SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA ONE

Transcription

1 EXHIBIT 7 EXHIBIT 7

2 1 JON B. ZIMMERMAN [SBN. 1121] GREGORY B. COHEN [SBN ] 2 ROBINSON & WOOD, INC. 227 N 1st Street 3 San Jose, California Telephone: (408) Facsimile: (408) Attorneys for Plaintiff, CILKER APARTMENTS, LLC SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA CILKER APARTMENTS, LLC, 12 Plaintiff, 13 vs. 14 WESTERN NATIONAL CONSTRUCTION, MCLARLAND, V ARQUEZ & PARTNERS, 15 GROUP M ENGINEERS, GENTRY ASSOCIATES CONSTRUCTION 16 CONSULTANTS, LARCO INDUSTRIES, FITCH PLASTERING, COURTNEY 17 WATERPROOFING, CELL CRETE, LOS NIETOS CONSTRUCTION, MADERA 18 FRAMING, KELLY DOOR, TARA COATINGS, LDI, and DOES 1-100, 19 inclusive, Case No. 113CV2581 PLAINTIFF CILKER APARTMENTS, LLC'S RESPONSES TO TARA COATINGS, INC.'S REQUESTS FOR Defendant. AND RELATED CROSS-ACTIONS PROPOUNDING PARTY: 25 RESPONDING PARTY: 26 SET NO.: Defendant and Cross-Defendant, TARA COATINGS, INC. Plaintiff, CILKER APARTMENTS, LLC ONE ~~==~~~~~~~~~~==~~1~~~~~ ~ PLAINTIFF CILKER APARTMENTS, LLC'S RESPONSES TO TARA COATINGS, INC'S REQUESTS FOR

3 U z... ~ 3:: Q «0...:1 o f- ~~ ~G:; z Z 0:: o 0 rjl f- Z f- -< Q:I 0 ~ PREFATORY STATEMENT This Responding Party has not fully completed its investigation of the facts relating to this case, has not completed discovery, and has not completed its preparation for trial or arbitration. All of the responses contained herein are based only upon such information documents as are presently available to and specifically known to this Responding Party and disclose only those contentions which presently occur to such Responding Party. It is anticipated that further discovery, independent investigation, legal research and analysis will supply additional facts and add meaning to known facts, as well as establish entirely new factual conclusions and legal contentions, all of which may lead to substantial additions to, changes in, and variations from the contentions herein set forth. The following responses are given without prejudice to Responding Party's right to produce evidence of any subsequently discovered act or fact which this Responding Party may later recall. This Responding Party accordingly reserves the right to change any and all answers herein set forth as additional facts are ascertained, analyses are made, legal research is completed, and contentions are made. The responses contained herein are made in a good faith effort to supply as much factual information and as much specification of legal contentions as are presently known, but should in no way be to the prejudice of this Responding Party in relation to further 18 discovery, research or analysis. 19 RESPONSES TO REQUESTS FOR ADMISSION 20 REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO.1: 21 Admit that the Document attached hereto as Exhibit "A" is a true and correct copy of the 22 Settlement Agreement and Release between Cilker Apartments, LLC, William H. Cilker, Sr., Carl 23 A. Cilker, and Elizabeth Cilker Smith and Michael K. Hayde the Non-Exempt QTIP Marital Trust 24 of the Glass Family Trust Dated February 18, 1982 and Western National Construction, a 25 California Corporation. 26 / / / 27 / / / / / / PLAINTIFF CILKER APARTMENTS, LLC'S RESPONSES TO TARA COATINGS, INC.'S REQUESTS FOR

