On July 15, 2003 a
Party Statement
was filed
involving a dispute between
Gwen R. Sykes,
and
Douglas Sykes,
for Unlimited Civil
in the District Court of Alameda County.
Preview
QT-26-2004
-
11:87
1 STEVEN.
FROM
PISER,
° SBN 62414
= 7-150
F |
P|
LE D
Hh |
LAW OFFICES OF STEVEN B. PISER AL
y 2. A Professional Corporation AMEDA COUNTY
‘ 499 Fourteenth Street, Suite 210 J 6
3 Oakland, California 94612 UL 2 6 2004
4 Telephone 510-835-5582 CLERK OF THE SUPERIOR COURT
Attomey for Defendant Py Cnet inecicsScaeae
5 Douglas G. Sykes Deputy
6
7
8 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
9 IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF ALAMEDA
10
' GWEN R. SYKES, ) Case No. RG03106646
i )
Plaintiff, ) DECLARATION OF STEVEN B. PISER
12 ) IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR ORDER
v. ) GRANTING PRIOR SEPARATE TRIAL
13 ) OF ISSUE OF VALIDITY OF
DOUGLAS SYKES, an individual, DOES 1 ) PRENUPTIAL AGREEMENT
14 through 20, inclusive, )
)
15 Defendants } Date: Aupnst 26, 2004
) Time: 9:00 a.m.
16 ) Dept: 136
600 Washington Street, Oakland, C
17 Trial Date: October 1,200¢ BY FA
18 I, Steven B. Piser, declare:
19 1. Y am an attorney at law duly admitted to practice before all the courts of the State
20 of California and the attomey of record herein for defendant Douglas Sykes. J have personal
21 knowledge of the facts set forth herein, and ifcalled to testify, would and could testify
22 competently thereto.
23 2. Plaintiff Gwendolyn Sykes’ complaint prays judgment against defendant for
24 damages (1) breach of express and implied oral contracts based on alleged agreements between
25 her and Doug that (a) essentially Doug would support her for the rest of her life and (6) she would
Legal
By
26 co-own a home in Berkeley with him [First and Second Causes of Action]; (2) a constructive must
Filed
One
27 on the Berkeley home [Third Cause of Action]; (3) promissory frand with respect to the alleged
2 contracts [Fourth Cause of Action]; (4) negligence and battery for allegedly infecting Gwen with
iv,0)
1
LawUlfices
of
STEVEN
B. PISER
DECL, OF STEVEN B,PISER ISO MOTION FOR ORDER GRANTING PRIOR SEPARATE TRIAL ON ISSUE OF
VALIDITY OF PRENUPTIAL AGREEMENT
2@@4 11:58 PAGE .@3
JUL 26
QT-26-2004 = 11:57 FROM? e T1580 P.010/012 Fedi5
herpes [Fifth and Seventh Causes of Action]; and (5) fraud for allegedly misrepresenting to Gwen
bv that he did not have a sexually transmitted disease when he knew that he did [Sixth Cause of
Action].
w
3. Defendant has filed an answer in which he has denied the allegations of the
&
complaint and has set up the defense that a prenuptial agreement (containing a waiver and release
YA WN
of claims) entered into between them in October 2000 establishes a complete bar to all of Gwen’s
causes of action.
4, Plaintiff has demanded a jury trial.
wom
5, The convenience of the parties and witnesses, the ends of justice, and the economy
wD
10 and efficiency of handling the litigation will be promoted by trying the issue of the validity and
l enforceability of the prenuptial agreement before trying all the other issues inthe case for these
12 reasons:
13 _& I estimate that the trialof this action will take approximately 4-5 weeks.
14 (b) I estimate that approximately 3-4 days of that time will be necessary to try
15 the issue of the validity and enforceability of the prenuptial agreement.
16 (c) I anticipate that six witnesses (including Gwen and Doug) will be called to
17 testify on the issue of the prenuptial agreement. Except for the parties, none of these witnesses
18 will also testify on the remaining issues in the case.
19 (d) The parties have disclosed upwards of 40 potential, non-expert witnesses
20 for trial of non-premarital agreement issues,
21 I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the
22 foregoing is tue and correct.
