SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT

Similar documents
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, CENTRAL DISTRICT. Santa Clara Case No CV INCLUDED ACTIONS:

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

ORIGINAL FILED. los ANGELES SUPERIOR COURT MAR 1G 2010 ANTELOPE VALLEY GROUNDWATER CASES

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

EXHIBIT C DECLARATION OF LUCAS I. QUASS 20

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

ANTELOPE VALLEY GROLINDWATER CASES ANSWER TO CROSS-COMPLAINT

1 BEST BEST & KRIEGER LLP EXEMPT FROM FILING FEES ERIC L. GARNER, Bar No

REPLY IN SUPPORT OF PROPOSED STATEMENT OF DECISION

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA

LAW OFFICES OF MICHAEL D.

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF SANTA CRUZ ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

Please reply to: Joyia Z. Greenfield Zachariah R. Tomlin May 6, 2016

Appendix A. Notices and Notification List. Antelope Valley-East Kern Water Agency 2015 Urban Water Management Plan

ANTELOPE VALLEY WATERMASTER ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA

Memorandum TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL. FROM: Norberto L. Duenas MEASURE B SETTLEMENT DISCUSSIONS - QUO WARRANTO.

Case3:15-cv VC Document25 Filed06/19/15 Page1 of 8

Exempt from filing fee Gov't Code Secs. 6100, 6103 NOTICE OF UNAVAILABILITY OF COUNSEL

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA RIVERSIDE DIVISION. Plaintiffs,

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETT S CLASS ACTION JOINT STIPULATION FOR DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE

Case 1:12-cv GBL-JFA Document 17 Filed 09/10/12 Page 1 of 4 PageID# 185

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF ORANGE CENTRAL JUSTICE CENTER

Case 3:18-cv RS Document 30 Filed 06/18/18 Page 1 of 6

Case3:13-cv SC Document99 Filed06/05/15 Page2 of 7 1 WHEREAS, Plaintiffs Arville Winans and Wilma Fritz in this action entitled Arville 2 Winans

Synchronoss Technologies, Inc. v. Funambol, Inc. Doc. 52

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA

REGULAR MEETING AGENDA. June 15, 2017 at 2:00 p.m. California State Association of Counties 1100 K Street, 1st Floor, Sacramento, CA 95814

"Uge EB JAN Daie Prodessod - By: %I, Y-.sT. wij ~1 ~

Case 2:14-cv ODW-RZ Document 66 Filed 08/06/15 Page 1 of 7 Page ID #:791

Attorneys for Defendant and Respondent CITY OF ANAHEIM SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF ORANGE, CENTRAL JUSTICE CENTER

Case 3:16-md VC Document 419 Filed 08/03/17 Page 1 of 5 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

Case 8:11-cv FMO-AN Document 193 Filed 10/16/15 Page 1 of 5 Page ID #:4291

By S. Lee, Deputy Clerk

$ Attorneys for Defendants PACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY and 9 PG&E CORPORATION

PlainSite. Legal Document. Arizona District Court Case No. 4:11-cv Carreon v. Toyota Financial Services Corporation et al.

NOTE: CHANGES MADE BY THE COURT

Case 2:06-cv R-CW Document 437 Filed 10/12/12 Page 1 of 11 Page ID #:7705

Case 1:11-cv AWI-JLT Document 3 Filed 01/06/12 Page 1 of 3

Attorneys for Plaintiffs CURT SCHLESINGER, PETER LO RE and the Certified Class SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF ORANGE SELF-HELP CENTER ANSWERING A BREACH OF CONTRACT COMPLAINT

Case3:11-cv EMC Document70 Filed03/06/14 Page1 of 43

E-FILED: Jan 24, :25 PM, Superior Court of CA, County of Santa Clara, Case #1-09-CV Filing #G-60221

Fresno County Superior Court, Case No. 1OCECGO2 116 The Honorable Jeffrey Y. Hamilton, Judge

CIV CIV DS MISC ORDER GRANTING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF SETTLEMENT AND FINAL JUDGMENT filed

Case 8:11-cv JST-JPR Document Filed 08/16/13 Page 1 of 6 Page ID #:5240

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT. Petitioners, Real Parties in Interest.

