Preview
09/07/2007 15:25 FAX 415 352 0988 ROECA HAAS HAGER, LLP o12
EDWARD D. HAAS (State Bar # 76647) FILED BY FAX
RUSSELL §. ROECA (State Bar # 97297) ALAMEDA COUNTY
He
DANIEL W. HAGER (State Bar # 121515) September 07, 2007
ROECA HAAS HAGER LLP
180 Sutter Street, Suite 200 CLERK OF _
WY
San Francisco, CA 94104 THE SUPERIOR COUR
By Robbi Mcintosh, Depu
Telephone: (415) 352-0980
FSF
Facsimile: (415) 352-0988 CASE NUMBER:
RG06279317
HH
Attorneys for Defendants
| THE MICHAEL BLUMENFELD CORPORATION as
DO
successor in interest to THE MICHAEL BLUMENFELD
LAW CORPORATION, MICHAEL BLUMEMFELD, a
NN
Professional Corporation, and MICHAEL JOEL
BLUMENFELD, deceased
fo
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA
oO
So
ie
COUNTY OF ALAMEDA
140 Sutter Sureet, Suite 200, San Francisco, CA 94104
VELMA SONNY-SONIA, a.k.a. VELMA
i
415.352.0980 Fax 415.352.0988
Case No. RG-06279317
SONIA,
Roeca Haas Hager LLP
UU
a
REPLY STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED
Plaintiff, MATERIAL FACTS IN SUPPORT OF
a
MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
vs.
DATE: August 7, 2007
THE MICHAEL BLUMENFELD LAW TIME: 9:00 am.
ee
CORPORATION, MICHAEL DEPT.: 520
NRO
BLUMENFELD a Professional
Corporation, MICHAEL JOEL
BLUMENFELD, deceased, and DOES 1 RESERVATION #: 710090
through 50, inclusive,
we
Re
ACTION FILED: July 14, 2006
Defendants. TRIAL DATE: April 25, 2008
Oo
SF
Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure § 437c(b), defendants The Michael Blumenfeld
KF
ROR
Corporation, as successor in interest to The Michael Blumenfeld Law Corporation, Michael
ee
NO
Blumenfeld, a Professional Corporation, and Michael Joel Blumenfeld, deceased (“defendants”),
WwW
RO
NM
pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure § 437c(b)(1), submit the following reply statement of
| undisputed material facts and supporting evidence in support of their motion for summary
Mw
NN
NH
judgment. Defendants also object to portions of the “evidence” offered by plaintiff.
SN
MN
ao
REPLY STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
! CASE NO. RG-06279317
09/07/2007 15:26 FAX 415 352 0988 ROECA HAAS HAGER, LLP ois
|
1 |! PLAINTIFF'S SUIT IS BARRED BY THE STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS
a) | SS RED a
Gan
3 | ae ee i
ae i fis A na FEA
HT
4 || 1. nearly 2001, plaintiff UNDISPUTED. Plaintiff admits.
retained defendant Michael J.
5 || Blumenfeld (“Blumenfeld”) to
file a Chapter 13 bankruptcy
6 ||| petition on her behalf and to
litigate an adversarial
7 || proceeding against Mark and
Clifton Wainwright.
8 Complaint For Negligence,
9 Breach of Contract, Breach of
Fiduciary Duty, Negligent
19 || Infliction of Emotional
Distress (July 4, 2006), Velma
3 11 ||| Senny-Sonia, a.k.a, Velma
z Sonny vy, The Michael
g 2 Blumenfeld Law Corporation,
22 Michael Joel Blumenfeld, a
S25 43 ||| Professional Corporation,
TEA Michael Joel Blumenfeld,
#E= 14 ||| deceased, Case No.
nee RG06280213 (“Complaint”) {
Se 195 || 15; Michael Blumenteld, A
age Professional Corporation,
= =E8 416 || Standard Hourly Legal Fee
a2 0 and Retainer Agreement
5 17 ||| Gated January 5, 2001 and
a attached to Complaint),
= 1g || Request for Judicial Notice
Exhibit 5
19 |
20 |
21 |
22 |!
|
23 |
24 |
25 |
26 |
27 |
28
i REPLY STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
CASE NO. RG-06279317
| 2
09/07/2007 15:26 FAX 415 352 0988 ROECA HAAS HAGER, LLP oi4
ae
P i
ie Ce iekendo in
bk
2. Qn or about May 9, 2001, Plaintiff admits.
WwW
Blumenfeld filed an adversary
proceeding in bankruptcy
&R
court against Mark and Clifton
Wainwright on behalf of
ta
plaintiff.
