Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-04470/USCOURTS-cand-3_06-cv-04470-7/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 190
Nature of Suit: Other Contract Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1441 Petition For Removal--Other Contract

---

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

1

U

nite

d

States District C

o

u

rt

For the Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

Philips Medical Capital, LLC, a

Delaware limited liability company,

 Plaintiff,

 v.

MEDICAL INSIGHTS

DIAGNOSTICS CENTERS, INC., a

California corporation, et al., 

 Defendants.

_____________________________/

and related cross action 

_____________________________/

No. C-06- 4470 JSW (WDB)

[PROPOSED] RIGHT TO ATTACH

ORDER AND ORDER FOR

ISSUANCE OF WRIT OF

ATTACHMENT; ORDER

GRANTING WRIT OF POSSESSION

AND STAYING REDELIVERY 

On September 20, 2006, Magistrate Judge Wayne D. Brazil conducted a

hearing in connection with plaintiff’s applications for (1) writs of attachment

against Medical Insights Diagnostic Centers, Inc., (“MIDC”), Virgil Williams,

John Lynch, and Arthur Gronner, and (2) a writ of possession of MRI equipment. 

Marshall F. Goldberg, Esq., appeared for plaintiff. William T. Webb, Esq.,

appeared for defendants. 

The District Court hereby ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Brazil’s Report and

Recommendation, filed October 11, 2006, in its entirety and, for the reasons stated

therein, ORDERS as follows.

Case 3:06-cv-04470-JSW Document 43 Filed 10/11/2006 Page 1 of 13
 Case 3:06-cv-04470-JSW Document 68 Filed 01/26/07 Page 1 of 13
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

2

I. PLAINTIFF’S APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF ATTACHMENT

AGAINST MIDC 

A. Findings

The Court FINDS as follows:

1. The claim upon which the attachment is sought is one upon which an

attachment may be based.

2. The evidence in the record establishes the probable validity of the

claim upon which the attachment is based.

3. The attachment is not sought for a purpose other than recovery on the

claim upon which the request for attachment is based.

4. The amount to be secured is $2,514,798.06 (two million five hundred

fourteen thousand seven hundred ninety eight dollars and six cents).

5. MIDC is a California corporation.

6. Plaintiff must post an undertaking in the amount $10,000.00 (ten

thousand dollars) before the writ shall issue.

7. MIDC has asserted no exemptions.

B. Order

1. Plaintiff has a right to attach property of defendant MIDC that is

located in California up to a value of $2,514,798.06 (which includes

$7,000.00 for allowed attorneys’ fees).

2. No property is exempt.

3. Upon the filing of an undertaking in the amount $10,000.00, the

Clerk of the Court shall issue a writ of attachment against all property

of defendant MIDC that is located in California and for which a

method of levy is provided by Article 2 (commencing with Section

488.300) of Chapter 8 of the California Code of Civil Procedure.

Case 3:06-cv-04470-JSW Document 43 Filed 10/11/2006 Page 2 of 13
 Case 3:06-cv-04470-JSW Document 68 Filed 01/26/07 Page 2 of 13
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

3

4. Defendant MIDC must transfer to the levying officer possession of

(a) any documentary evidence in MIDC’s possession or control of

title to any property described in paragraph I.B.3 and (b) any

documentary evidence in MIDC’s possession or control of debt owed

to MIDC that constitutes property described in paragraph I.B.3.

5. Notice to Defendant MIDC – Failure to comply with this order may

subject MIDC to contempt proceedings.

II. PLAINTIFF’S APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF ATTACHMENT

AGAINST VIRGIL L. WILLIAMS 

A. Findings

The Court FINDS as follows:

1. The claim upon which the attachment is sought is one upon which an

attachment may be based.

2. The evidence in the record establishes the probable validity of the

claim upon which the attachment is based.

3. The attachment is not sought for a purpose other than recovery on the

claim upon which the request for attachment is based.

4. The amount to be secured is $453,000.00 (four hundred fifty three

thousand dollars).

5. Virgil L. Williams is a natural person.

6. Plaintiff must post an undertaking in the amount $10,000.00 (ten

thousand dollars) before the writ shall issue.

