Albert C. Lum, Esquire State Bar Number 33521 William V.

Tarkanian, Esquire 2 State Bar Number 144491 LAW OFFICES OF ALBERT C. LUM 3 625 Fair Oaks Avenue Suite 358 4 South Pasadena, California 91030 (818) 799-5800
1 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
Legal/docs/Otrjn787.1

Attorneys for debtor and plaintiff WEST COAST STORE FIXTURE DESIGNERS, INC. UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA ___________________________ In re bankruptcy of ) ) In Proceedings Of ) Chapter 11 WEST COAST STORE FIXTURE ) DESIGNERS, INC., ) Bankruptcy Number ) LA 95-11218-CA Federal Tax Identification ) Number, ) Adversary Number ) LA 95-01776-CA 95-4250968, ) ) Debtor. ) ____________________________) PLAINTIFF’S (1) EVIDENTIARY ) OBJECTIONS TO VICKI L. HAMILTON WEST COAST STORE FIXTURE ) DECLARATION, AND (2) OPPOSITION TO DESIGNERS, INC.,a ) DEFENDANTS’ REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL California corporation, ) NOTICE IN SUPPORT OF THEIR MOTION ) TO DISMISS CERTAIN CLAIMS, MOTION ) TO STRIKE PUNITIVE DAMAGES, AND Plaintiff, ) MOTION FOR MORE DEFINITE STATEMENT ) - against ) ) R. J. LANTHIER CO., INC., ) a California corporation, ) Hearing Date: June 5, 1995 UNITED PACIFIC INSURANCE ) Hearing Time: 10:00 a.m. COMPANY, a Pennsylvania ) Courtroom: 1639 Corporation, and RELIANCE ) Judge: Calvin A. Ashland SURETY COMPANY, a business ) Location: 255 East Temple St., entity, ) Los Angeles, CA
1

Exhibit 2 and Exhibit 3. Yet. a “witness may not testify to a matter unless evidence is introduced sufficient to support a finding that he has personal knowledge of the matter. but need not. to strike portions of plaintiff’s complaint. Hamilton declaration (hereinafter referred to as “Hamilton declaration”). INC. (hereinafter referred to as the “plaintiff”) objects to (1) the Vicki L. upon the following grounds: (1) The declarant is an admitted lawyer representing defendants in this action (Hamilton decl.1 . (2) Exhibit 1 of the Hamilton declaration is hearsay under Rule 802 of the Federal This requirement has not been met by defendants through the Hamilton Rules of Evidence.. which has been filed in support of defendants R. LANTHIER CO. ) ____________________________) Plaintiff WEST COAST STORE FIXTURE DESIGNERS.” declaration. J. Evidence to prove personal knowledge may. as such. and for a more definite statement of plaintiff’s claims against defendants (hereinafter referred to as the “motions”). as well as (2) defendants’ concurrently filed request for judicial notice. (hereinafter referred to as “RSL”). there is no foundation stated in her declaration to support the “fact” that she has “personal knowledge” of the Exhibits referred to in the Hamilton declaration as Exhibit 1. UNITED PACIFIC INSURANCE COMPANY (hereinafter referred to as “UPIC”) and RELIANCE SURETY COMPANY’S (hereinafter referred to as “RSC”) motions for dismissal. nowhere in the Hamilton declaration is there any basis stated for a 2 Legal/docs/Otrjn787. at ¶ 1) and. consist of the testimony of the witness himself.1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 ) Defendants. Under Rule 602 of the Federal Rules of Evidence. INC.

nowhere in the Hamilton declaration is there any basis stated for a hearsay exception.1 3 . which provides that authentication is “a condition precedent to admissibility” of a document. defendants have not satisfied this mandate by any of the illustrative acts described in Rule 901(b). such as one emanating under the business records exception of Rule 803(6) of the Federal Rules of Evidence. For example. Yet. (3) Exhibit 2 of the Hamilton declaration is hearsay under Rule 802 of the Federal Rules of Evidence. (5) Exhibit 1 of the Hamilton declaration has not been authenticated by the declarant under Rule 901(a) of the Federal Rules of Evidence. defendants have not satisfied this mandate by any of the illustrative acts described in Rule 901(b). (4) Exhibit 3 of the Hamilton declaration is hearsay under Rule 802 of the Federal Rules of Evidence. (6) Exhibit 2 of the Hamilton declaration has not been authenticated by the declarant under Rule 901(a) of the Federal Rules of Evidence. such as one emanating under the business records exception of Rule 803(6) of the Federal Rules of Evidence. which provides that authentication is “a condition precedent to admissibility” of a document. such as one emanating under the business records exception of Rule 803(6) of the Federal Rules of Evidence.1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 hearsay exception. Yet. For example. Legal/docs/Otrjn787. nowhere in the Hamilton declaration is there any basis stated for a hearsay exception.

