Official Publication of the Santa Barbara County Bar ... · Santa Barbara County Bar Association The mission of the Santa Barbara County Bar Association is to preserve the integrity

Official Publication of the Santa Barbara County Bar Association January 2015 • Issue 508

Santa Barbara Lawyer

2 Santa Barbara Lawyer

KEITH C. BERRYYears of Experience and Local Expertise in theSouth Coast Santa Barbara Real Estate Market

R e a lto r ® , C R B , C R S , G R I , A B R

Previews Estates Director & Architectural Properties Division SpecialistMobile 805.689.4240 | office 805.563.7254 | fax 805.456.3808

3938 State Street Santa Barbara, CA [email protected]

facebook.com/KeithBerryRealEstate linkedin.com/in/keithcberry

©2014 Coldwell Banker Real Estate LLC. All Rights Reserved. Coldwell Banker Real Estate LLC fully supports the principles of the Fair Housing Act and the Equal Opportunity Act. Each Coldwell Banker Residential Brokerage office is owned by a subsidiary of NRT LLC. Coldwell Banker® and the Coldwell Banker Logo, Coldwell Banker Previews International® and the Coldwell Banker Previews International Logo, are registered service marks owned by Coldwell Banker Real Estate LLC.

We KnoW More, To GeT You More!

Up-to-the moment market knowledge Connecting sellers to the most qualified buyers

Greater exposure to sell your home in the shortest practical time Personal attentive and tailored service to meet the specific needs of

each customer

K e i T h c . b e r r Y

January 2015 3


Santa Barbara LawyerA Publication of the Santa Barbara

County Bar Association©2015 Santa Barbara County Bar Association

CONTRIBUTING WRITERSNaomi Dewey

David K. HughesKevin NimmonsRobert Sanger

Mayor Helene Schneider

EDITORNathan C. Rogers

ASSISTANT EDITORSLida SiderisEmily Allen

MOTIONS EDITORMichael Pasternak

VERDICTS & DECISIONS EDITOR

Lindsay G. Shinn

PROFILE EDITORJames P. Griffith

PHOTO EDITORMike Lyons

PRINT PRODUCTIONWilson Printing

DESIGNBaushke Graphic Arts

Submit all EDITORIAL matter [email protected]

with “SUBMISSION” in the email subject line.

Submit all MOTIONS matter to Michael Pasternak at [email protected].

Submit all ADvERTISINg toSBCBA, 15 W. Carrillo Street,

Suite 106, Santa Barbara, CA 93101phone 569-5511, fax 569-2888Classifieds can be emailed to:

[email protected]

Santa Barbara County Bar Association www.sblaw.org

2015 Officers and DirectorsNAOMI DEWEY President Buynak, Fauver, Archbald & Spray 820 State Street, 4th Floor Santa Barbara, CA 93101 T: 966-7422 [email protected] KATY gRAHAM President-Elect Senior Research Attorney 2nd District Court of Appeal, Div. 6 200 E Santa Clara St Ventura, CA 93001 T: 641-4753 [email protected] ANgELA ROACH Secretary University of California Santa BarbaraEmployee and Labor Relations3101 SAASBSanta Barbara, CA 93106-3160Cell: (415) [email protected]

JAMES gRIFFITHChief Financial Officer Law Offices of James P. Griffith1129 State St Ste 30Santa Barbara, CA 93101 T: 308-0178; F: 563-9141 [email protected] SCOTT CAMPBELL Past President Rogers, Sheffield & Campbell, LLP 427 East Carrillo Street Santa Barbara, CA 93101-2257 T: 963-9721; F: 966-3715 [email protected]

EMILY ALLEN Legal Aid Foundation301 E. Canon Perdido StreetSanta Barbara, CA 93101T: [email protected]

JEFF CHAMBLISS Santa Barbara County Public Defender’s Office 1100 Anacapa StreetSanta Barbara, CA 93101T: 568-3497 [email protected]

MICHAEL DENvERHollister & BraceP O Box 630 Santa Barbara, CA 93102 T: 963-6711; F: [email protected]

ELIZABETH DIAZLegal Aid Foundation 301 E. Canon Perdido StreetSanta Barbara, CA 93101T: [email protected]

STEvE DUNKLE Sanger, Swysen & Dunkle 125 E. De La Guerra, Suite 102 Santa Barbara, CA 93101T: [email protected]

ROBERT FOROUZANDEH Reicker, Pfau, Pyle & McRoy LLPP.O. Box 1470Santa Barbara, CA 93101T: 966-2440 [email protected]

AMBER HOLDERNESSOffice of County Counsel105 E. Anapamu Street, #201Santa Barbara, CA 93101T: [email protected]

ANDREW MITCHELLAttorney at Law125 E. Victoria Street, Suite FSanta Barbara, CA 93101T: [email protected]

NATHAN ROgERS The Law Office of Nathan C. Rogers 3 W. Carrillo Street #214 Santa Barbara, CA 93101 T: 591-8000; F: [email protected]

KELLY SCOTTSanta Barbara County District Attorney 312 E. Cook Street, Bldg. DSanta Maria, CA 93454 T: 346-7540 [email protected]

JAMES SWEENEYAllen & Kimbell, LLP317 E. Carrillo StSanta Barbara, CA 93101-1488 T: 963-8611; F: [email protected]

______________________LIDA SIDERIS Executive Director15 W. Carrillo Street, Suite 106Santa Barbara, CA 93101569-5511; Fax: [email protected]

Mission StatementSanta Barbara County Bar Association

The mission of the Santa Barbara County Bar Association is to preserve the integrity of the legal profession and respect for the law, to advance the professional growth and education of its members, to encourage civility and collegiality among its members, to promote equal access to justice and protect the independence of the legal profession and the judiciary.

January 2015 5

Santa Barbara LawyerOfficial Publication of the Santa Barbara County Bar Association January 2015 • Issue 508

Articles 7 From the President, By Naomi Dewey

9 From the Editor, By Nathan C. Rogers

10 New Laws Require Installation of Electric Vehicle Charging Stations on Leased Property, By Kevin Nim-mons

15 In Memoriam: Thomas W. Sneddon, Jr.

16 Get to Know...Jason Dominguez

18 Chowder Fest Was a Great Success!

21 A Common Thread, By David K. Hughes

22 Managing Big Data in Complex Litigation, By Robert Sanger

27 The Mayors Challenge to End Homelessness, By Helene Schneider

Sections 28 Classifieds

28 Motions

29 Verdicts & Decisions

31 Section Notices

About the CoverWe are proud to have 2015 Santa Barbara County Bar As-sociation President, Naomi Dewey, grace the cover of this edition of Santa Barbara Lawyer.

Yum Yum Chowderfest!See page 18 for more mouthwatering coverage.


2015 Membership Application

Member Name: _____________________________________________________________________________________

Check here if you do not want your name and office address disclosed to any buyer of Bar Assoc. mailing labels.

Check here if membership information is the same as last year. If so, the rest of the form may be left blank.

Check here if you do not want your e-mail address disclosed to SBCBA sponsors.

Office Address: _____________________________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________________________________________

City: ________________________________________________ State: _________ Zip: ___________________

E-Mail Address: _____________________________________________________________________________________

Phone Number: ________________________________________ Fax Number: ____________________________

Home Address: _____________________________________________________________________________________

City: ________________________________________________ State: _________ Zip: ___________________

State Bar #: ___________________________________________ Year Admitted to Bar: _____________________

Your member dues include a subscription to Santa Barbara Lawyer and the e-Newsletter.

SCHEDULE OF DUES FOR 2015 Active Members $130

Student Members $30

New Admittees (First Year Attorneys Only) $00

Affiliate Members (non-Attorney members only) $65

Legal Aid of Santa Barbara County donation $______.__

Total amount enclosed $______.__

AREAS OF INTEREST OR PRACTICE (check box as applicable) ADR Estate Planning/Probate

Civil Litigation Family Law

Criminal In-House Counsel & Corporate Law

Debtor/Creditor Intellectual Property/Tech. Business

Elder Law Real Property/Land Use

Employment Law Taxation

I am interested in receiving information about the SBCBA Lawyer Referral Service

Mail completed form along with check to: Santa Barbara County Bar Association, 15 West Carrillo Street, Suite 106, Santa Barbara, Ca 93101 Tel: (805) 569-5511

Donations to the Legal Aid Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent provided by law to a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization.

$90

$00

$45

$______.__

$______.__

January 2015 7

President’s MessageBy Naomi Dewey

H

Legal Community

appy New Year! As I write this in 2014, one thing is certain about the coming year: the legal profes-sion will continue to change, and as lawyers and

officers of the court, we are at the frontline of these changes. New technologies, outsourcing, unbundled services and modifications to the rules facing new admittees to the Bar could change the legal landscape beyond recognition. As we move into 2015, I urge you all to focus on the things that will not (and should not) change about the practice of law.

As a relatively new attorney (and a proud graduate of Santa Barbara College of Law), I was still a student when the California State Bar set up the Attorney Civility Task Force in August 2006. However, the work that group did was not new, and I have no doubt that it was formed in part due to a concern about a decrease in civility among California’s lawyers.