SD
Complaint 17; Complaint to
Determine the Nature and
Extent of Lien; Quiet Title;
Expungement of Deed of
Trust; Fraud; Breach of
Fiduciary Duty; Constructive
Fraud; and Statutory
10 Violations, Jn re: Velma
Sonny-Sonia, a.k.a. Velma
11
Sonny, Case No. 01-41125
180 Sutter Street, Suite 200, San Francisco, CA 94104
NG-13; Felma Sonny-Sonia,
12 a.k.a, Velma Sonny v. Mark
Wainwright; Clifion
415.352.0980 Fax 415.352.0988
13 Wainwright, a.k.a. Clifton
Roeca Haas Hager LLP
Wainwright d.b.a. Hillview
14 Properties, Adv. Proceeding
No. (May 9, 2001), Request
15 for Judicial Notice Exhibit 1
16 3, On or about May 19, 2003, DISPUTED. Matthew J. The stated fact that, on or
defendant Blumenfeld Webb substitute [sic] into the about May 19, 2003, defendant
17 formally withdrew from case to represent Plaintiff in Blumenfeld withdrew from
representing plaintiff in both regard to the adversarial representing plaintiff in both
18 her bankruptcy case and proceeding against the her bankruptcy case and
adversarial proceeding. Wainwrights, and later Lone adversarial proceeding is
19 Eagle only. Declaration of wholly undisputed by plaintiff.
Notice of Substitution of Matthew J. Webb in Support
20 Counsel Debtor (May 19, of Opposition to Motion for Plaintiff merely adds the
2003), United States Summary Judgment, TJ 2 contention that Matthew Webb
21 Bankruptcy Court for the through 4. substituted into the case to
Northern District of Califormia, represent plaintiff in regard to
22 in In re Velma Sonny-Sonia, the adversarial proceeding, and
a.k.a. Velma Sonny v, Mark cites to the Declaration of
23 Wainwright, et al., Case No. Matthew Webb in Support of
1901-41125 NG-13, Adversary Opposition to Motion for
24 Proceeding No. 01-4166, Summary Judgement (“Webb
Request for Judicial Notice Declaration”). It is notable
25 Exhibit 2 that the Webb Declaration also
does not dispute the stated
26 fact, but contains only
plaintiff's very limited
27 contention regardmg Webb’s
substitution.
28
REPLY STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
CASE NO. RG-06279317
3
09/07/2007 15:26 FAX 415 352 0988 ROECA HAAS HAGER, LLP ois
ee
i
We bo
u Y it
4, On or about March 3, 2004,
UNDISPUTED. Plaintiff admits.
plaintiff filed suit against
defendant Blumenfeld for
Be
negligence, breach of contract,
breach of fiduciary duty, and
Ww
negligent infliction of
emotional distress. Plaintiff
DH
alleged that defendants
committed a wrongful act and
~TI
that she was actually harmed.
oo
! 1
Plaintiff alleged then precisely
as she alleges now:
Oo
10 “Because the Lis Pendens had
not been filed, Lone Eagle is
ll now attempting to take title to
180 Sutter Street, Suite 200, San Francisoo, CA 94104
the Subject Property, without
12 regard to the dispute between
the Wainwrights, claiming he
418.352.0980 Fax 415.352.0088
13 is a bona fide purchaser,
Roeca Haas Hager LLP
Plaintiff, therefore, has been
14 forced to litigate this issue,
expend significant funds doing
15 so, and may lose title to the
Subject Property.”
