Wrongful Death Suit filed Nov. 13, 2013 in California, #5

[LuckyLucy2]

Do you have a link that shows the wife of the witness who saw Dina at the mansion the night of RZ's murder will testify for the defense? Just curious, I don't recall that one.

Nope, that is just my opinion based upon the fact that she is not a witness for the Zahaus. And she saw the woman, too. If she was comfortable testifying under oath that it was DIna, the Zahaus would have called her. They did not, The Defense would be crazy not to supeona her.

 

[beach]

Closed for Review.

Again,

Will do it when mods have time. Lately, time is precious around here. Lots of active trials and cases.

 

[K_Z]

The ex-parte scheduled for 6/08/16 has been rescheduled to 6/23/16.

357 06/07/2016 Ex Parte scheduled for 06/23/2016 at 08:45:00 AM at Central in C-69 Katherine Bacal.
356 06/07/2016 The Ex Parte was rescheduled to 06/23/2016 at 08:45:00 AM in C-69 before Katherine Bacal at Central.
355 06/03/2016 Discovery Hearing scheduled for 11/04/2016 at 11:00:00 AM at Central in C-69 Katherine Bacal.
354 05/17/2016 Ex Parte scheduled for 06/08/2016 at 08:45:00 AM at Central in C-69 Katherine Bacal.

Current list of future events:

06/23/2016 08:45 AM C-69 Ex Parte
07/15/2016 11:00 AM C-69 Discovery Hearing
11/04/2016 11:00 AM C-69 Motion Hearing (Civil) - Motion for Protective Order
11/04/2016 11:00 AM C-69 Discovery Hearing
11/04/2016 11:00 AM C-69 Discovery Hearing
01/13/2017 01:30 PM C-69 Summary Judgment / Summary Adjudication (Civil)
01/13/2017 01:30 PM C-69 Summary Judgment / Summary Adjudication (Civil)
01/13/2017 01:30 PM C-69 Summary Judgment / Summary Adjudication (Civil)
01/27/2017 10:30 AM C-69 Trial Readiness Conference (Civil)
03/10/2017 08:40 AM C-69 Civil Jury Trial

https://roa.sdcourt.ca.gov/roa/faces/CaseSearch.xhtml
Case Number: 37-2013-00075418-CU-PO-CTL

 

[Betty P]

Some activity by Adam's attorneys today. Assume it is related to the Ex Parte hearing scheduled for tomorrow 6/23/2016
I'm definitely NAL, but assume this has to do with his earlier request that the Zahau family provide him with a list of expert witnesses they plan to call, evidence, etc.

His attorneys are requesting the court compel the Zahau family's lawyer to turn over the information.to Adam's attorneys. They are including their explanation for legal reasons for doing so.

K_Z or anyone else, feel free to step in and do a better job explaining ;-) IMO, most of this still looks like delaying tactics.


367 06/22/2016 Proposed Order ([Proposed] Order Granting Defendant Adam Shacknai's Petition Pursuant to C.C.P. 425.11 to Order Plaintiffs to Serve Statements of Damages) submitted by Shacknai, Adam received but not filed on 06/22/2016. Shacknai, Adam (Defendant)

366 06/22/2016 Declaration - Other (Declaration of Krista M. Enns in Support of Defendant Adam Shacknai's Petition Pursuant to C.C.P. 425.11) filed by Shacknai, Adam. Shacknai, Adam (Defendant)

365 06/22/2016 Motion - Other (Defendant Adam Shacknai's Petition Pursuant to C.C.P. 425.11 to Order Plaintiffs to Serve Statements of Damages) filed by Shacknai, Adam. Shacknai, Adam (Defendant)

364 06/22/2016 Proposed Order ([Proposed] Order Granting Defendant Adam Shacknai's Motion to Compel re Inspection Demand) submitted by Shacknai, Adam received but not filed on 06/22/2016. Shacknai, Adam (Defendant)

363 06/22/2016 Declaration - Other (Declaration of Krista M. Enns in Support of Defendant Adam Shacknai's Motion to Compel re Inspection Demand) filed by Shacknai, Adam. Shacknai, Adam (Defendant)

362 06/22/2016 Statement - Other (Separate Statement in Support of Defendant Adam Shacknai's Motion to Compel re Inspection Demand) filed by Shacknai, Adam. Shacknai, Adam (Defendant)

361 06/22/2016 Motion to Compel Discovery (Defendant Adam Shacknai's Motion to Compel re Inspection Demand; Memorandum of Points and Authorities in Support) filed by Shacknai, Adam. Shacknai, Adam (Defendant)

