The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About07-3229F:\FII,ES\General\Current\ 12306\12306.1.pre2 Created: 9/20/04 0:06PM Revised: 5/25/07 11:41 AM Christopher E. Rice, Esquire MARTSON DEARDORFF WILLIAMS OTTO GILROY & FALLER MARTSON LAW OFFICES I.D. 90916 10 East High Street Cazlisle, PA 17013 (717) 243-3341 Attorneys for Plaintiff LISA M. DEBRUIN, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Plaintiff CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. NO. O 7 - 3 a a9 ~c~ CIVIL ACTION -LAW JOHANNES D. DEBRUIN, Defendant PRAECIPE TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Please enter judgment against Defendant Johannes D. DeBruin, individually, for Seventy- Two Thousand Four Hundred Eighty Dollazs and 40/100 ($72,480.40) based upon the certified copy of the judgment entered in the Superior Court of California, County of Napa, which is attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and index the judgment against the Defendant. MARTSON LAW OFFICES B~ S r~- Christopher E. Rice, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 90916 10 East High Street Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 243-3341 Attorneys for Plaintiff Date: ~~,:~ ~~ Q'1 t z 3 4 5 6 7 s 9 10 it 12 13 14 is 16 17 is 19 zo zl z2 23 24 2s 26 z~ 2s 29 • ~' MaY o ~ zoos cle~ o~ me nrapa s ~ cam By: LISA M. DEBRUIN Petitioner, v. JOHANNES DEBRUIN SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF NAPA Case No.: 26-30650 ORDER RE MOTION FOR ATTORNEY FEES & COSTS LISA M. De BRUIN, Petitioner (hereinafter referred to as LISA), through her attorney, C. Preston Shackelford, and JOHANNES De BRUIN, Respondent (hereinafter referred to as JOHANNES), through his attorney, James V. Jones, submitted briefs on LISA'S request for a court order to have JOHANNES pay a significant portion of her attorney fees. This request is made pursuant to Family Code §270 and §271. LISA states she has incurred over $120,000.00 in attorney fees due to JOHANNES thwarting all attempts at settlement and unreasonableness in attempting resolution. It is LISA'S position this case could have resolved for less than $30,000.00 had JOHANNES acted in a easonably cooperative manner. Instead she was forced to go through a three day trial and force ;ompliance with apost-trial decision and the final settlement negotiated between the parties after the court trial. ORDER RE N10T10N FOR ATPORNEY FEES 8c COST'S - 26-30650 1 1 z 3 a s 6 a 9 to 11 iz 13 ~a ~s 16 t7 la 19 20 zl zz zs za zs 26 z~ zs 29 • ~J Approximately six weeks before trial, LISA'S attorney sent a settlement proposal offering to resolve thc matter without the necessity of a trial. In summary, LISA proposed she be reimbursed $313,346.00 for her separate property investments, and $235,250.00 for her property interest in the Pennsylvania properties. Other than a response by letter two weeks later that the settlement proposal was being seriously considered, no written or oral response was ever provided. After three days of trial, the Court ruled LISA was to be reimbursed $320,178.00 for her separate property investments and reimbursed 46.75% of the value of the Pennsylvania properties. Pursuant to the parties previously stipulated value of the properties, Lisa's share was worth $226,971.00. This means the offer and the order were Iess than one-half of one percent difference. LISA'S position is JOHANNES has caused her attorney fees to be four times higher than she believes is reasonable, due to his unreasonable behavior on almost every issue and his refusal to attempt to settle this matter. ]n fact, LISA alleges even after trial JOHANNES refused to coopcrate by filing objections to the Statement of Decision in an attempt to re-litigate issues already resolved at trial. After the Court trial, the parties stipulated to a referee to resolve issues not ordered at trial. LISA alleges JOI3ANNF,S made a settlement offer completely inconsistent with the Court's Decision and subsequent written Statement of Decision. This, therefore, forced LISA to proceed with the hearing before the referee incurring further attorney fees. It was not until the third hearing, after a day and a half of hearings on the various unresolved issues of accounting, that JOI3ANNF.S