16
Complaint for Malpractice:
17 Negligence, Breach of
Contract, Breach of Fiduciary
18 Duty, Negligent Infliction of
Emotional Distress (March 3,
19 2004), Superior Court of
California, County of
20 Alameda, Velma Sonny-Sonia,
a.k.a. Velma Sonny v. Michael
21 |\F. Blumenfeld, an individual,
The Michael Blumenfeld Law
22 Corporation, and Michael Joel
Blumenfeld, a Professional
23 Corporation, Case No.
R.G04149832, Request for
24 Judicial Notice Exhibit 3
25
26
27
28
REPLY STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR, SUMMARY JUDGMENT
CASE NO. RG-06279317
4
09/07/2007 15:26 FAX 415 352 0988 ROECA HAAS HAGER, LLP dois
a an
he
5. Plaint UNDISPUTED. Plaintiff admits.
Ww
suit without prejudice on
) October 26, 2005.
6B
Request for Dismissal
aA
(October 26, 2005), Superior
Court of California, County of
Alameda, Vela Sonny-Sonia,
NH
a.k.a. Velma Sonny v. Michael
J. Blumenfeld, an individual,
The Michael Blumenfeld Law
wo
Corporation, and Michael Joel
Blumenfeld, a Professional
wo
Corporation, Case No.
10 RG04149332, Request for
Judicial Notice Exhibit 4
2 11 V6. ptaintiff filed this - her DISPUTED. Plaintiff filed the | The complaint was filed on
4 42 ||| second suit - against suit at issue against defendants | July 14, 2006.
g 8 defendants on July 4, 2006. on July 14, 2006.
Seo 43 Defendants made a
wea typographical error.
ss 14
4 |
F gé
Bee 15
a B a 16 |
F * 17 Defendants respond as follows to “Plaintiffs Additional Disputed and Undisputed Facts.”
5 |
= 18 eye Pan = 1 :
19 He Ae EG any
0 '1. Defendant Blumenfeld failed to file and | Immaterial to the present motion.
record a Lis Pendens, thereby giving public
5 notice of the proceeding, when the
I complaint was filed on May 9, 2001, or any
22 time subsequent to the filing of the |
complaint.
23 Wlo The complaint was served n or about Immaterial to the present motion.
oy May 25, 2001. That same day, Mark
Wainwright assigned his alleged interest in
05 the promissory note and deed of trust to
John Loan [sic] Eagle. A default was filed
26 against Mark Wainwright, Clifton
Wainwright, a.k.a. Clifton Wainwright d/b/a
27 Hillview Properties on or about July 1, 2001.
|
28
REPLY STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT
! CASE NO. RG-06279517
1 5
09/07/2007 15:26 FAX 415 352 0988 ROECA HAAS HAGER,LLP o17
a a 7 SOLAS IR is ee
i
WwW
3. On February 14, 2002, Lone Eagle filed a Immaterial to the present motion.
WwW
proof of claim, however, Defendants did not
file an objection to the claim.
BR
4, On February 22, 2002, Judge Newsome Immaterial to the present motion.
aA
entered a default against the Wainwright
[sic], which in affect ordered that the Note
was null and void due to fraud.
5. In April 2002, Lone Eagle sought to Immaterial to the present motion.
intervene to answer the Complaint, claiming
he was unaware of the judgment declaring
the note null and void.
10 6. In May 2002, the Trustee Martha Immaterial to the present motion.
Bronitsky notified Blumenfeld that the
il transmittal of the Blumenfeld Proof of
180 Sutter Street, Suite 200, San Francisco, CA 94104
Claim had been processed and that the
12 Trustee would begin to pay the claim in 90
days.
415.352.0980 Fax 415.352.0988
13
Roeca Haas Hager LLP
7. Blumenfeld wrote a letter to the court of Immaterial to the present motion.
14 June 14, 2002 stating his belief that no
further action need occur with regard to the
15 application to intervene “in light of the fact
that a judgment has been entered.”
16
8. In June 2002, Plaintiff submitted an It is undisputed that, in June 2002, plaintiff
17 Application to Dismiss Chapter 13 submitted an Application to Dismiss Chapter 13
Bankruptcy Case Without Prejudice, upon Bankruptcy Case Without Prejudice, upon the
18 the advice of Defendants, but retained advice of Defendants.
Defendants should any other matters arise in
19 relation to the Bankruptcy. Plaintiff advanced funds to defendant Blumenfeld
for what they “anticipated would be further
20 litigation in state court conceming the note and
deed of trust which was assigned to Lone Eagle.”
21 The remainder of those funds were returned to
plaintiff in March 2003.