FAX. IN TUE SUPERIOR COURT OF TUE STATE OF caiafornia INANDFORTHLCQLNTYOELOSANELES. EAST l)i$trict

Case5:12-cv HRL Document9 Filed08/09/12 Page1 of 5

Hells Angels Motorcycle Corporation v. Alexander McQueen Trading Limited et al Doc. 16

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

In re Santa Maria Valley Groundwater Litigation Santa Clara County Superior Court, Case No CV Tentative Decision re Trial Phase V

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA WESTERN DIVISION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

E-FILED 12/26/2017 4:20 PM FRESNO COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT By: C. Cogburn, Deputy

THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO

Case 4:16-cv HSG Document 116 Filed 08/07/17 Page 1 of 24

Case3:09-cv RS Document78 Filed05/03/11 Page1 of 7

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case GMB Doc 207 Filed 12/21/13 Entered 12/21/13 14:45:36 Desc Main Document Page 1 of 2

Defendant and Counterclaim Plaintiff.

Case 3:17-cv EMC Document 49 Filed 08/26/18 Page 1 of 15

Affirmation of Howard Cotton Exhibit 1

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA

California Enterprise Development Authority

Case 3:09-cv IEG -BGS Document 55 Filed 11/08/10 Page 1 of 5

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Case abl Doc 164 Entered 05/02/14 12:43:53 Page 1 of 5 UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEVADA

NOTICE OF PROPOSED SETTLEMENT OF DERIVATIVE ACTION

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO. Plaintiff, j Judge: Hon. Joan M. Lewis ) ) )

CITY OF PALMDALE. REPORT to the Mayor and Members of the City Council from the City Manager

Case3:12-mc CRB Document45 Filed01/02/13 Page1 of 6

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF KERN CIVIL - UNLIMITED JURISDICTION

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

Case 2:18-cv PSG-FFM Document 24 Filed 10/11/18 Page 1 of 10 Page ID #:219. Deadline

Levinson Arshonsky & Kurtz, LLP Ventura Blvd., Suite 1650 Sherman Oaks, CA Telephone (818)

Case 2:06-cv AB-JC Document 797 Filed 10/13/17 Page 1 of 4 Page ID #:25126

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

Woods et al v. Vector Marketing Corporation Doc. 276 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case 2:12-cv TLN-AC Document 165 Filed 09/14/15 Page 1 of 9

Case 3:16-cv MEJ Document 1 Filed 06/16/16 Page 1 of 6 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DELIVERY AND EXCHANGE AGREEMENT BETWEEN METROPOLITAN AND COACHELLA FOR 35,000 ACRE-FEET RECITALS

Case 3:15-cv JST Document 90 Filed 04/25/17 Page 1 of 10

Charles Edward Lincoln, pro se 603 Elmwood Place, Suite #6 Austin, Texas Tel:

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

Case 2:13-cv JFW-VBK Document 57 Filed 02/01/17 Page 1 of 15 Page ID #:1030 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Case5:11-cv LHK Document1777 Filed08/15/12 Page1 of 19 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

Case 2:08-cv R-E Document 179 Filed 09/20/13 Page 1 of 7 Page ID #:3675 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

AGREED MOTION FOR ENTRY OF CONSENT JUDGMENT AND PERMANENT INJUNCTION

United States District Court Central District of California

Case 4:09-cv CW Document 579 Filed 06/01/16 Page 1 of 5

Transcription:

