IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA

Save this PDF as:
 WORD  PNG  TXT  JPG

Size: px
Start display at page:

Download "IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA"

Transcription

1 1 RICHARD N. SIEVING, ESQ. (SB #3634) LUKE G. PEARS-DICKSON, ESQ. (SB #296581) 2 THE SIEVING LAW FIRM, A.P.C. 100 Howe Avenue, Suite 2N 3 Sacramento, California 958 Telephone: (9) Facsimile: (9) 444- E-FILED Mar 21, 5:00 PM David H. Yamasaki Chief Executive Officer/Clerk Superior Court of CA, County of Santa Clara Case #1--CV-81 Filing #G-860 By R. Walker, Deputy 5 Attorneys for DefendantlCross-Defendant/Cross-Complainant JELD-WEN, inc., a Delaware Corporation dba SUMMIT WiNDOW 6 & PATIO DOOR (erroneously sued herein as separate entities "JELD-WEN, inc." and "SUMMIT WINDOW & PATIO DOOR") IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA CILKER APARTMENTS, LLC, Plaintiff, v. WESTERN NATIONAL 15 CONSTRUCTION, et a!. Case No. 1--CV-81 JELD-WEN, INC. DBA SUMMIT WINDOW & PATIO DOOR'S ANSWER TO CORPORATION'S FIRST AMENDED CROSS-COMPLAINT Defendants. 1 CELL-CRETE CORPORATION, Cross-Complainant, v. ALLIANCE BUILDING PRODUCTS, 21!NC., et al. 22 Cross-Defendants _1 AND ALL RELATED CROSS-ACTIONS Judge: Dept.: Hon. Peter H. Kirwan One (1) DefendantlCross-ComplainantlCross-Defendant JELD-WEN, inc., a Delaware Corporation dba SUMMIT WINDOW & PATIO DOOR (erroneously sued herein as separate entities "JELD-WEN, INC." and "SUMMIT WINDOW & PATIO DOOR") ie SIEVING LAW FIRM, A.P.C. 00 Howe Ave., Suite 2N.. Sacramento, CA 958 (9) JELD-WEN, INC. DBA SUMMIT WINDOW & PATIO DOOR'S ANSWER TO CELL-CRETE CORPORATION'S FIRST AMENDED CROSS-COMPLAINT [Cilker - Answer to Cell-Crete 1 AXCM (03--).wpd (ipd:slb)]

2 E-FILED: Mar 21, 5:00 PM, Superior Court of CA, County of Santa Clara, Case #1--CV-81 Filing #G (hereinafter "Cross-Defendant") hereby answers the First Amended Cross-Complaint of 2 CELL-CRETE CORPORATION (hereinafter "CELL-CRETE"). 3 GENERAL DENIALS 4 1. This answering Cross-Defendant denies each and every paragraph of each 5 and every cause of action and further denies each and every, all and singular, separately 6 and severally, conjunctively and disjunctively, the allegations therein contained and further 7 denies that CELL-CRETE was damaged in any sum or sums whatsoever, or at all This answering Cross-Defendant denies that by reason of any act or acts, omission or omissions, fault, carelessness or negligence on the part of any of its agents, servants or employees, CELL-CRETE suffered injuries of any kind or character or damages of any kind or character in any sum or amount whatsoever. FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE As and for a separate, distinct and First Affirmative Defense, this answering Cross Defendant alleges that CELL-CRETE does not state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action against this answering Cross-Defendant. SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE As and for a separate, distinct and Second Affirmative Defense, this answering Cross-Defendant alleges that if, as alleged in the First Amended Cross-Complaint, CELL CRETE sustained injuries and damages in the manner therein alleged, CELL-CRETE was totally and one hundred percent (100%) at fault in and about the matter set forth in the First Amended Cross-Complaint, and entirely and solely failed to exercise ordinary care and that such negligence on its part proximately contributed to, and was a proximate cause of, the happening of the incidents, injuries, loss and damage complained of, if any 24 there were. THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE As and for a separate, distinct and Third Affirmative Defense, this answering Cross-Defendant contends that each alleged cause of action within the First Amended Cross-Complaint is absolutely barred by the terms of Cross-Defendant's written limited ie SIEVING LAW FIRM, A,P,C. 00 Howe Ave" Suite 2N Sacramento, CA 958 (9) JELD-WEN, INC, DBA SUMMIT WINDOW & PATIO DOOR'S ANSWER TO CELL-CRETE CORPORATION'S FIRST AMENDED CROSS-COMPLAINT [Cilker - Answer to Cell-Crete 1 AXCM (03--),wpd (lpd:slb)]