7. Defendant Williams has failed to prove that all property described in

plaintiff’s application is exempt from attachment.

//

//

Case 3:06-cv-04470-JSW Document 43 Filed 10/11/2006 Page 3 of 13
 Case 3:06-cv-04470-JSW Document 68 Filed 01/26/07 Page 3 of 13
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

4

8. The following property of Virgil Williams is exempt from

attachment:

(a) equity in two automobiles up to $2,300.00,

(b) furnishings in Dr. Williams’ home and personal effects located

at his residence located at 55 Yorkshire Drive, Oakland,

California, 94618, that are ordinarily and reasonably necessary

to Dr. Williams and his family and which he and his family

personally use and/or procured for use at their personal

residence,

(c) equity in watches and a ring up to an aggregate value of

$6,075.00,

(d) Virgil Williams’ earnings and bonuses for work as a physician,

(e) value of Northwestern Mutual Life Insurance Policies up to

$19,400.00,

(f) $50,000.00 equity in the homestead pursuant to Cal. C.C.P.

§704.730(a)(1), and 

(g) funds contained in retirement plans of the kind specified in

Cal.C.C.P. §704.115(a)(3) in excess of $150,000.00.

9. The following property of Virgil Williams is not exempt from

attachment: retirement funds of the kind specified in Cal.C.C.P. §704.115(a)(3) up

to the amount $150,000.00 (one hundred fifty thousand dollars). This order is

made WITHOUT PREJUDICE to plaintiff’s ability to request that the Court

revisit the issue of the amount of retirement funds that are not "exempt."

//

//

//

//

Case 3:06-cv-04470-JSW Document 43 Filed 10/11/2006 Page 4 of 13
 Case 3:06-cv-04470-JSW Document 68 Filed 01/26/07 Page 4 of 13
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

1

Paraphrasing the language of the authorizing statute, plaintiff seeks to attach:

money of individual Defendant(s) (a) located on the premises where a trade,

business or profession is conducted by Defendant(s), (b) in excess of $1,000

elsewhere than on the premises where a trade, business or profession is conducted

by Defendant(s) and not in deposit accounts, (c) located in a deposit account in

excess of $1,000, (d) in excess of an aggregate amount of $1,000 located in

deposit accounts and in a deposit account and money located elsewhere than on

the premises where a trade, business or profession is conducted by Defendant(s).

5

B. Order

1. Plaintiff has a right to attach property of defendant Virgil Williams

that is located in California up to a value of $453,000.00 (which

includes $3,000.00 for allowed attorneys’ fees).

2. The property described in paragraph II.A.8 is exempt and shall not be

attached.

3. The Clerk of the Court shall issue a writ of attachment in the amount

of $453,000.00 upon the filing of an undertaking in the amount of

$10,000.00, for any property of defendant Virgil Williams that is

subject to attachment under California Code of Civil Procedure

section 487.010 described as:

(a) Real property located at 55 Yorkshire Drive, Oakland,

California, 94618, and 

(b) (1) money on the premises where a trade, business, or

profession is conducted by the defendant, AND

(2) (a) money located elsewhere than on such premises

and deposit accounts in excess of the first one

thousand dollars ($1,000.00),

OR

if the defendant has (i) more than one deposit account or

(ii) at least one deposit account and money located

elsewhere than on the premises where a trade, business,

or profession is conducted by the defendant, then

(b) money in deposit accounts and elsewhere than on

the premises where a trade business, or profession

is conducted in excess of an aggregate amount of

one thousand dollars ($1,000.00).1

Case 3:06-cv-04470-JSW Document 43 Filed 10/11/2006 Page 5 of 13
 Case 3:06-cv-04470-JSW Document 68 Filed 01/26/07 Page 5 of 13
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.g., Lynch Motion at 8. We think the articulation in the text states plaintiff’s entitlement more

clearly.

6

4. Defendant Virgil Williams must transfer to the levying officer

possession of (a) any documentary evidence in Virgil Williams’

possession or control of his title to any property and (b) any

documentary evidence in Virgil Williams’ possession or control of

debt owed to Dr. Williams.