finally made a reasonable settlement. LISA sets forth reasons, besides the lack of setting forth a response or proposal to settle he property issues, why JOHANNES' actions increased LISA'S attorney fees. LISA sets forth the example of JOHANNES' refusal to meet and confer on three >ccasions after the Court ordered the parties to meet for the purpose of choosing a realtor to sell he family residence (October 21, 2005 Stipulation and Order; November !0, 2005 hearing on ORDER RE MOTION FOR ATTORNEY FEES & COSTS - 26-30650 2 1 2 3 a s 6 7 a 9 to 1l ]z 13 14 is 16 17 ]s 19 20 zl 22 23 2a 2s 26 27 28 29 • LISA'S OSC; January 17, 2006 Order and Stipulation). The matter was finally heard on February 9, 2006, and this Court ordered the parties to cooperate with signing the listing ~ agreement. Thereafter LISA states she still was forced to file an ex pane to have an appointment of an Elisor to sign the listing agreement in an attempt to place the residence on the market. A similar problem arose with the Pennsylvania properties requiring motions to be filed by LISA to obtain information, documentation and resolve management issues. LISA asserts JOHANNES has repeatedly acted to frustrate the policy of the law to reduce the cost of litigation and to promote settlement. LISA claims JOHANNES' actions have been a deliberate attempt to cost LISA as much as possible, both financially and emotionally, in litigating this dissolution. Based on the foregoing and more, LISA requests payment of attorney fees based on Family Cede§270 and §27i. LISA asserts JOHANNES has the ability to pay her attorney fees since he has been awarded the Pennsylvania properties with equity of over $300,000.00 even after JOHANNES makes an equalizing payment to LISA of $141,708.00. JOHANNES has also incurred a substantial attorney fee obligation in excess of $120,000.00. JOHANNES states he has been cooperative, beginning with him voluntarily leaving the house at LISA'S request. All of his records regarding the family residence, prior properties and the Pennsylvania properties remained at the residence. JOHAIVNES claimed he spent over $20,000.00 in legal fees to obtain records which could have been avoided by informal cooperation. Further, JOHANNES takes issue with LISA'S position regarding listing the Timberhill louse for sale. The reason litigation was necessary is because he wanted an opportunity to buy he property himself and otherwise, he wanted to use the rea[tor the parties had used in their hree prior real estate transactions. ORDER RE MOTION POR ATTORNEY FEES 8c COSTS - 26-30650 3 • • 2 3 4 s 6 7 s 9 to 11 12 13 la is 16 17 la 19 20 21 22 23 2a zs. 26 27 za Z9 JOHANNES also denies there was lack of communication with LISA regarding the Pennsylvania properties. He states LISA just did not like what she heard. Probably the biggest issue is the area of settlement. JOHANNES states he was highly motivated to settle as evidenced by two letters. One letter is dated, March 14, 2006, (Exhibit I I "H" to Respondent's Opposition to Petitioner's Motion for Attorney Fees) from JOHANNES' ~~ attorney to LISA'S attorney that ends with the last sentence, "I'm glad that you have set a date for my client's deposition, with that out of the way, I'm hoping that we can set up a mediation and get this case settled." In the other letter, dated February 16, 2006 (Exhibit "I" to Respondent's Opposition to Petitioner's Motion for Attorney Fees} from JOHANNES' attorney to LISA'S attorney, addressing the need to resolve the issue of each parties' claim for reimbursement on account of sepazate property contributions and to try that issue as soon as possible and/or mediate that issue. It is these two letters in which JOHANNES claims he tried to resolve this case by mediation. JOHANNES further states the case needed to be mediated due to LISA'S father's interference and contentious attempts to resolve the case. f JOH~!