Sbbt Deposits of Federal Refunds

Document Sample
Sbbt Deposits of Federal Refunds Powered By Docstoc
					 1    Court jbrown@sbCourts.org

 2

 3

 4

 5

 6

 7

 8                      SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
 9                                FOR THE COUNTY OF SANTA BARBARA
10                                          )              Case No.: 1156354
      CANIEVA HOOD, et al,                  )
11                                          )              COMPLEX CASE MANAGEMENT
                                            )              ORDER,
12                              Plaintiffs, )
      vs.                                   )              ASSIGNED JUDGE: Hon. James W Brown
13                                          )              DEPARTMENT:     Four
      SANTA BARBARA BANK & TRUST et al., )                 HEARING DATE: August 8, 2007
14                                          )              TIME:           1:30 pm
                                Defendants. )
15                                          )
                                            )
16                                          )
      And Related Cross-Actions             )
17                                          )
18
                  On December 1, 2004 the Court designated this matter as complex litigation under
19
     the California Standards of Judicial Administration.
20
                  The purpose of this order is to establish a case management plan for this complex
21
     litigation in order to avoid inconsistent or duplicative rulings, reduce the costs of litigation, assist
22
     the parties in resolving their disputes and reduce the costs and difficulties of discovery and trial.
23
     This complex case management order supersedes all prior complex case management orders in
24
     this case.
25
                  On any matter about which this order is silent, the Code of Civil Procedure, other
26
     statutes, the California Rules of Court, and the local rules of this Court shall be controlling.
27
                  On August 8, 2007 a complex case management conference was conducted in this
28
     matter. An unofficial copy of this Order may be posted on the Court’s web page at


                                         Complex Case Management Order - 1
 1   http://www.sbCourts.org/general_info/judicial_officers/jbrown/ as a convenience to Court
 2   and counsel, but the filed order entered by the Court is the only operative order. The parties
 3   stipulated and agreed that the e-mail by the Court to the e-mail address provided by
 4   counsel is equivalent to service as of the date of the e-mail and further notice of this Order
 5   is waived.
 6                The Court considered at the conference, pursuant to Appendix to California Rules of
 7   Court, Div I, section 19(e) (Initial Case Management Conference, Complex Litigation), and Rule
 8   212(i) of the California Rules of Court (Case Management Conference, Generally), the following
 9   subjects, and makes the following orders:
10   1. SEVERANCE, BIFURCATION, CONSOLIDATION OR COORDINATION (App. to
11      CRC, Div I, §19(e)(2))
12
           1.1.     Severance
13                  The Cross-Complaint is ordered bifurcated for purposes of a separate trial, which
14   shall occur after the trial on the underlying Applicable Amended Complaint. Notwithstanding
15   this order of severance, the Cross-Defendants may participate in the litigation of the underlying
16   Fifth Amended Complaint, and the Answers and Special Answers relating thereto, to the extent
17   reasonably necessary to protect their interests.
18         1.2.     Consolidation
19         1.3.     Coordination
20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28




                                        Complex Case Management Order - 2
 1   2. STATUS OF THE PARTIES AND PLEADINGS
 2
            2.1.       Current Status
 3     Operative Pleading:
         06-15-07 Complaint Fifth Amended for Violations of Consumer Legal Remedies Act Robbins-Rosenthal
 4     Fair Debt Collection Practices Act etc, Filed by Plaintiff Canieva Hood
                 Party Plaintiff                                         Parties Defendant
 5     Canieva Hood                            Santa Barbara Bank & Trust, Pacific Capital Bank NA, Tax
                                               Services of America Inc, Jackson Hewitt Tax Service, Inc. Jackson
                                               Hewitt Inc
 6

 7              Party Defendant              Served     Severed    Demurrer     Answer     Dismissed    Judgment
                                                                   Motion to
 8                                                                  Strike

 9     Santa Barbara Bank & Trust                                  8/8/07
       Pacific Capital Bank NA                                     8/8/07
10     Tax Services of America Inc                                 8/8/07
       Jackson Hewitt Inc                                          8/8/07
11     Jackson Hewitt Tax Service, Inc.
       Household Bank, FSB                                         5/1/07       special
       Beneficial National Bank                                    5/1/07       special
12
       Household Tax Masters, Inc                                  5/1/07       special
       JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A.,                                  5/1/07       special
13     Successor by Merger to Bank One,
       N.A. (Ohio),
14     River City Bank Inc aka River City                          5/1/07       special
       Bank
15     Republic Bank & Trust                                       5/1/07       special

16
     Defendants SBBT and all cross-defendants filed three motions with the Court of Appeal seeking
17
     a stay of the remittitur in the Court of Appeal based on their intent to file a petition for certiorari
18
     with the United States Supreme Court. SBBT filed its petition for writ of certiorari with the
19
     United States Supreme Court on April 2, 2007. Plaintiffs filed their opposition on May 3, 2007.
20
     According to the Supreme Court docket, the petition was distributed to the Court on May 15,
21
     2007 for the May 31, 2007 conference. The Supreme Court denied the petition on June 4, 2007.
22

23

24

25

26

27

28




                                               Complex Case Management Order - 3
 1

 2                    On March 20, 2007, the Court of Appeal denied defendants’ and cross-
 3   defendants’ latest motion for a further stay and issued the remittitur. In light of the Court of
 4   Appeal’s now final September 28, 2006 decision reversing this Court’s judgment, the stay is
 5   hereby lifted as to all parties.
 6     Operative Pleading:   10-12-04 Cross Complaint of Defts Santa Barbara Bank & Trust and Pacific Capital
       Bank, Filed by Defendant and deemed to apply to the Fourth Amended Complaint
 7          Party Cross-Complainant                              Parties Cross-Defendant
       Santa Barbara Bank & Trust           Republic First Bank of Delaware, First Bank of Deleware aka
 8                                          Republic First Bank of Delaware, Bank One NA Ohio, First Security
                                            Bank of Mackinaw Illinois, Republic Bank & Trust Company, River
                                            City Bank Inc aka River City Bank
 9
       Pacific Capital Bank
10
                Party Defendant             Served    Severed   Demurrer     Answer    Dismissed   Judgment
                                                                Motion to
11                                                               Strike