5. Notice to Defendant Virgil Williams – Failure to comply with this

order may subject you to contempt proceedings.

III. PLAINTIFF’S APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF ATTACHMENT

AGAINST JOHN A. LYNCH 

A. Findings

The Court FINDS as follows:

1. The claim upon which the attachment is sought is one upon which an

attachment may be based.

2. The evidence in the record establishes the probable validity of the

claim upon which the attachment is based.

3. The attachment is not sought for a purpose other than recovery on the

claim upon which the request for attachment is based.

4. The amount to be secured is $453,000.00 (four hundred fifty three

thousand dollars).

5. John A. Lynch is a natural person.

6. Plaintiff must post an undertaking in the amount $10,000.00 (ten

thousand dollars) before the writ shall issue.

7. Defendant Lynch has failed to prove that all property described in

plaintiff’s application is exempt from attachment.

//

Case 3:06-cv-04470-JSW Document 43 Filed 10/11/2006 Page 6 of 13
 Case 3:06-cv-04470-JSW Document 68 Filed 01/26/07 Page 6 of 13
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

8. The following property of John A. Lynch is exempt from attachment:

(a) equity in one automobile up to $2,300.00,

(b) furnishings in Mr. Lynch’s home and personal effects located

at his residence located at 5799 Balmoral Drive, Oakland,

California, 94619, that are ordinarily and reasonably necessary

to Mr. Lynch and his family and which he and his family

personally use and/or procured for use at their personal

residence,

(c) equity in personal jewelry, heirlooms and works of art,

including watches, paintings, sculptures, and wedding rings, up

to an aggregate value of $6,075.00,

(d) John Lynch’s employment earnings,

(e) value of AIG Term Life Insurance Policy up to $19,400.00,

(f) $75,000.00 equity in the homestead pursuant to Cal. C.C.P.

§704.730,

(g) funds contained in retirement plans of the kind specified in

Cal.C.C.P. §704.115(a)(3) in excess of $150,000.00, and

(h) tools of the trade including one 1997 Ford Van.

9. The following property of John Lynch is not exempt from

attachment: retirement funds of the kind specified in Cal.C.C.P. §704.115(a)(3) up

to the amount $150,000.00 (one hundred fifty thousand dollars). This order is

made WITHOUT PREJUDICE to plaintiff’s ability to request that the Court

revisit the issue of the amount of retirement funds that are not "exempt."

B. Order

1. Plaintiff has a right to attach property of defendant John A. Lynch

that is located in California up to a value of $453,000.00 (which

includes $3,000.00 for allowed attorneys fees).

Case 3:06-cv-04470-JSW Document 43 Filed 10/11/2006 Page 7 of 13
 Case 3:06-cv-04470-JSW Document 68 Filed 01/26/07 Page 7 of 13
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

2

Paraphrasing the language of the authorizing statute, plaintiff seeks to attach:

money of individual Defendant(s) (a) located on the premises where a trade,

business or profession is conducted by Defendant(s), (b) in excess of $1,000

elsewhere than on the premises where a trade, business or profession is conducted

by Defendant(s) and not in deposit accounts, (c) located in a deposit account in

excess of $1,000, (d) in excess of an aggregate amount of $1,000 located in

deposit accounts and in a deposit account and money located elsewhere than on

the premises where a trade, business or profession is conducted by Defendant(s).

E.g., Lynch Motion at 8. We think the articulation in the text states plaintiff’s entitlement more

clearly.

8

2. The property described in paragraph III.A.8 is exempt and shall not

be attached.

