in items 1 and 2. If a plaintiff designates a case as complex, the cover sheet must be served with the complaint on all parties to the action. A defendant may file and serve no later than the time of its first appearance a joinder in the plaintiffs designation, a counter-designation that the case is not complex, or, if the plaintiff has made no designation, a designation that the case is complex. CASE TYPES AND EXAMPLES Auto Tort Contract Provisionally Complex Civil Litigation (Cal. ‘Auto (22)-Personal Injury/Property Breach of ContraclWarranty (06) Rules of Court Rules 3.400-3.403) Damage/rongful Death Breach of Rental/Lease Antitrust/Trade Regulation (03) Uninsured Motorist (46) (if the Contract (not unlawful detainer Construction Defect (10) case involves an uninsured or wrongful eviction) Claims Involving Mass Tort (40) motorist claim subject to ContraclWarranty Breach—Seller Securities Litigation (28) arbitration, check this item Plaintiff (not fraud or negligence) Environmental/Toxic Tort (30) instead of Auto) Negligent Breach of Contac : Insurance Coverage Clas, DAWD farranty (arising from isi complex Property Damage virenatul Roath) Other Breach of ContraclWarranty case type listed above) (41) Tort Collections (e.g., money owed, apen Enforcement of Judgment Asbestos (04) Pook accounts) (09) Enforcement o amen Be a ‘Asbestos Property Dam: collection Case-Seller Plaintiff tract of Judgment (Out of Asbestos Personal injury Other Promissory Note/Collections County) Wrongful Death Case Confession of Judgment (non- Product Liability (not asbestos or Insurance Coverage (not provisionally domestic relations) toxic/environmental) (24) complex) (18) Sister State Judgment Medical Malpractice (45) Auto Subrogation Administrative Agency Award Medical Malpractice— . Other Coverage (not unpaid taxes) Physicians & Surgeons Other Contract (37) Petition/Certification of Entry of Other Professional Health Care Contractual Fraud Judgment on Unpaid Taxes Malpractice Other Contract Dispute Ofer Enforcement of Judgment ‘Other PUPDIWD (23) Real Property ‘ase Premises Liability (e.g., slip Eminent Domain/inverse Miscellaneous Civil Comptaint and fall) Condemnation (14) RICO (27) Intentional Bodily Injury/PDAWD- Wrongfut Eviction (33) Other Snore) ane (not specified {eg.. assault, vandalism) Other Real Property (e.g., quiet title) (26) Intentional Infietion of Sniiat Posen cai eal ronan Dect Retief Ony Emotional Distress Mortgage Foreclosure njune ive Relief Only (non- Negligent infliction of Quiet Title Mec! harassment) omer malonal Distress gine: Real Rroperty (not eminent ‘Other Commercial Complaint Non-PUPDIWD (Other) Tort . foreclosure) ome a (ron-torinan-complex) Business Tort/Unfair Business Unlawful Detainer ranttonhon a on Practice (07) Commercial (31) Miscellanecus con eee ‘Ceivit Rights (e.9., discrimination, Residential (32) Partnership and Corporate 44) false arrest) (not civil Drugs (38) (if the case involves illegal Governance (21) harassment) (08) drugs, check this item; otherwise, Other Petition (not specified sDefamation (e.g., slander, libel) report as Commercial or Residential) above) (43) «t Judicial Review inl Favacement Fraud (16) Asset Forfeiture (05) Workplace Violence wet Property (19) Petition Re: Arbitration Award (11) Elder/Dependent Adult fessional Negligence (25) ‘Writ of Mandate (02) “Abuse Legal Malpractice Writ-Administrative Mandamus Election Contest Other Professional Malpractice Writ-Mandamus on Limited Court Patiion for Name Che: BA emer ot medical or lege, Case