360 06/22/2016 Declaration - Other (Enns Declaration ISO Defendant Adam Shacknai's Ex Parte Application) filed by Shacknai, Adam. Shacknai, Adam (Defendant) Enns Declaration ISO Defendant Adam Shacknai's Ex Parte Application

359 06/22/2016 Proposed Order ([Proposed] Order re: Ex Parte Application) submitted by Shacknai, Adam received but not filed on 06/22/2016. Shacknai, Adam (Defendant)

https://roa.sdcourt.ca.gov/roa/faces/CaseSearch.xhtml

Case Number: 37-2013-00075418-CU-PO-CTL

 

[LuckyLucy2]

^^^ A Defendant is asking for Expert Witness Discovery to be moved up, meanwhile, the Plantiff's have not even requested the depositions of the Defendants, but somehow this is an attempt on the part of one of the Defendants to delay the proceedings? Pray tell, how does moving something up on the calendar delay anything?

 

[K_Z]

Documents #358 (13 pages), 359 (2 pages), and 360 (12 pages).

https://roa.sdcourt.ca.gov/roa/face..._s_Ex_Parte_Application_for_1466686375560.pdf

https://roa.sdcourt.ca.gov/roa/face...der_re_Ex_Parte_Application_1466686376091.pdf

https://roa.sdcourt.ca.gov/roa/face...fendant_Adam_Shacknai_s_Ex__1466686376247.pdf

** Links will expire in a few hours. Will send to moderator for posting in docs thread.

Adam Shacknai is asking to have the discovery hearing scheduled for Nov 4, 2016, moved up to July 16, 2016. I guess we will find out soon enough if the judge agrees to move up the discovery hearing, as the ex-parte hearing is this morning.

AS and his attorneys would also like a better look at the Zahau attorney's "white board CSI room" that was featured in a February news report.

13. Separately, a discovery dispute has arisen with respect to an inspection demand.
ABC News 10 has a byline on its website dated February 19, 2016—the originally scheduled hearing
date for Adam Shacknai’s and Dina Shacknai’s demurrers to the Second Amended Complaint. As
can be seen from the video, Mr. Greer is interviewed regarding this case and he shows the news crew
what he terms the “Zahau CSI Room,” including a whiteboard. Based on the camera angles, the full
contents ofthe room (including the whiteboard) were fully visible to the reporter who entered the
room, the camera operator, and any other news crew members that were with them. As can be seen
by the video, the contents ofthe room and the whiteboard also are partially visible to anyone with
access to the Internet. The ABC News story posted online can be found at
http://www.10news.com/news/lawyer-new-evidence-proves-zahau-murdered.
14. On April 14, 2016, my office served an inspection demand on behalf of Mr. Shacknai
seeking to inspect (1) the “Zahau CSI Room” and (2) whiteboard contained therein.

https://roa.sdcourt.ca.gov/roa/face...fendant_Adam_Shacknai_s_Ex__1466686376247.pdf

So, AS wants 3 things in the hearing today:

1. Statement of damages from plaintiffs
2. Move up the discovery hearing date
3. And let us have a closer look at Attorney Greer's CSI room and white boards seen in news report.

My take is that AS will get #1 and #2 granted. I think #3 is a harassment distraction, and add-on. I don't think they will get #3. I don't see this as a delay tactic, but more as harassment veiled within a discovery request. I think it's attorney work product, and AS will not get to see that again, unless he wants to use and closely examine the news footage that was aired. JMO.

("...anyone with access to the internet", lol! That would be "us".)

 

[Betty P]

Documents #358 (13 pages), 359 (2 pages), and 360 (12 pages).

https://roa.sdcourt.ca.gov/roa/face..._s_Ex_Parte_Application_for_1466686375560.pdf

https://roa.sdcourt.ca.gov/roa/face...der_re_Ex_Parte_Application_1466686376091.pdf

https://roa.sdcourt.ca.gov/roa/face...fendant_Adam_Shacknai_s_Ex__1466686376247.pdf

** Links will expire in a few hours. Will send to moderator for posting in docs thread.

Adam Shacknai is asking to have the discovery hearing scheduled for Nov 4, 2016, moved up to July 16, 2016. I guess we will find out soon enough if the judge agrees to move up the discovery hearing, as the ex-parte hearing is this morning.