12     Republic First Bank of Delaware                                      Deemed
                                                                            Filed
13                                                                          5/25/07
       First Bank of Deleware aka                                           Deemed
       Republic First Bank of Delaware                                      Filed
14
                                                                            5/25/07
       Bank One NA Ohio                                                     Deemed
15                                                                          Filed
                                                                            5/25/07
16     First Security Bank of Mackinaw                                      Deemed
       Illinois                                                             Filed
17                                                                          5/25/07
       Republic Bank & Trust Company                                        Deemed
18                                                                          Filed
                                                                            5/25/07
       River City Bank Inc aka River City                                   Deemed
19
       Bank                                                                 Filed
                                                                            5/25/07
20     Household Bank, F.S.B., Beneficial                                   Deemed
       National Bank, Household Tax                                         Filed
21     Masters, Inc. and JPMorgan Chase                                     5/25/07
       Bank, N.A., Successor by Merger to
22     Bank One, N.A. (Ohio)

23

24

25

26

27

28




                                             Complex Case Management Order - 4
 1

 2     Operative Pleading:

 3                  Party Plaintiff                             Parties Defendant

 4

 5              Party Defendant           Served   Severed   Demurrer    Answer     Dismissed   Judgment
                                                             Motion to
                                                              Strike
 6

 7

 8

 9
             2.2.        Deadline and Orders on the Status of Parties and Pleadings
10
             2.3.        Cross-Actions Deemed Filed, Served And Answered
11
                         Santa Barbara Bank & Trust v. Household Bank, FSB et al.
12
             2.4.        Pleadings Deemed Filed
13
                     Pursuant to the stipulation by the parties, the Fourth Amended Complaint is deemed
14
     filed and served as of May 11, 2007. Pursuant to the Court’s May 24, 2007 Order After Hearing
15
     granting plaintiff leave to amend, the Fifth Amended Complaint was filed and served on June 15,
16
     2007.
17
             Pursuant to the Stipulation among the parties, Defendants' Answers to the Third
18
     Amended Complaint, filed on October 12, 2004 and November 19, 2004, and Cross-Defendants'
19
     Special Answer to the Third Amended Complaint, filed on December 10, 2004, shall be deemed
20
     responsive to the Fifth Amended Complaint and timely filed subject to the right of any defendant
21
     or cross-defendant to file a new answer at its option, but no previously answering defendant or
22
     cross-defendant shall be required to do so. Any new answers and the answer of any newly-
23
     named defendant to the Fifth Amended Complaint shall be filed no later than August 30, 2007.
24
                     Defendants' Cross-Complaint, filed on October 12, 2004 in connection with the
25
     Third Amended Complaint, shall be deemed re-filed as of July 24, 2007 in connection with the
26
     Fifth Amended Complaint. Cross-Defendants' Answers to the Cross-Complaint, filed on
27

28




                                           Complex Case Management Order - 5
 1   December 6, 2006, shall be deemed responsive to the Cross-Complaint and timely filed subject
 2   to the right of any cross-defendant to timely file a new answer at its option.
 3                Defendants’ Answers to the Third Amended Complaint, filed on October 12, 2004
 4   and November 19, 2004, and Cross-Defendants’ Special Answer to the Third Amended
 5   Complaint, filed on December 10, 2004, shall be deemed responsive to the Fourth Amended
 6   Complaint and timely filed subject to the right of any defendant or cross-defendant to timely file
 7   a new answer at its option.
 8                Defendants’ Cross-Complaint, filed on October 12, 2004 in connection with the
 9   Third Amended Complaint, shall be deemed re-filed as of t his date in connection with the
10   Fourth Amended Complaint. Cross-Defendants’ Answers to the Cross-Complaint, filed on
11   December 6, 2006, shall be deemed responsive to the Cross-Complaint and timely filed subject
12   to the right of any cross-defendant to timely file a new answer at its option.
13
           2.5.      Express Indemnity Claims
14                   Santa Barbara Bank & Trust v. Household Bank, FSB et al.
15   3. COUNSEL
16
           3.1.      Master Counsel List
17                   The master list of counsel, their e-mail addresses and the parties is: (App. to CRC,
18   Div I, §19(e)(11)):
19          NAME                           E-MAIL ADDRESS                  PARTY
            James Sturdevant, Esq.         jsturdevant@sturdevantlaw.com   Plaintiffs
20          Monique Olivier, Esq.           molivier@sturdevantlaw.com
            The Sturdevant Law Firm
21          475 Sansome Street, Suite
            1750
            San Francisco, CA 94111
22
            Telephone: (415) 477-2410
            Facsimile: (415) 477-2420
23          Stuart Rossman, Esq.           srossman@nclc.org               Plaintiffs
            Chi Chi Wu, Esq.               cwu@nclc.org
24          The National Consumer Law
            Center
25          77 Summer Street, 10th Floor
            Boston, MA 02110
            Telephone: (617) 542-8010
26
            Facsimile: (617) 542-8028
            Julia B. Strickland, Esq.      jstrickland@stroock.com         Cross-Defendants Household Bank, F.S.B.;
27          Stephen J. Newman, Esq.        snewman@stroock.com             Beneficial National Bank; Household Tax
            Deborah E. Barack, Esq.        dbarack@stroock.com             Masters, Inc.; Bank One, N.A.; and Republic
28          Stroock & Stroock & Lavan                                      First Bank