-NNES disputes obstructing the listing of the family residence. He states he did not refuse to sign the listing, but had questions he wanted answered first. JOHANNES refers the Court to Exhibit "J" to Respondent's Opposition to Petitioner's Motion for Attorney Fees, which appears to the Court to reaffirm LISA'S position that information requested was not being provided on the Pennsylvania property. JOHANNES refers the Court to Exhibit "P" to Respondent's Opposition to Petitioner's Motion for Attorney Fees which is a three page declaration signed by JOHANNES on May 2, 2006. On page 3, line 25, JOHANNES declares, "I would strenuously urge Petitioner once ~galn to agree to mediation." JOHANNES refers the Court to Exhibit `Z" to Respondent's Opposition to Petitioner's vlotion for Attorney Fees where LISA'S attorney states by a-mail, on May 11, 2006, that she vould agree to binding arbitration. JOHANNES' attorney suggests an arbitrator and a possible ORDER RE MOTION FnR ATPORNEY BEES i$, COSTS - 26-30650 4 I a 3 a s 6 s 9 Io It 72 13 to is 76 17 to 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 z~ I hereby obi to be a true an odpinal or~le Dated: Clerk of the • • time frame of mid July. Nothing further is presented by JOHANNES evidencing any follow through by JOHANNES or refusal to arbitrate by Lisa. In fact, it is mid July when LISA'S attorney sends the nine page comprehensive settlement proposal to JOHANNES' attorney (Exhibit "M" to Petitioner's Motion for Attorney Fees}. In summary the Court makes the following findings: 1) Referenced correspondence regarding mediation addressed to LISA'S attorney were one sentence requests or statements buried in other writings. The other referenced correspondence came from LISA'S attorney to JOHANNES' attorney stating she would accept arbitration. Other than an acknowledgement of receigt of the agreement for arbitration and a suggested date sometime in mid July there is absolutely no follow up to mediation or arbitration; 2) Although JOHANNES' attorney states JOHANNES' position was known, the requests for mediation are meaningless without some type of clarification setting forth the parties positions and/or differences to be mediated; 3) Lack of any meaningful response by JOHANNES to the lengthy, comprehensive settlement proposal sent on July 14, 2006; 4) JOHANNES had exhibited obstructionist behavior and frustrated settlement as his repeated failure to cooperate on several issues; his refusal to engage in meaningful settlement discussions and lack of compliance with Court orders. THE COURT ORDERS JOHANNES to pay LISA $70,000.00 in attorney fees plus he sum of $2,480.40 incurred since January 10, 2007, for a total sum due from JOHANNES to rISA in the amount of $72,480.40, Dated: ~ d3 ~+D~ ~„~ document herein Francisco P. Tisher, Judge rect copy of the Napa Superior Court this court. c`~~"°R co ~~ aa o oa t yi 2`'~... : ` : ~'~' ORpER REMOTION POR ATTORNEY PEES de COS'T'S - 26-30650 y .. v perio rt at~A~ ~~~ 5 • i CERTIFICATE OF MAILING Napa Courts Civil, Criminal, Appeals LISA M. DEBRLT]N, Petitioner, CASE NO: 26-30654 Vs. JOI:[ANNES DEBRUIN, Respondent C. Preston Shackelford, Esq. Coombs & Dunlap 1211 Division $t. Napa, CA 94559 James V. Jones, Esq. Law Offices of James V. Jones 1564 First Street Napa, CA 94559 I hereby certify that I am not a party to this cause and that copies of the attached Order Re Morton For Attorney Fees & Costs were personally delivered to the court folder of the above parties in Napa, California on this date and that this certificate is executed in Napa, California on this date. ~~ ~ DA ~ ~~`' Deputy Court Exec cer Christopher E. Rice, Esquire MARTSON DEARDORFF WILLIAMS OTTO GILROY & FALLER MARTSON LAW OFFICES I.D. 90916 10 East High Street Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 243-3341 Attorneys for Plaintiff LISA M. DEBRUIN, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Plaintiff CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. NO. CIVIL ACTION -LAW JOHANNES D. DEBRUIN, Defendant NOTICE Pursuant to Rule 236 of the Pennsylvania Rules of Civil Procedure, you are hereby notified that a Money Judgment has been entered against you in the above proceeding. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS CONCERNING THIS NOTICE, PLEASE CALL: Attorney Christopher E. Rice, Esquire, at this telephone number: (717) 243-3341 Christopher E. Rice, Esquire MARTSON DEARDORFF WILLIAMS OTTO GILROY & FALLER MARTSON LAW OFFICES I.D. 90916 10 East High Street Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 243-3341 Attorneys for Plaintiff LISA M. DEBRUIN, v. JOHANNES D. DEBRUIN, Defendant IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Plaintiff CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA NO. CIVIL ACTION -LAW AFFIDAVIT OF LAST KNOWN ADDRESSES Christopher E. Rice, Esquire, being duly sworn according to law, deposes and says that he is counsel for Plaintiff in the above-captioned action, and based on his knowledge, information and belief, the last known address of Defendant is as follows: Johannes D. DeBruin 658 Matson Drive Napa, CA 94559 ~ ~~ Christopher E. Rice Sworn to and subscr'bed before me this ~_ day of ~ ~ 2007. 1 ~ COMMONWEALTH OF PLiNNSYLVANIA Notarial Seal Mary M. Price, Notary Public Carlisle Boro, Cumberland County My Commission Expires Aug. 18, 2007 Member. Pennsvivarua Association of Notaries Christopher E. Rice, Esquire MARTSON DEARDORFF WILLIAMS OTTO GILROY & FALLER MARTSON LAW OFFICES I.D. 90916 10 East High Street Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 243-3341 Attorneys for Plaintiff LISA M. DEBRUIN, v. NO. CIVIL ACTION -LAW JOHANNES D. DEBRUIN, Defendant AFFIDAVIT OF VALID ENFORCEABLE AND UNSATISFIED JUDGMENT Christopher E. Rice, Esquire, begin duly sworn according to law, deposes and says that he is counsel for Plaintiff in the above captioned action, and based on his knowledge, information and belief, the judgment entered in the Superior Court of the State of California, County of Napa, against the above-captioned Defendant, which is attached to the Praecipe to Enter Judgment, is valid, enforceable, and unsatisfied. Further, affiant attempted to obtain a certified copy of the docket entries from the Superior Court of California, County of Napa, but was unable to obtain the same. The Clerk of Court of Napa County would not provide a certified copy of the docket enteries to attach to this Affidavit. .~'" ~ Christopher E. Rice Sworn to and subscribe before me this 3~ u day of , 2007. IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Plaintiff CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA Notarial Seal Mary M. Price, Notary Public Carlisle f3oro, Cumberland County My Commission Expires Aug. 18, 2007 Member, Pennsylvania Association of Notaries CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Christopher E. Rice, of MARTSON DEARDORFF WILLIAMS OTTO GILROY & FALLER, hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing Praecipe was served this date by depositing same in the Post Office at Carlisle, PA, first class mail, postage prepaid, addressed as follows: James Z. Jones, Esquire 1564 lst Street Napa, CA 94559 Attorney for Johannes D. DeBruin MARTSON LAW OFFICES Christopher E. Rice Ten East High Street Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 243-3341 By Dated: s ~0 I (1 C? ~ O C ~, ~: ~ p ~. o ~`;~ ~ ~, ~`~ ,_ ~. ~ c rv .~ v ~ FaFILES\GenerallCurcentl12306U2305.1.pra3 ~ Created: 9/20/04 0:06PM Revised: 6/7!07 9:35AM Christopher E. Rice, Esquire MARTSON DEARDORFF WILLIAMS OTTO GILROY & FALLER MARTSON LAW OFFICES I.D. 9091b 10 East High Street Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 243-3341 Attorneys for Plaintiff LISA M. DEBRUIN, IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF Plaintiff CUMBERLAND COUNTY, PENNSYLVANIA v. NO. 07-3229 CIVIL CIVIL ACTION -LAW JOHANNES D. DEBRUIN, Defendant PRAECIPE TO THE PROTHONOTARY: Please mark the above-captioned matter settled and discontinued, and the judgment satisfied. Please issue a certificate reflecting the same. MARTSON LAW OFFICES Christopher E. Rice, Esquire Attorney I.D. No. 90916 10 East High Street Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 243-3341 Attorneys for Plaintiff Date: ~l~l~~ w.,, CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Christopher E. Rice, of MARTSON DEARDORFF WILLIAMS OTTO GILROY & FALLER, hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing Praecipe was served this date by depositing same in the Post Office at Carlisle, PA, first class mail, postage prepaid, addressed as follows: James Z. Jones, Esquire 1564 ls` Street Napa, CA 94559 Attorney for Johannes D. DeBruin MARTSON LAW OFFICES By ~' ~ ~ Christopher E. Rice Ten East High Street Carlisle, PA 17013 (717) 243-3341 Dated: ~~ ~/ ~~ ("> ~ C7 C ~ -rti f,~; ; T ~~ ' ( )I ~ ~ ~~ j f 4 ~_._ ~~ s'L~s' ..{