Preview
08-27-2004 13:07 FROM- AG?
MSE
—P.002.
STEVEN
LAW
A
B.
OFFICES
PISER,
Professional
OF
SBN
STEVEN
Corporation
62414
B. PISER. FILED
ALAMEDA COUNTY
bo
499 Fourteenth Street, Suite 210
Oakland, California 94612 AUG 2 7 2004
WwW
Telephone 510-835-5582
CLERK OF THE SUPERIOR COURT
BS
Attomey
Douglas
for
G.
Defendant
Sykes
py Malis fr Wap
Y Deputy
Ww
A
sa
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF ALAMEDA
10
1] GWEN R. SYKES, Case No, RG03106646
Sema!
Sige” Neve” Sec! Nene
12 Plaintiff, DEFENDANT’S OBJECTIONS TO
EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY PLAINTIFF
13 Vv. IN OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR
SUMMARY JUDGMENT OR, IN THE
Neng
14 DOUGLAS SYKES, an individual, DOES 1 ALTERNATIVE, SUMMARY
Snare
. through 20, inclusive, ADJUDICATION
ree
15
Nee” Sine”
Defendants Date: August 31, 2004
16 Time: 2:00 p.m.
eee
Dept: 31
3Y FAX
See
17 Reservation No.: 365153
18 Trial Date: October 1,2004
19 Defendant Douglas Sykes objects to the following evidence submitted by plaintiffin her
20 opposition to defendant’s motion for summary judgment:
21 Declaration ofGwen Sykes:
22 Paragraph 3: Defendant objects toparagraph 3 on the grounds of relevance.
Legal
By
23 Paragraph 4: Defendant objects toparagraph 4 on the grounds of relevance.
Filed
24 Paragraph 5: Defendant objects tothe firstsentence ofparagraph 5 on the grounds of
One
25 relevance, Defendant objects to the second sentence of paragraph 5 based upon relevance and on
26 the grounds that itis an inadmissible opinion.
27 Paragraph 6: Defendant objects tothe firstsentence of paragraph 6 on the grounds thatit
28 contains inadmissible opinion (“Upon having my firstsevere genital herpes outbreak”).
lawOffices of
STEVEN
B. PISER
DEFENDANT'S OBJECTIONS TO EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY PLAINTIFF INOPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR
SUMMARY JUDGMENT OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
FRON- @ ou. P.003/005 F-080
08-27-2004 13:08
Defendant objects to the entirety of paragraph 6 on the grounds ofrelevance.
ed
Paragraph 7: Defendant objects toparagraph 7 on the grounds of relevance.
| >
Paragraph 8: Defendant objects toparagraph 8 on the grounds of relevance.
WwW
Paragraph 9: Defendant objects toparagraph 9 on the grounds of relevance.
f
Paragraph 10: Defendant objects to paragraph 10 on the grounds of relevance.
NH
ND
Paragraph 14: Defendant objects to paragraph 14 pursuant to the provisions of California
Evidence Code section 1523(a) in thattestimony is not permitted to “prove the content of a
writing.”
Fe
Paragraph 18: Defendant objects to the entirety of paragraph 18 based upon the parol
oOo
10 evidence rule. Califomia Code of Civil Procedure section 1856(a). Itis undisputed that this
1] agreement was an integrated agreement, and the provisions that plaintiffseeks to assertare
12 facially inconsistent with the agreement. See Banco do Brasil, S.A. v.Latian, Inc.(1991) 234
Cal.App.4™ 995, 1010.
14 Paragraph 19: Defendant objects to the entirety of paragraph 19 based upon the paral
15 evidence role. California Code of Civil Procedure section 1856(a). It isundisputed thatthis
16 agreement was an integrated agreement, and the provisions that plaintiffseeks to assertare
17 facially inconsistent with the agreement. See Banco do Brasil, S.A. v, Latian, Inc. (1991) 234
18 Cal.App.4™ 995, 1010.
19 Paragraph 22: Defendant objects to the firstsentence of paragraph 22 based upon the
20 parol evidence role. California Code of Civil Procedure section 1856(a). Itis undisputed that this
21 agreement was an integrated agreement, and the provisions that plaintiffseeks to assertare
22 facially inconsistent with the agreement. See Banco do Brasil, S.A. y.Latian, Inc. (1991) 234
23 Cal.App.4™ 995, 1010.
24 Paragraph 23: Defendant objects to thatportion of paragraph 23 commencing atline 22
25 with the word “within,” through and including the word “infection” on line24, on the grounds
26 that theproffered evidence ishearsay and inadmissible opinion.
27 Paragraph 26: Defendant objects to the Jastsentence of paragraph 26 on the grounds of
28 relevance.
2
LawOffices of
STEVEN
8. PISER
DEFENDANT’S OBJECTIONS TO EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY PLAINTIFF INOPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR
SUMMARY JUDGMENT OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
@::: P.o04/005 F-050
08-27-2004 13:08 FROM- @
Paragraph 27: Defendant objects to paragraph 27 on the grounds of relevance.