22
Thus, plaintiff's argument at to what transpired in
23 June 2002 is imrnaterial to Blumenfeld
subsequent withdrawal from any further
24 representation a year later.
25 March 12, 2003 letter from Michael Blumenfeld
to Velma Sonny Sonia, attached as Exhibit A to
26 Declaration of Helga Gruber.
27
28
REPLY STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR SUMMA
Preview
09/07/2007 15:25 FAX 415 352 0988 ROECA HAAS HAGER, LLP o12 EDWARD D. HAAS (State Bar # 76647) FILED BY FAX RUSSELL §. ROECA (State Bar # 97297) ALAMEDA COUNTY He DANIEL W. HAGER (State Bar # 121515) September 07, 2007 ROECA HAAS HAGER LLP 180 Sutter Street, Suite 200 CLERK OF _ WY San Francisco, CA 94104 THE SUPERIOR COUR By Robbi Mcintosh, Depu Telephone: (415) 352-0980 FSF Facsimile: (415) 352-0988 CASE NUMBER: RG06279317 HH Attorneys for Defendants | THE MICHAEL BLUMENFELD CORPORATION as DO successor in interest to THE MICHAEL BLUMENFELD LAW CORPORATION, MICHAEL BLUMEMFELD, a NN Professional Corporation, and MICHAEL JOEL BLUMENFELD, deceased fo SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA oO So ie COUNTY OF ALAMEDA 140 Sutter Sureet, Suite 200, San Francisco, CA 94104 VELMA SONNY-SONIA, a.k.a. VELMA i 415.352.0980 Fax 415.352.0988 Case No. RG-06279317 SONIA, Roeca Haas Hager LLP UU a REPLY STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED Plaintiff, MATERIAL FACTS IN SUPPORT OF a MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT vs. DATE: August 7, 2007 THE MICHAEL BLUMENFELD LAW TIME: 9:00 am. ee CORPORATION, MICHAEL DEPT.: 520 NRO BLUMENFELD a Professional Corporation, MICHAEL JOEL BLUMENFELD, deceased, and DOES 1 RESERVATION #: 710090 through 50, inclusive, we Re ACTION FILED: July 14, 2006 Defendants. TRIAL DATE: April 25, 2008 Oo SF Pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure § 437c(b), defendants The Michael Blumenfeld KF ROR Corporation, as successor in interest to The Michael Blumenfeld Law Corporation, Michael ee NO Blumenfeld, a Professional Corporation, and Michael Joel Blumenfeld, deceased (“defendants”), WwW RO NM pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure § 437c(b)(1), submit the following reply statement of | undisputed material facts and supporting evidence in support of their motion for summary Mw NN NH judgment. Defendants also object to portions of the “evidence” offered by plaintiff. SN MN ao REPLY STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT ! CASE NO. RG-06279317 09/07/2007 15:26 FAX 415 352 0988 ROECA HAAS HAGER, LLP ois | 1 |! PLAINTIFF'S SUIT IS BARRED BY THE STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS a) | SS RED a Gan 3 | ae ee i ae i fis A na FEA HT 4 || 1. nearly 2001, plaintiff UNDISPUTED. Plaintiff admits. retained defendant Michael J. 5 || Blumenfeld (“Blumenfeld”) to file a Chapter 13 bankruptcy 6 ||| petition on her behalf and to litigate an adversarial 7 || proceeding against Mark and Clifton Wainwright. 8 Complaint For Negligence, 9 Breach of Contract, Breach of Fiduciary Duty, Negligent 19 || Infliction of Emotional Distress (July 4, 2006), Velma 3 11 ||| Senny-Sonia, a.k.a, Velma z Sonny vy, The Michael g 2 Blumenfeld Law Corporation, 22 Michael Joel Blumenfeld, a S25 43 ||| Professional Corporation, TEA Michael Joel Blumenfeld, #E= 14 ||| deceased, Case No. nee RG06280213 (“Complaint”) { Se 195 || 15; Michael Blumenteld, A age Professional Corporation, = =E8 416 || Standard Hourly Legal Fee a2 0 and Retainer Agreement 5 17 ||| Gated January 5, 2001 and a attached to Complaint), = 1g || Request for Judicial Notice Exhibit 5 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 |! | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 i REPLY STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT CASE NO. RG-06279317 | 2 09/07/2007 15:26 FAX 415 352 0988 ROECA HAAS HAGER, LLP oi4 ae P i ie Ce iekendo