, ; 8 j 1 1 (; _ :: 0 1 5 Robert G. Kuhs, SBN 01 Bernard C. Barmann, Jr., SBN 180 Kuh s & Parker P. O. 80x 05 00 Truxtun Avenue, Suite 00 Bakersfield, CA 0 Telephone: (1) -00 Facsimi le: (1) -0 E-Mail: bba rmann<i"kuhsparkerlaw.com Attorneys for Granite Construction Company SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES - CENTRAL DISTRICT ANTELOPE VALLEY GROU"nWATER CASES INCLUDED ACTIONS: Los AngeJes County Waterworks District No. 0 v. Diamond Fanning Co. Superior Court of California. COllnty of Los Angeles, Case No. Be 501 ; Los Angeles County Watcnvorks District No. 0 v. Diamond Fanning Co.. Superior Court of California, County of Kern. Case No. S 1500-CV- 58; Wm. Bolthouse Farms. Inc. v. City of Lancaster. Diamond Fanning Co. \t. Lancaster, Diamond Farming Co. v. Palmdale Water Dist., Superior Court of Cali fomi a, County ofri\tersidc. Case No. RIC 580. RIC. RIC 8 Rebecca Lee Willis v. Los Angeles County Waterworks District No. 0 Superior Court of Cal ifornia. County of los Angeles. Case No. Be 55 Wood v. A.V. Materials. Inc.. et af.. Superior Court ofcalifomi~. County of Los Angeles, Case No. Be 505 Little Rock Sand and Gravel. Inc. \t. Granite Construction Co.. Superior Court of California, County of Los Angeles, North Judicial District. Case No. MC0 Judicial Council Coordination No. 08 Santa Clara Case No. I-05-CV-0Q05 Assigned to J lonorable Jack Komar STIPULATION AND /proposed) ORDER INTERPRETING THE JUDGMENT AND PARTITIONING THE EXHIBIT "Granite Construction Company (Little Rock Sand and Gravel, Inc.)" PRODUCTION RIGHT Date: June.0l8 Time: :00 a. m_ Dept: 5. Room 5 1, 5th Floor STIPULA non AND [Proposed] ORDER INTER?RETI'NG THE JU DGMENT AND PARTITIONING THE EXHIBIT "Gronitc COtlstiuction Comp:my (Little Rock Sand and Gravel, 1nc,)" PRODUCTIO't'- RIGHT

? B :0 1 1 0 1 LITTLE ROCK SAND AND GRAVEL fnc. ("Little Rock") and GRANITE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY ('"Granite'") hereby stipulate as follows: I. RECITALS A. All of the cases seeking a judicial determination as to all rights to groundwater in the Antelope Valley Groundwater Basin were consolidated and coordinated as Judicial Council Coordination Proceeding No. 08 and assigned as the Antelope Valley Groundwater Cases CAY Cases") to the Santa Clara County Superior Court, Hon, Jack Komar. B. The Court entered Judgment in the Antelope Valley Groundwater Cases on December 8, 015. c. In March 01. Little Rock filed a complaint in Los Angeles County Superior Court, Little Rock Sand and Gravel. Inc. v. Granite Construction Company. Case No. MC0 (the "add-on case"). Little Rock's Verified First Amended Complaint alleged causes of action to quiet title and for declaratory rejiefregarding the acre foot (AF) Production Right allocalcd to "Granite Construction Company (Little Rock Sand and Gravel. Inc.)" in Exhibit to the Judgment. D. Judge Komar ordered coordination of the add-on case with the previously coordinated A V Cases. and ordered that the issues and disputes between Granite and Little Rock {colleclively, the "Stipulating Parties") raised in the pleadings filed in the add-on case shall be resolved by law and motion practice pursuant to Paragraph.5 ofthe Judgment and Physical Solution entered in the A V Cases. E. Granite filed a Motion To Illterpret And Enforce The Judgment And To Partition The Exhibit "Granite Construction Company (Little Rock Sand And Gravid, Tnc.)" Production Right ("Granite's Motion") and Little Rock filed an Opening Brief of Little Rock Sand and Gravel, Inc. Re Title to Groundwater Allocation Al'ising From Little Rock Sand And Gravel's Land And Granted Under Judgment And Physical Solution ("Little Rock's Opening Brief'), F. Granite's Motion and the issues raised in Little Rock's Opening Briefwere heard by 8 Judge Komar on June,0. During a recess in the proceedings, the Stipulating Parties reached an agreement to resolve their disputes raised in Granite's Motion and Little Rock's 1 STIPULATION AND [Proposed] ORDER PARTlTlONING THE EXHIBIT "Granite Constfllt;"tion Company (Little Rock Sand and Gravel, Inc.)" PRODUCTION RIGHT

