Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_18-cv-01104/USCOURTS-caed-2_18-cv-01104-4/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 360
Nature of Suit: Other Personal Injury
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Breach of Fiduciary Duty

---

-1-

STIPULATION & REQUEST FOR LEAVE OF COURT TO EXTEND THE APRIL 16, 2019 STAY OF DISCOVERY AND 

TIME FOR FILING ANSWERS, CROSS-CLAIMS AND/OR COUNTERCLAIMS AND FOR AN ADDITIONAL180 DAYS 

AND FOR MODIFICATION OF THE COURT’S SEPTEMBER 26, 2019 ORDER AND ORDER

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

K. Greg Peterson, Esq. (SBN: 118287)

K. GREG PETERSON, A PROFESSIONAL LAW CORPORATION

455 Capitol Mall, Suite 325

Sacramento, California 95814

Telephone: (916) 443-3010

Facsimile: (916) 492-2680

Email: greg@kgregpeterson.com

Attorney for Plaintiffs EL MACERO PARTNERS, LLC, a California limited liability 

company, and FAIR PLAZA II, LTD., a California limited partnership

Diane G. Kindermann Henderson, Esq. (SBN 144426) 

Glen C. Hansen (SBN 166923)

ABBOTT & KINDERMANN, INC.

2100 21st Street

Sacramento, California 95818

Telephone: (916) 456-9595

Facsimile: (916) 456-9599

Email: dkindermann@aklandlaw.com

Email: ghansen@aklandlaw.com

Attorneys for Defendants BYONG HYON SON, MYONG HEE SON and

EL MACERO CLEANERS, INC., a California corporation

Brett H. Oberst, Esq. (SBN: 196219)

DOLL AMIR & ELEY LLP

725 S. Figueroa Street, Suite 3275

Los Angeles, CA 90017

Telephone: (213) 542-3380

Facsimile: (213) 542-3163

Email: boberst@dollamir.com

Attorneys for Defendant AMERICAN GENERAL LIFE INSURANCE 

Company, a Texas corporation

Edward R. Hugo, Esq. (SBN: 124839)

Christina M. Glezakos, Esq. (SBN: 229928)

Hugo Parker, LLP

240 Stockton Street, Floor 8

San Francisco, CA 94108-5325

Telephone: (415) 808-0300

Facsimile: (415) 808-0333

Email: ehugo@hugoparker.com

Attorney for TIG Group, on behalf of Defendant ESTATE OF 

WILLIAM R. SUTTON, DECEASED, sued herein pursuant to 

California Probate Code sections 550 through 555

Case 2:18-cv-01104-MCE-KJN Document 27 Filed 04/01/20 Page 1 of 10
-2-

STIPULATION & REQUEST FOR LEAVE OF COURT TO EXTEND THE APRIL 16, 2019 STAY OF DISCOVERY AND 

TIME FOR FILING ANSWERS, CROSS-CLAIMS AND/OR COUNTERCLAIMS AND FOR AN ADDITIONAL180 DAYS 

AND FOR MODIFICATION OF THE COURT’S SEPTEMBER 26, 2019 ORDER AND ORDER

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

Kenneth R. Stone, Esq. (SBN: 67717)

HEFNER STARK & MAROIS, LLP 

2150 River Plaza Drive, Suite 450

Sacramento, CA 95833

Telephone: (916) 925-6620

Facsimile: (916) 925-1127

Email: kstone@hsmlaw.com

Attorneys for DAWNA F. SUTTON, Individually and as General Partner of CAL-WEST 

SUTTON, a California general partnership; DAWNA F. SUTTON, As Successor Trustee 

of The Sutton Family Revocable Trust Dated October 6, 1997; DAWNA F. SUTTON, as 

Trustee of The William R. Sutton Bypass Trust; DAWNA F. SUTTON, as Trustee of The 

Dawna F. Sutton Survivor's Trust; and TROUBLEFREE, LLC, a California limited liability 

company

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

EL MACERO PARTNERS, LLC, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

ESTATE OF WILLIAM R. SUTTON, et al., 

Defendants.