                                            Complex Case Management Order - 6
 1   2029 Century Park East, Ste.
     1800
 2   Los Angeles, CA 90067-3086
     Telephone: (310) 556-5800
 3   Facsimile: (310) 556-5959
     Nancy M. Lee, Esq               nlee@stroock.com                Household Tax Masters, Inc.; Bank One,
     Stroock & Stroock & Lavan       lacalendar@strook.com           N.A.; and Republic First Bank
 4
     2029 Century Park East, Ste.
     1800
 5   Los Angeles, CA 90067-3086
     Telephone: (310) 55605800
 6   Facsimile: (310) 556-5959
     David J. Reis, Esq.             dreis@howardrice.com            Cross-Defenants Republic Bank & Trust and
 7   Howard Rice Nemerovski                                          River City Bank
     Canady Falk & Rabkin
     Three Embarcadero Center,
 8
     7th Floor
     San Francisco, CA 94111-
 9   4024
     Telephone: (415) 434-1600
10   Facsimile: (415) 217-5910
     Christopher C. Kearney, Esq.    cck@kvn.com                     Cross-Defendants Republic First Bank and
11   Keker & Van Nest                                                First Bank of Delaware
     710 Sansome Street
12   San Francisco, CA 94111-
     1704
     Telephone: 415-391-5400
13   Facsimile: 415-397-7188
     Michael M. Hirn, Esq.           michael.hirn@dinslaw.com        River City Bank and Republic Bank and
14   John E. Selent, Esq.            john.selent@dinslaw.com         Trust
     Dinsmore & Shohl LLP
15   1400 PNC Plaza
     500 W. Jefferson Street
16   Louisville, KY 40202
     Telephone: (502) 540-2344
     Facsimile: (502) 585-2207
17

18   D. Ronald Ryland                rryland@smrh.com                Defendant and Cross-Complainant Santa
     Sheppard, Mullin, Richer &                                      Barbara Bank & Trust, a division of Pacific
19   Hampton LLP                                                     Capital Bank, N.A. and Pacific Capital Bank,
     4 Embarcadero Center, 17th                                      N.A.
20   Floor
     San Francisco, Ca. 94111
     Telephone: (415) 434-9100
21
     Facsimile: (415) 434-3947

22   John F. Dienelt, Esq.           John.dienelt@dlapiper.com;      Defendants, Jackson Hewitt Inc.; Jackson-
     DLA Piper US LLP                                                Hewitt Tax Service, Inc. and Tax Services of
23   1200 Nineteenth Street, N.W.                                    America
     Washington, D.C. 20036-
24   2412
     Telephone: (202) 861-3900
     Facsimile: (202) 223-2085
25
     William P. Donovan, Jr., Esq.   william.donovan@dlapiper.com;   Defendants, Jackson-Hewitt; Jackson-Hewitt
     DLA Piper Rudnick Gray                                          Tax Service, Inc. .; and Tax Services of
26   Cary US LLP                                                     America
     1999 Avenue of the Stars
27   Fourth Floor
     Los Angeles, CA 90067-6022
28   Telephone: (310) 595-3000
     Facsimile: (310) 595-3300



                                      Complex Case Management Order - 7
 1           Michael Heumann, Esq.             mheumann@nossaman.com          Cross-Defendant First Security Bank of
             Nossaman, Guthner, Knox &                                        Mackinaw, IL
 2           Elliott, LLP
             445 S. Figueroa St., 31st Floor
 3           Los Angeles, CA 90071-1602
             Telephone: (213) 612-7800
             Facsimile: (213) 612-7801
 4
             Brendan Macaulay, Esq.            bmacaulay@nossaman.com         Cross-Defendant First Security Bank of
             Nossaman, Guthner, Knox &                                        Mackinaw, IL
 5           Elliott, LLP
             50 California St., 34th Floor
 6           San Francisco, California
             94111-4799
 7           Telephone: (415) 398-3600
             Facsimile: (415) 398-2438
 8

 9

10
     jsturdevant@sturdevantlaw.com; molivier@sturdevantlaw.com; jstrickland@stroock.com; snewman@stroock.com;
11   dbarack@stroock.com; srossman@nclc.org; cwu@nclc.org; dreis@howardrice.com; michael.hirn@dinslaw.com;
     john.selent@dinslaw.com; rryland@smrh.com; John.dienelt@dlapiper.com; william.donovan@dlapiper.com;
12   mheumann@nossaman.com; bmacaulay@nossaman.com; cck@kvn.com; nlee@stroock.com; lacalendar@stroock.com

13
            3.2.      Liaison Counsel
14
                      Liaison counsel are appropriate in this case. (App. to CRC, Div I, §19(e)(6); CRC,
15
     Rules 1501(l), 1501(r) and 1506)).
16
                      The liaison counsel and the groups they represent are (App. to CRC, Div I,
17
     §19(e)(6); CRC, Rules 1501(l), 1501(r) and 1506)):
18
          GROUP           NAME OF LAISON COUNSEL                          ADDRESS                     PHONE & FAX
19    Cross-Defendants    Julia B. Strickland, Esq.,          Stroock & Stroock & Lavan            Telephone: (310) 556-
                          Stephen J. Newman, Esq. and         2029 Century Park East,              5800
20                        Deborah E. Barack, Esq.             Los Angeles, CA 90067-3086           Facsimile: (310) 556-
                          Nancy M. Lee, Esq                                                        5959
21

22
            3.3.         Liaison Groups
23
                      The master list of the Liaison Groups is:
24
      GROUP                 PARTY                                            COUNSEL