Paragraph 28; Defendant objects to paragraph 28 on the grounds of relevance.
Paragraph 29: Defendant objects to paragraph 29 on the grounds of relevance.
Paragraph 31: Defendant objects to paragraph 31 on the grounds of relevance.
Paragraph 32: Defendant objects to paragraph 32 on the grounds ofrelevance.
od
oi
Paragraph 33: Defendant objects and moves to strike paragraph 33 on the grounds of
nn?)
relevance.
Paragraph 36: Defendant objects to paragraph 36 on the grounds ofrelevance.
Paragraph 38: Defendant objects to paragraph 38 on the grounds of inadmissible opinion.
10 Paragraph 40: Defendant objects to paragraph 40 and Exhibit B on the grounds of
1 relevance.
12 Defendant requests thatall objections be sustained and that the proffered testimony be
13 stricken,
14 Dated: August 27, 2004 LAW OFFICES,@F STEVEN B. PISER
15
16
17
/ Steven B. Piser
18 Attorney for Defendant
Douglas Sykes
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3
low Offices of
STEVEN
B. PISER
DEFENDANT’S OBJECTIONS TO EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY PLAINTIFF IN OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR
SUMMARY JUDGMENT OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
@ 467 P.008/005 F-050
08-27-2004 13:08 FROM- @
Sykes v,Sykes
Alameda County Superior Court Action No. RGQ3 106840 & RGO3 106646
YL
PROOF OF SERVICE BY MAIL
YS
I,Carole Aubuchon, declare asfollows:
RO
I am employed in Alameda County, California, am over eighteen years of age, and
A
am not a party to the within action or proceeding. My business address is 499 Fourteenth
ND
Street, Suite 210, Oakland, California 94612.
NO
I served a copy of the following documents:
C6
DEFENDANT’S OBJECTIONS TO EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY PLAINTIFF IN
OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT OR, IN THE
Co
ALTERNATIVE, SUMMARY ADJUDICATION
by placing said copy sealed inan envelope(s) addressed as follows:
il
Hab Siam
12 2921 South Winchester Blvd.
Campbell, California 95008
13
with postage thereon fully prepaid, and thereafter was deposited in the United States Mail
14
at Oakland, California. That there is adelivery service by the United States Mail atthe
15 place addressed. That the date of deposit inthe mail was August 27, 2004.
16 I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed
August 27, 2004, at Oakland, California.
17
18
19
Carole Aubuchon
20
21
22
24
25
26
27
28
Preview
08-27-2004 13:07 FROM- AG? MSE —P.002. STEVEN LAW A B. OFFICES PISER, Professional OF SBN STEVEN Corporation 62414 B. PISER. FILED ALAMEDA COUNTY bo 499 Fourteenth Street, Suite 210 Oakland, California 94612 AUG 2 7 2004 WwW Telephone 510-835-5582 CLERK OF THE SUPERIOR COURT BS Attomey Douglas for G. Defendant Sykes py Malis fr Wap Y Deputy Ww A sa IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF ALAMEDA 10 1] GWEN R. SYKES, Case No, RG03106646 Sema! Sige” Neve” Sec! Nene 12 Plaintiff, DEFENDANT’S OBJECTIONS TO EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY PLAINTIFF 13 Vv. IN OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT OR, IN THE Neng 14 DOUGLAS SYKES, an individual, DOES 1 ALTERNATIVE, SUMMARY Snare . through 20, inclusive, ADJUDICATION ree 15 Nee” Sine” Defendants Date: August 31, 2004 16 Time: 2:00 p.m. eee Dept: 31 3Y FAX See 17 Reservation No.: 365153 18 Trial Date: October 1,2004 19 Defendant Douglas Sykes objects to the following evidence submitted by plaintiffin her 20 opposition to defendant’s motion for summary judgment: 21 Declaration ofGwen Sykes: 22 Paragraph 3: Defendant objects toparagraph 3 on the grounds of relevance. Legal By 23 Paragraph 4: Defendant objects toparagraph 4 on the grounds of relevance. Filed 24 Paragraph 5: Defendant objects tothe firstsentence ofparagraph 5 on the grounds of One 25 relevance, Defendant objects to the second sentence of paragraph 5 based upon relevance and on 26 the grounds that itis an inadmissible opinion. 