Matter - Petiton for Rellet From Cate Enigioyine Nor-PUPDAND Tort (35) Writ-Other Limited Court Case Claim rongful Termination (36) other ea eview (3 39) Other Civil Petition fer Employment (15) Review of Health Officer Order is Notice of Appeal-Labor Commissioner Appeals ‘CM-010 fRav. July 1, 2007] Page2ota CIVIL CASE COVER SHEETeo 4 BC539135 ‘SHORT TITLE ‘CASE NUMBER * ” STEVEN ROTH V NEIL FINESTONE CIVIL CASE COVER SHEET ADDENDUM AND STATEMENT OF LOCATION (CERTIFICATE OF GROUNDS FOR ASSIGNMENT.TO COURTHOUSE LOCATION) This form is required pursuant to Local Rule 2.0 in all new civil case filings in the Los Angeles Superior Court. Item I. Check the types of hearing and fill in the estimated length of hearing expected for this case: yury TRIAL? WZ] yes ctass action? L] ves uimmep case? Loves Time estimaTeo FOR TRIAL 7___C1 Hours/ © pays * Item Il. Indicate the correct district and courthouse location (4 steps — If you checked “Limited Case’, skip to Item III, Pg. 4): Step 1: After first completing the Civil Case Cover Sheet form, find the main Civil Case Cover Sheet heading for your case in the left margin below, and, to the right in Column A, the Civil Case Cover Sheet case type you selected. Step 2: Check one Superior Court type of action in Column B below which best describes the nature of this case. Step 3: In Column C, circle the reason for the court location choice that applies to the type of action you have checked. For any exception to the court location, see Local Rule 2.0. Applicable Reasons for Choosing Courthouse Location (see Column C below) 2 4. Class actions must be filed in the Stanley Mosk Courthouse, central district. 6. Location of property or permanently garaged vehicle. uw 2. May be filed in central (other county, or no bodily injury/property damage). 7. Location where petitioner resides. . = 3. Location where cause of action arose. - 8. Location wherein defendant/respondent functions wholly. a 4. Location where bodily injury, death or damage occurred. 9. Location where one or more of re parties reside. 5. Location where performance required or defendant resides. 10. Location of Labor Commissioner Office Step 4: Fill in the information requested on page 4 in Item Ill; complete Item IV. Sign the declaration. As, . vos B. a . Cc Civil Case Cover Sheet . Type of Action . Applicable Reasons - Category No. , . (Check onlyone)) . See Step 3 Above er Auto (22) © A7100 Motor Vehicle - Personal Injury/Property Damage/Wrongful Death 1.,2..4. as © < Uninsured Motorist (46) | 0 A7110 Personal Injury/Property Damage/Wrongful Death - Uninsured Motorist | 1.,2., 4. D A6070 Asbestos Property Dama 2. Asbestos (04) erty nese 2 e D_ A7221 Asbestos - Personal Injury/Wrongful Death 2. o ~ evs Product Liability (24) O A7260 Product Liability (not asbestos or toxic/environmental) 4,234.4. 8. as = 4.3 2 1 A7210. Medical Malpractice - Physicians & Surgeons 144, ae Medical Malpractice (45) me vs ‘ae . 3 2 G._A7240 Other Professional Health Care Malpractice 1.44. s S a= 1 A7250 Premises Liability (e.g., stip and fall) 14 ee Personal injury (1 A7230 Intentional Bodily Injury/Property Damage/Wrongful Death (e.g. Jaa £8 Property Damage assault, vandalism, etc.) oe a ‘Wrong Death D_A7270 intentional infliction of Emotional Distress 14,3, be 1 A7220 Other Personal Injury/Property Damage/Wrongful Death 14. LACIV 109 (Rev. 03/11) . CIVIL CASE COVER SHEET ADDENDUM Local Rule 2.0 LASC Approved 03-04 AND STATEMENT OF LOCATION Page 1 of 4‘SHORT TIT “ STEVEN ROTH V NEIL FINESTONE CASE NUMBER. A lees B. c Civil Case Cover Sheet . ‘Type of Action ' Applicable Reasons - Category No. (Check only one) See Step 3 Above Business Tort (07) @ AG6029 Other Commercial/Business Tort (not fraud/breach of contract) 1,3. 2s Be Civil Rights (08) 1 A605. Civil Rights/Discrimination 1.,2.,3. ag 34 Defamation (13) 1 A6010 Defamation (slanderflibe!) 442,38 32 - = ? Fraud (16) 1 A6013: Fraud (no contract) 1.2.63, 5s BS 0 A6017 Legal Malpractice 1,243." eo Professional Negligence (25) °9 . . a ee 1 A6050 Other Professional Malpractice (not medical or legal) 1,243. 2o Other (35) A6025 Other Non-Personal Injury/Property Damage tort 2.3. 5 Wrongful Termination (368) | 0 A6037 Wrongful Termination 5 2 © A6024 Other Employment Complaint Case 1, 2., 3. & Other Employment (15) . wi 0D A6109 Labor Commissioner Appeals 10. ‘G A6004 Breach of Rental/Lease Contract (not unlawful detainer or wrongful ° eviction) 2.8, Breach oF eo Warranty © A6008 Contrac¥Warranty Breach -Seller Plaintiff (no fraud/negligence) 2.5. (not insurance) 1 AG019 Negligent Breach of ContractMWarranty (no fraud) 1428, 1D A6028 Other Breach of ContrattiWarranty (not fraud or negligence) 1,245. & 1 A602 Collections Case-Seller Plaintiff 2.5.6. g Collections (09) 8 O A6012 Other Promissory Note/Collections Case 2., 5. insurance Coverage (18) O A6015 Insurance Coverage (not complex) 1 A6009 Contractual Fraud 1.2.3.5. Other Contract (37) 1 6031 Tortious Interference 4.2.3.5. 1 A6027 Other Contract Dispute(not breach/insurance/fraud/negligence) 1a, 2a 3.8. Eminent arias 1D A7300 Eminent Domain/Condemnation * Number of parcels, 2 e Wrongful Eviction (33) | 0 A6023 Wrongful Eviction Case 2.6, S £ é O A6018 Mortgage Foreclosure a s Other Real Property (28) | C1 A6032 Quiet Title ~ 1D AS8060 Other Real Property (not eminent domain, landlord/tenant, foreclosure) sy Be = = ce | Unawul Detar rCommercial | ry Ago21 Unlawful Detainer-Commercial (not drugs ot wrongful eviction) 2.6. ed = - - a Unlawful Detainer-Residential | 4 ,g020 Unlawful Detainer-Residential (not drugs or wrongful eviction) 2.6. ' a Untawtul Detainer- . 5 ate elaine) | AB020F Uniawiul Detainer-Post-Forectosure 2.6. Ss = Unlawful Detainer-Drugs (38) | 0 A6022_ Unlawful Detainer-Drugs 2.6. 4 LACIV 109 (Rev. 03/11) CIVIL CASE COVER SHEET ADDENDUM Local Rule 2.0 LASC Approved 03-04 AND STATEMENT OF LOCATION Page 2 of 4‘SHORT TITLE: ‘CASE NUMBER STEVEN ROTH V NEIL FINESTONE “A . “Bo, c Civil Case Cover Sheet, - cad toy ‘Type of Action ~ . * | Applicable Reasons - Category No, _ |. . (Check only one). See Step 3 Above Asset Forfeiture (05) 0 A6108 Asset Forfeiture Case 2.6. 2 Petition re Arbitration (11) 0 A6115 Petition to Compel/Confirm/Vacate Arbitration 2,5. s 3 e © A6151 Writ - Administrative Mandamus 2.8. 3 3 Writ of Mandate (02) A6152 Writ - Mandamus on Limited Court Case Matter 2. 3 D_A6153 Writ - Other Limited Court Case Review 2 Other Judicial Review (39) | A6150 Other Writ /Judicial Review 2,8. 5 Antitrust/Trade Regulation (03) | A6003 AntitrustTrade Regulation 1, 2, 8. = Construction Defect (10) | (1 6007 Construction Defect 14.2.3. s ® - - 2 Claims iverson Mass Tort | 4 46008 Claims Involving Mass Tort 12,8. eS Q Securities Litigation (28) | ( A6035 Securities Litigation Case 1.,2.,8. a 5 Toxic Tort i i 2 Environmental (30) O A6036 Toxic TorvEnvironmental 1,,2..3..8. 