J Opening Brief. which agreement was put on the record in open court before Judge Komar and acknowledged by representatives of Granite and Little Rock. II. STIPULATION NOW THEREFORE. it is hereby stipulated by and between Gmnite and little Rock that the Court may enter the Order sel fo rth below. 1 July l' 0lR LlTrLE ROC SAND AND GRA VEL. INC. Dated; Ju ly ~. 0 MUS I~ ARRETr' LLP By S ce ph ~ R. Isbell, Atto,rneys for LiWc Rock Sand and Gravel. Inc. 1 ') Ju ly _, 0 ls GRANIT E CONSTRUCTION COMPANY BY~~~~ Kyle T. Larkin Senior Vice President 0 Dated; July _ 0 KUHS & PARKER " B y.~_~~ ~ Bernard C. Bannann. Jr.. Alrneys for Granite Construction Company 5 8 III. ORDER Upon reading the foregoin g Stipulation of the parties. and good cause appearing thcl'dor. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED th at: I. The Court hereby declares that Ihe acre- feel r-a F") of water Production Right allocated in Exhibit to the Judgment "Gmn ite Construction Company (lih le Rock, ST IP ULA TJO~ AND [Proposed] ORDER PARTITION1NG THE EXH IBIT "Omnitc Co nstruction Company {Lillie Rock Sand and GI ' ~. ve l. inc.)" PRODUCTION RIGHT

5 Opening Brief, which agreement was put on the record in open court before Judge Komar and acknowledged by representatives of Granite and Little Rock. II. STIPULATION NOW THEREFORE, it is hereby stipulated by and between Granite and Little Rock that the Court may enter the Order set forth below. July_, 0 LITTLE ROCK SAND AND GRAVEL, INC. 8 By George M. Lane, President July --,0 MUSICK, PEELER & GARRETT, LLP 1 1 By Stephen R. Isbell, Attorneys for Little Rock Sand and Gravel, Inc. 15 July ~0 GRANITE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY 1 1 f/ ;f BY:>J/ Kiy(e T. Larkin Senior Vice President 0 July -0 KUHS & PARKER 1 BY_~~----------'=-------""<~ -----+ Bernard C. Barmann, Jr., Attorne Granite Construction Company 5 8 III. ORDER Upon reading the foregoing Stipulation of the parties, and good cause appearing therefor, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that: 1. The Court hereby declares that the acre-feet ("AF") of water Production Right allocated in Exhibit to the Judgment to "Granite Construction Company (Little Rock STIPULATION AND [Proposed] ORDER PARTITIONING THE EXHIBIT "Granite Construction Company (Little Rock Sand and Gravel, Inc.)" PRODUCTION RIGHT

! Sand and Gravel. Inc.)" sball be divided eq ually-i 1 AF to Granite, AF to Little Rockand is he reby ordered partitioned in the $arne fashion. 5. The Pre-Rampdown Production Allowance 0 (00 AF is divided equally----00 AF Granite. 00 AF to Linle Rock--and is hereby ordered partirioned in the same fa..c:;hion. Granite shall continue to htlvc: the righllo use Lillie Rock's Exhibit AF Production Right and Pre-Rampdown Production AlIow<im:c during the tenn orthe lease between the Stipulating Parties dated April 8, 18. as. amended, so long as the lease is in force and effect. lq 1.. 15. Little Rock shall dismiss the add-on case with prejudice within ten () calendar days of entry of this Order. 5. Litlle Rock has the right to vote little Rock's!! AF Production Right under the: Judgment and Physica l Solution. Granite will pay Ihe Adminislr.ttive Assessment associated with Little Rock's A F during the tenn of the lease so long as the lease is in force and effect.. Each party shall beal' its own attomcys' fees and costs incurred in connection with 01' arising out of the add-on case. Granite's MOli on, Li ttl e Rock's Opening Brief and the preparation oftn.is Stipulation and (proposed) Order. 1, 0 Honorable Jack Komar (Ret.) Judge of the Superior Court ' STIPULATIO:-I AND [Propo..ed] ORDER PARTITIONING THE EXHIBIT "Granite Construction Company (Link Roc!.. S~nd and Gnwcl, Inc.)" PRODUCTION R!GHT