3 E-FILED: Mar 21, 5:00 PM, Superior Court of CA, County of Santa Clara, Case #1--CV-81 Filing #G HE SIEVING LAW FIRM, A.P.C. 100 Howe Ave., Suite non Sacramento, CA 958 (9) warranty and the failure to give this Cross-Defendant reasonable and sufficient notice of the alleged breaches of warranty. FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE As and for a separate, distinct and Fourth Affirmative Defense, this answering Cross-Defendant asserts that all limitations conspicuously expressed in its Limited Warranty are enforceable, thus barring and/or limiting any recovery for damages by Plaintiff, Defendants or Cross-Complainants, if any there were. FIFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE As and for a separate, distinct and Fifth Affirmative Defense, this answering Cross Defendant alleges that said injuries and/or damages sustained by CELL-CRETE were either solely, or in part, negligently or otherwise caused by persons, firms, corporations, or entities other than this answering Cross-Defendant and said negligence or other conduct comparatively reduces the percentages of negligence or responsibility, if any, of this answering Cross-Defendant. SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE As and for a separate, distinct and Sixth Affirmative Defense, this answering Cross-Defendant alleges that the injuries or damages claimed by CELL-CRETE are due solely to the fact that CELL-CRETE failed to act in a manner which would mitigate any alleged damages and/or injuries. SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE As and for a separate, distinct and Seventh Affirmative Defense, this answering Cross-Defendant alleges that CELL-CRETE voluntarily and knowingly entered into and engaged in the operations and conduct alleged in said First Amended Cross-Complaint and voluntarily and knowingly assumed all risks incident to said operations, acts and conduct at the time and place mentioned in said First Amended Cross-Complaint. EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE As and for a separate, distinct and Eighth Affirmative Defense, this answering Cross-Defendant alleges that any contractual provision(s) delineating that this answering -3- JELD-WEN, INC. DBA SUMMIT WINDOW & PATIO DOOR'S ANSWER TO CEll-CRETE CORPORATION'S FIRST AMENDED CROSS-COMPLAINT [Cilker - Answer to Cell-Crete 1 AXCM (03--).wpd (lpd:slb)]

4 E-FILED: Mar 21, 5:00 PM, Superior Court of CA, County of Santa Clara, Case #1--CV-81 Filing #G ~E SIEVING LAW FIRM, A.P.C. 100 Howe Ave., Suite 2N Sacramento, CA 958 (9) Cross-Defendant would indemnify any other parties are unconscionable and unenforceable. NINTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE As and for a separate, distinct and Ninth Affirmative Defense, this answering Cross-Defendant alleges that any contractual provision(s) delineating thatthis answering Cross-Defendant would defend any other parties are unconscionable and unenforceable. TENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE As and for a separate, distinct and Tenth Affirmative Defense, this answering Cross-Defendant alleges that CELL-CRETE failed to give timely notice to Cross Defendant of its claim and that accordingly, CELL-CRETE is estopped to pursue its alleged remedies by its own conduct and by application of the doctrines of waiver, estoppel, and laches. ELEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE As and for a separate, distinct and Eleventh Affirmative Defense, this answering Cross-Defendant alleges that the First Amended Cross-Complaint, and each cause of action thereof alleged against this Cross-Defendant, is barred by the statutes of limitations set forth in the California Code of Civil Procedure, commencing with Section 335 and continuing through Section 349.4, more particularly, but not limited to, the following: Sections 337(1),337.1,337.15,338,339,340, and 343; and by Sections 07(3), and (1) and (2) of the California Commercial Code. TWELFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE As and for a separate, distinct and Twelfth Affirmative Defense, this answering Cross-Defendant asserts that should CELL-CRETE recover damages from this answering Cross-Defendant, this answering Cross-Defendant is entitled to indemnification, either in whole or in part, from all persons or entities whose negligence andlor fault proximately contributed to CELL-CRETE's damages, if any there are. III III -4- JELD-WEN, INC. DBA SUMMIT WINDOW & PATIO DOOR'S ANSWER TO CELL-CRETE CORPORATION'S FIRST AMENDED CROSS-COMPLAINT [Cilker Answer to Cell-Crete 1 AXCM (03 -).wpd (ipd:slb)]

