Ribeiro-Sunglow LLC, et al v. Umpqua Bank

Filing 20

STIPULATION and ORDER signed by District Judge John A. Mendez on 4/12/17 ORDERING that Designation of Expert Witnesses due 6/13/2017, Supplemental Expert Disclosure due 6/27/2017, Joint Mid-Litigaiton Statement to be filed by 6/27/2017, All Disco very to be Completed by 7/11/2017, Dispositive Motions to be filed by 8/22/2017, Date for Hearing on all Dispositive Motions is 9/19/2017 at 1:30 p.m., Joint Pretrial Statement to be filed by 10/27/2017. Final Pretrial Conference SET for 11/3/2017 at 10:00 AM, and Trial SET for 1/8/2018 at 09:00 AM, BOTH in Courtroom 6 (JAM) before District Judge John A. Mendez. (Kastilahn, A)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14

JAMES J. BANKS (SBN 119525)
W. DAVID CORRICK (SBN 171827)
BANKS & WATSON
901 F Street, Suite 200
Sacramento, CA 95814-0733
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
Email: [e-mail]
Attorneys for Plaintiffs/Counterclaim-Defendants,
RIBEIRO-SUNGLOW, LLC, a Nevada
Limited Liability Company; and
RIBEIRO CALIFORNIA II, LLC, a
Nevada Limited Liability Company
DOUGLAS H. KRAFT (SBN 155127)
JOHN H. McCARDLE (SBN 155115)
KRAFT OPICH, LLP
7509 Madison Avenue, Suite 111
Citrus Heights, CA 95610
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Email: [e-mail]
Email: [e-mail]
Attorneys for Defendant/Counter-Claimant,
UMPQUA BANK, an Oregon state chartered bank

15
16

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

17

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

18
19

RIBEIRO-SUNGLOW, LLC, a Nevada Limited
Liability Company; and RIBEIRO CALIFORNIA
II, LLC, a Nevada Limited Liability Company,
Plaintiffs,

20
21
22

Case No.: 2:15-cv-01853-JAM-AC
SECOND STIPULATION FOR ORDER TO
MODIFY PRE-TRIAL SCHEDULING
ORDER; ORDER
[FRCP 16(B)(4)]

v.
UMPQUA BANK, a Bank Organized Under the
Laws of the State of Oregon,

23

THE HONORABLE JOHN A. MENDEZ

Defendant.

24
25

Plaintiffs RIBEIRO-SUNGLOW, LLC, a Nevada Limited Liability Company, and RIBEIRO

26

CALIFORNIA II, LLC, a Nevada Limited Liability Company, and defendant UMPQUA BANK, by and

27

through their respective undersigned counsel respectfully submit the following Stipulation for Order to

28

Modify Pre-Trial Scheduling Order and [Proposed] Order pursuant to FRCP 16(b)(4). For good cause as
{00082134.DOCX; 1}

1

SECOND STIPULATION TO MODIFY STATUS
(PRE-TRIAL SCHEDULING) ORDER; [PROPOSED] ORDER

1

shown herein, the parties seek an extension of 150-days of all remaining deadlines set forth in the

2

Pre-Trial Scheduling Order as delineated, infra.

3
4
5
6
7
8
9

WHEREAS, Plaintiffs filed this action to obtain recovery of two parcels of real property situated
in El Dorado Hills, California, from Defendant;
WHEREAS, Defendant holds title to the two parcels pursuant to a purchase at a trustee’s sale held
on or about August 15, 2011;
WHEREAS, the parties dispute the lawfulness and validity of the trustee’s sale which resulted in
the transfer of title in the two parcels to Defendant;
WHEREAS, Defendant filed a cross-complaint to quiet title in the two parcels to itself;

10

WHEREAS, the Court issued a Pre-Trial Scheduling Order on December 7, 2015;

11

WHEREAS, this case involves complex real estate title issues which bear upon multiple properties

12

and involve varied issues and interests;

13

WHEREAS, Johnny R. Ribeiro is a principal owner in RIBEIRO-SUNGLOW, LLC;

14

WHEREAS, UMPQUA BANK brought a prior arbitration action against Johnny R. Ribeiro, in his

15

individual capacity and as trustee of the Johnny R. Ribeiro Separate Trust, for breach of contract and for

16

monies had and received pursuant to Johnny R. Ribeiro’s personal guarantee of two real estate loans made

17

to Ribeiro-Commerce, LLC, RIBEIRO-SUNGLOW, LLC, and RIBEIRO CALIFORNIA II, LLC, in

18

which UMPQUA BANK obtained a judgment in the amount of $7,417,564.42;