25

26

27

28




                                                Complex Case Management Order - 8
 1
           3.4.       Pro Hac Vice Admission of Counsel
 2          Stuart Rossman and Chi Chi Wu of the National Consumer Law Center, attorneys for
 3   plaintiffs, have been admitted to this Court Pro Hac Vice.
 4          Michael Hirn and John Selent of Dinsmore & Shohl LLP, attorneys for cross-defendants
 5   River City Bank and Republic Bank and Trust have been admitted to this Court Pro Hac Vice.
 6         John F. Dienelt, Esq., attorneys for defendants Jackson Hewitt Inc., Jackson-Hewitt Tax
 7   Service, Inc., and Tax Services of America have been admitted to this Court Pro Hac Vice.
 8
           3.5.       Trial Counsel
 9                    The names and addresses of the attorneys who will try the case are (CRC, Rule
10   212(i)(9)):
11                    COUNSEL                E-MAIL ADDRESS                        PARTY
             James Sturdevant, Esq.    jim@sturdevantlaw.com          Plaintiffs
12           Monique Olivier, Esq.     monique@sturdevantlaw.com
             Stuart Rossman, Esq.      srossman@nclc.org
13           Chi Chi Wu, Esq.           cwu@nclc.org

14
     4. MOTIONS
15
           4.1.       Preliminary Legal Question Schedule
16                 On February 9, 2005, the court found that the Third Amended Complaint challenges
17   the lending practices of national banks in regard to federal income tax refunds. Accordingly, the
18   efficient determination of this action was served by first considering the defense of federal
19   preemption. The parties were directed to serve cross-motions in regard to the validity of this
20   defense not later than March 14, 2005.    On 03-14-05 the Motion by Defendants Santa Barbara
21   Bank & Trust, a Division of Pacific Capital Bank NA and Pacific Capital Bank NA for Judgment
22   on the Pleadings or in the Alternative, for Summary Adjudciation et al -- Hrg: 05/04/2005 at
23   1:30pm in Dept 4, was Filed by Defendant. On 03-14-05 the Motion of Cross-Defendants for
24   Judgment on the Pleadings or in the Alternative, for Summary Adjudication That Federal
25   Preemption Bars Plaintiffs et al -- Hrg: 05/04/2005 at 1:30 pm in Dept 4, was Filed by Cross
26   Defendant. On May 4, 2005 Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings by Santa Barbara Bank &
27   Trust was GRANTED and the Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings by Beneficial National
28   Bank et al, Federal Preemption was GRANTED. Plaintiff appealed this Court’s order and



                                        Complex Case Management Order - 9
 1   judgment. On September 28, 2006, the Court of Appeal reversed, finding that plaintiffs’ state
 2   law claims are not preempted by federal law. Hood v. Santa Barbara Bank & Trust, 143 Cal.
 3   App. 4th 526 (2006) Following the Supreme Court’s denial of defendants’ Petition for Review of
 4   that decision on January 3, 2007, the Court of Appeal’s decision is now final.
 5
            4.2.      Class Certification Motion
 6                 The hearing on the motion for class certification shall be held on November 14, 2007
 7   at 1:30 p.m. Plaintiff shall file and serve her motion for class certification no later than
 8   September 14, 2007. Opposition papers shall be filed and served by October 12, 2007. Reply
 9   papers shall be filed and served no later than November 5, 2007.
10          4.3.      Demurrers, Motions to Strike and Summary Adjudication Motions (App. to
11                     CRC, Div I, §19(e)(7))
12     Motion: 08-06-04 Defendants Santa Barbara Bank & Trust and Pacific Capital Bank NA Demurrers. 08-
       06-04 Defendants Santa Barbara Bank and Trust and Pacific Capital Banks NA's Motion to Strike Portions of
13     Plaintiffs Complaint, Filed by Defendant

14                Moving Party                                       Responding Parties
       Santa Barbara Bank & Trust
15     Pacific Capital Banks NA

              Responding Parties             Hearing     Submitted                    Disposition
16

17

18

19
       Motion: 08-06-04 Cendant Corporations Jackson Hewitt incs and Tax Services of Americas Demurrer to
20     Plaintiffs Second Amended Complaint; Memorandum of Points and Authorities, Filed by Defendant

21                Moving Party                                       Responding Parties
       Cendant Corporations
22     Jackson Hewitt incs
       Tax Services of Americas
       Santa Barbara Bank & Trust (join)
23
       Pacific Capital Banks NA (join)
                Responding Parties           Hearing     Submitted                    Disposition
24

25

26

27

28




                                             Complex Case Management Order - 10
 1

 2   Motion: Motion For Judgment On The Pleadings

 3              Moving Party                                       Responding Parties
     Santa Barbara Bank & Trust, A
 4   Division Of Pacific Capital Bank,
     N.A., Pacific Capital Bank, N.A
 5   All Cross-Defendants

             Responding Parties            Hearing     Submitted                    Disposition
 6
                                                                    GRANTED 5/18/05
 7   Motion: 05-03-07 Notice of Demurrer and Demurrer of Defendants Santa Barbara Bank &Trust and Pacific
     Capital Bank NA to Fourth Amended Complaint or in the Alternative Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings
 8   as to First Cause of Action of Third Amended Complaint etc Hrg 5/23/, Filed by Santa Barbara Bank & Trust

 9              Moving Party                                       Responding Parties
     Santa Barbara Bank & Trust and       Plaintiff Canieva Hood
10   Pacific Capital Bank
     All Cross-Defendants
     Jackson Hewitt, Inc.
11
     Jackson Hewitt Tax Service, Inc.
     Tax Services of America
12            Responding Parties           Hearing     Submitted                    Disposition

13                                        5/23/07      5/23/07     Santa Barbara Bank & Trust and Pacific Capital
                                                                   Bank
14                                        5/23/07      5/23/07     All Cross-Defendants
                                          5/23/07      5/23/07     Jackson Hewitt, Inc.
15                                        5/23/07      5/23/07     Jackson Hewitt Tax Service, Inc.
                                          5/23/07      5/23/07     Tax Services of America
16

