Free Response to Motion - District Court of Arizona - Arizona

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16

Ernest Calderón (#007677) Faith C. Klepper (#018444) CALDERÓN LAW OFFICES 2020 N. Central Ave., Suite 1110 Phoenix, AZ 85004 (602) 265-0004 Attorneys for Defendant
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

JOYCE A. CORRALES, Plaintiff, vs. CHASE BANKCARD SERVICES, INC., a Delaware corporation, d/b/a. Chase Manhattan Bank, N.A., Defendant.

No. CIV 02-2157-PHX-SRB RESPONSE TO SECOND AMENDED MOTION TO WITHDRAW AS COUNSEL AND REQUEST FOR SHOW CAUSE HEARING (Honorable Susan R. Bolton)

Defendant Chase Bankcard Services, Inc. ("Chase"), by and through undersigned
17 18 19 20 21

counsel, hereby responds to the Second Amended Motion to Withdraw as Counsel filed by Plaintiff's attorney, Mark Brinton. Chase does not take a position on whether the court should grant Mr. Brinton's Motion to Withdraw as Counsel. However, the motion does raise issues of concern for this Court to resolve.

22 23 24 25 26

In the motion, Mr. Brinton notes his suspicions that plaintiff Joyce Corrales knowingly permitted and assisted paralegal Roger McKee to forge her signature on the verification submitted with the Plaintiff's Separate Statement of Facts ("the questioned

1

Case 2:02-cv-02157-SRB

Document 78

Filed 07/17/2006

Page 1 of 6

1 2 3

signature").1 Undersigned counsel has reviewed the questioned signature and compared it to signatures of Ms. Corrales as they appear in the records in this matter and the related state case. Additionally, undersigned counsel has reviewed discovery in this case that

4 5 6 7 8

documents Ms. Corrales' signature during her employment with Chase. This preliminary investigation verifies Mr. Brinton's suspicions and has yielded other instances of similarly questionable conduct. Based upon this new information, Chase requests this Court order Ms. Corrales to

9 10 11 12 13 14

show cause why the case should not be dismissed for perpetrating or attempting to perpetrate a fraud upon this Court. The information discovered by Chase's review of the record follows. 1. Pre-litigation documents with Plaintiff signature As this court knows, the Ms. Corrales is a former employee of defendant Chase

15 16 17 18 19

Bankcard Services who resigned after being interviewed in a sexual harassment investigation. At her deposition on October 14, 2005, Ms. Corrales was shown a copy of her employment application with Chase. She verified that the document was her application in her handwriting. (Deposition of Joyce Corrales, October

20 21 22 23 24 25 26
1

14, 2005 at 189 and Exh. 5, attached hereto as Exhibit A.) The signature on that application ("known signature") does not match the questioned signature.

Mr. McKee, an attorney on permanent disability status, has been assisting Ms. Corrales with this litigation prior to Mr. Brinton's first appearance in October 2005. See Defendant's Reply to Plaintiff's Response to Rule 41 Motion Dismiss Complaint (Docket #34) at 4.
2

Case 2:02-cv-02157-SRB

Document 78

Filed 07/17/2006

Page 2 of 6

1 2 3

2.

Federal court documents with Plaintiff signature Over the course of this litigation, there have been several documents filed with the court purporting to be signed by Joyce Corrales, as she was representing herself

4 5 6 7 8

prior to October 2005. Among the documents with the purported signature of the plaintiff are the Complaint (Docket No. 1), Response to the Rule 12(b) Motion to Dismiss the Complaint (Docket No. 10), the First Amended Complaint and Motion to Amend the Complaint (Docket Nos. 42, 48), the Response to Defendant's

9 10 11 12 13 14

Motion to Dismiss for Rule 41 Violation (Docket No. 40), the Notice of Appeal (Docket No. 26) and the Court of Appeals Civil Docketing Statement (Docket No. 26-1, also attached as Exhibit B). The signatures on the Notice of Appeal and Civil Docketing Statement match the known signature. However, the signatures on the Complaint, Amended

15 16 17 18 19

Complaint, Response to the Rule 12(b) Motion to Dismiss and the Response to the Motion to Dismiss for Rule 41 Violation do not match the known signature but are substantially similar to the questioned signature. 3. Discovery documents Additionally, Plaintiff's Initial Disclosure Statement was signed pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(g) and provided to Chase on or about August 2, 2005. (Attached as Exhibit C.) The signature on the Disclosure Statement does not match the known signature and is nearly identical to the questioned signature.