23 Executed this 23" day of July 2004 at Oakland, California.
24
25
26 Steven B. Piser
27
28
2
LawOffices
of
STEVEN
B. PISER
DECL. OF STEVEN B. PISER ISO MOTION FOR ORDER GRANTING PRIOR SEPARATE TRIAL ON ISSUE OF
VALIDITY OF PRENUPTIAL AGREEMENT
PAGE. 14
JUL 26 2084 11:58
Document Filed Date
July 26, 2004
Case Filing Date
July 15, 2003
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
Preview
QT-26-2004 - 11:87 1 STEVEN. FROM PISER, ° SBN 62414 = 7-150 F | P| LE D Hh | LAW OFFICES OF STEVEN B. PISER AL y 2. A Professional Corporation AMEDA COUNTY ‘ 499 Fourteenth Street, Suite 210 J 6 3 Oakland, California 94612 UL 2 6 2004 4 Telephone 510-835-5582 CLERK OF THE SUPERIOR COURT Attomey for Defendant Py Cnet inecicsScaeae 5 Douglas G. Sykes Deputy 6 7 8 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 9 IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF ALAMEDA 10 ' GWEN R. SYKES, ) Case No. RG03106646 i ) Plaintiff, ) DECLARATION OF STEVEN B. PISER 12 ) IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR ORDER v. ) GRANTING PRIOR SEPARATE TRIAL 13 ) OF ISSUE OF VALIDITY OF DOUGLAS SYKES, an individual, DOES 1 ) PRENUPTIAL AGREEMENT 14 through 20, inclusive, ) ) 15 Defendants } Date: Aupnst 26, 2004 ) Time: 9:00 a.m. 16 ) Dept: 136 600 Washington Street, Oakland, C 17 Trial Date: October 1,200¢ BY FA 18 I, Steven B. Piser, declare: 19 1. Y am an attorney at law duly admitted to practice before all the courts of the State 20 of California and the attomey of record herein for defendant Douglas Sykes. J have personal 21 knowledge of the facts set forth herein, and ifcalled to testify, would and could testify 22 competently thereto. 23 2. Plaintiff Gwendolyn Sykes’ complaint prays judgment against defendant for 24 damages (1) breach of express and implied oral contracts based on alleged agreements between 25 her and Doug that (a) essentially Doug would support her for the rest of her life and (6) she would Legal By 26 co-own a home in Berkeley with him [First and Second Causes of Action]; (2) a constructive must Filed One 27 on the Berkeley home [Third Cause of Action]; (3) promissory frand with respect to the alleged 2 contracts [Fourth Cause of Action]; (4) negligence and battery for allegedly infecting Gwen with iv,0) 1 LawUlfices of STEVEN B. PISER DECL, OF STEVEN B,PISER ISO MOTION FOR ORDER GRANTING PRIOR SEPARATE TRIAL ON ISSUE OF VALIDITY OF PRENUPTIAL AGREEMENT 2@@4 11:58 PAGE .@3 JUL 26 QT-26-2004 = 11:57 FROM? e T1580 P.010/012 Fedi5 herpes [Fifth and Seventh Causes of Action]; and (5) fraud for allegedly misrepresenting to Gwen bv that he did not have a sexually transmitted disease when he knew that he did [Sixth Cause of Action]. w 3. Defendant has filed an answer in which he has denied the allegations of the & complaint and has set up the defense that a prenuptial agreement (containing a waiver and release YA WN of claims) entered into between them in October 2000 establishes a complete bar to all of Gwen’s causes of action. 4, Plaintiff has demanded a jury trial. wom 5, The convenience of the parties and witnesses, the ends of justice, and the economy wD 10 and efficiency of handling the litigation will be promoted by trying the issue of the validity and l enforceability of the prenuptial agreement before trying all the other issues inthe case for these 12 reasons: 13 _& I estimate that the trialof this action will take approximately 4-5 weeks. 14 (b) I estimate that approximately 3-4 days of that time will be necessary to try 15 the issue of the validity and enforceability of the prenuptial agreement. 16 (c) I anticipate that six witnesses (including Gwen and Doug) will be called to 17 testify on the issue of the prenuptial agreement. Except for the parties, none of these witnesses 18 will also testify on the remaining issues in the case. 19 (d) The parties have disclosed upwards of 40 potential, non-expert witnesses 20 for trial of non-premarital agreement issues, 21 I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the 22 foregoing is tue and correct. 23 Executed this 23" day of July 2004 at Oakland, California. 24 25 26 Steven B. Piser 27 28 2 LawOffices of STEVEN B. PISER DECL. OF STEVEN B. PISER ISO MOTION FOR ORDER GRANTING PRIOR SEPARATE TRIAL ON ISSUE OF VALIDITY OF PRENUPTIAL AGREEMENT PAGE. 14 JUL 26 2084 11:58