17

18   Motion: 07-02-07 Demurrer - Not. of Demurrer and Demurrrer of Defendants Santa Barbara Bank & Trust
     and Pacific Capital Bank NA to Fifth Amended Comp.
19
                Moving Party                                       Responding Parties
     Santa Barbara Bank & Trust and       Plaintiff Canieva Hood
20   Pacific Capital Bank
     All Cross-Defendants
21   Jackson Hewitt, Inc.
     Jackson Hewitt Tax Service, Inc.
22   Tax Services of America

23           Responding Parties            Hearing     Submitted                    Disposition

24   Plaintiff Canieva Hood               8/8/07                   Santa Barbara Bank & Trust and Pacific Capital
                                                                   Bank: SUSTAINED as to 1st C/A
     Plaintiff Canieva Hood               8/8/07                   All Cross-Defendants:
25
     Plaintiff Canieva Hood               8/8/07                   Jackson Hewitt, Inc.: OVERRULED
     Plaintiff Canieva Hood               8/8/07                   Jackson Hewitt Tax Service, Inc.:
26                                                                 OVERRULED
     Plaintiff Canieva Hood               8/8/07                   Tax Services of America
27

28




                                           Complex Case Management Order - 11
 1   Motion:

 2               Moving Party                                        Responding Parties

 3

 4             Responding Parties           Hearing     Submitted                     Disposition

 5

 6

 7

 8
          4.4.         Discovery Motions
     Motion: Canieva Hood’s Motion to Compel Further Responses to Plaintiff’s First Set of Special Interrogatories
 9   and First Request fo Production of Documents

10               Moving Party                                         Responding Parties
     Plaintiff Canieva Hood                Defendant and Cross-Complainant Santa Barbara Bank & Trust and Pacific
11                                         Capital Banks NA., joinders filed to the Opposition by Household Bank
                                           FSB/Beneficial National Bank and by First Security Bank of Mackinaw
12                                         Illinois


13
               Responding Parties           Hearing     Submitted                     Disposition

14                                         2/9/05       2/9/05       GRANTED in part

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28




                                            Complex Case Management Order - 12
 1

 2   Motion: Santa Barbara Bank & Trust and Pacific Capital Banks NA Motion to Compel Plaintiff to Produce all
     Responsive Documents to Santa Barbara Bank & Trust”s First Request for Production of Documents
 3
                Moving Party                                        Responding Parties
 4   Defendant and Cross-Complainant      Plaintiff Canieva Hood
     Santa Barbara Bank & Trust and
     Pacific Capital Bank, N.A.
 5

 6
               Responding Parties           Hearing     Submitted                      Disposition

 7                                        5/4/05        5/4/05       GRANTED for 1994, 2000, 2001, 2002, and
                                                                     2003
 8

 9   Motion: 05-01-07 Notice of Motion - Santa Barbara Bank & Trust's Notice of Motion and Mot. to Compel
     Plaintiff to Provide Supplemental Responses to Santa Barbara Bank & Trust's First Set of Special
10   Interrogatories Date: 05/23/2007 Time: 1:30 pm [corrected on 05/03/07] Dept: 4, Filed by Santa Barbara Bank
     & Trust
11                Moving Party                                       Responding Parties
     Defendant and Cross-Complainant       Plaintiff Canieva Hood
     Santa Barbara Bank & Trust and
12   Pacific Capital Bank, N.A.

13
               Responding Parties           Hearing     Submitted                      Disposition
14
     Plaintiff Canieva Hood               5/23/07       5/23/07      GRANTED as to Nos. 3, 13-20, and 43-55;
15                                                                   DENIED as to No. 21 5/23/07
          4.5.         Other Motions
16
     Motion: 03-15-04 Notice of Motion and Motion to Transfer Venue to Santa Barbara Superior Court of Deft's
17   Santa Barbara Bank & Trust and Pacific Capital Bank NA's -- First Appearance Fee Collected $663.50, Filed
     by Defendant
18
               Moving Party                                         Responding Parties
     Santa Barbara Bank & Trust
19   Trust and Pacific Capital Bank NA
     Tax Services of America Inc
20   (joinder)
             Responding Parties             Hearing     Submitted                      Disposition
21
                                                                     Granted 3/15/04
22

23   Motion:

24               Moving Party                                       Responding Parties

25
               Responding Parties           Hearing     Submitted                      Disposition
26

27

28




                                           Complex Case Management Order - 13
 1   5. DISCOVERY
 2
           5.1.     Special Discovery (App. to CRC, Div I, §19(e)(3))
 3
                    5.1.1. List of Undisputed Facts
 4
                    5.1.2. Defect List
 5
                    5.1.3. Required Statements
 6

 7
                    5.1.4. Inspection and Testing

 8                  5.1.5. Expert Information Exchange

 9          5.2.    Stages of Discovery
10                  For the efficient management of this case, it is necessary for discovery to be
11   staged. Failure by any party to participate in any stage of discovery shall not preclude the party
12   from participating in a later stage. Notwithstanding the staging set forth below, any witness who
13   submits a declaration in support of or in opposition to a motion shall be made available for a
14   deposition to occur a reasonable period of time before the applicable responding or reply papers
15   are due, the date and place of such deposition to be negotiated in good faith by counsel.
16
                    5.2.1. Stage One
17
                    Stage One Discovery shall be limited to class certification issues and shall be
18
     completed by November, 5, 2007.
19
                    5.2.2. Stage Two
20
                    Stage Two discovery is limited to issues relating to the merits of the plaintiffs’
21
     claims and the merits of the claims of any class certified by the court. Deadline for Stage Two
22
     discovery is 45 days before the initial trial call date in the absence of a court order.
23

24                  5.2.3. Stage Three

25                  Stage Three discovery is limited to expert witness reports and discovery relating

26   to any designated expert witnesses. Stage Three Discovery may not be commenced until after

27   Stage Two Discovery is completed. The timing for completion of Stage Three Discovery will be

28   addressed after class certification issues are resolved.