in bk 2. Qn or about May 9, 2001, Plaintiff admits. WwW Blumenfeld filed an adversary proceeding in bankruptcy &R court against Mark and Clifton Wainwright on behalf of ta plaintiff. SD Complaint 17; Complaint to Determine the Nature and Extent of Lien; Quiet Title; Expungement of Deed of Trust; Fraud; Breach of Fiduciary Duty; Constructive Fraud; and Statutory 10 Violations, Jn re: Velma Sonny-Sonia, a.k.a. Velma 11 Sonny, Case No. 01-41125 180 Sutter Street, Suite 200, San Francisco, CA 94104 NG-13; Felma Sonny-Sonia, 12 a.k.a, Velma Sonny v. Mark Wainwright; Clifion 415.352.0980 Fax 415.352.0988 13 Wainwright, a.k.a. Clifton Roeca Haas Hager LLP Wainwright d.b.a. Hillview 14 Properties, Adv. Proceeding No. (May 9, 2001), Request 15 for Judicial Notice Exhibit 1 16 3, On or about May 19, 2003, DISPUTED. Matthew J. The stated fact that, on or defendant Blumenfeld Webb substitute [sic] into the about May 19, 2003, defendant 17 formally withdrew from case to represent Plaintiff in Blumenfeld withdrew from representing plaintiff in both regard to the adversarial representing plaintiff in both 18 her bankruptcy case and proceeding against the her bankruptcy case and adversarial proceeding. Wainwrights, and later Lone adversarial proceeding is 19 Eagle only. Declaration of wholly undisputed by plaintiff. Notice of Substitution of Matthew J. Webb in Support 20 Counsel Debtor (May 19, of Opposition to Motion for Plaintiff merely adds the 2003), United States Summary Judgment, TJ 2 contention that Matthew Webb 21 Bankruptcy Court for the through 4. substituted into the case to Northern District of Califormia, represent plaintiff in regard to 22 in In re Velma Sonny-Sonia, the adversarial proceeding, and a.k.a. Velma Sonny v, Mark cites to the Declaration of 23 Wainwright, et al., Case No. Matthew Webb in Support of 1901-41125 NG-13, Adversary Opposition to Motion for 24 Proceeding No. 01-4166, Summary Judgement (“Webb Request for Judicial Notice Declaration”). It is notable 25 Exhibit 2 that the Webb Declaration also does not dispute the stated 26 fact, but contains only plaintiff's very limited 27 contention regardmg Webb’s substitution. 28 REPLY STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT CASE NO. RG-06279317 3 09/07/2007 15:26 FAX 415 352 0988 ROECA HAAS HAGER, LLP ois ee i We bo u Y it 4, On or about March 3, 2004, UNDISPUTED. Plaintiff admits. plaintiff filed suit against defendant Blumenfeld for Be negligence, breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty, and Ww negligent infliction of emotional distress. Plaintiff DH alleged that defendants committed a wrongful act and ~TI that she was actually harmed. oo ! 1 Plaintiff alleged then precisely as she alleges now: Oo 10 “Because the Lis Pendens had not been filed, Lone Eagle is ll now attempting to take title to 180 Sutter Street, Suite 200, San Francisoo, CA 94104 the Subject Property, without 12 regard to the dispute between the Wainwrights, claiming he 418.352.0980 Fax 415.352.0088 13 is a bona fide purchaser, Roeca Haas Hager LLP Plaintiff, therefore, has been 14 forced to litigate this issue, expend significant funds doing 15 so, and may lose title to the Subject Property.” 16 Complaint for Malpractice: 17 Negligence, Breach of Contract, Breach of Fiduciary 18 Duty, Negligent Infliction of Emotional Distress (March 3, 19 2004), Superior Court of California, County of 20 Alameda, Velma Sonny-Sonia, a.k.a. Velma Sonny v. Michael 21 |\F. Blumenfeld, an individual, The Michael Blumenfeld Law 22 Corporation, and Michael Joel Blumenfeld, a Professional 23 Corporation, Case No. R.G04149832, Request for 24 Judicial Notice Exhibit 3 25 26 27 28 REPLY STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR, SUMMARY JUDGMENT CASE NO. RG-06279317 4 09/07/2007 15:26 FAX 415 352 0988 ROECA HAAS HAGER, LLP dois a an he 5. Plaint UNDISPUTED. Plaintiff admits. Ww suit without prejudice on ) October 26, 2005. 