2 Insurance Coverage Claims a from Complex Case (41) A614 Insurance Coverage/Subrogation (complex case only) 1D A6141 Sister State Judgment & =e 1 A6160 Abstract of Judgment 5 EE Enforcement 0 A6107 Confession of Judgment (non-domestic relations) 53 of Judgment (20) 1 AG140. Administrative Agency Award (not unpaid taxes) as A614 Petition/Certificate for Entry of Judgment on Unpaid Tax DD A6112 Other Enforcement of Judgment Case RICO (27) 1 A6033 Racketeering (RICO) Case 1.,2.,8,° o . 3 3 C1 A6030 Declaratory Relief Only 1.,2.,8. 2 1D A6040 injunctive Relief Only (not domestic/harassment) 2,8. 3 Other Complaints g (Not Specified Above) (42) | AG011 Other Commercial Complaint Case (non-tor¥non-complex) 1,,2,,8. 1 A6000 Other Civil Complaint (non-tortnon-complex) an, = = = ° Partnership romreaen (A613 Partnership and Corporate Governance Case’ 2.8. A wo Q A6121 Civil Harassment 2., 3.9. 3-5 Q A6123 Workplace Harassment 2.3.9. ee ES other Petitions C1 A6124. Elder/Dependent Adult Abuse Case 2.3.9. (Not Specified Above) 1 A6190 Election Contest 2. oO (43) a aS 1D A6110 Petition for Change of Name 2.7. © 1 A6170 Petition for Relief from Late Claim Law 2.,3..4., 8. oad A6100 Other Civil Petition 2.9. ts LACIV 109 (Rev. 03/11) CIVIL CASE COVER SHEET ADDENDUM Local Rule 2.0 LASC Approved 03-04 AND STATEMENT OF LOCATION Page 3 of 4fe SHORT TITLE: CASE NUMBER. STEVEN ROTH V NEIL FINESTONE Item III. Statement of Location: Enter the address of the accident, party's residence or place of business, performance, or other circumstance indicated in Item II., Step 3 on Page 1, as the proper reason for filing in the court location you selected. ‘ADDRESS: REASON: Check the appropriate boxes forthe numbers shown | NeilFinestone —- ' under Column C for the type of action that you have selected for | 9100 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 720E, Beverly Hills, CA 90212 this case. @1. 02. 3. 04. 05. 06. 07. 08. O9. 010. cerry: STATE: ZIP CODE: LOS ANGELES CA 90212 Item IV. Declaration of Assignment: | declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct and that the above-entitled matter is properly filed for assignment to the STANLEY MOSK courthouse in the CENTRAL District of the Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles [Code Civ. Proc., § 392 et seq., and Local Rule 2.0, subds. (b), (c) and (d)}. Dated: 3-11-2014 SFM # A (SIGNATURE OF ATTORNEYIFILING PARTY) PLEASE HAVE THE FOLLOWING ITEMS COMPLETED AND READY TO BE FILED IN ORDER TO PROPERLY COMMENCE YOUR NEW COURT CASE: 1. _ Original Complaint or Petition. 2. If filing a Complaint, a completed Summons form for issuance by the Clerk. 3. Civil Case Cover Sheet, Judicial Council form CM-010. 4 eM Case Cover Sheet Addendum and Statement of Location form, LACIV 109, LASC Approved 03-04 (Rev. 1). a Payment in full of the filing fee, unless fees have been waived. Asigned order appointing the Guardian ad Litem, Judicial Council form CIV-010, if the plaintiff or petitioner is a minor under 18 years of age will be required by Court in order to issue a summons. ‘ 7. Additional copies of documents to be conformed by the Clerk. Copies of the cover sheet and this addendum a must be served along with the summons and complaint, or other initiating pleading in the case. LAGIV 109 (Rev. 03/11) CIVIL CASE COVER SHEET ADDENDUM Local Rule 2.0 LASC Approved 03-04 AND STATEMENT OF LOCATION Page 4 of 4. 