                                         Complex Case Management Order - 14
 1
                    5.2.4. Stage Four
 2                  Stage Four Discovery is limited to issues related to the Cross-Complaint. Stage
 3   Four Discovery may not be commenced until after the trial of the underlying Fifth Amended
 4   Complaint, and shall be completed not later than 90 days after the completion of trial on the
 5   underlying Fifth Amended Complaint.
 6         5.3.     Protective Orders (App. to CRC, Div I, §19(e)(4))
 7                  The Stipulated Protective Order entered into by the parties and made an Order of
 8   this Court on April 13, 2004 remains in effect.
 9         5.4.     Preservation of Evidence
10                  In accordance with the parties’ obligations under California law, the parties shall
11   preserve all records, documents, microfiches, software, hardware and other records, whether
12   electronic, paper or otherwise, and all writings as defined in Cal. Evid. Code § 250, in the
13   possession or control of the parties that is likely to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence
14   related to the allegations contained in the Fifth Amended Complaint. Such documents include
15   those that in any manner identify members of the proposed class and subclasses or that will aid
16   in the identification of such proposed class members. The parties shall retain and preserve all
17   electronic media related to the allegations contained in the Fifth Amended Complaint including
18   backup tapes and other storage media and refrain from overwriting or deleting information
19   contained thereon. Notwithstanding the foregoing, original paper checks may be destroyed so
20   long as true copies of the front and back of each such check are maintained in electronic form or
21   on microfiche. The relevant period of the records to be maintained is on or after March 18, 1999
22   to the present for documents relating to proposed class members. The relevant period of the
23   records to be maintained extends back to January 1994 with respect to other documents including
24   plaintiff Hood’s tax documents and documents relating to defendants’ practices, procedures and
25   policies concerning collection of prior RAL debts.
26         5.5.     Document Depository (App. to CRC, Div I, §19(e)(9))
27                  Exchange of documents will be through a document depository as follows:
28                  [Name, Address, and phone number of the Depository]



                                        Complex Case Management Order - 15
 1                  On or before *** or within thirty (30) days of appearing in this action, whichever
 2   is later, all defendants and cross-defendants shall deposit complete copies of all documents
 3   requested in Exhibit ***.
 4                  All documents produced and deposited shall be Bate stamped and shall bear the
 5   “letter” designation of the producing party. All deposits are to be accompanied by a verified
 6   notice of deposit containing an index of the documents deposited. All parties are under a
 7   continuing obligation to deposit all non-privileged documents that are discovered after the
 8   initial production and deposit with the depository. In the event that a part subsequently obtains
 9   and deposits documents, that party shall number and deposit said documents and serve a
10   supplemental notice of deposit.
11                  All documents withheld from deposit on the grounds of privilege shall be
12   specifically identified by date, general subject matter, addressor, addressee and the reason for
13   withholding said document (e.g. attorney client privilege, attorney work product, etc.)
14                  All third party documents obtained pursuant to subpoena and/or authorization
15   shall be Bate stamped with the “letter” designation of the third party and shall be deposited in
16   the depository by the party who obtained the documents.
17
           5.6.     Interrogatories
18         5.7.     Pre-Joinder Discovery Materials
19                  The parties to the underlying action exchanged discovery materials prior to the
20   appearance of the cross-defendants. Copies of all discovery materials, including without
21   limitation deposition transcripts and exhibits thereto, shall be provided to any cross-defendant
22   who so requests them, not later than March 1, 2005. The requesting cross-defendant shall be
23   responsible to pay reasonable copying charges. All materials so provided shall be deemed
24   “attorneys’ eyes only” confidential until such time as they may be re-designated pursuant to
25   agreement or Court Order.
26

27

28




                                       Complex Case Management Order - 16
 1
             5.8.       Depositions (App. to CRC, Div I, §19(e)(8))
 2                      The following depositions, for the general purpose indicated, may be taken on the
 3   dates specified:
 4                          Deponent                                    General Purpose                                     Date

 5

 6

 7
             5.9.       Discovery Referee (CCP §639(a)(5))
 8
                        5.9.1. Appointment
 9
                        It is not necessary for the court to appoint a referee to hear and determine all or
10
     some discovery motions and disputes relevant to discovery in the action and to report findings
11
     and make a recommendation thereon.
12

13                      5.9.2. Additional Discovery By Leave Of Discovery Referee

14   6. ELECTRONIC CASE MANAGEMENT

15                  The Court approves and the Parties have stipulated to electronic service of

16   documents via LexisNexis File & Service (“LNFS”), as set forth in the separate Order re

17   Electronic Service filed concurrently, which Order is and shall be deemed part of this Case

18   Management Order. (“LNFS”) as follows (CCP §1010.6(a)(6)):
     When a party to this litigation wishes to serve a document to counsel of record, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that party may
19   elect to effectuate service of the document by the following procedure:

