|
DARIAN CONSTRUCTION CO.
703 Pier Avenue, Suite B345
Hermosa Beach, California 90254
Tel. 310-428-8131
Fax 310-374-0134
December 9, 2001
Honorable Chief Justice
and Presiding Justices
California Supreme Court
300 South Spring Street, Rm. 2752
Los Angeles, CA 90013
RE: Supreme Court Case No. S101637 – Darian v. S.C.
Appellate Court Case No. B153492 – Darian v. Superior Court
Appellate Court Case No. B154312 – Darian v. David Pasternak
Superior Court Case No. 061016 – Accent Builders v. Darian Construction, and Cross Complaint, Darian Construction v. Accent Builders and Superior Gunite
Appellate Court Case No. B141541 – Bruce Darian v. Anthony Federico
Appellate Court Case No. B141543 – Bruce Darian v. Ronald Federico
Dear Chief Justice and Presiding Justices:
I would like to make the Court aware of the several cases and how they are related and affecting one another.
1. Plaintiff/Respondent, Petitioner and Appellant Bruce Darian respectfully requests that the Supreme Court make a determination as to whether the Superior Court case (Case No. 061016) is stayed until the petition for review and stay (Case No. S101637) and the appeal (Case No. B154312) have been heard and decided.
2. On October 3, 2001, in Superior Court (Case No. 061016), the Honorable Patricia Collins ruled in favor of a receiver’s motion for final pay estimate (which was later revised from “final” to “interim” pay estimate), 17 months after taking receivership.
3. On October 5, 2001, Respondent filed a writ of prohibition and stay in Division 2 (Case No. B153492).
4. On October 16, 2001, the respondent’s writ of prohibition and stay was denied.
5. On October 26, 2001, Respondent filed a petition for review in this Court (Case No. S101637, Darian v. S.C. (U.S.A.)).
Honorable Chief Justice
and Presiding Justices
December 9, 2001
Page 2
6. On November 1, 2001, Plaintiff and Appellant filed an appeal in Superior Court, Darian v. Superior Court (Case No. B153492), and has since timely designated the clerks’ and reporters’ transcripts in all related cases. Plaintiff/Respondent discovered when reviewing the court docket and case information statement that this case has been renamed Bruce H. Darian, et. al. v. David Pasternak, et. al. and assigned case no. B154312.
7. Enclosed is a letter dated December 4, 2001 addressed to the Clerk to the Honorable Patricia L. Collins, Los Angeles Superior Court, West District, Dept. B, Case No. SC 061016. In this letter, Mr. Frank Molloy, counsel for Accent Builders, is stating that he has talked to the clerk and has been advised that “the existence of such an appeal is not readily apparent.” I checked with the Court of Appeal on December 7, and printed out a docket showing it at the present time in Division P and as stated has been renamed Bruce H. Darian v. David Pasternak (Case No. B154312).
8. Although the United States of America is named as a real party in interest in all cases, they are on the same side as petitioner being as the petitioner and the real party in interest, the United States of America, are plaintiffs in U.S.A. ex rel Bruce Darian v. Accent Builders, Inc. (Case No. CV 00-10255 FMC (JWJx)). The United States of America should not be listed or construed as a respondent to any of the above-named cases. At the present time, on the Supreme Court docket listing, the United States of America and Accent Builders, Inc. are erroneously listed together as related parties, showing Frank White Molloy as their attorney. The United States of America’s interests are being defended with petitioner’s interests in the above False Claims action.
9. Petitioner has filed plaintiff/respondent’s briefs in two other related actions: Bruce Darian v. Anthony Federico in Division 7 (Case No. B141541) and Bruce Darian v. Ronald Federico in Division 5 (Case No. B141543).
10. Frank White Molloy, counsel for defendants Anthony Federico and Ronald Federico, filed a request in Division 5 which is a Supplemental Statement of Opposition to Respondent’s Request for Judicial Notice and/or Augmenting the Record, which was made on November 2nd in Division 3 (the case was later transferred to Division 5).
11. On November 29, 2001, Counsel filed but did not serve Plaintiff/Respondent with the supplemental statement of opposition. Additionally, no original opposition was filed to enable it to be filed as a “supplemental” opposition. Plaintiff/Respondent declares that the same counsel requested, in Division 7, a request for an extension of time in which to file a reply to Plaintiff/Respondent’s opening brief and Respondent hereby declares that I was not served with that request and was not given an opportunity to file an opposition.
Honorable Chief Justice
and Presiding Justices
December 9, 2001
Page 3
12. From June 1, 2001 to the present, Plaintiff/Respondent has maintained the following as his mailing address: 703 Pier Avenue, Ste. B345, Hermosa Beach, CA 90254. Division 7 corresponded with Plaintiff/Respondent using this address until November 5, 2001, at which point the Court resumed using Plaintiff/Respondent’s previous address of 23852 PCH, #277, Malibu, CA 90265. Mail was subsequently returned to the Court with no forwarding address as the proprietor of this mail center has illegally refused to forward mail or notify senders of the forwarding address.
13. Superior Court lost petitioner’s moving papers demurring to Halco Electric’s complaint in Halco v. Darian Construction (Case No. SC065888). Bruce Darian, petitioner, paid $191.00 and received a receipt and conformed copy, though the moving papers are not in the case history report. This case was dismissed without prejudice and the receiver paid all claims to Halco Electric.
Sincerely,
Bruce H. Darian
Enclosures: Docket Printout, Dated December 7, 2001, Case No. B154312
Letter from Frank Molloy, Dated December 4, 2001
|
C
O R R E S P O N D E N C E 