Whatever the motivation for the Task Force’s inception,

the resulting California Attorney Guidelines of Civility and Professionalism are more important today than ever before. The Guidelines are especially relevant because they embody the civility, professionalism and collegiality that the Santa Barbara County Bar Association champions in all of our work. As attorneys, we have an obligation to be professional with one another, and this obligation “includes civility, professional integrity, personal dignity, candor, diligence, respect, courtesy, and cooperation, all of which are essential to the fair administration of justice and conflict resolution.” (California Attorney Guidelines of Civility and Professionalism.)

Focusing on those values – civility, integrity, and dignity – in the work we do to promote the legal community in our interactions with the judiciary, elected officials and the community at large is key to the success of the Bar Associa-tion, and it is also key to the future of the legal profession. These values distinguish practicing attorneys from online legal service providers, and by embracing them, we each make sure that the legal profession will continue to thrive for years to come.

2015 Santa Barbara County Bar Association President Naomi Dewey is a principal at Buynak Fauver Archbald & Spray, specializing in client-focused general counsel and litigation ser-vices with a focus on employment law for employers, government entities, nonprofits and corporations, along with construction law and government entity tort defense.

Law Library Wants to Hear from You!

The Board of Trustees of the Santa Barbara County Law Li-brary is asking the legal community for input to ensure that

the collections in both Santa Barbara and Santa Maria remain “attorney friendly.”

Please share any comments with Ray MacGregor, Library Director,

at [email protected]


January 2015 9

Nathan C. RogersI

Legal Community

From the EditorBy NathaN C. RogeRs

www.edwardjones.com Member SIPC

Edward Jones ranked “Highest in Investor Satisfaction with Full Service Brokerage Firms, Two Years in a Row”

Visit jdpower.com

Daniel J De MeyerFinancial Advisor.

125 E De La Guerra St Ste 101Santa Barbara, CA 93101805-564-0011

am honored to serve as the 2015 editor of Santa Bar-bara Lawyer. At the outset, I would like to thank my predecessor, Claude Dorais, for his sage advice and for

smoothing my transition into this role. I would like to also thank 2014 assistant editor, Shelley Vail, and the indefati-gable Lida Sideris, our Executive Director, for their hard work and assistance. If one is to become captain of a ship, it certainly helps to have a seaworthy craft, and that is definitely the case with our magazine.

Assistant editor Emily Allen and I are excited about the upcoming year. Among other things, beginning in the current issue, David Hughes will be enlightening us about the 800th anniversary of the Magna Carta and its

significance. Another new feature will be a monthly “Proust Questionnaire” to better get to know some of our colleagues. We will also try to include content from parts of our legal community that haven’t historically contributed to the magazine, such as our local legal nonprofits and government attorneys.

Additionally, in 2014 the Santa Barbara County Bar created the position of “legislative liaison” to serve as a liaison between the SBCBA and the legislative branch of government. Therefore, this year we will attempt to include a variety of articles from elected officials on legis-lation and public policy matters, starting this month with a contribution from Santa Barbara Mayor Helene Schneider.

Santa Barbara Lawyer is not our publication, however, but yours. Therefore, we welcome your ideas and input regarding what you would like to see in the magazine. I hope you enjoy the January issue and wish you all a healthy and prosperous 2015.

SAVE THE DATE2015 High School Mock Trial Competition Call for Scorers

Volunteer scorers are needed to help make this an effec-tive competition and a rewarding experience for our local high school students. Interested attorneys, paralegals and legal professionals are invited to apply to serve as scorers. The participating schools this year are Cabrillo, Carpinteria, Dos Pueblos, Laguna Blanca, Pioneer Valley, San Marcos, Santa Barbara, Santa Maria and Santa Ynez Valley Union.

The competition is sponsored by The Constitutional Rights Foundation, the Santa Barbara County Education Office and the Santa Barbara County Superior Court.

When: Preliminary Rounds: Saturday, February 21 Semi-Finals and Finals: Saturday, February 28 Both days feature a morning and afternoon session. Where: 1100 Anacapa Street (Courthouse), Santa Barbara

There will be a free one hour MCLE training tentatively scheduled for noon on February 18 and 5:00 pm on Febru-ary 19. Training is required to score.


Legal News

Continued on page 13

New Laws Require Installation of Electric vehicle Charging Stations on Leased PropertyBy KeviN NimmoNs

Governor Brown recently signed into law two new additions to the California Civil Code governing lessees’ rights to install electric vehicle (“EV”) charg-

ing stations on leased residential and commercial property. Civil Code section 1947.6 applies to residential properties while section 1952.7 applies to commercial properties. As electric vehicles and EV charging stations grow in number and popularity throughout California, the laws governing EV charging stations will become more important. Lessors and lessees, and their attorneys, should understand these new laws and how to incorporate them into lease negotia-tions to avoid future disputes when a lessee desires to install a charging station on lessor property.

A. Civil Code Section 1952.7: Commercial Lease EV Charging Stations

Section 1952.7 provides: “Any term in a lease that is executed, renewed, or extended on or after January 1, 2015, that conveys any possessory interest in commercial property that either prohibits or unreasonably restricts the installation or use of an electric vehicle charging station in a parking space associated with the commercial property, or that is otherwise in conflict with the provisions of this section, is void and unenforceable.” Lessors are permitted to impose “reasonable restrictions” or “reasonable standards,” statutorily defined terms, on the installation of charging stations. (Civ. Code § 1952.7(a)(2).) Section 1952.7 does not apply to:

A commercial property where charging stations already exist for use by tenants in a ratio that is equal to or greater than two available parking spaces for every 100 parking spaces at the commercial property.

A commercial property where there are less than 50 parking spaces.

A commercial lessee is only permitted to install the same number of charging stations as it is allotted parking spaces under the lease. Even if there is no parking allotted, the lessee is still permitted to install EV charging stations. This may come as a surprise to lessors, but it is consistent with

“the policy of the state to promote, encourage, and remove obstacles to the use of electric vehicle charging stations.” (Civ. Code § 1952.7(2).) As a result, even if the lease does not allot any parking to the lessee, the lessee may install the same num-ber of charging stations equal to the number of parking spaces calculated by multiplying the total number of parking spaces located at the commercial property by a fraction, the denominator of which is the total rentable square feet at the property, and the numera-tor of which is the number of total square feet rented by the leaseholder. (Civ. Code § 1952.7(a)(3).)

Even though lessors understandably would be reluctant to permit a lessee to install an EV charging station, lessors will at least be relieved to know that the lessee must pay all costs of installation and the lessee’s installation of an EV charging station must meet applicable health and safety standards and requirements imposed by state and local authorities as well as all other applicable zoning, land use, or other ordinances, or land use permit requirements. (Civ. Code § 1952.7(d).) In addition, the lessee is responsible for all costs for damage to property and the charging sta-tion resulting from the installation, maintenance, repair, removal, or replacement of the charging station, costs for the maintenance, repair, and replacement of the charging station, and the cost of electricity associated with the charg-ing station. (Civ. Code § 1952.7(f)(2).)

If the installation of a charging station has the effect of granting the leaseholder a reserved parking space and a reserved parking space is not allotted to the leaseholder in the lease, the owner of the commercial property may charge a reasonable monthly rental amount for the parking space. (Civ. Code § 1952.7(a)(4).) This provision may have the effect of granting a lessee an exclusive parking space, even if the lease does not.

Section 1952.7 implies that unless the lease requires the lessor’s prior approval to install a charging station, the lessee may install a charging station so long as it meets the minimum statutory requirements. The lessor cannot avoid or delay its approval and the approval or denial shall

Kevin Nimmons

January 2015 11


Joye is unmatched in her focus with impeccable attention to detail, delivering successful real estate transactions at all levels of complexities. Her personalized concierge approach has afforded her clients with a seamless real estate experience. During her career she has handled over a half billion dollars in listings and/or sales. Discover the difference with Sotheby’s International Realty’s global presence with active overseas buyers from 49 worldwide locations.

Joye Lytel delivers a trifecta…..The highest level of experience, excellence and expertise.

Sotheby’s International Realty and the Sotheby’s International Realty logo are registered (or unregistered) service marks used with permission. Operated by Sotheby’s International Realty, Inc. Real estate agents affiliated with Sotheby’s International Realty, Inc. are independent contractor sales associates and are not employees of Sotheby’s International Realty, Inc.

JOYE LYTEL1482 East Valley Road, Montecito, CA 93108

Home: 805.563.5001Mobile: 805.452.1979Office: 805.969.5005

[email protected]

January 2015 13

Legal News

be in writing. “If lessor approval is required, the lessee first shall obtain approval from the lessor to install the electric vehicle charging station and the lessor shall approve the installation if the lessee complies with the applicable pro-visions of the lease consistent with the provisions of this section.” (Civ. Code § 1952.7(e).) The lessee must comply with the lessor’s reasonable standards for the installation of the charging station, hire a licensed contractor to install the charging station, and within 14 days of approval, pro-vide a certificate of insurance that names the lessor as an additional insured under the lessee’s minimum $1,000,000 liability insurance policy. Therefore, it is imperative for les-sors to ensure that the lease (1) requires approval by lessor of any installation or modification of the property for a charging station and (2) imposes reasonable conditions for installation of EV charging stations. If not, then the lessee may have the right to install a charging station so long as it meets only the minimum requirements in section 1952.7, and as discussed above, even if the lease does not provide the lessee a right to park.