20        LEXISNEXIS FILE & SERVE
          1. In order to facilitate case management, document retrieval and case organization, the parties will utilize the services of
21        LexisNexis File & Serve (“LNFS”) and its litigation system (the “System”) for providing electronic service, storage and
          delivery of court-filed and discovery-related documents through a secure website to facilitate expeditious, efficient and
          economical communication by and amongst counsel. The Court, at its option, may also use LNFS and its System for these
22
          purposes as well to communicate with counsel of record.
          SERVICE ONLY
23        2. The System shall apply only to the service of documents, and not to their filing. Original documents must still be filed
          in the traditional manner (i.e., filing the signed, original document with the Court), pursuant to the applicable California
24        Code of Civil Procedure and Local Rules of this Court.
          SERVICE LIST & SIGN-UP
25        3. Within five (5) days of this Order, plaintiff’s counsel shall submit to the LNFS representative a complete and current
          service list of counsel of record for this litigation. Within 10 days of this Order, all attorneys of record for this litigation, or
26        within five (5) days of the entry of appearance for a new attorney of record, shall register for electronic service in this
          litigation by completing the application located at the following website: http://www.lexisnexis.com/fileandserve
          (advanced registration). All counsel, whether or not they choose to serve their own documents electronically, have a
27        continuing duty to keep LNFS apprised of their most current contact information.
          SERVICE OF DOCUMENTS AND WEBSITE
28        Establishment and Use of the LNFS Website Generally




                                                   Complex Case Management Order - 17
 1   4. When any counsel of record wishes to serve a document, that counsel may serve the document according to all the
     requirements and procedures of this Order. All references to “document” in this Order shall be interpreted to include any
 2   exhibits or attachments to the document and shall include both pleadings and discovery-related documents (such as
     interrogatories, requests for production, deposition notices/transcripts, etc.); provided, however, that each attorney shall
 3   determine individually whether to utilize the System to serve correspondence and/or the actual production of discovery
     documents in response to another party’s request for production.
     LNFS shall establish and maintain an Internet website (the “Website”) for this litigation. LNFS will post all documents
 4   served by the parties to the Website as provided in this Order and shall serve each document on the parties included on the
     service list provided to LNFS in accordance with the procedures herein.
 5   Each attorney shall serve each document via electronic transfer of the document file to LNFS via the Internet (either as a
     word-processing file or a scanned image of the document). Each attorney shall title each document to identify the type and
 6   purpose of each document and the party who is submitting such document. Each document electronically served pursuant
     to this Order shall be deemed to have been served under the California Code of Civil Procedure on the same calendar day
 7   of its electronic transfer to LNFS.
     After LNFS receives a document, LNFS shall convert such document into Adobe Portable Document Format (“PDF”) and
     post it to the Website within one (1) hour of receipt.
 8   Within one (1) hour of the time a document is posted to the Website, LNFS shall send an email to all registered users
     notifying them that the document has been posted to the Website (unless such registered user has declined to receive such
 9   email notifications). The email shall contain hypertext link(s) to the document location(s) on the System (or, if so
     designated by the recipient, the email shall have the served document attached thereto).
10   In the event a document that is to be filed with the Court is rejected by the Court for filing after it has been posted on the
     Website by LNFS, the rejection was caused by an aspect of the caption of the document, and the party seeking to file the
11   document successfully files it with the Court within two (2) business days of its rejection with revisions to the caption only,
     then the party filing the document shall promptly submit a notice of successful filing, including the date of the filing and
     the revised page(s) of the caption, to LNFS for posting on the Website. In all other circumstances in which a document to
12   be filed with the Court is rejected for filing after LNFS has posted it on the Website, the party that caused the document to
     be posted shall promptly notify LNFS in writing that the document was rejected by the Court for filing. LNFS shall
13   promptly notify all parties on whom that document was served of the fact of rejection, and shall cause a permanent notation
     to be placed on the Website in conjunction with that document memorializing the fact of rejection.
14   All documents posted on the System will be identified by: (a) the name of the serving law firm; (b) the caption(s) of the
     case(s) to which the document belongs; (c) the title of the document set forth on its caption; and (d) the identity of the party
15   on whose behalf the document is being served.
     The System shall contain an index of all served documents for the litigation that will be searchable and sortable according
     to methods that provide useful 24/7 365 days’ access to the documents.
16   Access to the System will be limited to registered users. Registered users will consist of authorized Court personnel,
     counsel of record and their designated staff members. LNFS will provide each registered user with a user name and
17   password to access the System and the documents served in the litigation. LNFS personnel will perform all administrative
     functions for the System, but all initial data, additions, deletions or changes to the service list must be approved by the
18   parties.
     Every pleading, document and instrument served electronically shall bear a facsimile or typographical signature of at least
19   one of the attorneys of record, along with the typed name, address, telephone number and State Bar of California number
     of such attorney. Typographical signatures shall be treated exactly as personal signatures for purposes of electronically
     served documents under the California Code of Civil Procedure. The serving party of any document requiring multiple
20   signatures (e.g., stipulations, joint status reports) must list thereon all the names of other signatories by means of an
     “s/____” block for each. By submitting such a document, the serving party certifies that each of the other signatories has
21   expressly agreed to the form and substance of the document and that the serving party has the actual authority to submit the
     document electronically. The serving party must maintain any records evidencing this concurrence for subsequent
22   production to the Court if so ordered or for inspection upon request by a party.
     Any document transmitted to the System shall certify in the Proof of Service that a true and correct copy was electronically
23   served on counsel of record by transmission to LNFS.
     Until further notice, documents filed under seal (“sealed documents”) shall not be served through the System. Instead, the
     service of sealed documents shall be made pursuant to the applicable provisions of the California Code of Civil Procedure.
24
     LNFS shall have available to counsel of record and the Court a 24-hour 365 days help desk hotline at (888) 529-7587 and
     website -http://www.lexisnexis.com/fileandserve/support.asp.
25