3. The Clerk of the Court shall issue a writ of attachment in the amount

of $453,000.00 upon the filing of an undertaking in the amount of

$10,000.00, for any property of defendant John A. Lynch that is

subject to attachment under California Code of Civil Procedure

section 487.010 described as:

(a) Real property located at 5799 Balmoral Drive, Oakland,

California, 94619, and 

(b) (1) money on the premises where a trade, business, or

profession is conducted by the defendant, AND

(2) (a) money located elsewhere than on such premises

and deposit accounts in excess of the first one

thousand dollars ($1,000.00),

OR

if the defendant has (i) more than one deposit account or

(ii) at least one deposit account and money located

elsewhere than on the premises where a trade, business,

or profession is conducted by the defendant, then

(b) money in deposit accounts and elsewhere than on

the premises where a trade business, or profession

is conducted in excess of an aggregate amount of

one thousand dollars ($1,000.00).2

//

//

//

Case 3:06-cv-04470-JSW Document 43 Filed 10/11/2006 Page 8 of 13
 Case 3:06-cv-04470-JSW Document 68 Filed 01/26/07 Page 8 of 13
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

9

4. Defendant John A. Lynch must transfer to the levying officer

possession of (a) any documentary evidence in Mr. Lynch’s

possession or control of his title to any property and (b) any

documentary evidence in Mr. Lynch’s possession or control of debt

owed to Mr. Lynch.

5. Notice to Defendant John A. Lynch – Failure to comply with this

order may subject you to contempt proceedings.

IV. PLAINTIFF’S APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF ATTACHMENT

AGAINST ARTHUR GRONNER 

A. Findings

The Court FINDS as follows:

1. The claim upon which the attachment is sought is one upon which an

attachment may be based.

2. The evidence in the record establishes the probable validity of the

claim upon which the attachment is based.

3. The attachment is not sought for a purpose other than recovery on the

claim upon which the request for attachment is based.

4. The amount to be secured is $453,000.00 (four hundred fifty three

thousand dollars).

5. Arthur T. Gronner is a natural person.

6. Plaintiff must post an undertaking in the amount $10,000.00 (ten

thousand dollars) before the writ shall issue.

7. Defendant Gronner has failed to prove that all property described in

plaintiff’s application is exempt from attachment.

//

//

//

Case 3:06-cv-04470-JSW Document 43 Filed 10/11/2006 Page 9 of 13
 Case 3:06-cv-04470-JSW Document 68 Filed 01/26/07 Page 9 of 13
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

10

8. The following property of Arthur T. Gronner is exempt from

attachment:

(a) equity in two automobiles up to $2,300.00,

(b) furnishings in Dr. Gronner’s home and personal effects located

at his residence located at 24 Cabernet Ct., Lafayette,

California, 94549, that are ordinarily and reasonably necessary

to Dr. Gronner and his family and which he and his family

personally use and/or procured for use at their personal

residence,

(c) equity in personal jewelry, heirlooms and works of art,

including rings and necklaces, up to an aggregate value of

$6,075.00,

(d) Dr. Gronner’s employment earnings,

(e) $75,000.00 equity in the homestead pursuant to Cal. C.C.P.

§704.730, and

(F) funds contained in retirement plans of the kind specified in

Cal.C.C.P. §704.115(a)(3) in excess of $150,000.00.

9. The following property of Arthur Gronner is not exempt from

attachment: retirement funds of the kind specified in Cal.C.C.P. §704.115(a)(3) up

to the amount $150,000.00 (one hundred fifty thousand dollars). This order is

made WITHOUT PREJUDICE to plaintiff’s ability to request that the Court

revisit the issue of the amount of retirement funds that are not "exempt."

B. Order

1. Plaintiff has a right to attach property of defendant Arthur T. Gronner

that is located in California up to a value of $453,000.00 (which

includes $3,000.00 for allowed attorneys’ fees).

Case 3:06-cv-04470-JSW Document 43 Filed 10/11/2006 Page 10 of 13
 Case 3:06-cv-04470-JSW Document 68 Filed 01/26/07 Page 10 of 13
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

3

Paraphrasing the language of the authorizing statute, plaintiff seeks to attach:

money of individual Defendant(s) (a) located on the premises where a trade,

business or profession is conducted by Defendant(s), (b) in excess of $1,000

elsewhere than on the premises where a trade, business or profession is conducted

by Defendant(s) and not in deposit accounts, (c) located in a deposit account in

excess of $1,000, (d) in excess of an aggregate amount of $1,000 located in

deposit accounts and in a deposit account and money located elsewhere than on

the premises where a trade, business or profession is conducted by Defendant(s).