5 2116/2017 3:28:45 PM Chris Daniel - District Cl is County B vi ae WITHOS g i Ee See 17-1100 6 IC _ rt: 4 one conic Da . Browne. SBN 9357 - , 7 212 21900 Burbank Blvd., Suite 20 t ourt: Filed: 2/15/2017 2:12:22 PM Woodland Hills. CA 91367 J ' yore xo. 818 276-1925 . Faxnc ;Osboner 818 702-0910 Fite). ADORESE (Goroee dmbrownelaw@amail.com ATOR EY FOR temo! defendant Neil Finestone SUPERIOR GOURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES s U11N. Hill St. MAILING ADDRESS: crvanpapcooe Los Angeles. CA 90012 Srevornanc Stanley Mosk Courthouse | SHORT THLE: : i | Roth v. Finestone | + | 1 | | 1 t . . _COMMISSION TO TAKE DEPOSITION OUTSIDE CALIFORNIA ! BC539135 [| ORDERED BY COURT [4] ISSUED BY THE CLERK OF THE COURT > 1, The Superior Court of California hereby authorizes the deposition. upon oral examination, of {identity of deponent): Carzie Burkhead 2. The deposition is to be taken in (state of the United States. territory, or insular possession subject to its Jorisdiction): Texas 3. The dezosition will be conducted {check one): a. LY) Under the supervision of a persen who is authorized to administer oaths by the laws of the United States or those of the place where the examination is to be held and who is not othenwise disqualified under California Code of Civil Procedure sections 2025.320 and 2025.340(>}(f}): or db. Before (name of appointee}: who is appointed to administer oaths and to take testimony. 4. The documents or inings to be produced at the time and place of the deposition are described in Attachment4 __) none, 5. Additional terms required by the foreign jurisdiction to initiate the process are contained in Attachment 5. Number of pages attached: €. Unger California Coce of Civil Procedure section 2026.00, Cadfornia authorizes that a commission to take an out-of-state deposit.on may be issued by the clerk of the court or, if the foreign jurisdiction requires it, by order of the court 7. The Superior Court of the State of California hereby requests tnat prosess issue in the above-referenced place where the examination is to be held, requiring the attendance and enforcing the obligations of the deponent to produce documents and answer questions. SHERRI. CARTER dategany FO 200 gS Judge . OR 2 Clerk, by 7 Paget oft COMMISSION TO TAKE DEPOSITION OUTSIDE CALIFORNIA Form Agaro. Proc. § 2028 0104) ewe bourtin‘o. 2,900VME OLED COPY, ORIGINAL FILED Soparior Court Gt Califsraty SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA Reserved for CREE Fe Stamp COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES JAN 30 2017 "COURTHOUSE ADDRESS 477 Wf HILL STREET, LOS ANGELES, CA 90012 PLAINTIFF: : “Rete. DEFENDANT. ~ cu NES TO NET CASE NUMBER CIVIL DEPOSIT Bcs 34138y Clerk: Prepare a form for each depositor paying separately. Shorr’ R, Carter, Executive Otticer/Cta-k By. Charile , Corman. Deputy PLEASE REPORT TO THE CLERK'S OFFICE/CASHIER: ZB OD Room 102, Central Civil [] Clerk's Office, Room IE Department Number ¥_| Distribution Codes Amt, Due x Distribution Codes Amt, Due t_ | OAILY JURY FEES y 74 | DEPOSIT IN TRUST Dates__ . — # of dayis) xs 72 | JURY FEES ~ 101 FIRST PAPERS (General Jurisdiction) Trial Date: 7 a {lniuar Depos') $ REPORTER'S FEES FIRST PAPERS : 101 | Limited over $10,000 Dates - 141 | With declaration Limited to $10,000 (Per B&P 6322.1(a)) Hot% days) XS, 190 | Limited to $10,600. 