26

27

28




                                             Complex Case Management Order - 18
 1   7. ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION AND MANDATORY SETTLEMENT
 2      CONFERENCES (App. to CRC, Div I, §19(e)(5))
 3
           7.1.       Alternate Dispute Resolution (CRC, Rule 212(i)(1)-(2))
 4
           7.2.       Mandatory Settlement Conferences (App. to CRC, Div I, §19(e)(5); CRC,
 5                      Rule 212(i)(10))
 6                    A Mandatory Settlement Conference is set for 8:30 a.m. on *** in
 7   DEPARTMENT FIVE. Settlement conference statements are to be filed by each party at least 5
 8   days prior. ALL PARTIES NECESSARY TO EFFECT A SETTLEMENT MUST BE
 9   PRESENT AT THIS CONFERENCE.
10   8. TRIAL
11                This matter is set for Trial on *** at 9:00 am in this Department. The case will not
12   be delayed due to unavailability of witnesses or other cause absent further order of the Court,
13   which will not be granted absent exhaustion of efforts to obtain trial deposition testimony (CRC,
14   Rule 212(i)(3)).
15                A jury is demanded by the following parties who represent that jury fees will be
16   timely posted (CRC, Rule 212(i)(4)-(5)):
17                Plaintiffs
18                The estimated length of trial, including pre-trial motions and jury selection is 66
19   HOURS. (CRC, Rule 212(i)(6)). Plaintiff estimates that three weeks (3 x 22 hours per week)
20   will be needed for trial, including pre-trial motions and jury selection.
21                No later than five (5) days before the trial date, each party shall file, serve and, e-
22   mail to the Court at jbrown@sbCourts.org as an e-mail attachment (Microsoft Word preferred)
23   the following:
24                The table of contents of the party’s proposed exhibits in the evidence binder;
25                A complete witness list of the party’s proposed witnesses;
26                The party’s trial brief;
27                Any in limine motions offered by the party;
28




                                           Complex Case Management Order - 19
 1                A list of the parties’ requested CACI jury instructions, by number, together
 2   with a document containing the edited text of each CACI Instruction as the party wants it
 3   given;
 4                The text of any requested special jury instruction, with supporting authorities;
 5                All parties shall meet and confer and prepare a joint evidence binder with sufficient
 6   copies for the witness stand and a copy for each side in the case. The evidence binder shall be
 7   lodged with the Department Four clerk on or before the trial date and shall comply with the
 8   following requirements.
 9                Exhibits shall be numbered serially, without designation as “Plaintiff’s” or
10   “Defendant’s”;
11                Each party shall be assigned a block of numbers sufficient for the number of
12   exhibits to be offered by that party, with the lowest numbered block assigned to the
13   plaintiff;
14                There shall be a separate, numbered tab in the binder for each exhibit or group
15   exhibit;
16                Each group exhibit shall have an internal numbering system (Bates stamp or
17   pagination);
18                Impeachment exhibits need not be in the evidence binder, but a numbered tab
19   for a “reserved” exhibit must be in the evidence binder for each impeachment exhibit; and
20                Medical bills or invoices shall be tabbed separately from medical records.
21                All parties shall familiarize themselves with the Department Four web page at
22   http://www.sbCourts.org/general_info/judicial_officers/jbrown/ and the “Department
23   4:Forms” particularly the “Pre-trial Order” forms and be prepared to provide all information
24   required by the order at the pre-trial conference on the first day of trial.
25

26

27

28




                                         Complex Case Management Order - 20
 1   9. SCHEDULE OF CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCES
 2
             The Court will conduct further complex case management conferences approximately
 3
     every seven (7) weeks on Wednesday afternoons in this department. (CRC, Rule 212(i)(11)-(12);
 4
     App. to CRC, Div I, §19(e)(12)).
 5
                  In order to reduce file congestion:
 6
                  (1) No Courtesy copies shall be delivered to the Court;
 7
                  (2) Where the Court’s orders require only service of a document the parties shall not
 8
     also file copies of that document.
 9
             All law and motion matters shall be set for hearing at a complex case management
10
     conference. If a matter is not set for a scheduled complex case management conference hearing,
11
     the notice of motion shall contain a certificate by counsel for the moving party why special
12
     setting is required.
13
                  On or before the Friday before a scheduled complex case management conference,
14
     each party shall file, serve and submit to the Court by e-mail at jbrown@sbCourts.org a
15
     statement of proposed amendments to or modifications of the then current complex case
16
     management order. Microsoft Word is the preferred format and proposals limited to proposed
17
     findings and orders with very limited surplusage or argumentative material are strongly
18
     encouraged. The Court considers transmittal letters or e-mails to the Court concerning Proposed
19
     Case Management Orders or amendments thereto as ex parte communications and does not read
20
     or review them. The Court has authorized only submission of a statement of proposed
21
     amendments to or modifications of the then current complex case management order on the
22
     Friday before a scheduled CCMC. Supplemental briefs and letters are not authorized.
23
     Circumvention by submitting argumentative material in the proposed modifications is
24
     discouraged.
25
                    Complex case management conferences in this case are set in Department Four as
26
     follows:
27
                  May 4, 2005 at 1:30 pm
28
                  May 25, 2005 at 2:30 pm


                                          Complex Case Management Order - 21
 1              November 16, 2005 at 1:30 pm
 2              March 28, 2007 at 1:30 pm
 3              May 23, 2007 at 1:30 p.m.
 4              July 25, 2007 at 2:30 pm is VACATED.
 5              August 8, 2007 at 2:30 pm
 6              September 26, 2007 at 3:00 pm
 7              November 14, 2007 at 1:30 pm
 8              Wednesday, January 16, 2008 at 1:30 pm
 9   IT IS SO ORDERED.
10
     Dated: August 8, 2007
11

12
                                               ________________________________
13                                             JAMES W. BROWN
                                               Judge of the Superior Court
14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28




                                   Complex Case Management Order - 22

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Categories:
Tags:
Stats:
views:50
posted:8/9/2011
language:English
pages:22
Description: Sbbt Deposits of Federal Refunds document sample