__________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: 2:18-cv-01090-MCE-DB

STIPULATION AND REQUEST 

FOR LEAVE OF COURT TO 

EXTEND THE SEPTEMBER 26, 

2019 STAY OF DISCOVERY AND 

TIME FOR FILING ANSWERS, 

CROSS-CLAIMS AND/OR

COUNTERCLAIMS FOR AN 

ADDITIONAL ONE YEAR PERIOD 

AND FOR MODIFICATION OF 

THE COURT’S SEPTEMBER 26, 

2019 ORDER; AND ORDER

The Parties hereto, by and through their attorneys of record, hereby stipulate to 

the following facts in support of a joint request for leave of Court to extend for an 

additional one year period the deadlines set forth in the Court’s September 26, 2019

Order regarding discovery and time for filing answers, crossclaims and/or counterclaims 

and for modification of the Court’s September 26, 2019 Order as follows:

Case 2:18-cv-01104-MCE-KJN Document 27 Filed 04/01/20 Page 2 of 10
-3-

STIPULATION & REQUEST FOR LEAVE OF COURT TO EXTEND THE APRIL 16, 2019 STAY OF DISCOVERY AND 

TIME FOR FILING ANSWERS, CROSS-CLAIMS AND/OR COUNTERCLAIMS AND FOR AN ADDITIONAL180 DAYS 

AND FOR MODIFICATION OF THE COURT’S SEPTEMBER 26, 2019 ORDER AND ORDER

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

I. STATUS OF THE ACTION:

A. Plaintiffs EL MACERO PARTNERS, LLC, a California limited liability 

company, and FAIR PLAZA II, LTD., a California limited partnership, filed their Complaint 

herein on or about April 3, 2018. Thereafter, on or about August 21, 2018, Plaintiffs filed 

their First Amended Complaint (“FAC”), adding Defendant B.C. TILE II, INC. DBA 

COTTONWOOD CLEANERS AND EL MACERO CLEANERS (“B.C. Tile II, Inc.”);

B. The following Defendants have filed their Answers to Plaintiffs’ FAC:

• DAWNA F. SUTTON; individually and as General Partner of CALWEST SUTTON, a California general partnership; DAWNA F. SUTTON, as 

Successor Trustee of The Sutton Family Revocable Trust Dated October 6, 1997; 

DAWNA F. SUTTON, as Trustee of The William R. Sutton Bypass Trust; DAWNA 

F. SUTTON, as Trustee of The Dawna F. Sutton Survivor’s Trust; CAL-WEST 

SUTTON, a California general partnership, and TROUBLEFREE, LLC, a California 

limited liability company (the “Sutton-Related Defendants”); and

• BYONG HYON SON and MYONG HEE SON, individually and doing 

business as EL MACERO CLEANERS and Defendant EL MACERO CLEANERS, 

INC. a California corporation (the “El Macero, Inc.-Related Defendants”);

C. Defendant AMERICAN GENERAL, the alleged successor-in-interest to 

California-Western States Life Insurance Company, and TIG Group, on behalf of 

Defendant the ESTATE OF WILLIAM R. SUTTON, Deceased, has yet to file a response 

to the FAC. In accordance with the Court’s September 26, 2019 Order its response is 

currently due to be filed on or before March 24, 2020.

D. The following Defendants have had defaults entered against them, as 

indicated:

• The default of Defendant CHANG SIK CHOI was entered by the 

Clerk of the Court as to the First Amended Complaint on February 28, 2020;

• The default of Defendant B. C. Tile II, Inc. was entered by the Clerk 

of the Court as to the First Amended Complaint on December 4, 2018;

Case 2:18-cv-01104-MCE-KJN Document 27 Filed 04/01/20 Page 3 of 10
-4-

STIPULATION & REQUEST FOR LEAVE OF COURT TO EXTEND THE APRIL 16, 2019 STAY OF DISCOVERY AND 

TIME FOR FILING ANSWERS, CROSS-CLAIMS AND/OR COUNTERCLAIMS AND FOR AN ADDITIONAL180 DAYS 

AND FOR MODIFICATION OF THE COURT’S SEPTEMBER 26, 2019 ORDER AND ORDER

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

E. Plaintiffs have been unable to locate a personal representative for 

Defendant ESTATE OF SANG-EUI SIM, DECEASED or insurance carrier(s) for Mr. Sim, 

but Plaintiffs are continuing in their efforts to do so; and

J. Formal discovery to date has been limited to Plaintiffs’ service of the 

Subpoenas (for production of documents) on InterWest Insurance and Nationwide

Insurance and the deposition of Bill Williams, an individual formerly employed by the 

Sutton Defendants as a handyman at the El Macero Shopping Center.

II. SHOWING OF GOOD CAUSE:

A. Plaintiffs have commenced an investigation of the PCE contamination at the 

Site and have incurred and will continue to incur response costs related to such 

investigation and remediation of the contamination. However, for the reasons set forth 

more fully below, the full extent of Plaintiffs’ damages is not yet known.