27 Paragraph 6: Defendant objects tothe firstsentence of paragraph 6 on the grounds thatit 28 contains inadmissible opinion (“Upon having my firstsevere genital herpes outbreak”). lawOffices of STEVEN B. PISER DEFENDANT'S OBJECTIONS TO EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY PLAINTIFF INOPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, SUMMARY ADJUDICATION FRON- @ ou. P.003/005 F-080 08-27-2004 13:08 Defendant objects to the entirety of paragraph 6 on the grounds ofrelevance. ed Paragraph 7: Defendant objects toparagraph 7 on the grounds of relevance. | > Paragraph 8: Defendant objects toparagraph 8 on the grounds of relevance. WwW Paragraph 9: Defendant objects toparagraph 9 on the grounds of relevance. f Paragraph 10: Defendant objects to paragraph 10 on the grounds of relevance. NH ND Paragraph 14: Defendant objects to paragraph 14 pursuant to the provisions of California Evidence Code section 1523(a) in thattestimony is not permitted to “prove the content of a writing.” Fe Paragraph 18: Defendant objects to the entirety of paragraph 18 based upon the parol oOo 10 evidence rule. Califomia Code of Civil Procedure section 1856(a). Itis undisputed that this 1] agreement was an integrated agreement, and the provisions that plaintiffseeks to assertare 12 facially inconsistent with the agreement. See Banco do Brasil, S.A. v.Latian, Inc.(1991) 234 Cal.App.4™ 995, 1010. 14 Paragraph 19: Defendant objects to the entirety of paragraph 19 based upon the paral 15 evidence role. California Code of Civil Procedure section 1856(a). It isundisputed thatthis 16 agreement was an integrated agreement, and the provisions that plaintiffseeks to assertare 17 facially inconsistent with the agreement. See Banco do Brasil, S.A. v, Latian, Inc. (1991) 234 18 Cal.App.4™ 995, 1010. 19 Paragraph 22: Defendant objects to the firstsentence of paragraph 22 based upon the 20 parol evidence role. California Code of Civil Procedure section 1856(a). Itis undisputed that this 21 agreement was an integrated agreement, and the provisions that plaintiffseeks to assertare 22 facially inconsistent with the agreement. See Banco do Brasil, S.A. y.Latian, Inc. (1991) 234 23 Cal.App.4™ 995, 1010. 24 Paragraph 23: Defendant objects to thatportion of paragraph 23 commencing atline 22 25 with the word “within,” through and including the word “infection” on line24, on the grounds 26 that theproffered evidence ishearsay and inadmissible opinion. 27 Paragraph 26: Defendant objects to the Jastsentence of paragraph 26 on the grounds of 28 relevance. 2 LawOffices of STEVEN 8. PISER DEFENDANT’S OBJECTIONS TO EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY PLAINTIFF INOPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, SUMMARY ADJUDICATION @::: P.o04/005 F-050 08-27-2004 13:08 FROM- @ Paragraph 27: Defendant objects to paragraph 27 on the grounds of relevance. Paragraph 28; Defendant objects to paragraph 28 on the grounds of relevance. Paragraph 29: Defendant objects to paragraph 29 on the grounds of relevance. Paragraph 31: Defendant objects to paragraph 31 on the grounds of relevance. Paragraph 32: Defendant objects to paragraph 32 on the grounds ofrelevance. od oi Paragraph 33: Defendant objects and moves to strike paragraph 33 on the grounds of nn?) relevance. Paragraph 36: Defendant objects to paragraph 36 on the grounds ofrelevance. Paragraph 38: Defendant objects to paragraph 38 on the grounds of inadmissible opinion. 10 Paragraph 40: Defendant objects to paragraph 40 and Exhibit B on the grounds of 1 relevance. 12 Defendant requests thatall objections be sustained and that the proffered testimony be 13 stricken, 14 Dated: August 27, 2004 LAW OFFICES,@F STEVEN B. PISER 15 16 17 / Steven B. Piser 18 Attorney for Defendant Douglas Sykes 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 3 low Offices of STEVEN B. PISER DEFENDANT’S OBJECTIONS TO EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY PLAINTIFF IN OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT OR, IN THE ALTERNATIVE, SUMMARY ADJUDICATION @ 467 P.008/005 F-050 08-27-2004 13:08 FROM- @ Sykes v,Sykes Alameda County Superior Court Action No. RGQ3 106840 & RGO3 106646 YL PROOF OF SERVICE BY MAIL YS I,Carole Aubuchon, declare asfollows: RO I am employed in Alameda County, California, am over eighteen years of age, and A am not a party to the within action or proceeding. My business address is 499 Fourteenth ND Street, Suite 210, Oakland, California 94612. NO I served a copy of the following documents: C6 DEFENDANT’S OBJECTIONS TO EVIDENCE SUBMITTED BY PLAINTIFF IN OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT OR, IN THE Co ALTERNATIVE, SUMMARY ADJUDICATION by placing said copy sealed inan envelope(s) addressed as follows: il Hab Siam 12 2921 South Winchester Blvd. Campbell, California 95008 13 with postage thereon fully prepaid, and thereafter was deposited in the United States Mail 14 at Oakland, California. That there is adelivery service by the United States Mail atthe 15 place addressed. That the date of deposit inthe mail was August 27, 2004. 16 I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed August 27, 2004, at Oakland, California. 17 18 19 Carole Aubuchon 20 21 22 24 25 26 27 28