AS and his attorneys would also like a better look at the Zahau attorney's "white board CSI room" that was featured in a February news report.



https://roa.sdcourt.ca.gov/roa/face...fendant_Adam_Shacknai_s_Ex__1466686376247.pdf

So, AS wants 3 things in the hearing today:

1. Statement of damages from plaintiffs
2. Move up the discovery hearing date
3. And let us have a closer look at Attorney Greer's CSI room and white boards seen in news report.

My take is that AS will get #1 and #2 granted. I think #3 is a harassment distraction, and add-on. I don't think they will get #3. I don't see this as a delay tactic, but more as harassment veiled within a discovery request. I think it's attorney work product, and AS will not get to see that again, unless he wants to use and closely examine the news footage that was aired. JMO.

("...anyone with access to the internet", lol! That would be "us".)

They'll get a chance to see the CSI Room at the trial.

Thanks for the explanations!

I guess we'll hear something today or tomorrow.

 

[Betty P]

^^^ A Defendant is asking for Expert Witness Discovery to be moved up, meanwhile, the Plantiff's have not even requested the depositions of the Defendants, but somehow this is an attempt on the part of one of the Defendants to delay the proceedings? Pray tell, how does moving something up on the calendar delay anything?

Plaintiffs have already requested the depostions of the Defendents, but apparently some are still fighting it. Do you have any inside information about which of the defendants are still fighting depositions?

 

[Imp]

Poor Adam. Team Shacknai was just so doggone sure there would be no evidence after the investigators gave them a helping hand and the quickie "renovation" of the mansion was complete. Must've come as a terrible shock to hear the phrase "Zahau CSI Room." lol

 

[K_Z]

Any of the 3 defendants are free to create their own "CSI Room", with posters and whiteboards. Nothing is stopping them from doing that.

But then again, I guess it's so much easier to try to "demand" the plaintiff's work product. ("Hey kid, gimme your math homework!"-- like a schoolyard bully.) In this case, the whine is "Hey-- those guys made POSTERS. And we gotta have them."

This whole thing reminds me of way back when Dina was whining and complaining in court filings about wanting to get Adam's phone records from the plaintiffs. Because apparently she and her attorneys felt they couldn't just ask Adam, her co-defendant, for his own phone records.

 

[K_Z]

New entries on SD ROA. A discovery hearing is now scheduled for July 15, so we can assume the court granted that request today.

374 06/23/2016 Proof of Service filed by Shacknai, Adam. Shacknai, Adam (Defendant) Proof of Personal Service by Messenger

373 06/23/2016 Proof of Service filed by Shacknai, Adam. Shacknai, Adam (Defendant) Proof of Service

372 06/23/2016 Proof of Service filed by Shacknai, Adam. Shacknai, Adam (Defendant) Proof of Personal Service by Messenger

371 06/23/2016 Proof of Service filed by Shacknai, Adam. Shacknai, Adam (Defendant) Proof of Personal Service by Messenger

370 06/23/2016 Proof of Service filed by Shacknai, Adam. Shacknai, Adam (Defendant) Proof of Personal Service by Messenger

369 06/23/2016 Proof of Service filed by Shacknai, Adam. Shacknai, Adam (Defendant) Proof of Personal Service by Messenger

368 06/23/2016 Minutes finalized for Ex Parte heard 06/23/2016 08:45:00 AM.

**No document available for the Minutes yet.

Future Events

Event Date Event Time Location Event Type

07/15/2016 11:00 AM C-69 Discovery Hearing
11/04/2016 11:00 AM C-69 Motion Hearing (Civil) - Motion for Protective Order
11/04/2016 11:00 AM C-69 Discovery Hearing
11/04/2016 11:00 AM C-69 Discovery Hearing
01/13/2017 01:30 PM C-69 Summary Judgment / Summary Adjudication (Civil)
01/13/2017 01:30 PM C-69 Summary Judgment / Summary Adjudication (Civil)
01/13/2017 01:30 PM C-69 Summary Judgment / Summary Adjudication (Civil)
01/27/2017 10:30 AM C-69 Trial Readiness Conference (Civil)
03/10/2017 08:40 AM C-69 Civil Jury Trial

https://roa.sdcourt.ca.gov/roa/faces/CaseSearch.xhtml
Case Number: 37-2013-00075418-CU-PO-CTL

 

[*Lash*]

Any of the 3 defendants are free to create their own "CSI Room", with posters and whiteboards. Nothing is stopping them from doing that.

But then again, I guess it's so much easier to try to "demand" the plaintiff's work product. ("Hey kid, gimme your math homework!"-- like a schoolyard bully.) In this case, the whine is "Hey-- those guys made POSTERS. And we gotta have them."