B. Plaintiffs’ environmental consultant, Dr. Ijaz Jamall of Risk-Based 

Decisions, Inc. (RBDI), originally projected that, as an interim remedial measure, a Soil 

Vapor Extraction (SVE) system consisting of, among other things, three shallowscreened and three deep-screened SVE wells, would be installed and operational by

approximately the summer of 2018. It was Dr. Jamall’s opinion at that time that upon the 

expiration of a six-month period of SVE system operation he would have sufficient 

information in hand from on-going field work to provide a reliable estimate of the 

anticipated full cost of the investigation and cleanup of the Site.

C. Due to an unforeseen delay in obtaining a construction permit from the Yolo 

County Air District, the system was not activated until January 2019. That delay, coupled 

with the very wet 2019 winter and high groundwater levels that followed, prevented the 

system from operating and it was not until mid-August 2019 that the SVE system became 

partially operational.

D. Dr. Jamall has advised that because only the three shallow wells began 

operating in August 2019 and because an expected summertime drop in groundwater 

levels did not occur, the deeper vapor extraction wells are submerged and are expected 

Case 2:18-cv-01104-MCE-KJN Document 27 Filed 04/01/20 Page 4 of 10
-5-

STIPULATION & REQUEST FOR LEAVE OF COURT TO EXTEND THE APRIL 16, 2019 STAY OF DISCOVERY AND 

TIME FOR FILING ANSWERS, CROSS-CLAIMS AND/OR COUNTERCLAIMS AND FOR AN ADDITIONAL180 DAYS 

AND FOR MODIFICATION OF THE COURT’S SEPTEMBER 26, 2019 ORDER AND ORDER

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

to remain submerged beyond the end of the 2019/2020 rainy season. However, once the

groundwater levels have dropped sufficiently, Plaintiffs’ consultant intends to operate all 

six of the SVE wells through at least the end of summer 2020, and as long as the 

groundwater levels permit. It is Dr. Jamall’s continued professional opinion that he will 

need a minimum of six months of data before he can provide a reliable estimate of the full 

cost of the investigation and cleanup of the Site, which, at this point, appears to possibly

be another year or more away.

E. To complicate matters, Dr. Jamall has further advised that the Water Board 

staff have recently proposed dropping the Environmental Screening Levels (ESL) to close 

a commercial PCE site by a factor of 30 from 2,100 μg/m3 at five-feet below grade or in 

the sub-slab space under a building to 67 μg/m3, which will make it extremely difficult to 

effectively close most commercial sites.

1 While the proposed regulations have not been 

formally adopted and are still in the public comment stage, the Water Board has been 

reluctant to close sites outside of those standards. RBDI and other stakeholders in the 

environmental remediation industry have submitted written comments but the final 

adoption of the proposed changes of the ESL faces great uncertainty at this moment.

F. In view of the much more extended period of delay than the Parties had 

originally anticipated, the result of which is the absence of meaningful data on which to 

rely for purposes of discussing settlement, much less complete discovery, and coupled 

with the fact that this is a fourth proposed extension and stay, the Parties hereto have 

jointly agreed to propose a one-year extension of the September 26, 2019 stay while 

awaiting reliable data and discussing the possibility of resolution of this matter through 

informal means and/or through the services of an independent, third-party mediator in an 

effort to preserve judicial resources and avoid incurring further and possibly unnecessary 

litigation costs.

11 The results of the 2016 soil gas sampling at six feet at the El Macero Center ranged from a high of 

24,000 μg/m3 to a low of ND (non-detect).

Case 2:18-cv-01104-MCE-KJN Document 27 Filed 04/01/20 Page 5 of 10
-6-

STIPULATION & REQUEST FOR LEAVE OF COURT TO EXTEND THE APRIL 16, 2019 STAY OF DISCOVERY AND 

TIME FOR FILING ANSWERS, CROSS-CLAIMS AND/OR COUNTERCLAIMS AND FOR AN ADDITIONAL180 DAYS 

AND FOR MODIFICATION OF THE COURT’S SEPTEMBER 26, 2019 ORDER AND ORDER

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

III. STIPULATION

NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby stipulated by and between the Parties hereto, by 

and through their respective counsel, that, subject to the Court’s approval:

1. There shall be a one-year extension of the existing deadlines set forth in the 

Court’s September 26, 2019 Order in this matter of all non-expert written discovery,

including interrogatories, requests for admission and, except as set forth hereinbelow in 