4 1 RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO.1: 2 Objection. This request is seeks a response based on information protected from 3 disclosure by the attorney-client and attorney-work product privileges. This request is also vague 4 and ambiguous. 5 Without waiving said objections, this Responding Party answers as follows: 6 Admit that this appears to be a copy of the limited settlement agreement. 7 REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO.2: 8 Admit that YOU made claims against Western National Construction related to 9 construction defects at THE PROPERTY in RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO.2: 11 Objection. This request is compound, vague and ambiguous. It is further vague as to the 12 terms "claims" and "construction defects" as they are not defined herein. Additionally, this 13 request is improper as it seeks a response based on information protected from disclosure by the 14 attorney-client and attorney-work product privileges. 15 Without waiving said objections, this Responding Party answers as follows: 16 Responding party cannot admit or deny the request as phrased, but it is nevertheless 17 denied. 18 REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO.3: 19 Admit that the defects that YOU alleged in 2006 related to THE PROJECT encompass the 20 same defects that YOU are claiming against Western National Construction in the current 21 litigation. 22 RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO.3: 23 Objection. This request is compound, vague and ambiguous. It is further vague as to the 24 term "defects" as it is not defined herein. Additionally, this request is improper as it seeks a 25 response based on information protected from disclosure by the attorney-client and attorney-work 26 product privileges. 27 Without waiving said objections, this Responding Party answers as follows: PLAINTIFF CILKER APARTMENTS, LLC'S RESPONSES TO TARA COATINGS, INC.'S REQUESTS FOR

5 1 Responding party cannot admit or deny the request as phrased, but it is nevertheless 2 denied. 3 REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO.4: 4 Admit that the Document attached hereto as Exhibit "A" refers to claims of defective work 5 on THE PROJECT which YOU were aware of in RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO.4: 7 Objection. This request is compound, vague and ambiguous. It is further vague as to the 8 terms "claims" and "defective" as they are not defined herein. Further, this request is improper as 9 it seeks a response based on information protected from disclosure by the attorney-client and 10 attorney-work product privileges. Additionally, the document speaks for itself. 11 REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO.5: 12 Admit that the defective work referred to in the Document attached hereto as Exhibit "A" 13 resulted in a written estimate of repair prior to YOU entering into the Settlement Agreement & 14 Release attached as Exhibit "A" hereto. 15 RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO.5: 16 Objection. This request is compound, vague and ambiguous and unintelligible. It is 17 further vague as to the terms "defective" and "written estimate of repair" as they are not defined 18 herein. Additionally, this request is improper as it seeks a response based on information 19 protected from disclosure by the attorney-client and attorney-work product privileges. Finally, the 20 document speaks for itself. 21 REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO.6: 22 Admit that the Settlement Agreement & Release attached hereto as Exhibit "A" limits 23 YOUR recovery for any claims against any subcontractor on THE PROJECT to the insurance 24 policy limits that they may have. 25 RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO.6: 26 Objection. This request is compound, vague and ambiguous. It is further vague as to the 27 terms "claims" as it is not defined herein. Calls for a legal conclusion. Additionally, this request PLAINTIFF CILKER APARTMENTS, LLC'S RESPONSES TO TARA COATINGS, INC'S REQUESTS FOR

6 1 is improper as it seeks a response based on information protected from disclosure by the attorney- 2 client and attorney-work product privileges. Finally, the document speaks for itself. 3 Without waiving said objections, this Responding Party answers as follows: 4 Responding party cannot admit or deny the request as phrased, but it is nevertheless 5 denied. 6 REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO.7: 7 Admit that YOU were aware of water intrusion issues on THE PROJECT at the time of 8 execution ofthe Settlement Agreement & Release attached hereto as Exhibit "A". 9 RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO.7: 10 Objection. This request is compound, vague and ambiguous. It is further vague as to the 11 term "water intrusion issues" as it is not defined herein. Additionally, this request is improper as it 12 seeks a response based on information protected from disclosure by the attorney-client and 13 attorney-work product privileges. 14 Without waiving said objections, this Responding Party answers as follows: 15 Responding party cannot admit or deny the request as phrased, but it is nevertheless 16 denied. 17 REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO.8: 18 Admit that YOU submitted a defective work claim to Western National Construction 19 related to THE PROJECT in RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO.8: 21 Objection. This request is compound, vague and ambiguous. It is further vague as to the 22 term "defective work claim" as it is not defined herein. Additionally, this request is improper as it 23 seeks a response based on information protected from disclosure from the attorney-client and 24 attorney-work product privileges. 25 Without waiving said objections, this Responding Party answers as follows: 26 Responding party cannot admit or deny the request as phrased, but it is nevertheless 27 denied. I0411S1 5 PLAINTIFF CILKER APARTMENTS, LLC'S RESPONSES TO TARA COATINGS, INC'S REQUESTS FOR