5 E-FILED: Mar 21, 5:00 PM, Superior Court of CA, County of Santa Clara, Case #1--CV-81 Filing #G As and for a separate, distinct and Thirteenth Affirmative Defense, this answering Cross-Defendant alleges that the First Amended Cross-Complaint, and each cause of action thereof, is barred by virtue of CELL-CRETE's conduct in causing the damages alleged by CELL-CRETE under the doctrine of unclean hands. FOURTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE As and for a separate, distinct and Fourteenth Affirmative Defense, this answering Cross-Defendant alleges that prior to the commencement of this action, this answering Cross-Defendant duly performed, satisfied, and discharged all duties and obligations it may have owed to Plaintiff, Defendants, and/or Cross-Complainants arising out of any and all agreements, representations, or contracts made by it or on behalf of this answering Cross-Defendant, and this action is therefore barred by the provisions of California Civil Code 73. FIFTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE As and for a separate, distinct and Fifteenth Affirmative Defense, this answering Cross-Defendant alleges that Plaintiff, Defendants, Cross-Complainants, and others unrelated to this answering Cross-Defendant, modified, altered, abused, and/or misused the materials and/or equipment provided by this answering Cross-Defendant, and such conduct caused and/or contributed to the damages which are alleged in this lawsuit. SIXTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE As and for a separate, distinct and Sixteenth Affirmative Defense, this answering Cross-Defendant alleges that any product manufactured, supplied andlor installed by this answering Cross-Defendant did not cause damage to any property other than to the product itself and, therefore, recovery may not be granted on any claims sounding in tort or seeking contribution and/or indemnity. III III III -ie SIEVING LAW FIRM, A.P.C. 100 Howe Ave., Suite 2N Sacramento, CA 958 (9) JELD-WEN, INC. DBA SUMMIT WINDOW & PATIO DOOR'S ANSWER TO CELL-CRETE CORPORATION'S FIRST AMENDED CROSS-COMPLAINT fcilker - Answer to Cell-Crete 1 AXCM (03--).wpd (Ipd:slb)]

6 E-FILED: Mar 21, 5:00 PM, Superior Court of CA, County of Santa Clara, Case #1--CV-81 Filing #G As and for a separate, distinct and Seventeenth Affirmative Defense, this answering Cross-Defendant alleges that recovery by CELL-CRETE is barred by the provisions of Civil Code Sections 82 and EIGHTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE As and for a separate, distinct and Eighteenth Affirmative Defense, this answering Cross-Defendant alleges that CELL-CRETE has suffered no damage as contemplated by the case of Aas v. Superior Court and therefore cannot recover in tort for the alleged damages. NINETEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE As and for a separate, distinct and Nineteenth Affirmative Defense, this answering Cross-Defendant alleges that the work and/or activities of this Cross-Defendant were done in a professional and satisfactory manner. TWENTIETH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE As and for a separate, distinct and Twentieth Affirmative Defense, this answering Cross-Defendant alleges that CELL-CRETE expressly, voluntarily, and knowingly assumed all risks about which it now complains as stated in the First Amended Cross-Complaint, and is therefore barred either totally or partially to the extent of said assumption of any damages. TWENTY-FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE As and for a separate, distinct and Twenty-First Affirmative Defense, this answering Cross-Defendant alleges that the work it completed met the standard of care known at the time the work was performed and was recognized as state of the art at all relevant times herein. TWENTY SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE As and for a separate, distinct and Twenty-Second Affirmative Defense, this answering Cross-Defendant alleges that the persons or entities legally responsible for the alleged damages, if any, sustained by CELL-CRETE in this action are persons or ~E SIEVING LAW FIRM, A.p,c. 100 Howe Ave" Suite 2N Sacramento, CA 958 (9) JELD-WEN, INC, DBA SUMMIT WINDOW & PATIO DOOR'S ANSWER TO CELL-CRETE CORPORATION'S FIRST AMENDED CROSS-COMPLAINT [Cilker - Answer to Cell-Crete 1 AXCM (03--),wpd (Ipd:slb)]