19
20
21
22
23
24

WHEREAS, the arbitration judgment was entered in the District Court of Clark County, Nevada
on November 15, 2013;
WHEREAS, the parties are attempting to negotiate a global resolution of this case and the prior
judgment;
WHEREAS, the parties convened for a settlement meeting on September 7, 2016, and agreed to
diligently pursue global resolution of both matters;

25

WHEREAS, in order to provide the parties with additional time to reach a mutually agreeable

26

resolution of these matters, the Court entered an order to modify the Pre-Trial Scheduling Order on

27

September 12, 2016;

28
{00082134.DOCX; 1}

2

SECOND STIPULATION TO MODIFY STATUS
(PRE-TRIAL SCHEDULING) ORDER; [PROPOSED] ORDER

1

WHEREAS, the success of the agreed plan for global resolution hinged upon unraveling highly

2

complex title issues, performing a thorough examination of Johnny R. Ribeiro’s exceedingly complex

3

financial affairs, and obtaining approval of a proposed global resolution through multiple levels of

4

UMPQUA BANK hierarchy;

5

WHEREAS, the parties were unable to reach a global resolution; however, the parties continued to

6

diligently focus their attention on resolving the current litigation before this Court and ultimately reached

7

a tentative settlement of the current litigation;

8
9

WHEREAS, the parties drafted a form of settlement agreement that was agreeable to both sides,
but contingent upon resolving the title issues referenced above;

10

WHEREAS, the proposed form of settlement agreement called for Defendant to pass title of the

11

property to Plaintiffs via a Grant Deed, but was contingent upon a title company agreeing to the form of

12

Grant Deed and agreeing to insure Plaintiff’s title;

13

WHEREAS, on April 6, 2017, the title company advised that it would not issue a title insurance

14

policy based on the Grant Deed and advised that a rescission of the Trustee’s Deed as to the affected

15

parcels would be a more efficacious means of returning title to Plaintiffs;

16

WHEREAS, the parties need additional time to determine whether rescission of the Trustee’s

17

Deed can be accomplished, the form of the rescission, and if doing so will result in Plaintiffs obtaining the

18

required title insurance;

19

WHEREAS, the parties believe that their resources and attentions are better spent focusing on

20

settlement, rather than preparing for trial, but need to preserve the rights and ability to fully litigate this

21

matter should a trial be necessary; and

22
23
24

WHEREAS, good cause exists, the parties seek an order further modifying the remaining dates set
forth in the modified Pre-Trial Scheduling Order as follows:
Event

Current Date

New Date

25

Disclosure of Expert Witnesses

Feb. 13, 2017

June 13, 2017

26

Supplemental Expert Disclosure

Feb. 27, 2017

June 27, 2017

27

L/D to File Joint Mid-Litigation Statement

Feb. 27, 2017

June 27, 2017

28

All Discovery to be Completed

March 6, 2017

July 11, 2017

{00082134.DOCX; 1}

3

SECOND STIPULATION TO MODIFY STATUS
(PRE-TRIAL SCHEDULING) ORDER; [PROPOSED] ORDER

1

Event

Current Date

New Date

2

All Dispositive Motions to Be Filed

April 18, 2017

Aug. 22, 2017

3

Date for Hearing on all Dispositive Motions

May 16, 2017
(1:30 p.m.)

Sept. 19, 2017
(1:30 p.m.)

L/D to File Joint Pretrial Statement

June 30, 2017

Oct. 27, 2017

Final Pre-Trial Conference

July 7, 2017
(10:00 a.m.)

Nov. 3, 2017
(10:00 a.m.)

Trial

Aug. 28, 2017

Jan. 8, 2018 at 9:00 a.m.

4
5
6
7
8

Dated: April 11, 2017

BANKS & WATSON

9

By: /s/ James J. Banks
JAMES J. BANKS,
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
RIBEIRO-SUNGLOW, LLC, and
RIBEIRO CALIFORNIA II, LLC

10
11
12

Dated: April 11, 2017

KRAFT OPICH, LLP

13

By: /s/ Douglas H. Kraft
DOUGLAS H. KRAFT,
Attorneys for Defendant UMPQUA BANK

14
15
16

ORDER (AS MODIFIED BY THE COURT)
GOOD CAUSE appearing therefore, SO ORDERED.

17
18

DATED: 4/12/2017

/s/ John A. Mendez____________
JOHN A. MENDEZ
United States District Court Judge

19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
{00082134.DOCX; 1}

4

SECOND STIPULATION TO MODIFY STATUS
(PRE-TRIAL SCHEDULING) ORDER; [PROPOSED] ORDER