7 1 REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO.9: 2 Admit that the Settlement Agreement & Release attached hereto as Exhibit "A" does not 3 contain any agreement to toll any statute of limitations related to any claims for defective work 4 related to THE PROJECT. 5 RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO.9: 6 Objection. This request is compound, vague and ambiguous. Additionally, this request is 7 improper as it seeks a response based on information protected from disclosure from the attorney- 8 client and attorney-work product privileges. Further, this request is improper as it seeks a legal 9 conclusion. Finally, the document speaks for itself. Accordingly, this request is improper, and a 10 response cannot be provided thereto. u z -~ ~ ~ «0...:1 o r- ~;;; ~~ z z e<: o 0 rfj r- Z r- -< CQ 0 ~ 11 REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO. 10: 12 Admit that the lack of slope on the podium deck was part of the "defective work" claims as 13 referenced in the Settlement Agreement & Release attached hereto as Exhibit "A". 14 RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO. 10: 15 Objection. This request is compound, vague and ambiguous. It is further vague as to the 16 term "defective work claims" as it is not defined herein. Additionally, this request is improper as 17 it seeks a response based on information protected from disclosure from the attorney-client and 18 attorney-work product privileges. 19 Without waiving said objections, this Responding Party answers as follows: 20 Denied. 21 REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO. 11: 22 Admit that thc lack of slope on the private balconies was pati of the "defective work" 23 claims as referenced in the Settlement Agreement & Release attached hereto as Exhibit "A". 24 RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO. 11: 25 Objection. This request is compound, vague and ambiguous. It is further vague as to the 26 term "defective work claims" as it is not defined herein. Additionally, this request is improper as 27 it seeks a response based on information protected from disclosure from the attorney-client and attorney-work product privileges PLAINTIFF CILKER APARTMENTS, LLC'S RESPONSES TO TARA COATINGS, INC'S REQUESTS FOR

8 1 Without waiving said objections, this Responding Party answers as follows: 2 Denied. 3 REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO. 12: 4 Admit that the lack of slope on THE PROJECT substrates was part of the "defective work" 5 claims as referenced in the Settlement Agreement & Release attached hereto as Exhibit "A". 6 RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO. 12: 7 Objection. This request is compound, vague and ambiguous. It is further vague as to the 8 term "defective work claims" as it is not defined herein. Additionally, this request is improper as 9 it seeks a response based on information protected from disclosure from the attorney-client and 10 attorney-work product privileges. 11 Without waiving said objections, this Responding Party answers as follows: 12 Denied. 13 REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO. 13: 14 Admit that improper installation of waterproofing materials on THE PROJECT was part of 15 the "defective work" claims as referenced in the Settlement Agreement & Release attached hereto 16 as Exhibit "A". 17 RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO. 13: 18 Objection. This request is compound, vague and ambiguous. It is further vague as to the 19 term "defective work claims" as it is not defined herein. Additionally, this request is improper as 20 it seeks a response based on information protected from disclosure from the attorney-client and 21 attorney-work product privileges. 22 Without waiving said objections, this Responding Party answers as follows: 23 Denied. 24 REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO. 14: 25 Admit that at the time of signing the Settlement Agreement & Release attached hereto as 26 Exhibit "A" there was no ongoing repair work related to the "defective work" as referenced in the 27 signing the Settlement Agreement & Release attached hereto as Exhibit "AI! PLAINTIFF CILKER APARTMENTS, LLC'S RESPONSES TO TARA COATINGS, INC.'S REQUESTS FOR