This whole thing reminds me of way back when Dina was whining and complaining in court filings about wanting to get Adam's phone records from the plaintiffs. Because apparently she and her attorneys felt they couldn't just ask Adam, her co-defendant, for his own phone records.

According to Adam, it is only fair. Further down in doc 358, Dina Shacknai as well as Adam is requesting to view the "Zahau CSI Room" and whiteboard. What, they want to view the entire room? A room...in the office...of the plaintiff's attorney?

Snipped from ROA doc# 358 - BBM

Allowing the Defendants the same access to the Room and the whiteboard is only fair.

On April 14, 2016, Mr. Shacknai served an inspection demand seeking to inspect (1) the“Zahau CSI Room” and (2) whiteboard contained therein. Id, at ^ 14. On April, 26, Defendant Dina Shacknai served a Notice of Joinder By Defendant, Dina Shacknai to Defendant, Adam Shacknai’s Request For Inspection to Plaintiffs.

 

[LuckyLucy2]

Plaintiffs have already requested the depostions of the Defendents, but apparently some are still fighting it. Do you have any inside information about which of the defendants are still fighting depositions?

The Zahaus did not even request depostitions from the Defendents until March 11 of this year. They certainly aren't in a hurry, are they? Why? Because they know the depostions will only show people that were concerned for, and there for, Max. They know how bad it will make them look trying to frame innocent people who were in the midst of a crisis involving a 6-year old child.

Do you have a link showing that the Defendents are fighting depostions?

 

[LuckyLucy2]

So glad to see that the Judge granted Adam's Ex Parte. It is time the Zahaus put up or shut up.

It is clear there is no evidence linking any of the Defendants to Rebecca's suicide, indeed, even Mary, Pari, and Doug have no knowledge of anything that links the three to Rebecca's death, according to their sworn deposition statements. After three years, the Defendants still do not know the reasons for the (false) charges against them. That is because there are no reasons that make any sense since it is all made up.

I do hope the Judge allows the Defendants into the "CSI" room, which, I believe was put together just for the benefit of a News10 segment. Greer is using the Jose Baez method of trying to taint the jury pool by getting as much media as he can in which he calls the defendants "murderers", and shows their photos on a white board. A move that is very smarmy. A move that you use when you have no evidence.

Good to see that the Defendants are calling Greer's bluff. IMO, there is nothing on that board that puts anyone in the courtyard or Rebecca's room that night, just more unethical posturing by Greer.

Hope Adam is also able to depose the "Handwriting Expert", who said someone 6 foot tall had to have painted the note on the door, even though the girl who was 2" shorter than RZ had no problem painting it at that height in the News10 reenactment.

So now is looks like the Zahaus only have Cyril Wecht (who has said he cannot say it was murder), Jim Haager, who knows an insider in the case, and a white board in a small room to prove their case - and their paid "experts".

Its not looking so good for the Zahaus, their murder argument, and their lust for $10 million.

 

[BBL]

So glad to see that the Judge granted Adam's Ex Parte. It is time the Zahaus put up or shut up.

It is clear there is no evidence linking any of the Defendants to Rebecca's suicide, indeed, even Mary, Pari, and Doug have no knowledge of anything that links the three to Rebecca's death, according to their sworn deposition statements. After three years, the Defendants still do not know the reasons for the (false) charges against them. That is because there are no reasons that make any sense since it is all made up.

I do hope the Judge allows the Defendants into the "CSI" room, which, I believe was put together just for the benefit of a News10 segment. Greer is using the Jose Baez method of trying to taint the jury pool by getting as much media as he can in which he calls the defendants "murderers", and shows their photos on a white board. A move that is very smarmy. A move that you use when you have no evidence.

Good to see that the Defendants are calling Greer's bluff. IMO, there is nothing on that board that puts anyone in the courtyard or Rebecca's room that night, just more unethical posturing by Greer.

Hope Adam is also able to depose the "Handwriting Expert", who said someone 6 foot tall had to have painted the note on the door, even though the girl who was 2" shorter than RZ had no problem painting it at that height in the News10 reenactment.

So now is looks like the Zahaus only have Cyril Wecht (who has said he cannot say it was murder), Jim Haager, who knows an insider in the case, and a white board in a small room to prove their case - and their paid "experts".

Its not looking so good for the Zahaus, their murder argument, and their lust for $10 million.

This whole thing just cracks me up. On the one had it is a "white board in a small room", on the other hand it is important enough for 2 defendants to ask to view it.