7 E-FILED: Mar 21, 5:00 PM, Superior Court of CA, County of Santa Clara, Case #1--CV-81 Filing #G entities other than this answering Cross-Defendant. Therefore, Cross-Defendant is 2 not responsible for any damages alleged by CELL-CRETE in its First Amended Cross- 3 Complaint. 4 TWENTY-THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE 5 As and for a separate, distinct and Twenty-Third Affirmative Defense, this 6 answering Cross-Defendant alleges by answering CELL-CRETE's First Amended 7 Cross-Complaint and/or taking any other action in this litigation, it does not waive, and 8 is reserving the right to compel CELL-CRETE's compliance with California Civil Code 9 895, et seq., as well as the right to claim any and all applicable affirmative defenses 10 set forth therein. WHEREFORE, Cross-Defendant prays Judgment as follows: CELL-CRETE takes nothing by virtue of this action; For costs of suit incurred herein; For reasonable attorney's fees; For such other and further relief as the court may deem just and proper DATED: March 21, THE SIEVING LAW FIRM, AP.C. L-~-- ~-..", -:-~t'uke G. PEARS-DICKSON Attorney for Defendant!Cross-Defendant! Cross-Complainant JELD-WEN, inc., a Delaware Corporation dba SUMMIT WINDOW & PATIO DOOR (erroneously sued herein as separate entities "JELD WEN, INC." and "SUMMIT WINDOW & PATIO DOOR") By: / ~ ~--., THE SIEVING LAW FIRM, A.P. 100 Howe Ave., Suite 2N Sacramento, CA 958 (9) JELD-WEN, INC. DBA SUMMIT WINDOW & PATIO DOOR'S ANSWER TO CELL-CRETE CORPORATION'S FIRST AMENDED CROSS-COMPLAINT [Cilker - Answer to Cell-Crete 1 AXCM (03--).wpd (Ipd:slb))

8 E-FILED: Mar 21, 5:00 PM, Superior Court of CA, County of Santa Clara, Case #1--CV-81 Filing #G-860 ATTORNEY OR PARTY WITHOUT ATTORNEY (Name and Address): Richard N. Sieving, Esq. (SB #3634) luke G. Pears-Dickson, Esq. (SB #296581) THE SIEVING LAW FIRM, AP.C. Attorneys at law 100 Howe Avenue, Suite 2N Sacramento, CA 958 ATTORNEY FOR (Name): TELEPHONE NO.: (9) DefendantlCross-DefendanUCross-Complainant JELD-WEN, inc. dba SUMMIT WINDOW & PATIO DOOR (erroneousl~sued herein as separate entities "SUMMIT WINDOW & PA 10 DOORn and "Doe 3: Jeld-Wen, Inc. dba Summit Window & Patio Doorn) FOR COURT USE ONL Y Insert name of court and name of judicial district, if any: Santa Clara County Superior Court SHORT TITLE OF CASE: Cilker Apartments, llc v. Western National Construction, et al. HRG DATE: I TIME: I DEPT: CASE NUMBER: 1--CV-81 I, the undersigned, declare: PROOF OF SERVICE [C.C.P. 10A and 15.5] I am a citizen of the United States and am employed in the County of Sacramento, California. f am over the age of eighteen () years, not a party to the above-entitled action, and my business address is located in the County of Sacramento at 100 Howe Avenue, Suite 2N, Sacramento, California 958. On the date executed below, I served the document(s) described as: 1.) JELD-WEN, INC. DBA SUMMIT WINDOW & PATIO DOOR'S ANSWER TO CELL CRETE CORPORATION'S FIRST AMENDED CROSS COMPLAINT on interested parties in this as follows: [ X] BY ELECTRONIC TRANSFER: I caused ail of the above-entiued document(s) to be served through the Santa Clara County Superior Court's Electronic Filing System to all parties appearing on the Court's electronic service list on the date executed below. The file transmission was reported as complete and a copy ofthe "SC Superior Court E-Filing Receipt" page will be maintained with the original document(s) in our office. I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on March 21, at Sacramento, California.