E.g., Lynch Motion at 8. We think the articulation in the text states plaintiff’s entitlement more

clearly.

11

2. The property described in paragraph IV.A.8 is exempt and shall not

be attached.

3. The Clerk of the Court shall issue a writ of attachment in the amount

of $453,000.00 upon the filing of an undertaking in the amount of

$10,000.00, for any property of defendant Arthur T. Gronner that is

subject to attachment under California Code of Civil Procedure

section 487.010 described as:

(a) Real property located at 24 Cabernet Court, Lafayette,

California, 94549, and 

(b) (1) money on the premises where a trade, business, or

profession is conducted by the defendant, AND

(2) (a) money located elsewhere than on such premises

and deposit accounts in excess of the first one

thousand dollars ($1,000.00),

OR

if the defendant has (i) more than one deposit account or

(ii) at least one deposit account and money located

elsewhere than on the premises where a trade, business,

or profession is conducted by the defendant, then

(b) money in deposit accounts and elsewhere than on

the premises where a trade business, or profession

is conducted in excess of an aggregate amount of

one thousand dollars ($1,000.00).3

//

//

//

Case 3:06-cv-04470-JSW Document 43 Filed 10/11/2006 Page 11 of 13
 Case 3:06-cv-04470-JSW Document 68 Filed 01/26/07 Page 11 of 13
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

12

4. Defendant Arthur T. Gronner must transfer to the levying officer

possession of (a) any documentary evidence in Dr. Gronner’s

possession or control of his title to any property and (b) any

documentary evidence in Dr. Gronner’s possession or control of debt

owed to Dr. Gronner.

5. Notice to Defendant Arthur T. Gronner – Failure to comply with

this order may subject you to contempt proceedings.

V. PLAINTIFF’S APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF POSSESSION

A. Findings

The Court FINDS as follows:

1. MIDC has been properly served as required by Cal. C.C.P. §512.030.

2. Plaintiff has established the probable validity of its claim to

possession of the following property:

(a) Items of Equipment, Software and Maintenance: VitalWorks

PACS/RIS,

(b) Items of Equipment, Software and Maintenance: one Panorana

MRI 0.6T, and 

(c) Items of Equipment, Software and Maintenance: one MedRad

Injector and one Silent Scan Music and Communication

System.

3. There is probable cause to believe this property is located at the

following private place: Medical Insights Diagnostic Centers, Inc., 1401 Willow

Pass Road, Suite 110, Concord, California, 94520.

4. Plaintiff has not yet filed an undertaking as required by Cal. C.C. P.

§515.010.

5. MIDC wishes to retain possession of the property.

Case 3:06-cv-04470-JSW Document 43 Filed 10/11/2006 Page 12 of 13
 Case 3:06-cv-04470-JSW Document 68 Filed 01/26/07 Page 12 of 13
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

13

6. Plaintiff does not object to MIDC’s retention of the property on the

condition that MIDC files an undertaking pursuant to Cal. C.C.P. §515.020.

7. In order to retain possession of the property, defendant must file an

undertaking in the amount $375,000.00 (three hundred seventy five thousand

dollars).

B. Order

1. Upon filing of an appropriate undertaking plaintiff is entitled to

issuance of a writ of possession for the property described in section

V.A.2.

2. Redelivery of the property will be STAYED on the condition that

MIDC files an undertaking in the amount $375,000.00.

3. Defendant must file the requisite undertaking by [insert month and

date], 2006. If MIDC does not comply with this order, plaintiff may

move this Court for a prompt determination of the amount of the

undertaking plaintiff will be required to post pursuant to Cal. C.C.P.

§515.010. Upon plaintiff’s filing of the requisite undertaking, the

Court will direct the Clerk of the Court to promptly issue a writ of

possession for the property described in section V.A.2.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: October __, 2006

 

JEFFREY S. WHITE

United States District Judge

Copies to: 

parties, 

JSW, wdb, stats

Case 3:06-cv-04470-JSW Document 43 Filed 10/11/2006 Page 13 of 13

February 6, 2007. January 26, 2007

Case 3:06-cv-04470-JSW Document 68 Filed 01/26/07 Page 13 of 13