Great America Insurance Company et al v. Chang et al

Filing 59

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE Order to Show Cause Hearing set for 5/10/2013 10:00 AM. Show Cause Response due by 4/25/2013.. Signed by Judge Samuel Conti on 4/11/2013. (sclc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 4/11/2013)

1
2
3
4
5

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

6

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

7
8

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

GREAT AMERICAN INSURANCE
COMPANY, and GREAT AMERICAN
INSURANCE COMPANY OF NEW YORK,

) Case No. 12-00833-SC
)
) ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE
)
Plaintiffs,
)
)
v.
)
)
MICHAEL CHANG, d/b/a SUNRISE
)
CLEANERS, INC., and ROXANNE
)
CHANG, d/b/a, SUNRISE CLEANERS, )
INC.,
)
)
Defendants.
)
)
)
MICHAEL CHANG, d/b/a SUNRISE
)
CLEANERS, INC., and ROXANNE
)
CHANG, d/b/a, SUNRISE CLEANERS, )
INC.,
)
)
Third-Party
)
Plaintiffs,
)
)
v.
)
)
FIREMAN'S FUND INSURANCE
)
COMPANY,
)
)
Third-Party
)
Defendant.
)
)

1

Having reviewed the pleadings in this matter, the Court is

2

concerned about potential conflicts of interest between Defendants

3

Michael Chang and Roxanne Chang (the "Changs") and their attorneys

4

Gregg S. Garrison and Herman I. Kalfen.1

5

dispute over whether Plaintiffs owe a duty to defend and indemnify

6

the Changs in underlying state court actions concerning the alleged

7

contamination of the Changs' San Mateo property.

8

Amended Complaint ("FAC"), Plaintiffs allege that Messrs. Garrison

9

and Kalfen devised a strategy to manufacture the appearance of a

This case involves a

In their First

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

10

defense obligation with respect to the underlying actions by

11

seeking to arrange for other parties to file cross-complaints

12

against Michael Chang.

13

this contention, Plaintiffs quote from email correspondence among

14

Messrs. Garrison and Kalfen and Brian T. Kelleher, the Changs'

15

environmental consultant.

16

Mr. Garrison is named sixteen times in Plaintiffs' FAC, and Mr.

17

Kalfen is named twenty-eight times.

18

ECF No. 16 ("FAC") ¶ 52.

In support of

See, e.g., id. ¶¶ 53, 63-65.

In total,

In light of these facts, there is a distinct possibility that

19

Messrs. Garrison and Kalfen will be called as fact witnesses.

20

California Rule of Professional Conduct 5-210 generally bars an

21

attorney from acting as an advocate before a jury which will hear

22

that attorney's testimony.

23

reach trial, the Court is concerned that Messrs. Garrison and

24

Kalfen may be compelled to offer deposition testimony against their

25

own clients.

Further, even if this case does not

26
27
1

28

Mr. Kalfen has yet to formally appear in this action, but his
name is listed on the Changs' briefs. See ECF No. 56.

2

1

Accordingly, the Court hereby ORDERS Messrs. Garrison and

2

Kalfen to SHOW CAUSE why they should be allowed to continue to

3

represent the Changs in this matter.

4

take place at 10:00 a.m. on May 10, 2013 in Courtroom 1, 17th

5

Floor, 450 Golden Gate Avenue, San Francisco, California.

6

Garrison and Kalfen shall file a brief on this issue no later than

7

fourteen (14) days of the signature date of this Order.

8

also ORDERS Mr. Garrison to forward a copy of this Order to his

9

clients and to file a declaration with the Court attesting to that

United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

10

The show cause hearing shall

Messrs.

The Court

fact.

11
12

IT IS SO ORDERED.

13
14
15

Dated:

April 11, 2013
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28

3