9 Re: Cilker Apartments, LLC v. Western National Construction Santa Clara County Superior Court Case Number 1--CV-81 E-FILED: Mar 21, 5:00 PM, Superior Court of CA, County of Santa Clara, Case #1--CV-81 Filing #G-860 SERVICE LIST (Updated March 3, ) Atlorne~{s} Phone & Fax Numbers Part~'ies} Jon B. Zimmerman, Esq. Phone: 408/ Plaintiff Cilker Apartments, LLC Gregory B. Cohen, Esq. Fax: 408/ ROBINSON & WOOD, INC. 2 N. 1st Street San Jose, CA 953 Mary K. Glaspy, Esq. Phone: 9/ Defendant Western National LAW OFFICES OF GLASPY & GLASPY, INC. Fax: 9/ Construction One Walnut Creek Center 100 pringle Avenue, Suite 750 Walnut Creek, CA Paul C. Glaspy, Esq. Phone: 408/ Defendant Western National LAW OFFICES OF GLASPY & Fax: 408/ Construction GLASPY, INC 1550 The Alameda, Suite 0 San Jose, CA 956 Michael Erlinger, Esq. Phone: 7/ Defendant Western National Mihaela Minculescu, Esq. Fax: 7/ Construction Michael J. Pepek, Esq. Sam M. Danskin, Esq. GREEN & HALL 51 East First Street, 10 th Floor Santa Ana, CA 905 William D. Morrow Phone: 7/ ADM Construction Geoffrey Kraemer Fax: 7/ ADM Construction Co., Inc. MORROW & WHITE 535 Anton Blvd., Suite 50 Costa Mesa, CA 9 David Levy, Esq. Phone: 415/ ADM Construction Co., inc. Daniel A. Serot, Esq. ext ADM Painting Company Courtney McFate, Esq. Alt. Phone 9/ AMPAM LDI Mechanical, Inc. Usa McConnell, Esq. Fax: 9/ LDt Mechanical, Inc. VAN DE POEL, LEVY, ALLEN & Eastern Landscape Company, Inc. ARNEAL, LLP 00 South Main Plaza, Suite 3 Walnut Creek, CA Brian H. Gunn, Esq. Phone: 9/ Alliance Building Products, Inc. Rebecca J. Collaco, Esq. Fax: 9/ WOLFE & WYMAN LLP N. California Blvd., Suite 645 Walnut Creek, CA Alison Flowers, Esq. Phone: 562/ AMPAM Parks Mechanical, Inc TAUBMAN, SIMPSON, YOUNG & Fax: 562/ SULENTOR One World Trade Center, Suite 400 Long Beach, CA Robyn S. McClain, Esq. Phone: 858/ AMPAM Parks Mechanical, Inc LETOFSKY - McCLAIN Fax: 858/ Nobel Drive, Suite 400 San Diego, CA 922 CILKER APTS., LLC v. WESTERN NA T'L CONSTRUCTION SERVICE LIST PAGE -1-

10 Attomey:{s} Phone & Fax Numbers Party:{ies} E-FILED: Mar 21, 5:00 PM, Superior Court of CA, County of Santa Clara, Case #1--CV-81 Filing #G-860 Chad S. Tapp, Esq. Phone: 9/ Anderson Truss PORTER SCOTT Fax: Pacific Coast Building Structures 350 University Avenue, #0 dba Anderson Truss Sacramento, CA 958 Tom Kirvin, Esq. Phone: 415/ lntervernor Uberty Mutual SANTANA TCHENG VIERRA & Fax: 415/ Insurance Company on behalf of its SYMONDS insured California Classic Paver 71 Stevenson Street, Suite 700 Designs, Inc. San Francisco, CA94105 Michael L Marx, Esq. Phone: 415/ Casey-Fogli Concrete Contractors Denise Sutherland, Esq. Fax: 415/ Joseph J. Albanese, Inc. GOODMAN NEUMAN HAMILTON, LLP 4 Montgomery Street, 10 th Floor San Francisco, CA Thomas Yen, Esq. Phone: 415/2-00 Casey-Fogli Concrete Contractors LAW OFFICES OF MICHAEL Fax: 415/2-60 Central Coast Stairs POLLARD 5 Market Street Suite 50 San Francisco Joseph Ryan, Esq. Phone: 9/ Cell-Crete Corporation Jill Ufter, Esq. Fax: 9/ Gary Berticevich, Esq RYAN & LIFTER 10 Crow Canyon Place, Suite 330 San Ramon, CA Kathryn L Kim, Esq. Phone: SPRINGEL & FINK LLP Alt. Phone 415/ Courtney Waterproofing, Inc. 7/ Courtney Waterproofing 151 Market Street, Suite 20 Fax: 415/ San Francisco, CA Albert P. Blake, Jr., Esq. Phone: 9/ Davey Roofing, Inc. LAW OFFICES OF TIMOTHY R. Fax: 866/ WAGNER 55 Grant Street, Suite 800-B Concord, CA 945 G Geoffrey Wood, Esq. Phone: 510/ Demetrius Painting II, Inc. Jenn N. Crittondon ext. 6 Dimetrius Painting II, Inc. ERICKSEN ARBUTHNOT Fax: 510/ One Concord Center 00 Clayton Road, Suite 350 Concord, CA 945 Laura K. Buttrell Phone: 9/ Eastern Landscape Company LAW OFFICE OF DAVID A WALLIS Fax: 9/ Robecks Welding & Fabrication, 21 Harvard Street, Suite 100 Inc. Sacramento, CA Lori R. Mayfield, Esq. Phone: 510/ Eastern Landscape Company, Inc. Eric Butler, Esq. Fax: 510/ Roebeck's Welding & Fabrication, LAW OFFICE OF LORI R. MAYFIELD inc. 505 th Street, Suite 10 Oakland, CA 946 butlere Brett L McKague, Esq. Phone: 9/ Gentry Associates Construction Jeremy J. Schroeder, Esq. Fax: 9/ Consultants FLESHER McKAGUE, LLP 22 Plaza Drive Rocklin, CA CILKER APTS., LLC v. WESTERN NA T'L CONSTRUCTION SERVICE LIST