9 1 RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO. 14: 2 Objection. This request is compound, vague and ambiguous. It is further vague as to the 3 terms "defective work claims" and "ongoing repair work" as they are not defined herein. 4 Additionally, this request is improper as it seeks a response based on information protected from 5 disclosure from the attorney-client and attorney-work product privileges. Finally, given the 6 manner in which this request was drafted, it is unintelligible as it is not clear as to what the 7 Propounding Party is requesting that the Responding Party admit or deny. Accordingly, no 8 response to this request can be provided. 9 REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO. 15: 10 Admit that at the time of signing the Settlement Agreement & Release attached hereto as 11 Exhibit "A" YOU were contemplating filing a lawsuit for construction defects against Western 12 National Construction. 13 RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO. 15: 14 Objection. This request is compound, vague and ambiguous. Additionally, this request is 15 improper as it seeks a response based on information protected from disclosure from the attorney- 16 client and attorney-work product privileges. 17 Without waiving said objections, this Responding Party answers as follows: 18 Responding party cannot admit or deny the request as phrased, but it is nevertheless 19 denied. 20 REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO. 16: 21 Admit that at the time of signing the Settlement Agreement & Release attached hereto as 22 Exhibit "A" YOU knew that Tara Coatings, Inc. performed the above grade waterproofing work 23 on THE PROJECT. 24 RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO. 16: 25 Objection. This request is compound, vague and ambiguous. It is further vague as to the 26 term "performed" as it is not defined herein. 27 Without waiving said objections, this Responding Party answers as follows: Responding Party is unable to admit or deny this request at this time PLAINTIFF CILKER APARTMENTS, LLC'S RESPONSES TO TARA COATINGS, INC,'S REQUESTS FOR

10 1 REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO. 17: 2 Admit that the Settlement Agreement & Release attached hereto as Exhibit "A" bars YOU 3 from prosecuting this case against Western National Construction. 4 RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO. 17: 5 Objection. This request is compound, vague and ambiguous. Additionally, this request is 6 improper as it seeks a response based on information protected from disclosure from the attorney- 7 client and attorney-work product privileges. Finally, this request improperly seeks a legal 8 conclusion. 9 REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO. 18: 10 Admit that the Settlement Agreement & Release attached hereto as Exhibit "A" bars YOU 11 from prosecuting this case against Tara Coatings, Inc. 12 RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO. 18: 13 Objection. This request is compound, vague and ambiguous. Additionally, this request is 14 improper as it seeks a response based on information protected from disclosure from the attorney- 15 client and attorney-work product privileges. Finally, this request improperly seeks a legal 16 conclusion. 17 Dated: December 21, 2015 ROBINSON & WOOD, INC By: JON B. ZIMMERMAN GREGORY B. COHEN Attorneys for Plaintiff, CILKER APARTMENTS, LLC PLAINTIFF CILKER APARTMENTS, LLC'S RESPONSES TO TARA COATINGS, INC.'S REQUESTS FOR

11 c,) ~ 12 ~ i3: j o 13 f- ~~ 14 ~~ Zo ~ ~ :5< 15 IXl 16 0 ~ VERIFICATION Cilker Apartments, LLC v. Western National Construction, et at., Case No. 113CV2581 I have read the foregoing PLAINTIFF CILKER APARTMENTS, LLGS RESPONSES TO TARA COATINGS, INC.'S REQUESTS FOR and know its contents. I am an Authorized Representative of Cilker Apartments, LLC, a party to this action, and am authorized to make this verification for and on its behalf, and I make this verification for that reason. I am informed and believe and on that ground allege that the matters stated in the foregoing document are true. Executed on DecembeOI, 2015, at San Jose, California. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct. Cdrl Cilk r