Free Motion for Protective Order - District Court of Arizona - Arizona

1 J. Daniel Campbell, Bar No. 005395
2 Lisa M. Hemann, Bar N0. 024703
O'CONNOR & CAMPBELL
3 3838 North Central Avenue .
City Square Plaza, Suite 1800
4 Phoenix, Arizona 85012 .
5 [email protected]
(602) 241-7000
6
Attorneys for Defendants Farid Meshkatai
7 and Anita Kramer Meshkatai, Individually
8 and as trustee of the Anita Kramer Living
Trust, and Non-Party Yariv E/azar
9
10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
ll DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
12 FIDELITY NATIONAL FINANCIAL, )
13 INC., a Delaware Corporation; and ) Case No.: 03 1222 PHX RCB
FIDELITY EXPRESS NETWORK, )
14 INC., a California Corporation, )
)
15 Piamuits, )
16 vs. ) .
COLIN H. FRIEDMAN, individually and ) CERTIFICATION OF DAN
17 as trustee of the Friedman Family Trust) CAMPBELL PURSUANT
UDT, dated July 23,1987; HEDY ) TO RULE 26(c)
18 KRAMER FRIEDMAN, individually and )
19 as trustee of the Friedman Family Trust)
UDT, dated July 23, 1987; FARID )
20 MESHKATAI, an individual; and ANITA)
21 KRAMER MESHKATAI, individually )
and as trustee of the Anita Kramer )
22 Living Trust, dated July 23, 1987, )
)
23 Defendants. )
24 )
25
26
-1-
ase 2:03-ov-01222-RCB Document 144-3 Filed O2/07/2007 Page 1 of 3

1 Dan Campbell, being first duly sworn, deposes and says:
2 1. I am Arizona counsel for Defendants Farid Meshkatai and Anita
3 Meshkatai. I make this affidavit on the basis of my personal knowledge, except
4 those matters stated on information and belief which I believe to be true based
5 on the information available to me. I am competent and qualified to testify to
5 the matters hereafter stated.
7 2. I make this affidavit in compliance with Rule 26(c`), Federal Rules of
8 Civil Procedure, and state that I have in good faith attempted to confer with
9 Plaintiffs regarding the debtor’s exam and request for production in Arizona.
10 3. I entered my appearance on behalf of Defendants Farid and Anita
11 Meshkatai on December 4, 2006. I have only been involved in this case as it
12 has related to post-judgment discovery here in Arizona. However, it is my
13 understanding that the disputes between Plaintiffs and my client go back years.
14 4. On February 7, 2007, I called PIaintiffs’ counsel, Orlando
15 Cabanday, in order to discuss the two debtor’s exams Plaintiffs have scheduled
15 for my client, Farid Meshkatai, as well as the request for production at issue.
17 One has been scheduled for California and one in Arizona.
18 5. lVIr. Cabanday stated that he would be willing to forgo one of the
19 debtor’s exams if either lVIr. Allen Hyman, who is Mr. Meshkatai’s counsel in
20 California, or I affirmatively stated that we would move fonrvard with the debtor’s
21 exam in that state.
22 6. I informed Mr. Cabanday that it would make sense to have Mr.
23 Meshkatai’s debtor’s exam taken in California because l\/lr. Hyman had been
24 more intimately involved with all law suits and that it would be easier and
25 quicker for him to prepare for and defend lVIr. Meshkatai’s debtor’s exam. At
26
ase 2:03-cv-01222-RCB Document 144-3 Filed O2/07/2007 Page 2 of 3

1 first, Mr. Cabanday agreed. Then, Nlr. Cabanday changed his mind and stated
2 that he would pursue the debtor’s exam in Arizona because he liked the Arizona
3 order better.
4 7. I then informed Mr. Cabanday that it would take our office much
5 longer to gather and review the documents requested by Plaintiffs because of
6 the volume of documents, and because of our relative recent involvement with
7 the case. Mr. Cabanday stated that he could give us "another week" to produce
8 the documents.
9 8. I then told IVIr. Cabanday that if we would be taking on a larger role
10 in the litigation by having to defend a debtor’s exam and review documents for
11 production, we would need we would need at least a month to obtain
12 documents, prepare a privilege log, and adequately prepare for the exam. Mr.
13 Cabanday refused to give us more than a week to produce the documents. I
14 informed I\/lr. Cabanday of the burden we would face and he said "fiIe the
15 Motion for a Protective Order". We then ended the phone call.
16 9. It would be burdensome on my office and staff to comply with Mr.
17 Cabanday’s demands — especially since this matter could be more efficiently
18 handled in Califo ` .
19 Dated thi ay of Februa , 2 7
2O _ -
21
22 _
23 Dan Ca pbell
24
25
26
..3-
ase 2:O3—cv-01222-RCB Document 144-3 Filed O2/O7/2007 Page 3 of 3

Case 2:03-cv-01222-RCB

Document 144-3

Filed 02/07/2007

Page 1 of 3

Case 2:03-cv-01222-RCB

Document 144-3

Filed 02/07/2007

Page 2 of 3

Case 2:03-cv-01222-RCB

Document 144-3

Filed 02/07/2007

Page 3 of 3