253 | Half day 252 _| Full bay 721 | SANCTIONS ORDERED ON 2iT_|RECLASSIFIGATION FEE Bate: oe 213 | MOTIONIAPPLICATION TO CONTINUE HEARING 180 | COMPLEX LITIGATION TRIAL Plant 200 | MOTIOWAPPLICATION TO CONTINUE TRIAL MOTIONAPPLICATION TO CONTINUE 151_| COMPLEX LITIGATION/Defendant EO $5015 Se" Tobe pad via: Ccash i check 1 Certinted Check/Money Order [1] Credit Card Clon or before: __ C1 Forthwith Payment will be made by (] Plaintiff __ Ch@efendant + INS TON SHERRI R. CARTER, Executive Officer/Clerk DATED: |. Sm, 2ZOFL— BY: Deputy Clerk TO BE CONPLETED BY DEPOSITOR CASHIER'S VALIDATION Depositor’s Name: BNWT Mv \e f 55 Owns” Ld OFFIUE- : 1 Plaintiff in Pro Per () Defendant in Pro Per ExXGounse! for £1 Praintit Name of Parly Wy Gerendant_ NEM Riwes Tove Name of Party Address of depositor Sorre Z|la400 SB oRpBAWL, BWD ial Street oo Q \\ a ABC / City/State/Zip LACIV 083 (Rev, 07/15) LASC Approved 03-04 CIVIL DEPOSIT Distribution: Original - Case File Copy ~ Customer[TO)3OS5S 235 « 4 ae be Mg2/16/2017 3:28:45 PM Chris Daniel - District Clerk Harris County Envelope No: 15368415 - } i K tf st vy t : By: CUERO, NELSON 201 7 BOE? . 21 5 Filed: 2/15/2017 2:12:22 PM SUBPOENA FOR WITNESS DEPOSITION/SUBPOENA DUCES TECUM PURSUANT TO TEXAS RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE 176 AND 201 CAUSE NO. IN THE JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS STEVEN ROTH ys, NEIL RAPHAEL FINESTONE, etal. Plaintiff Defendant TO ANY SHERIFF OR CONSTABLE OF THE STATE OF TEXAS OR OTHER PERSON AUTHORIZED TO SERVE AND EXECUTE SUBPOENAS AS PROVIDED IN RULE 176 T.R.C.P. YOU ARE HEREBY COMMANDED TOSUMMON CARRIE BURKHEAD , Address located in or near the City/Town of County, Texas, to appear before , Notary Public/Court Reporter, at the offices of EDISON McDOWELL & HETHERINGTON, LLP located at First City Tower, 1001 Fannin, Ste. 2700 in the City/Town of. HOUSTON , HARRIS County, Texas, on the 10th day of MARCH 20 17 at 10:30A . M,, in order to give deposition as a witness on behalf of the Plaintiff/Defendant in the above styled Civil Action, to attend from day to day until lawfully discharged. SAID ABOVE NAMED WITNESS IS FURTHER COMMANDED to produce at said time and place set forth above, the following books, papers, documents, or other tangible things, to wit: DONOT FAIL to return this writ to said Court, with return thereon, showing the manner of execution. ISSUED this the 15th day of FEBRUARY AD., 20 17 CHRIS DANIEL, District Clerk Harris County, Texas 201 Caroline, Houston, Texas 77002 By: __ Deputy District Clerk Issued At Request Of Plaintiff/Defendant, DEFENDANT C/O McFALL, BREITBEIL & EIDMAN, PC Phone Number: (713) 590-9300 Address: 4400 POST OAK PARKWAY, STE. 2850, HOUSTON, TX 77027 OFFICER'S RETURN ON BACK CIVCPO2 Revised 2/17/2000SUBPOENA FOR WITNESS DEPOSITION SUBPOENA DUCES TECUM. RETURN Came to hand the day of 20 at o'clock __.M., and executed the day of . 20 ,at o’clock .M., by delivering to the within named in person at ' in County, Texas, a true copy of this Subpoena, and tendering said witness the sum of $ By Deputy: Sheriff/Constable County, Texas OR By: ‘ Person who is not a party to the suit, and is not Jess than 18 years of age. ACCEPTANCE OF SERVICE OF SUBPOENA BY WITNESS PER RULE 176 T.R.C.P. I, the undersigned witness named in the Subpoena acknowledge receipt of a copy thereof, and hereby accept service of the attached subpoena, and will appear in said court on said date and time directed in this subpoena. Rule 176.8(a) Contempt. Failure by any person without adequate excuse to obey a subpoena served upon that person may be deemed a contempt of the court from which the subpoena is issued or a district court in the county in which the subpoena is served, and may be punished by fine or confinement, or both. SIGNATURE OF WITNESS DATE FETC IEEE IEE IE IGT AIAG TCT TTI ATI II III TI IIIT IRI AIT TAI I AI AI AAI AD AAS A AAAS SAI A AAA erry Not executed as to the witness _- for the following reasons: FEE FOR SERVICE OF SUBPOENA: $ CIVCPO2 Revised 2/17/2000