But, here is what I truly don't understand. This is a white board in conference room set up to gather and store evidence of the plaintiff's ideas. Who in their right mind would ask for access? Are the plaintiffs asking to view the "war room" of the defendants? The whole thing, and that this is even part of the legal process, amazes me. Is the room even there anymore? Since when can the defense say "hey, let me see the room you are working out of so that I can see what your are thinking about my case"? That is like asking to see inside a lawyers office or conference room. I'm serious when I ask this, what in the world makes Dina and Adam think they should have access to the plaintiffs thought process? Their intellectual property, so to speak?



It seems something was there that definitely made the defendants worried.

 

[LuckyLucy2]

^ Because the room was seen by the news crew, was broadcast to all of San Diego, and is on the internet, it is no longer considered "attorney-client privledged work product", and it therefore, subject to discovery by the Defendants.

What makes the defendants interested in the white board and information on it (IMO, they are not "worried"), is that the Zahaus themselves don't seem to know what the case is based on since there is no evidence linking them to the scene of Zahau's suicide. Under such circumstances, they should be able to view any "evidence" that has been put out in the public. Such as the white board was.

Bet Greer certainly wasn't planning on that, and if anyone is worried, my guess is it is him.

 

[LuckyLucy2]

It seems the ones who are using delaying tactics - wasting both the time of the court and the taxpayer's money - are the Zahaus. Why would they want to delay the proceedings in a case they brought before the court?

Why would it take them so long to write up something that says, "Since Rebecca Zahau was not working at the time of her death, we have no damages?"

From Adam Shacknai's Application for Ex Parte (BBM):

While discovery in this action has been underway since early 2014, Plaintiffs have not
produced any discovery related to their alleged damages. Id. at f 3. Therefore, on April 1, 2016, pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure Section 425.11, Mr. Shacknai served a Request for a statement of Damages on each plaintiff named in the Second Amended Complaint or its caption. Id. at 14.

Plaintiffs' responses were due April 21 (15 days plus 5 days for mail service). However, on April 21, Plaintiffs' counsel, Keith Greer, left Krista M. Enns, counsel for Mr. Shacknai, a voicemail message stating he would mail the Statements the following day. In light of this communication, Ms. Enns extended Plaintiffs' deadline to respond to April 22 and confirmed the extension via email. Id. at 5.

Ten days later, on May 2, Ms. Enns reached out to Mr, Greer asking for courtesy copies of the Statements by email as the service copies had not been received. Id. at *i\ 6. Mr. Greer did not respond. Id.

On May 6, Ms. Enns sent Mr. Greer a meet and confer letter regarding the as yet un-served Statement of Damages and advising Mr, Greer that Mr. Shacknai would be forced to seek Court intervention if the Statements were not served forthwith. Id. at f 7. Plaintiffs did not respond. Id.

Over a week later, on May 17, 2016, still having received no response to the May 6 meet and confer letter, Ms. Enns emailed a paralegal at Mr. Greer's office cc'ing Mr. Greer, again asking when the Statements of Damages would be served. Mr. Wilson responded three days later, on Friday, May 20, that they were “currently working on them and should have them out no later than next Monday.” Id. at ^ 8. The next Monday was May 23, 2016.

On June 7, 2016, Ms. Enns followed up with Mr. Wilson, again cc'ing Mr. Greer. Id. ^ Mr. Wilson did not respond until a full week later, in an email in which he stated, “My apologies for any inconvenience, but Mr. Greer is out of town this week and won't be back until Wednesday night. We can have the statement of damages over to you on Thursday morning via facsimile. Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Thank you for your patience.” Id. ^ 10.

At no point has Plaintiffs' counsel taken the position that they do not each need to provide a Statement of Damages as to each Plaintiff. Id. at *jf 11.

Yet, over two months after the statutory deadline to respond to the requests for the Statement of Damages, Plaintiffs' counsel still have not served them. Id. at f 12. Thus, on June 22, 2016, Mr. Shacknai filed and served his Petition.

So very, very unprofessional on the part of Attorney Greer. Does he know there are no damages that the Zahaus are entitled to because of Rebecca's suicide and is just trying to drag out this sham case as long as he can?

 

[Betty P]

Thank you, K_Z! Glad to see the case is finally moving forward.

IIRC, this is the first discovery hearing.

 

[*Lash*]

Thinking of Rebecca and her loved ones today! I cannot believe 5 years have passed. You're in my thoughts and prayers.

:grouphug:

 

[SweetT]

So a discovery hearing on July 15th. So can someone please explain to me what exactly occurs in a discovery hearing? TIA