6B Request for Dismissal aA (October 26, 2005), Superior Court of California, County of Alameda, Vela Sonny-Sonia, NH a.k.a. Velma Sonny v. Michael J. Blumenfeld, an individual, The Michael Blumenfeld Law wo Corporation, and Michael Joel Blumenfeld, a Professional wo Corporation, Case No. 10 RG04149332, Request for Judicial Notice Exhibit 4 2 11 V6. ptaintiff filed this - her DISPUTED. Plaintiff filed the | The complaint was filed on 4 42 ||| second suit - against suit at issue against defendants | July 14, 2006. g 8 defendants on July 4, 2006. on July 14, 2006. Seo 43 Defendants made a wea typographical error. ss 14 4 | F gé Bee 15 a B a 16 | F * 17 Defendants respond as follows to “Plaintiffs Additional Disputed and Undisputed Facts.” 5 | = 18 eye Pan = 1 : 19 He Ae EG any 0 '1. Defendant Blumenfeld failed to file and | Immaterial to the present motion. record a Lis Pendens, thereby giving public 5 notice of the proceeding, when the I complaint was filed on May 9, 2001, or any 22 time subsequent to the filing of the | complaint. 23 Wlo The complaint was served n or about Immaterial to the present motion. oy May 25, 2001. That same day, Mark Wainwright assigned his alleged interest in 05 the promissory note and deed of trust to John Loan [sic] Eagle. A default was filed 26 against Mark Wainwright, Clifton Wainwright, a.k.a. Clifton Wainwright d/b/a 27 Hillview Properties on or about July 1, 2001. | 28 REPLY STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT ! CASE NO. RG-06279517 1 5 09/07/2007 15:26 FAX 415 352 0988 ROECA HAAS HAGER,LLP o17 a a 7 SOLAS IR is ee i WwW 3. On February 14, 2002, Lone Eagle filed a Immaterial to the present motion. WwW proof of claim, however, Defendants did not file an objection to the claim. BR 4, On February 22, 2002, Judge Newsome Immaterial to the present motion. aA entered a default against the Wainwright [sic], which in affect ordered that the Note was null and void due to fraud. 5. In April 2002, Lone Eagle sought to Immaterial to the present motion. intervene to answer the Complaint, claiming he was unaware of the judgment declaring the note null and void. 10 6. In May 2002, the Trustee Martha Immaterial to the present motion. Bronitsky notified Blumenfeld that the il transmittal of the Blumenfeld Proof of 180 Sutter Street, Suite 200, San Francisco, CA 94104 Claim had been processed and that the 12 Trustee would begin to pay the claim in 90 days. 415.352.0980 Fax 415.352.0988 13 Roeca Haas Hager LLP 7. Blumenfeld wrote a letter to the court of Immaterial to the present motion. 14 June 14, 2002 stating his belief that no further action need occur with regard to the 15 application to intervene “in light of the fact that a judgment has been entered.” 16 8. In June 2002, Plaintiff submitted an It is undisputed that, in June 2002, plaintiff 17 Application to Dismiss Chapter 13 submitted an Application to Dismiss Chapter 13 Bankruptcy Case Without Prejudice, upon Bankruptcy Case Without Prejudice, upon the 18 the advice of Defendants, but retained advice of Defendants. Defendants should any other matters arise in 19 relation to the Bankruptcy. Plaintiff advanced funds to defendant Blumenfeld for what they “anticipated would be further 20 litigation in state court conceming the note and deed of trust which was assigned to Lone Eagle.” 21 The remainder of those funds were returned to plaintiff in March 2003. 22 Thus, plaintiff's argument at to what transpired in 23 June 2002 is imrnaterial to Blumenfeld subsequent withdrawal from any further 24 representation a year later. 25 March 12, 2003 letter from Michael Blumenfeld to Velma Sonny Sonia, attached as Exhibit A to 26 Declaration of Helga Gruber. 27 28 REPLY STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR SUMMA