Source: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-azd-2_08-cv-02150/USCOURTS-azd-2_08-cv-02150-0/pdf.json

Nature of Suit Code: 190
Nature of Suit: Other Contract Actions
Cause of Action: 28:1332 Diversity-Breach of 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

WO

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Barton Colson, individually, 

Plaintiff, 

vs.

Javad Ghaemmaghami and Marie

DeBernardi Ghaemmaghami, husband and

wife; Javad and Marie Ghaemmaghami

d/b/a Scottsdale Lamborghini and/or

Scottsdale Motorsports; Lamborghini of

Scottsdale L.L.C., an Arizona limited

liability company; Motor Sports of

Scottsdale, Inc., an Arizona corporation;

Motorsports of Scottsdale No. 2 L.L.C., an

Arizona limited liability company; and

Automobili Lamborghini America, L.L.C.,

a Delaware Corporation,

Defendants.

 

Automobili Lamborghini Holding, S.P.A.,

Automobili Lamborghini, S.P.A., and

Automobili Lamborghini America, L.L.C.,

Crossclaimants,

vs.

Motorsports of Scottsdale, Inc., d/b/a

Lamborghini America Scottsdale, L.L.C.;

Motorsports of Scottsdale No. 2, L.L.C.;

Javad Ghaemmaghami and Marie

Ghaemmaghami, husband and wife.

Crossdefendants. 

. . .

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

No. CV-08-2150-PHX-MHM 

ORDER FOR ISSUANCE OF

PROVISIONAL REMEDY

(PREJUDGMENT GARNISHMENT)

WITH NOTICE

Case 2:08-cv-02150-MHM Document 69 Filed 02/06/09 Page 1 of 4
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

 Collectively these Defendants are: Javad Ghaemmaghami and Marie DeBernardi

Ghaemmaghami, husband and wife; Javad and Marie Ghaemmaghami d/b/a Scottsdale

Lamborghini and/or Scottsdale Motorsports; Lamborghini of Scottsdale L.L.C., an Arizona

limited liability company; Motor Sports of Scottsdale, Inc., an Arizona corporation; and

Motorsports of Scottsdale No. 2, L.L.C., an Arizona limited liability company.

2

 Collectively Defendant and Crossclaimants are: Automobili Lamborghini America,

L.L.C., Automobili Lamborghini Holding, S.P.A., and Automobili Lamborghini, S.P.A.

3

 Contrary to the Court’s February 2, 2009 Order, Marie DeBernardi Ghaemmaghami

was not physically present at the February 5th hearing. Javad Ghaemmaghami, however,

represented in open court that he had his wife’s full and express authority to speak on her

behalf and bind their marital community. See, LRCiv 83.7.

- 2 -

Pursuant to Rules 64 and 69, FED.R.CIV.P., and the referral by the assigned

District Judge, the Court held an evidentiary hearing on February 5, 2009 on Plaintiff Barton

Colson’s (“Colson”) Verified Emergency Application for Provisional Remedy (Garnishment)

with Notice, docket # 5, filed on November 20, 2008. 

After finding this District Court has colorable jurisdiction pursuant 28 U.S.C.

§ 1332(a) to warrant proceeding further with this litigation, the Court considered Colson’s

Complaint, docket # 3, Application for Provisional Remedy, and Memorandum Pursuant to

Order to Show Cause, docket # 58, including the exhibits therein; Defendants

Ghaemmaghami’s1

 Answer and admissions therein, docket # 44; the absence of any written

opposition to Colson’s Application for Provisional Remedy by Defendants Ghaemmaghami;

and the written arguments of Colson’s counsel in support thereof.

The Court FINDS that:

1. Plaintiff Colson has stipulated and agreed that he is not seeking a

provisional remedy (prejudgment garnishment) against Defendants Lamborghini.2

 (docket

# 51)

2. Plaintiff Colson and Defendants Ghaemmaghami3

 were present and

represented by counsel at today’s hearing and were given an opportunity to be heard and

present evidence in opposition to Colson’s Application for Garnishment;

Case 2:08-cv-02150-MHM Document 69 Filed 02/06/09 Page 2 of 4
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 -

3. Plaintiff Colson is a “Judgment Creditor” within the meaning of Arizona

Revised Statute (“A.R.S.”) § 12-1570(4) (“ ‘Judgment Creditor’ means a person . . . that has

. . . an order pursuant to chapter 14 of this title [Section 12-2401 et seq] allowing him to

garnish monies . . . before final judgment on the underlying action.”

4. Defendants Ghaemmaghami and their counsel stipulated and agreed in open

court on the record to the entry of this Order without the necessity of conducting a formal

§ 12-2410 hearing and that this Order may issue without Plaintiff Colson’s posting a bond

required by A.R.S. § 12-1573.

5. Plaintiff Colson served his Application for Garnishment on Defendants

Ghaemmaghami as required by, and has otherwise complied with, A.R.S. §§ 12-1572, 12-

2403, 12-2404 and 12-2406;

6. Independent of Defendants Ghaemmaghami’s stipulation, there is probable

cause to believe that Defendants Ghaemmaghami are indebted to Plaintiff Colson in, at least,

the sum of $1,381,000.00, and that said debt is likely just, due, and unpaid;

7. Based on the written evidence, it is likely that Plaintiff Colson will prevail

at trial on his claims to recover said debt;

8. There is good reason to believe that Garnishees Wells Fargo Bank and Bank

of America, more particularly identified in Plaintiff Colson’s Application for Garnishment,

are indebted to Defendants Ghaemmaghami and/or have non-exempt monies in their

possession belonging to Defendants Ghaemmaghami.

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff Colson’s Verified Emergency Application for

Provisional Remedy (Garnishment) with Notice, docket # 5, is GRANTED and hereby

directing the Clerk of the Court to issue forthwith a Writ for Provisional Remedy

(Prejudgment Garnishment) and Summons.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the United States Marshal Service or other

officer authorized by law to serve process in Maricopa County, Arizona, shall serve and

Case 2:08-cv-02150-MHM Document 69 Filed 02/06/09 Page 3 of 4
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 -

summons the Garnishees to answer under oath as required by A.R.S. §§ 12-1578.01 and 12-

1579.

Dated this 5th day of February, 2009.

Case 2:08-cv-02150-MHM Document 69 Filed 02/06/09 Page 4 of 4