11 Attome~{s} Phone & Fax Numbers Part~{ies} E-FILED: Mar 21, 5:00 PM, Superior Court of CA, County of Santa Clara, Case #1--CV-81 Filing #G-860 Joseph Long, Esq. Phone: 9/ Los Nietos Construction Marcia A. Pollioni, Esq. Cell: 415/ Los Nietos Construction Company LONG BLUMBERG, LLP 2950 Buskirk Avenue, Suiet 315 Walnut Creek, CA Phillip Bazzano, Esq. Phone: 9/ Madera Construction SELLAR HAZARD & LUCIA Cell: 9/ North Civic Drive, Suite 5 Walnut Creek, CA Alexander Moore, Esq. Phone: 510/ Madera Framing BOORNAZIAN, JENSEN & GARTHE 555 th Street, Suite 00 Fax: 510/ Oakland, CA com Elizabeth W. Lawley Phone: 9/ Madera Framing HAIGHT BROWN & BONESTEEL, LLP Fax: 9/ Natomas Park Drive, Suite 450 Sacramento, CA Dana Richard, Esq. Phone: 51 0/ McLarand, Vasquez & Partners Stephen B. Litchfield, Esq. Fax: 510/ COLLINS COLLINS MUIR & STEWART, LLP 99 Harrison Street, Suite 00 Oakland, CA 946 Todd A. Fischer, Esq. Phone: 831/ Pyramid Builders, Inc. Bryan P. Kerney, Esq. Fax: 831/ FISCHER KERNEY, LLP 888 Munras Avenue Monterey, CA Mark C. Phillips Phone: 415/ Pyramid Builders, Inc. Kramer, de Boer & Keane, LLP Fax: 415/ Market Street, Suite 20 San Francisco, CA Bruce Trevithick, Esq. Phone: 7/ Roebeck's Welding & Fabrication, LAW OFFICES OF MELISSA M. Fax: 877/ Inc. BALLARD Direct: 7/ P.O. Box 22 Brea, CA jenna. fischer Todd A. Jones, Esq. Phone: 9/ Roebeck's Welding & Fabrication, LAW OFFICES OF ARCHER NORRIS Fax: 9/ Inc. 301 University Avenue, Suite 0 Sacramento, CA 958 Thomas B. Wait, Esq. Phone: 909/ Tara Coatings Robert A. Hufnagel, Esq. Fax: 909/ Tara Coatings, Inc. WAIT & HUFNAGEL 0 West First Street, Suite 222 Claremont, CA 9 Frank J. Perretta, Esq. Phone: 408/ White Residential, Inc. MILLER, MORTON, CAILLAT & Fax: 408/ NEVIS, LLP 50 West San Fernando Street, Suite 00 San Jose, CA 953 Bruce A. Edwards, Esq. Phone: 415/ Special Master JAMS Fax: 415/ Two Embarcadero Center, Suite 1500 San Francisco, CA 941 D Serve Only If Checked CILKER APTS., LLC v. WESTERN NAT'L CONSTRUCTION SERVICE LIST PAGE =3=

12 Atiomell(s} Phone & Fax Numbers Partll{ies} E-FILED: Mar 21, 5:00 PM, Superior Court of CA, County of Santa Clara, Case #1--CV-81 Filing #G-860 Served by: Richard N. Sieving, Esq. Phone: 9/ JELD-WEN, inc., an Oregon Luke G. Pears-Dickson, Esq. Fax: 9/444- Corporation dba Summit Window & THE SIEVING LAW FIRM, A.P.C. Patio Door 100 Howe Avenue, Suite 2N Sacramento, CA 958 CILKER APTS., LLC v. WESTERN NA T'L CONSTRUCTION SERVICE LIST PAGE -4-