B. Civil Code section 1947.6: Residential Lease EV Charging Stations

Section 1947.6 is similar to section 1952.7. There are some notable differences, however. Section 1947.6 provides that “For any lease executed, extended, or renewed on and after July 1, 2015, a lessor of a dwelling shall approve a written request of a lessee to install an electric vehicle charging station at a parking space allotted for the lessee that meets the requirements of this section and complies with the les-sor’s procedural approval process for modification to the property.” The law does not apply where:

(1) Electric vehicle charging stations already exist for les-sees in a ratio that is equal to or greater than 10 percent of the designated parking spaces.

(2) Parking is not provided as part of the lease agreement.(3) A property where there are less than five parking

spaces.(4) A dwelling that is subject to the residential rent control

ordinance of a public entity.A lessor is not obligated to provide an additional parking

space to a lessee in order to accommodate an electric vehicle charging station. (Civ. Code § 1947.6(d).) If the EV charging station has the effect of providing the lessee with a reserved parking space, the lessor may charge a monthly rental amount for that parking space. (Civ. Code § 1947.6(e).) An EV charging station and all modifications and improve-ments to the property shall comply with federal, state, and

local law, and all applicable zoning requirements, land use requirements, and covenants, conditions, and restrictions. (Civ. Code § 1947.6(f).)

The lessee must request in writing the lessor’s consent to any modification. Based on the language of the statute, it is this author’s opinion that the lessor can condition its consent on the lessee satisfying reasonable conditions, in addition to those specified in section 1947.6: “A lessee’s written request to make a modification to the property in order to install and use an electric vehicle charging station shall include, but is not limited to, his or her consent to enter into a written agreement that includes, but is not limited to, the following” and the subsection goes on to list five mini-mum requirements. Because of the language “including but not limited to,” used twice within subsection (g), the les-sor can most likely attach any other reasonable conditions consistent with section 1947.6.

C. Considerations in the Lease Negotiation Process

Given the new requirements in Sections 1947.6 and 1952.7, commercial and residential property owners to whom these new laws apply would be wise to confront these issues in the lease negotiation process. For example, section 1947.6 governing residential leases does not apply where parking is not provided as part of the lease agree-ment. A lessor of residential property may consider enter-ing into separate parking contracts with its lessees to avoid application of Section 1947.6. Whereas, section 1952.7 governing charging stations at commercial properties may require the commercial lessor to allow installation of a charging station even if there are no parking spaces allotted to the tenant. (See, Civ. Code §1952.7(a)(3).) Lessors may want to consider in the lease the location of any future EV charging station so it is installed in a location that does not disrupt business or other tenants, and is near existing infrastructure, such as electricity.

As another example, Civil Code sections 1947.6 and 1952.7 each provide that if the EV charging station has the effect of providing the lessee with a reserved parking space, the lessor may charge a monthly rental for that parking space. In order to avoid future disputes over the monthly rental amount, the parties should consider including in the lease either a predetermined monthly rental or a mechanism to calculate the rental.

As another example, a commercial lessee is required to provide a certificate of general liability insurance to the com-mercial lessor, but there is no requirement to do so in the residential context under Section 1947.6. Both residential and commercial lessors should consider requiring the les-

Nimmons, continued from page 10


Legal News

see to present to the lessor a certificate of such insurance well prior to commencement of any work to modify the property.

Both residential and commercial lessors should consider reasonable standards to condition the lessor’s consent to any modifications to its property for installation of an EV charging station. Such reasonable standards should be in addition to those requirements already imposed by sections 1947.6 or 1952.7, whichever applies. The lessor’s conditions should not contravene “the policy of the state to promote, encourage, and remove obstacles to the use of electric vehicle charging stations.” (Civ. Code § 1952.7(2).) Only “reasonable restrictions” or “reasonable standards” that do not significantly increase the cost of the electric vehicle charging station or its installation or significantly decrease the charging station’s efficiency or specified performance may be considered.

Commercial and residential lessors should consider re-serving in the lease the right to make future rules govern-ing the installation, use, maintenance, and removal of any charging station, and installation, use, and maintenance of the infrastructure for the charging station.

The residential and commercial lessor should consider provisions in the lease in the event the lessee does not fin-ish the modifications due to early termination of the lease or other reason, or if the lessee does not pay the contrac-tors who conduct the modifications. This is particularly a concern for residential lessors who have leases with shorter terms than with commercial lessors who generally have longer lease terms and tenants with a vested commer-cial interest in the leased premises. However, any lessor should be concerned about the economics of installing an EV charging station. The lessor does not want to be left holding the bag if the lease terminates early and/or the lessee refuses to finish the installation or modification. The

parties should consider whether the lessee will defend and indemnify lessor from any mechanic’s lien actions in con-nection with the modification. The lease guaranty, if any, should include the tenant’s obligations to cover all costs of the EV charging station.

The parties should consider whether at the termination of the lease the lessee is obligated to remove the EV charging station and, if so, who pays for the costs of removal. The lessor may desire the lessee to remove the EV charging sta-tion if it is unlikely the EV charging station will be used by others when the lessee no longer possesses the premises. A standard provision that the lessee must remove all improve-ments to the property may require the lessee to remove any installed EV charging station, but it may not cover improvements to parking spaces that are not exclusively for the tenant’s use and are located in “common areas.”

Considering these and other concerns in the lease nego-tiation process, a special addendum to the lease or within the lease itself, and ensuring the lease guaranty covers such issues, will likely help avoid future disputes between lessors and lessees who desire to install EV charging stations.

Kevin Nimmons is a shareholder at the law firm of Hol-lister & Brace, PC. Kevin practices in the areas of both real estate and business. He represents commercial and residen-tial lessors and lessees in Southern California. He can be contacted at [email protected] with any questions.

Have you renewed your membership in the Santa

Barbara County Bar Association?

See page 6 for the 2015 SBCBA Renewal

Application.

P E T R U C O R P O R A T I O N A FULL SERVICE LAND COMPANY

Title Searches/Reports Title Consulting/Research Oil, Gas, Mineral Land Consulting Water, Geothermal, Wind & Solar Management/Administration Leasing & Land Contracts Title Engineering Right-of-Way Consulting Environmental Studies Subdivisions/Parcel Maps Permits/Regulatory Compliance Expert Witness & Due Diligence Map Drafting / AutoCAD

T I M O T H Y B . T R U W E

Registered Professional Landman Registered Environmental

Property Assessor

250 Hallock Dr., Suite 100 Santa Paula, CA 93060-9218

(805) 933-1389 Fax (805) 933-1380

http://www.PetruCorporation.com [email protected]

January 2015 15

In Memoriam

[Editor’s Note: The following is taken from Pat McKinley’s remarks delivered at Tom Sneddon’s funeral service. Mr. Sneddon, who served as Santa Barbara County District Attorney from 1983 to 2010, passed away on November 1, 2014.]

hen you try a jury trial – and Tom tried hun-dreds of them – the

thing that makes your heart skip is when your phone rings, and the clerk says, “Mr. Sneddon, we have a verdict!” It is only comparable to getting your bar exam results – that feeling before you open the enve-lope (in Tom’s day and mine), or you hit the button on the computer now to see if you passed or failed.

The District Attorney’s office under Tom ran very well, and one reason is the almost limitless dis-cretion he gave to Deputy DAs to handle their own cases and make the decisions on that case, feeling no one knew the case better than the lawyer assigned to try it.

He also tried cases after his election, in one case taking over a death penalty case after the assigned prosecutor could not handle it. Stan Roden had to do this during his time as our DA, and trying these tough cases like Tom and Stan did, and not cherry picking, went a long way with our Deputy DAs in the respect department. Tom’s handling of a case involving the murder of two people in Santa Barbara followed by an investigation and prosecution in Israel is worth noting. The time he and Detective (and later DA Investigator) Ed Skehan put in on that case is a fitting ex-ample of the lengths Tom would go to for justice – a case that took both of them to Israel numerous times, followed

In Memoriam: Thomas W. Sneddon, Jr.

by a domestic prosecution and conviction in Tel Aviv – the whole case lasting from 1987 to 1993. I was there in Jeru-salem when Tom made the case for prosecution in Israel. He did not pull any punches either. The recipient of Tom’s rather forceful presentation, Dorit Benish, is now the Chief Justice of the Israel Supreme Court. Judith Amsterdam, the DA from Tel Aviv and now a judge there, is writing a book about the case, and is dedicating it to Tom.

Tom had a great moral and ethical compass and used it in his dealings with people and in making decisions concerning the office. When Eric Hansen tried his first felony jury trial, it was with Tom when he was the Chief Trial Deputy. They were pulling jury instructions and Tom said, “There are a lot

of mistakes a prosecutor can make in trying a case. Just make sure that they don’t involve dishonesty or unethical conduct.” Eric told me he never forgot that, and of course he went on to become the Chief Trial Deputy himself in later years.

Tom hired me! Tom hired me! I have heard that a lot recently. When Tom and I were first in the office, there was one female Deputy DA. More than anyone else, Tom was responsible for the hiring, mentoring and promoting of women Deputy DAs. He hired Christine Stanley and Joyce Dud-ley, the two DAs who succeeded him, and many others. The office now, North and South, is equally staffed by men and women. I have received many heartfelt comments from them, and other Deputy DAs, past and present, about Tom’s

death. Tom taught at the local law school and hired more than one of the students he met and taught there.

In closing, I also want to mention the DA Building on Santa Barbara Street. During the time Tom was in the office we moved four times. He, almost by sheer will, got us our wonderful, new, stand-alone building with its inscription there for all to see. The layout of the building itself was a result of listening to our reception, records, victim-witness, filing, and other personnel. Tom’s compassion for victims, his dedication to public safety, his passion for prosecution and his integrity in doing so are his legacy.

Mr. Sneddon, we have a verdict! Yes, Tom, we have a verdict: You were the greatest DA, in the greatest DA’s of-fice on the Pacific Rim!

W


Legal Community

Each month we will be asking a differ-ent lawyer to answer part of the “Proust Questionnaire,” a list of thirty-five ques-tions made famous by the canonical French author, Marcel Proust. Our first participant is Jason Dominguez, the new Executive Director of the Legal Aid Foundation of Santa Barbara County.

1). What is your idea of perfect happiness? Living on an extraordinarily beautiful coast, sur-rounded by family, friends, books, and a philanthropic legal community.

2). What is your greatest fear? I’m squarely in the Roosevelt camp. Fear itself. 3). Which living person do you most admire? My parents.

4). What is your greatest extravagance? Travel.

5). What is your current state of mind? Focused.

6). Which words or phrases do you most overuse? I don’t know.

7). What or who is the greatest love of your life? My amazing family.

8). When and where were you happiest? The mo-ments that accompanied completing an extraordinary team achievement.

9). Which talent would you most like to have? Pho-tographic memory.

get to Know...

Jason Dominguez

10). What do you consider your greatest achievement? Working at an international tribunal.

11). Where would you most like to live? Right where I am.

12). What is your most treasured posses-sion? My bicycle.

13). What is your most marked characteristic? The ability to focus, as a photographer and otherwise.

14). What do you most value in your friends? Sense of humor.

15). Who are your favorite writers? David Foster Wallace, Wally Lamb, Dave Eggers, Zadie Smith, Lorie Moore, Cynthia Ozick.

16). Who is your hero of fiction? Luke Skywalker.

17). Who are your heroes in real life? Teachers, social workers, musicians.

18). Which historical figure do you most identify with? Benjamin Franklin.

19). What is it that you most dislike? Suffering.

20). What is your motto? Live every day to the fullest!

If there is someone you would like to nominate for the Proust Questionnaire please email us at [email protected].

January 2015 17

www.maho-prentice.com(805) 962-1930

Fifthian Building629 State St., Suite 217, Santa Barbara, CA 93111

Maho Prentice LLP is a Santa Barbara firm which focusses its practice on handling plaintiff personal injury cases. We welcome your referrals on matters of personal injury and wrongful death and pay referral fees per State Bar rules. Maho Prentice has successfully obtained settlements and verdicts in amounts exceeding $17 million dollars in the past two years alone. We will speak with all potential clients free of charge and will handle all good cases anywhere in the State of California. Please consider establishing a rewarding relationship with us.

Fellow Santa BarBara lawyerS:


Members of the Bar Association:

To all who assisted or attended the recent Chowder Fest event, we at the Legal Aid Foundation extend our thanks and gratitude for your support. Special thanks are extended to our volunteer organizing committee, to our many busi-ness patrons who provided food and beverages, and to our sponsors listed below who provided financial support. As a result, we were able to generate over $45,000 from the event, net of all expenses, to fund the ongoing work of Legal Aid.

We would like to extend a special message of appreciation to the Bar Association and its Board of Directors for all of the support they have provided to Legal Aid over this last year. In addition to a $10,000 sponsorship of the Chow-der Fest event, the Bar Association funded an additional

Chowder Fest Was A great Success!Best Clam Chowder: 1st Place, Three Pickles; 2nd Place, Bacara

Best Creative Chowder: 1st Place, Chase Restaurant; 2nd Place, Ojai JellyPeople’s Choice: Three Pickles

Best Overall Chowder: Three Pickles

$10,000 towards the support of Legal Aid operations and fund raising efforts, a portion of which we intend to devote to needed improvements to our historic building. The Bar Association has also been a valuable partner in assisting us in obtaining grants and other assistance important to achieving the goals of both organizations, including assis-tance in securing $40,000 in funding from the County of Santa Barbara to increase legal services to the community. We look forward to a continued partnership with the Bar in similar endeavors over the coming year.

Thanks again for all of your support for Legal Aid. It is truly appreciated.

Sincerely, Jason DominguezExecutive Director

January 2015 19

Supporting Firms and OrganizationsSanta Barbara County Bar Association Food & Home MagazineBacara Resort & SpaDeckers Outdoor CorporationThe Fund For Santa BarbaraCommunity West Bank Cappello & Noël LLP Hollister & BraceReicker, Pfau, Pyle & McRoy LLPEhlers & FairbanksMayer, Hoffman McCann PC

Supporting IndividualsAllan Ghitterman & Susan RoseSusan & William WagnerHon. Thomas & June AnderleAlan & Carol BlakeboroRobert & Leila NoelGarry Tetalman, Esq.Saji Gunawardane, Esq.

Call us today so you can focus onwhat’s important – your clients.

Business & Professional Practice Valuations

Cash Flow Available for Support

High Earner Child Support Situations

Lifestyle Expense Analysis

Community/Separate Property Balance Sheets

Tax Effects of Divorce & Tax Planning

Asset Tracing

Reimbursement & Misappropriation Analyses

White, Zuckerman, Warsavsky, Luna & Hunt, LLP offers much more than accounting expertise. Ourcreative ideas and new strategies give our clients a competitive edge. In family law, you need professionalswho can analyze financial situations and provide unimpeachable analysis and expert testimony. With decades of experience, we are highly qualified in all areas including:

To attend our Santa Barbara Family LawStudy Group, e-mail [email protected] is no charge for the dinner or programand you will receive one hour of MCLE credit.

Our two California locations include:

Los Angeles 818-981-4226

Orange County 949-219-9816

E-mail: [email protected] www.wzwlh.com

Certified Public ACCOUNTANTS

Expert Witnesses

Forensic Accountants

Business Appraisers

Marital Dissolution

Lost Earnings & Profits

Wrongful Termination

Fraud Investigation


StreaMLined approach reSuLtS

coSt effective

Over 25 years PI litigation on the Central Coast

(805) [email protected]

www.lindenauermediation.com

Trained MediaTor:Straus Institute

Pepperdine University

MediaTion PanelisT:Santa Barbara, Ventura, San Luis Obispo

Resolute Systems, LLC

1 1

Lindenauer Mediation

Victoria Lindenauer, Esq.

January 2015 21

t the end of 2014, The Economist magazine published a ranking of the best and worst places to do busi-ness in the world. The rankings were based on 91

indicators within 10 broad categories: politics, the economy, market opportunities, policy towards free enterprise, open-ness to foreign investment, foreign trade and exchange con-trols, taxes, financing, the labor market, and infrastructure. 82 countries were ranked. Libya was last; China was in 50th place. In the top quartile were 21 countries, bracketed at the top by Singapore and at the bottom by the United Kingdom, with the United States positioned at number 7.

In reviewing the top quartile of coun-tries, I asked myself: what differentiat-ed them from all of the other countries in the world? What, if anything, did they share in common? Was there a common thread running through each of these 21 countries? In pondering those questions, I considered a number of possibilities.

Was it geography? Yes, 12 of the countries would be described as Northern European. But, there were also countries from the Americas, including Chile and Canada, and countries from Oceania and Asia, such as Taiwan and Malaysia. So, statistically, geography could not be the defining factor linking the 21 countries together.

Was it language? Yes, a lot of the countries were English speaking, but in fact, the assembled countries represented at least 12 different language groups. Thus, language was not the connection.

Was it British roots? Many of the countries were either part of the English commonwealth, or former colonies. But, being only 9 in number, we cannot conclude that that the British connection was the defining criteria.

The link is also neither race nor ethnicity, since there is such a wide divergence in each of the countries in both of those categories. Neither is the link religion. More of the

A Common ThreadBy DaviD K. hughes

countries were Protestant and Catholic than other religions but, in total, at least 11 different faith groups could be deemed dominant within the 21 countries.

Neither is the thread the existence of natural resources. Top performing city states like Singapore and Hong Kong have few if any natural resources.

What about education? Surely, countries that value the importance of education will also be countries that provide fertile ground and opportunities for business. In 2014, the World Economic Forum published its Global Competitive Index, which reviewed 144 countries. Included in that sur-vey was a measure of each country’s educational quality at both the primary level and in higher education. Most of The Economist’s 21 best business countries expectedly scored very high with respect to educational structure and achievement, but there were also a handful that did not, and that were bested in the rankings by countries such as China and the United Arab Emirates which strongly em-phasize education but did not score high with respect to a business-friendly culture.

Was the key factor governance? Ev-ery year the World Bank, through its Governance Indicators Project, reviews the quality of governance in the coun-tries of the world. But its study pro-vided no clear answer to my question. It is true that most of the top quartile of countries would be described as having well run governments. But the manner and modes and politics of government in each of the 21 countries are widely divergent – from the arguably benign autocracy of Singapore to the lack of a unified government in Belgium, inexo-

rably split along lines of language and culture. The mode of governance, though critically important for business success, was, therefore, not necessarily the most significant factor linking the 21 countries.

I finally thought about the law. At least nine of the countries would be described as following the common law tradition, but an equal number were civil law in their tradition and practice. So, the form of the law followed in each country could not be described as the defining char-acteristic linking the top countries for business. But, could it be something else related to law? And, if so, what was it? Thinking, looking, and researching further, I may have found the answer, the common thread.

The World Justice Project (“WJP”) was co-founded by Bill

A

Legal News

Continued on page 24

Countries which do not give lip service to the rule of law, but apply and protect it vigorously, will naturally be better havens for business.


Criminal Justice

ARobert Sanger

Managing Big Data in Complex LitigationBy RoBeRt saNgeR

ny lawyer doing complex litigation, civil or crimi-nal, has confronted what seems like an insurmount-able sea of data. Many of us have used computer

relational database programs and otherwise fought through the mass of information to prepare to try a case. There have been some advancements in managing data made by law enforcement in recent years to make their investigations manageable. During law enforcement investigations, the goal is somewhat different than that of the lawyer prepar-ing for trial; however, the concepts are useful.

Big Data — SizeWhat is “big data” in the context of either investigating

cases or preparing them for trial? Data is “big” in two re-gards: size and complexity. This is an important concept because looking at the meaning of “big data” in the context of a particular case helps set the parameters of the methods employed in analyzing that data.

Data may be big in the sense that there is simply a huge mass of it. Although large in size, it may not be particularly complex to analyze. For instance, a “paper” case involving records that are electronically stored and searchable may entail a lot of data but it may be manageable.

In this regard, obtaining the data in searchable form is paramount. Banks often will respond to a subpoena or search warrant with a box or boxes of photocopied state-ments, deposit slips and check copies. However, if specified, the bank may be able to provide the account reconciliations in electronic form that is already searchable with their, usu-ally proprietary, software.

If the issues in the case were related to, say, a pattern of deposits and withdrawals or the issuance of checks and wire transfers to identified subjects, years of records could be searched in a relatively short period of time with the bank’s software. Of course, unless you represent the bank, it will probably be reluctant to provide the software and there may be a discovery dispute that has to be judicially resolved before progress can be made.

We have also confronted this issue with regard to mas-

sive records of the federal government. We have had some luck negotiating or obtaining an order for a “run time” version of the proprietary software for big data that was read-ily accessible to the other side. Run time versions of the software are not downloadable and, in theory, cannot be made to stand alone. In essence, you obtain the use of the software for exploring the data on the one disk or hard drive on which the data is provided. In one case alone, having the run time software from the Department of Justice saved several hundreds of hours of preliminary analysis by our expert.

Big Data — ComplexityWere life so easy! Most of the time in “big data” cases, the

data is complex. This is so even if large chunks of it can be analyzed electronically as suggested above. The reality is that most cases involve a variety of media and a variety of means of producing the data. Overall, complex cases usually involve a substantial amount of text-based data. This data may be included in emails, word processed documents and, of course, handwritten notes or otherwise corrupted text that is not subject to optical character recognition (OCR).

In criminal cases, search warrants are often issued to permit the seizure of entire computer systems, including networks, stand-alone computers, laptops, smart phones and other devices. Furthermore, law enforcement usually uses the ENCASE proprietary software to make a mirror image of each hard drive which includes the ability to search deleted files. The result, both for law enforcement and the legal team for the accused, is that individuals are simply looking at months or years of accumulated and, for the most part, unrelated data.

In addition, law enforcement currently tends to subpoena data from internet service providers, social media and other repositories. Wiretap warrants can exponentially increase the amount of data to be analyzed.

Of course, life is messy and search warrants generally include all notes and other handwritten materials. Going through the boxes of materials seized from company file cabinets can make an investigator or lawyer long for even a relatively full hard drive. The fact is, these days, computer

January 2015 23

Criminal Justice

analytic capabilities still have to be merged with critical thinking and a lot of hard work.

The Lawyer and the Green EyeshadeWe all know that there is no substitute for being im-

mersed in the case and painstakingly going through all of the material. There are stories we all could tell about find-ing that one piece of paper that made all the difference in the litigation.

On the other hand, we have to recognize that in cases involving 20, 30, 100 or 500 banker’s boxes of material along with a terabyte hard drive or two thrown in, it is not possible for one person to inspect every digital entry and to sit and read every word of every document. The question is how to manage the material and master it on a case-by-case basis.

The federal government has devised some common sense guidelines to deal with big data cases.1 There have been numerous scholarly and professional publications that have also dealt with the problem of simply not having enough time to analyze big data in a criminal law enforcement in-vestigation.2 Without taking away from the work ethic of the successful and well-prepared trial lawyer, we can learn something from law enforcement.

The Concept of Dealing with Big Data – Both Size and Complexity

The first thing to do is to determine what form the data is in. If it is searchable – e.g., bank or government records – make sure that you have it in a searchable form and that you have the software to evaluate it. As mentioned above, if it is proprietary, then negotiate or move to get a run time version. Then either learn to (or hire an expert to) run rel-evant searches on the data.

Next, generate reports. Timelines are invaluable. If you are lucky enough to have the data in Excel or some other easy to use format, timelines can be run instantaneously. In addition, you can run reports according to names of individuals or other categories.

As to the portion of the data that is not readily searchable, do your best to convert it to searchable data. For transcripts or typewritten or computer-written reports, you can OCR it. Even the best OCR program will miss or misrecognize a certain number of words, so remember that it is not perfect. However, once it is OCR’d you can do word searches.

One recent law enforcement contribution to this process has been to use natural language searching techniques. There are various programs that will allow you to search OCR’d material and some of them are very powerful. On the other hand, you must recognize the limitations. Simply

doing word or Boolean concept searches on materials may miss something important. You still have to get into the data and read through. However, you will have at least identi-fied some potential areas to mine for specific information.

Then, identify the materials that are handwritten or not otherwise susceptible to OCR and computer analysis. In criminal cases, this may involve file notes, handwritten reports or poorly preserved or defectively copied docu-ments. There is no substitute for sitting with the materials and painstakingly sifting through them.

However, even in this area, there are powerful computer programs available to help organize such materials and to generate useful reports. There are many relational database programs on the market that require documents to be iden-tified on a template (and attached as a file) but that, with some hard work, will allow you to retrieve the information at the relevant time.

ConclusionOne of the things that law enforcement emphasizes is

the need to share your analysis and conclusions and make the data accessible to team members as much as possible. In trial preparation, the trial lawyer has to “know it all” or get as close to attaining that goal as possible. The lawyer cannot simply delegate the task of knowing the case. On the other hand, in addition to being hands on, the trial lawyer has to rely on the team in big data cases to make it all intelligible.

Robert Sanger is a Certified Criminal Law Specialist and has been practicing as a criminal defense lawyer in Santa Barbara for over 40 years. He is a partner in the firm of Sanger Swysen & Dunkle. Mr. Sanger is Immediate Past President of California Attorneys for Criminal Justice (CACJ), the statewide criminal defense lawyers’ organization. He is a Director of Death Penalty Focus. Mr. Sanger is a Member of the ABA Criminal Justice Sentencing Committee and the NACDL Death Penalty Committee. He is a Member of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). Mr. Sanger was also accepted into the Jurisprudence Section of the American Academy of Forensic Sciences (AAFS) and will be presenting at the AAFS Annual Conference in February.

eNDNotes1 See, e.g., U.S. Department of Justice’s Global Justice Information

Sharing Initiative (Global), Law Enforcement Analytic Standards (2nd edition, 2012).

2 See, e.g., Maarten van Banerveld,, Nhien-An Le-Khac and M-Tahar Kechadi, Performance Evaluation of a Natural Language Processing Approach Applied in White Collar Crime Investigation, University of Dublin Springer, 2014).


Legal News

Neukom, the former Microsoft General Counsel and, later, the Managing General Partner of the San Francisco Giants. Periodically, the WJP prepares a Rule of Law index. This is a massive undertaking, as demonstrated by its 2014 224-page report. The WJP conducted a quantitative measurement of the rule of law in practice in 99 countries by looking at 47 indicators within 9 categories. Acknowledging that the concept of the “rule of law” has been inherently difficult to reduce to a simple one sentence definition, the WJP instead adopted the following working definition: it is a system where four universal principles are upheld – that govern-ments, and their officials, as well as individuals and private entities are all accountable under the law; that laws are clear, just, applied evenly, and protect fundamental rights; that the legal process is accessible, fair and effective; and that justice is timely delivered.

And what do we find from the voluminous report that rated Denmark number one and Venezuela last with respect to the rule of law in practice? Of the 21 countries rated by The Economist as being “best for business” that were also measured by the WJP, all but one were also rated within

ANTICOUNI & ASSOCIATES

IS PLEASED TO ANNOUNCE THAT GREGORY B. WILBUR HAS JOINED THE FIRM. MR. WILBUR, A GRADUATE OF GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY AND NEW YORK UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW, WILL CONTINUE TO FOCUS ON EMPLOYMENT LAW.

ANTICOUNI & ASSOCIATES HAS DECADES OF EXPERIENCE HELPING EMPLOYEES SEEKING

RECOURSE FOR VIOLATIONS OF CALIFORNIA AND FEDERAL EMPLOYMENT LAWS, ASSISTING EMPLOYERS AVOID COSTLY EMPLOYMENT LITIGATION AND LITIGATING WHEN APPROPRIATE.

ANTICOUNI & ASSOCIATES HAS OBTAINED OVER $100,000,000.00 FOR CALIFORNIA

EMPLOYEES AND OVER $2,000,000.00 IN CY PRES FUNDS FOR LOCAL NON-PROFITS IN THE PAST 25 YEARS.*

REFERRAL FEES ON CONTINGENCY CASES PAID PURSUANT TO STATE BAR RULES.

TELEPHONE: 805/845.0864

FAX: 805/845.0965 www.anticouniassociates.com

*THIS DOES NOT GUARANTEE, WARRANTY, OR PREDICT THE OUTCOME OF ANY PARTICULAR CASE.

the top 21 countries for applying the rule of law in practice. This is a remarkable corollary which appears to be a com-mon thread our search has been seeking.

But this conclusion should not surprise us as attorneys. We know from our schooling, experience, and individual practices that when people have been afforded individual freedoms protected by the rule of law, they and all of their endeavors have the opportunity to thrive. Countries which do not give lip service to the rule of law, but apply and protect it vigorously, will naturally be better havens for busi-ness. As John Locke reminds us, “wherever the law ends, tyranny begins.” This year, when we will be celebrating the 800th anniversary of the Magna Carta, a cornerstone in the building of the rule of law, let us not forget the practical and real importance of the rule of law, and diligently endeavor to revere and protect it in all that we do.

Hughes, continued from page 21

January 2015 25

Serving Businesses in Southern California Since 1979

Visit us at www.cislo.com or call us at 1 (866) CISLO LAW

We have Succesfully Settled or LitigatedOver 98% of Our Cases

Santa Monica, Westlake Village and Santa BarbaraWith Offices In

IP Filings, Counseling, Licensing & Litigation

Litigation Attorneys at LawPatent, Copyright and Trademark

®

®

CISLO & THOMAS LLP

AV Preeminent Rating(5 out of 5)

AVVO Rated ‘Superb’(10 out of 10)

BONGIOVI MEDIATIONMediating Solutions since 1998

“There is no better

ambassador for the

value of mediation than

Henry Bongiovi.”

HENRY J. BONGIOVI

Mediator • Arbitrator • Discovery Referee

Conducting Mediationsthroughout California

805.564.2115www.henrybongiovi.com


Named a 2015 Southern California Superlawyer®!

www.santabarbaraappeals.com

[email protected]

28

FOR LEASEDowntown Office Space

EXCELLENT SPACE FOR A LAW FIRM...• 2,973sfwithhighceilings• Greatdowntownlocation• On-siteparking• Prominentsignageandvisibility

209 E. Victoria St

Caitlin [email protected]

Kristopher [email protected]

HayesCommercial.com | 222 E. Carrillo St, Suite 101, Santa Barbara

ONE BLOCK FROM THE COUNTY COURTHOUSE

Wells Fargo Private Bank provides financial services and products through Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. and its affiliates. Deposit and loan products offered through Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. Member FDIC. Insurance products are available through Insurance subsidiaries of Wells Fargo & Company and underwritten by non-

affiliated Insurance Companies. Not available in all states. © 2014 Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. All rights reserved. NMLSR ID 399801

Wells Fargo Private Bank offers the dedicated attention of our regional team backed by the strength, innovation and resources of the larger Wells Fargo organization. We instill confidence in our clients by devising a strategy based on their unique needs while leveraging our national resources to extend the impact of their wealth, now and over time.

To learn more about how your local Wells Fargo Private Bank office can help you, contact:

S. Victoria Kahn Vice President Fiduciary Advisory Specialist 805-564-2838 [email protected]

Regional support backed by institutional strength

January 2015 27

ometimes it takes an audacious goal to motivate us into action. This is especially true when working on complex – and seemingly impossible – issues.

Reducing homelessness is one of those issues, and a re-cent call to action by First Lady Michelle Obama and the Department of Housing and Urban Development may just be what’s needed to create significant positive and lasting change.

Last June, First Lady Obama issued a Mayors Challenge to End Veterans Homelessness by the end of 2015, and earlier this year, the Central Coast Collaborative on Homelessness (C3H) Policy Council agreed to join over 300 communities throughout the country and participate.

The national fact sheet about this Challenge describes ending Veterans homelessness as reaching the point where there are no Veterans sleep-ing on our streets and every Veteran has access to permanent housing. In addition, should Veterans become homeless or be at-risk of becoming homeless, communities will have the capacity to quickly connect them to the help they need to achieve hous-ing stability.

The Mayors Challenge is a way to solidify partnerships and secure commitments to end Veteran homelessness from mayors and other elected lead-ers across the country. C3H is the best local organization to oversee this process, as its structure focuses on regional collaboration and “connecting the dots” between various public, private, and nonprofit agencies. Already, we’re see-ing great improvements connecting with the Veterans Af-fairs office and ensuring that our homeless veterans receive their VA health and other related benefits.

Participating in a national endeavor will also give us the ability to learn from other communities, adopt best prac-tices, and avoid pitfalls. There’s also the opportunity to find out about other potential funding sources that will help both

The Mayors Challenge To End veteran Homelessness By heleNe sChNeiDeR

Veterans and other people experiencing homelessness who have a need for supportive services and affordable housing.

One of the outcomes I hope we achieve is that by help-ing veterans move from homelessness to housing and self-sufficiency, we will discover and correct gaps in services and coordination, which would also result in assisting many other non-Veteran homeless individuals. In fact, C3H

made it a priority in its direction to pursue this Challenge to also focus on the needs of homeless families and seniors.

Finally, to measure our success rate, we must create and monitor accurate and timely data. Achiev-ing this is harder than it sounds, especially with multiple data points among different service providers and in following HIPAA confidenti-ality requirements.

Every Vet deserves a home. They answered the call defending our rights and freedom for our country; we must ensure that they are well taken care of after their service. Meeting this Challenge will help us succeed in helping others. As the saying goes, “a rising tide lifts all boats.” Here’s to smooth sailing moving forward.

Helene Schneider is the Mayor of Santa Barbara and Vice Chair of the C3H Policy Council. To be part of the effort to end homelessness you can volunteer during the Vulnerability Survey that takes place January 28 and 28. To learn more, please go to Common Ground Santa Barbara County (CGSBC) www.com-mongroundsb.org. CGSBC is a special project of the Legal Aid Foundation of Santa Barbara County.

S

To learn more, please go to Common Ground Santa Barbara County (CGSBC) www.commongroundsb.org. CGSBC is a special project of the Legal Aid Foundation of Santa Barbara County.

Santa Barbara Community


Legal Community

Jill Himlan, formerly of Griffith & Thornburgh, LLP, has joined local company Med-Bridge as corporate counsel. Himlan received her J.D., with Great Distinction, from the University of the Pacific Mc-George School of Law. She also attended University of the Pacific as an undergraduate where she was on the Division I cross-country team and graduated cum laude with a degree in mathematics.

Herb Fox has been named a 2015 Southern California Superlawyer for his appellate law practice. Herb is certi-fied by the State Bar as an Appellate Law Specialist. He maintains offices in Santa Barbara and in Los Angeles.

If you have news to report - e.g. a new practice, a new hire or promotion, an appointment, upcoming projects/initiatives by local associations, an upcoming event, engagement, marriage, a birth in the family, etc., Santa Barbara Lawyer invites you to “Make a Motion!”. Send one to two paragraphs for consideration by the editorial deadline to our Motions editor, Mike Pasternak at [email protected]. If you submit an accompanying photograph, please ensure that the JPEG or TIFF file has a minimum resolution of 300 dpi. Please note that the Santa Barbara Lawyer editorial board retains discretion to publish or not publish any submission as well as to edit submissions for content, length, and/or clarity.

Room at the Inn2015 Membership in William L. Gordon Inn of Court

There is room at the Inns of Court for you. Since 1995, The William L. Gordon Inn of Court has been a Santa Bar-bara Chapter of the American Inns of Court. Its mission is to foster civility, professionalism, and excellence in the legal profession.

The monthly meetings are generally entertaining, educational, and a great way for the more experienced profes-sionals to mentor the less experienced attorneys and students.

Benefits of membership in the Inn include all of the following:

1. Ten excellent dinners currently at the University Club (one each month November through October - excepting December and January);

2. At least nine hours of participatory MCLE credit (based on attendance - plus credit for being a presenter);

3. The opportunity to work as a team with local judges and other judicial officers and attorneys at all levels of experience to give one MCLE presentation during the year;

4. Social hour prior to dinner meetings to meet and become acquainted with the other members of the Inn and their guests; and,

5. Membership in the American Inns of Court and the bimonthly publication “The Bencher.”

If you are interested in becoming a member of our Inn of Court, please contact Cheryl Johnson at 963-6711 or at [email protected] .

Classifieds

attoRNey PositioN

Santa Barbara law firm specializing in Worker’s Comp looking for part-time/full-time attorney. Work Comp or medical background preferred, but will train highly qual. in-div. Excellent salary, Benefits pkg, & 401k plan for full-time.

Fax resume to J. Kaufman, 805-966-0922.

January 2015 29

Legal Community

verdicts and Decisions

Natalie Makabi et al. v. Aroma Bakery Café, Inc. et al.LOS ANGELES COUNTY SUPERIOR - CENTRAL DIVISION

CASE NUMBER: BC468146TYPE OF CASE: Unpaid WagesTYPE OF PROCEEDING: Court TrialJUDGE: Hon. Richard Fruin LENGTH OF TRIAL: 7 daysDATE OF VERDICT OR DECISION: April 4, 2014; fee award October 23, 2014PLAINTIFFS: Natalie Makabi, Sivan Cohen, Maor Batito, Udi Berdugo, Or Takaev, Ekat-

erina Avashurova, and Roee LaviPLAINTIFFS’ COUNSEL: James H. Cordes; Jennifer Kramer; Ricardo Chavez; and Robert AckermannDEFENDANTS: Aroma Bakery Café, Inc., dba Aroma Bakery & Café; Gourmet Kosher Bak-

ing, Easkak Gedalia, and Izhak GuyDEFENDANTS’ COUNSEL: Eli M. Kantor

OVERVIEW OF CASE: Six of the Plaintiffs worked as servers, and one worked as a hostess, for Defendants, the Aroma Bakery Café restaurants in Hollywood and Encino. The servers worked for tips only. The hostess worked for cash wages only that did not include overtime. The case was originally filed as a class action but class allegations were dropped after discovery of another earlier filed class action. Plaintiffs opted out of the class action.

FACTS AND CONTENTIONS: Plaintiffs, all immigrants from Israel, contended they were entitled to be paid, but had not been paid, minimum wage for all hours worked and overtime wages for overtime hours worked. They also alleged they were entitled to, but not provided, lawful meal or rest breaks.

Defendants contended that Plaintiffs were paid at least the minimum wage because Plaintiffs were entitled to keep the mandatory service charges that were added to customer bills. Defendants also alleged Plaintiffs were provided meal and rest breaks.

RESULT: The Court found that the six servers worked for tips only; that is, without payment of wages in Defendants’ restaurants. The Court found that the hostess received only cash wages without overtime. The Court found that Plaintiffs were not provided with meal and rest breaks.

The Court awarded $499,236.99 in unpaid wages and prejudgment interest collectively for the seven Plaintiffs against the corporate Defendants. The Court ordered a permanent injunction against the individual Defendants. Although the Court found that the Defendants had violated PAGA, it declined to award any damages for the PAGA violations.

The Court also found that Plaintiffs were the prevailing parties and awarded reasonable fees and costs under Labor Code sections 226 and 1194 in the amount of $476,865.89 against all Defendants, corporate and individual, jointly and severally.


Legal News

Carlos Ortiz v. Teledyne-Reson A/S, et al.SANTA BARBARA SUPERIOR COURT, DEPARTMENT 4

CASE NUMBER: 1385278TYPE OF CASE: Wrongful Termination/Employment DiscriminationTYPE OF PROCEEDING: Jury trial JUDGE: Hon. Donna D. GeckLENGTH OF TRIAL: 3 weeks, 2 daysLENGTH OF DELIBERATIONS: 2 ½ daysDATE OF VERDICT OR DECISION: July 15, 2014PLAINTIFF: Carlos OrtizPLAINTIFF’S COUNSEL: Edward Lowenschuss, EsquireDEFENDANTS: Teledyne-Reson A/S, Teledyne Reson Inc., Reson A/S, Reson Inc.DEFENDANTS’ COUNSEL: Melissa Fassett of Price, Postel & Parma, LLP

OVERVIEW OF CASE: Plaintiff alleged discrimination and wrongful termination from employment based on his national origin (Ecuador) and age (55), and failure to accommodate his disability. Defendants contended Plaintiff was terminated for inadequate sales and that Defendants did not fail to accommodate a disability.

FACTS AND CONTENTIONS: Plaintiff was employed with Defendants for 19 ½ years. He was one of the first eight employees with the company, and was acknowledged on various occasions for his outstanding work performance. Plaintiff claimed he was paid significantly less than others at the company in similar positions, who had less education, knowledge, and experience than Plaintiff. He also claimed he repeatedly was passed up for promotions, on several occa-sions in favor of employees who were trained by Plaintiff.

After being promoted to a position as Sales Manager for Latin America, Plaintiff alleged that he was terminated without warning or explanation. Defendants contend that Plaintiff was terminated, along with other employees, based on his performance as part of an overall effort to improve the company’s sales. Plaintiff asserted that prior to his termination he secured a $75 million deal, the largest sale in the history of the company. Defendants denied the sale took place and contended that Defendants abandoned the deal before a contract was ever signed. After Plaintiff filed his lawsuit and made multiple discovery requests for documents evidencing the alleged sale, Defendants’ CEO destroyed his personal copy of documents pertaining to this project.

SUMMARY OF CLAIMED DAMAGES: Plaintiff sought in excess of $3,800,000 in past and future lost earnings, $60,000 in past and future economic losses, $500,000 in past and future non-economic losses, and an unspecified amount of puni-tive damages.

RESULT: The jury rendered a verdict for Plaintiff in the total amount of $1,130,000.00 ($380,000 for past economic loss, $500,000 for past non-economic loss, and $250,000 for future non-economic loss). The jury voted 9-3 in favor of liability on the national origin/age discrimination claim. The jury found for Defendants on the failure to accommodate an alleged disability claim and on the claim for punitive damages. Defendants are pursuing post-trial motions, including motions for judgment notwithstanding the verdict, new trial, and remittitur.

January 2015 31

The Litigation Section of the Santa Barbara County Bar Association presents:

HOW TO WIN AT TRIAL:Learn the Tactics, How to Emphasize

and What’s Really Important

Take the guesswork out of trying cases. Successful trial work involves much more than knowing the trial process and “leaving it up to the jury.” This presentation will reveal key tactics in trial practice, how to emphasize evi-dence and what really matters to win a case. The speaker shall provide a multi-media presentation that includes selected slides from over twenty successful jury trials.

SpeakerMatthew Haffner of HAFFNER LAW GROUPMr. Haffner, with twenty five years civil litigation experi-ence, has over thirty jury trials to verdict, all as a defense lawyer, with 29 defense verdicts, including for wrongful death; catastrophic injury; significant construction defect damage; contractual disputes; and, employment law. Haffner Law Group’s practice has recently expanded to include plaintiff’s matters, so all trial practitioners may gather critical trial practice information from this seminar.

Date and TimeThursday, January 15th, 12:00 to 1:30 pm

LocationSanta Barbara College of Law, Room 1, 20 East Victoria Street, Santa Barbara

ReservationsReserve via email to Mark Coffin,Chair of Litigation Section, by Thursday, January 8th, [email protected]

Cost and Payment$40/members $45/non-members – includes lunchMail checks by Thursday, January 8th, payable to: Santa Barbara County Bar Association, c/o Mark CoffinLAW OFFICE OF MARK T. COFFIN, 21 E. Carrillo Street, Suite 240, Santa Barbara, CA 93101

MCLE CreditOne and ½ hour credit applied for

The Litigation Section of the Santa Barbara County Bar Association presents:

Jury Instructions, Verdict Forms, and Statements of Decision:

Why They Matter on Appeal (And Why You Should Care)

Jury instructions, verdict forms and statements of decision are the backbones of a judgment, and a weak backbone can mean calamity on appeal. For the prevailing party, protecting against erroneous instructions and verdict forms, or from a defective statement of decision, are critical steps to preserving your judgment. For the losing party, preserving errors by making proper and timely requests and objections are critical steps to win reversal.

Speaker: Herb Fox, Esq. (CALS)Herb Fox has 27 years of appellate law experience as a former Research Attorney at the Court of Appeal and as a Certified Appellate Law Specialist. Herb has been attorney-of-record in over 200 appeals, and frequently consults with trial attorneys about creating and preserving their appellate records. He handles appeals throughout California, and is the Treasurer of the Los Angeles County Bar Association’s Appellate Courts Section.

Date and TimeWednesday, February 25th, 12 to 1:00 pm

LocationSanta Barbara College of Law, Room 1, 20 East Victoria Street, Santa Barbara

ReservationsReserve via email to Mark Coffin,Chair of Litigation Section, by Friday, February 13th, at [email protected]

Cost and Payment$35 members, $40 non-members (includes lunch)

Mail checks by Friday, February 13th, payable to:

Santa Barbara County Bar Associationc/o Mark CoffinLAW OFFICE OF MARK T. COFFIN21 E. Carrillo Street, Suite 240Santa Barbara, CA 93101Tel: 805-248-7118

MCLE CreditOne hour MCLE credit applied for.


Registration Payments received è On or before 1-9-2015 After 1-9-2015 SBCBA Members $110.00 $130.00

Registration Form Non-SBCBA Members $160.00 $175.00

Name Email Firm Membership status qMbr qNon-mbr qMbr qNon-mbr

Payment: ___ SBCBA members at q $110 q $130 _______.00 ___ non-SBCBA members at q $160 q $175 _______.00 à Total: $_________

To register and pay by credit card, call SBCBA at 569-5511. Otherwise, mail completed registration form with payment to SBCBA, 15 West Carrillo, Ste. 106, Santa Barbara, CA 93101. Attach additional sheets for additional registrants.

Saturday, January 24, 2015 at Garden Street Academy

Featuring

• Presentations on cyber-snooping and related Fourth Amendment Rights by the ACLU, the Electronic Frontier Foundation and Santa Clara Law School Professor Kyle Graham.

• A fabulous Judges’ Panel led by Presiding

Judge James Herman and Assistant Presiding Judge Patricia Kelly, addressing the state of the budget, the emergence of electronic filing and the use of technology at trial.