20 21 22 23 24 25 26

3

Case 2:02-cv-02157-SRB

Document 78

Filed 07/17/2006

Page 3 of 6

1 2 3

4.

State court matter documents After this Court granted Chase's Rule 12(b) motion to dismiss the complaint as to the Title VII counts, the remaining charge of invasion of privacy was removed to

4 5 6 7 8

state court. In that case, Corrales filed, among other things, a Complaint (attached herein as Exhibit D) and Response to Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment (attached herein as Exhibit E) in Maricopa County Superior Court and most recently, a Motion to Extend Time to File a Petition for Review (attached herein as

9 10 11 12 13 14

Exhibit F) in the Arizona Court of Appeals. Only the signature on the Complaint matches the known signature of Joyce Corrales. The remaining signatures are substantially similar to the signature

questioned by her attorney Mr. Brinton. These documents indicate that the alleged forgery goes well beyond a single

15 16 17 18 19

document filed with the Plaintiff's Separate Statement of Facts. Based on this evidence, it appears from this evidence that Ms. Corrales and Mr. McKee may have perpetrated a continuing fraud upon this Court as well as the Arizona state courts. This Court, citing Sun World Inc. v. Lizarazu Olivarria, 144 F.R.D. 384 (E.D. Cal.

20 21 22 23 24 25

1992), has previously held that an evidentiary hearing may be warranted when questions of a fraud on the court have been raised. Greenburg v. Roberts Properties, Ltd., 2005 WL 3536114 (D. Ariz. Dec. 22, 2005). In that case, this Court noted that it has the power to dismiss an action "when a party has willfully deceived the court and engaged in conduct utterly inconsistent with the orderly administration of justice." Id. at *2. Mr.

26

4

Case 2:02-cv-02157-SRB

Document 78

Filed 07/17/2006

Page 4 of 6

1 2 3

Brinton's Motion to Withdraw and the attached exhibits from the records in this case and the related state court matter have raised substantial questions regarding the propriety and legality of Ms. Corrales' and Mr. McKee's conduct.

4 5 6 7 8

Accordingly, Chase requests this Court review the signatures alleged to be those of Joyce Corrales and, if it can conclude with an appropriate degree of certainty that someone other than Joyce Corrales has signed verified documents, documents submitted under oath or penalty of perjury, or documents subject to the provisions of Rule 26(g),

9 10 11 12 13 14

and that Ms. Corrales was aware of and took part in this conduct, Chase requests this Court immediately dismiss this matter with prejudice and award all fees and costs to Chase. In the alternative, if this Court cannot make such a finding after reviewing this record, Chase requests the Court hold an evidentiary hearing to determine whether Ms. Corrales has personally signed all prior documents filed with the Court or otherwise

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

subject to the provisions of Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(g).

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED this 17th day of July, 2006.

CALDERÓN LAW OFFICES

______s/Faith C. Klepper__________ Ernest Calderón Faith C. Klepper Attorneys for Defendant Chase BankCard Services, Inc.

5

Case 2:02-cv-02157-SRB

Document 78

Filed 07/17/2006

Page 5 of 6

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

ORIGINAL of the foregoing electronically this 17th day of July, 2006, with: Clerk of the Court United States District Court District of Arizona COPY of the foregoing mailed this 17th day of July, 2006, to: HONORABLE SUSAN R. BOLTON United States District Court Sandra Day O'Connor U.S. Courthouse, Suite 522 401 West Washington Street, SPC 50 Phoenix, AZ 85003-2153

Mark Brinton 1745 South Alma School Road, Suite 100 Mesa, Arizona 85210-3010 Attorney for Plaintiff

s/Faith C. Klepper

6

Case 2:02-cv-02157-SRB

Document 78

Filed 07/17/2006

Page 6 of 6