Paragraph 2, document requests; all Party depositions; all expert witness discovery, 

including expert witness disclosure, exchange of reports and the taking of expert 

depositions; 

2. During the above-described one-year extension period, the Parties shall 

have the ability to subpoena third-party documents;

3. There shall be a one-year extension of the date for responding to the FAC, 

including bringing cross-claims and/or counterclaims by all Parties, and any responses, 

cross-claims, and/or counterclaims shall be served and filed within 14 days following the 

expiration of the one-year extension period; 

4. There shall be a one-year extension of the current date for completion of all 

non-expert discovery, which date is currently calculated as October 26, 2020. This 

extension shall have the effect of also extending all other dates in the Court’s September 

26, 2019 Order, including, but not limited to, designation of expert witnesses, exchanging 

of written reports and supplemental designations of expert witnesses, filing of dispositive 

motions, and filing of a Joint Notice of Trial Readiness; and

5. All of the foregoing dates shall be calculated from and after the dates 

extended pursuant to the Court’s September 26, 2019 Order, as shown below:

TASK EXTENSION

CURRENT DATE

PER 9/26/2019

ORDER

NEW DATE

Non-Expert Discovery

Completion

One-year extension 

from non-expert 

discovery completion 

date

10/26/2020 10/26/2021

Case 2:18-cv-01104-MCE-KJN Document 27 Filed 04/01/20 Page 6 of 10
-7-

STIPULATION & REQUEST FOR LEAVE OF COURT TO EXTEND THE APRIL 16, 2019 STAY OF DISCOVERY AND 

TIME FOR FILING ANSWERS, CROSS-CLAIMS AND/OR COUNTERCLAIMS AND FOR AN ADDITIONAL180 DAYS 

AND FOR MODIFICATION OF THE COURT’S SEPTEMBER 26, 2019 ORDER AND ORDER

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

Written Discovery One -year stay 2/25/2020 2/25/2021

Expert Disclosure + 

reports

60 days from 

extended Non-Expert 

Discovery Completion

Date

12/28/2020 12/28/2021

Supplemental Expert 

Disclosure

30 days after 

designation of experts

1/27/2021 1/27/2022

Dispositive Motions One-year extension 

from non-expert 

discovery completion 

date

4/26/2021 4/26/2022

Joint Notice of Trial 

Readiness – to be filed 

not later than 30 days 

after last ruling on a 

dispositive motion

TBD based on 

date of last 

ruling on a 

dispositive 

motion

Response to First 

Amended Complaint, 

Cross-claims/

Counterclaims

One-year stay + 14 

days

3/24/2020 3/24/2021

1

IT IS SO STIPULATED.

Dated: March 30, 2020, 2020 K. GREG PETERSON, a

Professional Law Corporation

By: /s/ K. Greg Peterson

K. Greg Peterson, Esq.

Attorney for EL MACERO PARTNERS, LLC, a 

California limited liability company, and FAIR PLAZA II, 

LTD., a California limited partnership

Dated: March 27, 2020 ABBOTT & KINDERMANN, INC.

By: /s/ Glen C. Hansen (as authorized 3/24/2020)

Diane G. Kindermann Henderson, Esq.

Attorneys for Defendants BYONG HYON SON, 

MYONG HEE SON and EL MACERO CLEANERS,

INC., a California corporation

Case 2:18-cv-01104-MCE-KJN Document 27 Filed 04/01/20 Page 7 of 10
-8-

STIPULATION & REQUEST FOR LEAVE OF COURT TO EXTEND THE APRIL 16, 2019 STAY OF DISCOVERY AND 

TIME FOR FILING ANSWERS, CROSS-CLAIMS AND/OR COUNTERCLAIMS AND FOR AN ADDITIONAL180 DAYS 

AND FOR MODIFICATION OF THE COURT’S SEPTEMBER 26, 2019 ORDER AND ORDER

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

Dated: March 27, 2020 DOLL AMIR & ELEY

By: /s/ Brett H. Oberst (as authorized 3/27/20)

Brett H. Oberst, Esq.

Attorneys for Defendant AMERICAN GENERAL LIFE 

INSURANCE COMPANY, a Texas corporation

Dated: March 24, 2020 HEFNER STARK & MAROIS

By: /s/ Kenneth R. Stone (as authorized 3/24/2020)

Kenneth R. Stone, Esq.

Attorneys for DAWNA F. SUTTON, Individually and as 

General Partner of CAL-WEST SUTTON, a California 

general partnership; DAWNA F. SUTTON, As 

Successor Trustee of The Sutton Family Revocable 

Trust Dated October 6, 1997; DAWNA F. 