2 and 3. For example. Lum. (2) capable of accurate and ready determination by resort to sources whose accuracy cannot reasonably be questioned. defendants have not satisfied this mandate by any of the illustrative acts described in Rule 901(b).” Dated: May 24. which provides that authentication is “a condition precedent to admissibility” of a document. (10) Because defendants request the Court to take judicial notice of the “facts” stated in paragraphs 6. 7. California 91030 (818) 799-5800 4 Legal/docs/Otrjn787.1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 (7) Exhibit 3 of the Hamilton declaration has not been authenticated by the declarant under Rule 901(a) of the Federal Rules of Evidence. (9) Exhibit 3 is unclear because lines 1 and 3 of the text are partially obliterated with a marker. which is based upon Exhibits 1. Esquire State Bar Number 33521 William V. 1995 ____________________________ Albert C. (8) Exhibit 3 is an unrecorded document. Esquire State Bar Number 144491 LAW OFFICES OF ALBERT C. 8 and 12 (see defendants’ request for judicial notice). those “facts” cannot be judicially noticed under Rule 201(b) of the Federal Rules of Evidence inasmuch as that Rule only allows the judicial notice of a “fact” that is “not subject to reasonable dispute in that it is either. LUM 625 Fair Oaks Avenue Suite 358 South Pasadena. Tarkanian. which must be recorded to be effective under Section 3184 of the California Civil Code..1 ..

INC.1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Legal/docs/Otrjn787. 5 .1 Attorneys for debtor and plaintiff WEST COAST STORE FIXTURE DESIGNERS.

S. Attorney at Law MARKS AND GOLIA 3900 Harney Street First Floor San Diego. HAMILTON DECLARATION. AND (2) 6 OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS’ REQUEST FOR JUDICIAL NOTICE IN SUPPORT OF THEIR MOTION TO DISMISS CERTAIN CLAIMS. State of California.1 2 3 PROOF OF SERVICE 1013A (3) CCP Revised 5/1/88 STATE OF CALIFORNIA. California 92110-2825 Office of the United States Trustee 221 North Figueroa Street Los Angeles. (BY PERSONAL SERVICE) I delivered such envelope by hand to the offices of the (State) I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California [ ] [X] . AND MOTION FOR MORE DEFINITE STATEMENT upon all the parties to this action: 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 [[ ] by placing the true copies thereof enclosed in sealed envelopes addressed as stated on the attached mailing list: [X] by placing [ ] the original [X] a true copy thereof enclosed in a sealed envelope addressed as follows: Vicki L. As follows: I am "readily familiar" with the firm's practice of collection and processing correspondence for mailing. COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES I am employed in the county of Los Angeles. California. 1995. I am over the age of 18 and not a party to the within action. service is presumed invalid if postal cancellation date or postage meter date is more than one day after date of deposit for mailing in affidavit. Suite 4 358. Hamilton. MOTION TO STRIKE 7 DEMAND FOR PUNITIVE DAMAGES. Executed on May 24. 5 On May 24. The envelope was mailed with postage thereon fully prepaid. California 91030. I served the foregoing document described as PLAINTIFF’S (1) EVIDENTIARY OBJECTIONS TO VICKI L. South Pasadena. postal service on that same day with postage thereon fully prepaid at South Pasadena. California. California in the ordinary course of business. I am aware that on motion of the party served. 1995. Under that practice it would be deposited with U. at South Pasadena. California 90012-2601 [X] [ ] [X] BY MAIL: I deposited such envelope in the mail at South Pasadena. my business address is 625 Fair Oaks Avenue.

1995. Executed on May 24.1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 [ ] that the above is true and correct. Shirley C. Moy Type Name Signature . at South Pasadena. California. (Federal) I declare that I am employed in the office of a member of the bar of this court at whose direction the service was made.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful