`
`DAVID T. SHUEY, ESQ. (Bar No.162087)
`Email: shuey@rankinlaw.com
`GEOFFREY A. MIRES, ESQ. (Bar No. 98428)
`Email: mires@rankinlaw.com
`RANKIN, SHUEY, RANUCCI, MINTZ,
`LAMPASONA & REYNOLDS
`2030 Franklin Street, Sixth Floor
`Oakland, CA 94612
`Telephone Number: (510) 433-2600
`Facsimile Numbers: (510) 433-2699 and (510) 452-3006
`
`
`Attorneys for Defendants,
`THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF
`CALIFORNIA, a public corporation; SHARMIN
`SHEKARCHIAN, M.D.; JUDITH WALSH, M.D.;
`ANNE W. CHANG, M.D. [Erroneously Sued as ANNIE
`CHANG, M.D.]; AARON TWARD, M.D.; and
`KRISTIN INGRID HAWKINSON, R.N.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`ELECTRONICALLY
`F I L E D
`
`Superior Court of California,
`County of San Francisco
`02/22/2023
`Clerk of the Court
`BY: SANDRA SCHIRO
`Deputy Clerk
`
`DISCOVERY
`
`SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
`
`COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO
`
`UNLIMITED JURISDICTION
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`MICHAEL FERRAN,
`
`
`
`
`
`THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY
`OF CALIFORNIA; SHARMIN
`SHEKARCHIAN, M.D.; JUDITH
`WALSH, M.D.; ANNIE CHANG, M.D.
`and DOES 1-100,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Defendants.
`
`
`Case No. CGC-20-584104
`
`DECLARATION OF DAVID T. SHUEY IN
`SUPPORT OF THE REGENTS OF THE
`UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, a public
`corporation’s, OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF’S
`MOTION TO COMPEL FURTHER
`RESPONSES TO SPECIAL
`INTERROGATORIES, SET THREE AND
`REQUEST FOR MONETARY
`SANCTIONS_____________________________
`
`Date: March 7, 2023
`Time: 9:00 a.m.
`Dept: 302
`
`Action Filed: April 9, 2020
`Trial Date:
`October 9, 2023
`
`I, DAVID T. SHUEY, declare as follows:
`
`
`
`1.
`
`That I am an attorney duly licensed to practice before all the courts of the State of
`
`California. I am a principal attorney with RANKIN, SHUEY, RANUCCI, MINTZ,
`
`LAMPASONA & REYNOLDS counsel for the Defendants in this action, including but not limited
`
`to THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA. [THE REGENTS].
`1
`
`
`DECLARATION OF DAVID T. SHUEY IN SUPPORT OF THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF
`CALIFORNIA, A PUBLIC CORPORATION’S, OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO COMPEL
`
`
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`Oakland, CA 94612
`
`RANKIN, SHUEY, RANUCCI, MINTZ,
`
`2030 Franklin Street, Sixth Floor
`LAMPASONA & REYNOLDS
`
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`2.
`
`This Declaration is made in support of Defendant THE REGENTS’ Opposition to
`
`the pending Motion to Compel brought by Plaintiff. I have personal knowledge of the contents of
`
`this Declaration and would similarly testify if called as a witness in this matter.
`
`
`
`3.
`
`The objections asserted to the subject Special Interrogatories were made in good
`
`faith, and after careful consideration of the privileges and protections afforded the information and
`
`entities/individuals involved in the underlying investigative process at THE REGENTS.
`
`
`
`4.
`
`Regrettably, there was not a timely response to Plaintiff’s counsel’s efforts to meet
`
`and confer in this matter prior to the filing of the subject Motion. There was a confluence of
`
`events and distractions which unfortunately interfered with and ultimately preempted participation
`
`in that process.
`
`A. First and foremost, my father experienced a decline in his health in early
`
`December with an admission to the emergency room, admission to the
`
`hospital. Ultimately, a family decision was made to place him on comfort
`
`care and he passed away right before the Holidays. Those emotionally
`
`charged events further necessitated assisting my mother following my father’s
`
`passing all of which admittedly distracted my attention away from business
`
`matters and specifically Plaintiff’s counsel’s diligent efforts to engage in the
`
`meet and confer process. By the time I was able to refocus, and then dig out
`
`from hundreds of emails the subject Motion had been filed.
`
`B. Secondly, my own health was also concurrently problematic concurrently.
`
`Beginning around Thanksgiving and continuing throughout December (and
`
`still lingering today) I was experiencing severe back problems which limited
`
`my activities and my participation in work tasks.
`
`C. Lastly, the above events all coincided with time off from work surrounding
`
`the holidays, for me, the other attorney on the file and my staff.
`
`D.
`
`I have written to Plaintiff’s counsel describing the above distractions, and my
`
`regret that the meet and confer process was not completed. Counsel’s
`
`
`
`response was appreciated and was notably sympathetic to the issues which
`2
`
`DECLARATION OF DAVID T. SHUEY IN SUPPORT OF THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF
`CALIFORNIA, A PUBLIC CORPORATION’S, OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO COMPEL
`
`
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`Oakland, CA 94612
`
`RANKIN, SHUEY, RANUCCI, MINTZ,
`
`2030 Franklin Street, Sixth Floor
`LAMPASONA & REYNOLDS
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`had confronted me.
`
`5.
`
`At various times during the pendency of this matter, Plaintiff (when he was in pro
`
`per) and Plaintiff’s prior counsel have been encouraged to depose Defendant Dr. AARON
`
`TWARD – which has to this date not happened in this matter. As a general proposition, there
`
`would be no anticipated objection to the use of the response from the San Francisco Health Plan in
`
`an effort to cross-examine or to try to impeach Dr. TWARD, though quality of care investigation
`
`by THE REGENTS would necessarily be precluded.
`
`
`
`6.
`
`To the extent that defense counsel may have played any role in the investigative or
`
`grievance process, the attorney/client privilege has been and will continue to be asserted and
`
`preserved.
`
`
`
`I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the
`
`foregoing is true and correct. Executed this 22nd day of February 2023, at Oakland, California.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` ________________________________________
`
`DAVID T. SHUEY
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`DECLARATION OF DAVID T. SHUEY IN SUPPORT OF THE REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF
`CALIFORNIA, A PUBLIC CORPORATION’S, OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF’S MOTION TO COMPEL
`
`
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`Oakland, CA 94612
`
`RANKIN, SHUEY, RANUCCI, MINTZ,
`
`2030 Franklin Street, Sixth Floor
`LAMPASONA & REYNOLDS
`
`