SUTTON, as Trustee of The William R. Sutton Bypass 

Trust; DAWNA F. SUTTON, as Trustee of The Dawna 

F. Sutton Survivor's Trust; and TROUBLEFREE, LLC, 

a California limited liability company

Dated: March 27, 2020 HUGO PARKER, LLP

By: /s/ Christina M. Glezakos (as authorized 3/27/2020

Christina M. Glezakos, Esq.

Attorney for TIG Group, on behalf of Defendant 

ESTATE OF WILLIAM R. SUTTON, DECEASED, sued 

herein pursuant to California Probate Code sections 

550 through 555

Case 2:18-cv-01104-MCE-KJN Document 27 Filed 04/01/20 Page 8 of 10
-9-

STIPULATION & REQUEST FOR LEAVE OF COURT TO EXTEND THE APRIL 16, 2019 STAY OF DISCOVERY AND 

TIME FOR FILING ANSWERS, CROSS-CLAIMS AND/OR COUNTERCLAIMS AND FOR AN ADDITIONAL180 DAYS 

AND FOR MODIFICATION OF THE COURT’S SEPTEMBER 26, 2019 ORDER AND ORDER

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

ORDER

The Court, having received, read, and considered the stipulation of the Parties, 

and good cause appearing as required by Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, rule 16(b)(4),

hereby adopts the stipulation of the Parties in its entirety as its order, as follows:

1. There shall be a one-year extension of the deadlines set forth in this Court’s 

September 26, 2019 Order in this matter of all non-expert written discovery, including 

interrogatories, requests for admission and, except as set forth hereinbelow in Paragraph 

2, document requests; all Party depositions; all expert witness discovery, including expert 

witness disclosure, exchange of reports and the taking of expert depositions; 

2. During the above-described one-year extension period, the Parties shall 

have the ability to subpoena third-party documents;

3. There shall be a one-year extension of the date for responding to the FAC, 

including bringing cross-claims and/or counterclaims by all Parties, and any responses, 

cross-claims, and/or counterclaims shall be served and filed within 14 days following the 

expiration of the one-year extension period; 

4. There shall be a one-year extension of the current date for completion of all 

non-expert discovery, which date is currently calculated as October 26, 2020. This 

extension shall have the effect of also extending all other dates in the Court’s September 

26, 2019 Order, including, but not limited to, designation of expert witnesses, exchanging 

of written reports and supplemental designations of expert witnesses, filing of dispositive 

motions, and filing of a Joint Notice of Trial Readiness; and

5. All of the foregoing dates shall be calculated from and after the dates

previously extended pursuant to the Court’s September 26, 2019 Order, as shown below:

/ / /

/ / /

/ / /

/ / /

/ / /

Case 2:18-cv-01104-MCE-KJN Document 27 Filed 04/01/20 Page 9 of 10
-10-

STIPULATION & REQUEST FOR LEAVE OF COURT TO EXTEND THE APRIL 16, 2019 STAY OF DISCOVERY AND 

TIME FOR FILING ANSWERS, CROSS-CLAIMS AND/OR COUNTERCLAIMS AND FOR AN ADDITIONAL180 DAYS 

AND FOR MODIFICATION OF THE COURT’S SEPTEMBER 26, 2019 ORDER AND ORDER

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

TASK EXTENSION

CURRENT DATE

PER 9/26/2019

ORDER

NEW DATE

Non-Expert Discovery

Completion

One-year extension 

from non-expert

discovery completion 

date

10/26/2020 10/26/2021

Written Discovery One-year stay 2/25/2020 2/25/2021

Expert Disclosure + 

reports

60 days from 

extended Non-Expert

Discovery Completion

Date

12/28/2020 12/28/2021

Supplemental Expert 

Disclosure

30 days after 

designation of experts

1/27/2021 1/27/2022

Dispositive Motions One-year extension 

from non-expert 

discovery completion 

date

4/26/2021 4/26/2022

Joint Notice of Trial 

Readiness – to be filed 

not later than 30 days 

after last ruling on a 

dispositive motion

TBD based on date 

of last ruling on a 

dispositive motion

Response to First 

Amended Complaint, 

Cross-claims/

Counterclaims

One-year stay + 14 

days

3/24/2020 3/24/2021

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 31, 2020

Case 2:18-cv-01104-MCE-KJN Document 27 Filed 04/01/20 Page 10 of 10