• Courses include Ethics, Elimination of

Bias, Substance Abuse, Developments in Bankruptcy Law, Entertainment Law, Human Rights, Employment Law, Cyber Security, and Estate and Elder Issues.

6 Hours of MCLE Credit

Bench & Bar Conference

Featured Sponsors: Amherst Exchange Corporation; Fell, Marking, Abkin, Montgomery, Granet & Raney LLP; Foley Bezek Behle & Curtis, LLP; Frank's Legal Services; Hollister & Brace, APC; The Law Offices of John Thyne III; Lawcopy; MyCase.com; Norman Schall & Associates; Personal Court Reporters; Price Postel & Parma LLP; Rogers, Sheffield & Campbell, LLP; Seed Mackall LLP; Thomson Reuters; Tri County Court Reporters

January 2015 33

8:15

AM

– 9

:00

AM

Reg

istra

tion

and

Brea

kfas

t. E

nter

from

Gar

den

Stre

et

Bre

akou

t Ses

sion

A

9:00

AM

to 9

:50

AM

1 ho

ur M

CLE

“Dri

nkin

g W

ith In

tent

: Pr

oof a

nd C

onse

quen

ces”

[1

Hr.

Subs

tanc

e A

buse

]

Dr.

Jeff

Her

ten

“Wha

t Eve

ry A

ttorn

ey S

houl

d K

now

A

bout

Con

stru

ctio

n La

w”

Mar

k T.

Cof

fin

The

Law

Off

ice

of M

ark

T. C

offin

“Law

and

Eco

nom

ics o

f H

uman

Rig

hts i

n th

e H

ague

an

d Le

gal A

id in

San

ta

Barb

ara”

Ja

son

Dom

ingu

ez

Sant

a B

arba

ra L

egal

Aid

“Fou

nder

itis:

A C

ase

Stud

y in

Em

ploy

ee M

obili

ty Is

sues

and

R

elat

ed L

itiga

tion

in th

e St

art-U

p En

viro

nmen

t”M

att M

azza

St

radl

ing

Yoc

ca C

arls

on &

Rau

th

9:50

AM

to 1

0:10

AM

Le

gal S

ervi

ces &

Tec

hnol

ogy

Exhi

bits

10:1

0 A

M to

11

AM

1

hour

MC

LE

Foru

m o

f Jud

ges:

Led

by

Pres

idin

g Ju

dge

Jam

es H

erm

an a

nd A

ssis

tant

Pre

sidi

ng Ju

dge

Patri

cia

Kel

ly

Feat

urin

g Ju

dges

Kay

Kun

s, B

rian

Hill

, Jam

es V

oyse

y an

d M

icha

el C

arro

zzo

Bre

akou

t Ses

sion

B 11

:10

AM

to N

oon

1 ho

ur M

CLE

“Civ

ility

Und

er P

ress

ure”

[1 H

r. Le

gal E

thic

s]

Kat

y G

raha

m

“Pro

tect

ing

and

Prov

idin

g fo

r Y

our

Clie

nts U

sing

a Pr

ivat

e Pr

ofes

siona

l Fi

duci

ary”

Lind

say

Dor

ner

Sant

a B

arba

ra E

stat

e Se

rvic

es

“Ass

ets f

or S

ale:

The

Ins a

nd

Out

s of a

Ban

krup

tcy

Sale

”

Pete

r Sus

i and

Jon

Gur

a H

ollis

ter &

Bra

ce

“Avo

idin

g Se

curi

ties L

itiga

tion:

K

ey P

rovi

sions

and

Pitf

alls

in

Secu

ritie

s Offe

ring

s”

Kirs

ten

Schm

idt

Are

nt F

ox L

LP

Noo

n to

12:

15 P

M

Pre

-For

um L

unch

eon

Buffe

t

12:1

5 PM

to 1

:45

PM

1.5

hour

s MC

LE

Lunc

heon

Deb

ate:

Gov

ernm

ent S

urve

illan

ce a

nd F

ourt

h A

men

dmen

t Pri

vacy

Rig

hts

Pete

r Bib

ring

of th

e A

CLU

add

ress

ing

pro-

priv

acy

side

and

Pro

fess

or K

yle

Gra

ham

of S

anta

Cla

ra L

aw S

choo

l add

ress

ing

Gov

ernm

ent s

ide

1:45

PM

to 2

:00

PM

Leg

al S

ervi

ces &

Tec

hnol

ogy

Exhi

bits

Bre

akou

t Ses

sion

C 2:

00 P

M to

2:5

0 PM

1 ho

ur M

CLE

[1 H

r. El

imin

atio

n of

Bia

s]

Hon

. Den

ise

de B

elle

feui

lle

“Ent

erta

inm

ent L

aw fo

r Ev

eryd

ay C

orpo

rate

Law

yers

”

Jona

than

Blin

derm

an

Gla

ser W

eil

“Abu

sive

Lend

ing

Prac

tices

”

Rob

ert C

urtis

Fo

ley

Bez

ek B

ehle

& C

urtis

, LLP

“Cyb

er S

ecur

ity: I

nsur

ance

fo

r a

Cyb

er B

reac

h”

Dav

id B

ende

r A

nder

son

Kill

3: 0

0 PM

to 3

:50

PM

1 ho

ur M

CLE

K

eyno

te A

ddre

ss: “

Litig

atin

g Th

roug

h a

PRIS

M”

pres

ente

d by

Nat

e C

ardo

zo o

f the

Ele

ctro

nic

Fron

tier F

ound

atio

n

2015

Ben

ch a

nd B

ar C

onfe

renc

e Ja

nuar

y 24

, 201

5 at

the G

arde

n St

reet

Aca

dem

y

Sche

dule


THANK YOU TO OUR 2015 SBCBA SECTION HEADS

Alternative Dispute Resolution David C. Peterson [email protected]

Bench & Bar RelationsJames Griffith [email protected]

Civil Litigation Mark Coffin [email protected]

Mandatory Fee ArbitrationThomas Hinshaw 729-2526 [email protected] Campbell [email protected] Gunawardane [email protected]

Criminal LawCatherine Swysen [email protected]

Debtor/Creditor Carissa Horowitz [email protected] Nelson [email protected]

Elder Law Denise Platt [email protected] Balisok (818) [email protected]

Employment Law Kimberly Cole [email protected]

Estate Planning/Probate Brooke Cleary [email protected] Graff [email protected]

Family Law Maureen Grattan [email protected]

In-House Counsel & Corporate Law Betty L. Jeppesen 450-1789 [email protected]

Intellectual Property/Tech. Business Christine L. Kopitzke [email protected]

Real Property/Land Use Joshua P. Rabinowitz 963-0755 [email protected] Bret Stone [email protected]

Taxation Peter Muzinich 966-2440 [email protected] Cindy Brittain [email protected]

SANTA BARBARACHRISTIAN LAWYERS ASSOCIATION

Meeting for lunch and fellowship on the last Friday of each month

at 12 pm The University Club

1332 Santa Barbara Street

$20 for attorneys, $10 for students

For more information please call or email Brenda Cota at (805) 963-9721 or [email protected]













1

Serving Santa Barbara Attorneys Since 1982 John L. Taylor & Associates Private Investigations Dedicated to the (PHOTO)

principles of integrity,

trust, and discretion.

www.jtaylorpi.com Civil / Criminal / Personal / Business • Sub Rosa / Surveillance Infidelity, Personal Injury, Child Custody, Fraud

• Full Scale Asset Searches Banks & Brokerage Accounts, Property, DMV

• People Searches Witnesses, Skip Trace, Dead Beats, Lost Family

P.O. Box 61253 Santa Barbara CA 93160 Tel: (805) 964-2089 Fax: (805) 964-2413

[email protected] CA. Lic. 11313

January 2015 35

Lawyer Referral Service805.569.9400


The Santa Barbara County Bar Association15 W. Carrillo St., Suite 106Santa Barbara, CA 93101

Change Service Requested

Prsrt stdU.s. Postage Paidsanta Barbara, CA

Permit #734

Santa Barbara Lawyer

For your Real Estate needs, choose carefully and choose experience!

“I’ve been a Lawyer for 23 years and a Real Estate Broker with my own company for over 20 years.”

“As a real estate company owner beginning my 20th year of serving Santa Barbara, I look forward to helping you buy or sell real estate property, and as always, personally dedicating

myself to striving for excellence in every transaction.”

Over $550,000,000 Sold Since 2000Among the top 10 agents in Santa Barbara

(per MLS Statistics in Gross Sales Volume)

• Intensive Marketing Plan for each listing

• Member, Santa Barbara, Ventura, and Santa Ynez Real Estate Boards

• Expert witness in Real Estate and Divorce Matters, and Estate Planning

• Licensed Attorney, Professor Real Estate Laws Course at SBCC

1086 Coast Village Road, Santa Barbara, California 93108 • Office 805 969-1258 • Cell 805 455-8910To view my listings visit www.garygoldberg.net • Email [email protected]

Gary GoldbergReal Estate Broker • Licensed AttorneyUC Hastings College of Law • Order of the Coif

CalBRE License # 01172139

Documents

Official Publication of the Santa Barbara County Bar ... · Santa Barbara County Bar Association The mission of the Santa Barbara County Bar Association is to preserve the integrity