Free Memorandum - District Court of Arizona - Arizona

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
LAW OFFICES SANDERS & PARKS, P.C. 1300 ABACUS TOWERS 3030 NORTH THIRD STREET PHOENIX, ARIZONA 85012-3099 TELEPHONE (602) 532-5600 FACSIMILE (602) 532-5700

J. Steven Sparks (State Bar No. 015561) SANDERS & PARKS, P.C. 3030 North Third Street, Suite 1300 Phoenix, Arizona 85012-3099 Telephone: (602) 532-5769 Fax: (602) 230-5051 [email protected] Attorneys for Defendants GLENDALE UNION HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 205, TANYA SOTO, STEVE SOTO, ANNIE PRESTON, KEITH PRESTON, CLAY KLAVITTER and JILL KLAVITTER UNITED STATED DISTRICT COURT IN AND FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

11 12 13 14

JOE RAMIREZ and ANA RAMIREZ, Individually and as Parents and Legal Guardians of JOSE RAMIREZ, Plaintiffs,

15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

vs. GLENDALE UNION HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 205; JOHN DOE AND JANE DOE I-X; ABC CORPORATIONS I-X; and XYZ PARTNERSHIPS I-X, Defendants. __________________________________ JOE RAMIREZ and ANA RAMIREZ, Individually and as Parents and Legal Guardians of JOSE RAMIREZ, Plaintiffs, vs. GLENDALE UNION HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 205; TANYA SOTO and
Case 2:03-cv-00060-ROS Document 119

) CASE NO.: CIV03-0060 PHX-ROS ) ) ) DEFENDANTS' MEMORANDUM ) RE: ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE ) HEARING ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
Filed 04/04/2006 Page 1 of 5

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8

JOHN DOE SOTO; ANNIE PRESTON and JOHN DOE PRESTON; CLAY KLAVITTER and JANE DOE KLAVITTER; JOHN DOE AND JANE DOE I-X; ABC CORPORATIONS I-X; and XYZ PARTNERSHIPS I-X,

) ) ) ) ) ) ) Defendants. ) ___________________________________ ) Defendants, by and through counsel undersigned, submit the following

Memorandum Re: Order to Show Cause Hearing pursuant to this Court's Order dated
9 10
LAW OFFICES SANDERS & PARKS, P.C. 1300 ABACUS TOWERS 3030 NORTH THIRD STREET PHOENIX, ARIZONA 85012-3099 TELEPHONE (602) 532-5600 FACSIMILE (602) 532-5700

March 8, 2006. In a document entitled "Defendants' Status Report Re: Surviving Claims and Propriety of Plaintiff's Filing of Ramirez II," Defendants offered extensive briefing on the issue of whether Plaintiffs and their counsel should be sanctioned under 28 U.S.C. §

11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

1927 and Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Such briefing is incorporated into this Memorandum as if fully set forth herein. Based upon the totality of the circumstances, Defendants believed - - and continue to believe - - that Plaintiffs and their attorney should be sanctioned for their willful disregard of this Court's Order when they filed a subsequent lawsuit alleging the exact same claims that were previously rejected by this Court. Defendants agree with the Court's sentiments - - as expressed at the March 8, 2006 hearing - - that Plaintiffs' counsel failed to articulate any justifiable explanation for his conduct. Defendants similarly believe that Plaintiffs have failed to offer a legitimate explanation in their recently filed Memorandum Re: Order to Show Cause Hearing.

Case 2:03-cv-00060-ROS

Document 119 -2

Filed 04/04/2006

Page 2 of 5

1 2 3

Instead, Plaintiffs hurl accusations of misconduct at Defendants and their counsel intending to cast them in a negative light. Plaintiffs also try to avoid the real issues by weaving a tale that bears little resemblance to the evidence. Specifically, Plaintiffs try

4 5 6 7 8

to create the illusion that "it was clear that Defendants knew about the assault for six months before Mr. and Mrs. Ramirez found out about it." This is simply false. The collective testimony of the school representatives is that the school first learned of the alleged incident in March, when Plaintiff's mother stormed into Cortez High School

9 10
LAW OFFICES SANDERS & PARKS, P.C. 1300 ABACUS TOWERS 3030 NORTH THIRD STREET PHOENIX, ARIZONA 85012-3099 TELEPHONE (602) 532-5600 FACSIMILE (602) 532-5700

raising such accusations. No one at Cortez High School or at Glendale Union High School District had any information about the alleged assault until months later. Plaintiffs' attempt to distract the Court from the real issue should not be condoned and the Court ought to focus on whether it was truly appropriate for Plaintiffs to "judge

11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

shop" in order to get the ruling they wanted. Defendants would submit that it was not. As described in Defendants' Status Report dated January 19, 2006, Plaintiffs' misconduct has forced Defendants to incur significant expense, including attorneys' fees and costs. It is well settled that attorneys' fees and costs are recoverable as sanctions under these circumstances. See e.g., Chambers v. Nasco, Inc., 501 U.S. 32, 46 (1991); Salstrom v. City Corp Credit Services, 74 F.3d 183, 195 (9th Cir. 1996); and Fink v. Gomez 239 F.3d 989, 992-93 (9th Cir. 2001). Plaintiffs have not even attempted to distinguish these cases or to argue that Defendants' attorneys' fees and costs are not recoverable.

Case 2:03-cv-00060-ROS

Document 119 -3

Filed 04/04/2006

Page 3 of 5

1 2 3

Pursuant to the authority cited herein, and the Court's request on March 8, 2006, the amount of Defendants' attorneys' fees and costs incurred in defending the baseless claims included in the improperly filed Ramirez II are $19,968.43. Such attorneys' fees

4 5 6 7 8

and costs are supported by the attached Affidavit of J. Steven Sparks (Exhibit "A") and Defendants respectfully request that sanctions be imposed upon Plaintiffs and their counsel in that amount. Under 28 U.S.C. § 1927 and the cases cited above, the Court also has authority to

9 10
LAW OFFICES SANDERS & PARKS, P.C. 1300 ABACUS TOWERS 3030 NORTH THIRD STREET PHOENIX, ARIZONA 85012-3099 TELEPHONE (602) 532-5600 FACSIMILE (602) 532-5700

dismiss all claims which were improperly brought. Defendants hereby request that this Court dismiss all of the claims that were included in the improperly-filed Ramirez II. Plaintiffs should not be entitled to bring those claims that were previously disallowed by this Court. To allow those claims to go forward would only serve to reward Plaintiffs

11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

for their improper litigation tactics. RESPECTFULLY submitted this 4th day of April, 2006. SANDERS & PARKS, P.C. By: s/J. Steven Sparks J. Steven Sparks 3030 N. Third Street, Suite 1300 Phoenix, Arizona 85012-3099 Attorneys for Defendants

Case 2:03-cv-00060-ROS

Document 119 -4

Filed 04/04/2006

Page 4 of 5

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
LAW OFFICES SANDERS & PARKS, P.C. 1300 ABACUS TOWERS 3030 NORTH THIRD STREET PHOENIX, ARIZONA 85012-3099 TELEPHONE (602) 532-5600 FACSIMILE (602) 532-5700

I hereby certify that on April 4, 2006, I electronically transmitted the foregoing document to the Clerk's office using the CM/ECF System for filing and transmittal of a Notice of Electronic Filing to the following EM/ECF Registrants: [email protected] Attorneys for Plaintiffs To be hand-delivered as a courtesy hard copy on April 4, 2006, to the Honorable Roslyn O. Silver. s/ J. Steven Sparks

11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

Case 2:03-cv-00060-ROS

Document 119 -5

Filed 04/04/2006

Page 5 of 5