ACF 2006 Corp. v. Farrise, 18-cv-00029-YGR. (2018)
Court: District Court, N.D. California
Number: infdco20180607b02
Visitors: 9
Filed: Jun. 06, 2018
Latest Update: Jun. 06, 2018
Summary: RIGHT TO ATTACH ORDER AND ORDER FOR ISSUANCE OF WRIT OF ATTACHMENT Re: Dkt. No. 70 YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS , District Judge . Having carefully considered plaintiff ACF 2006 Corp.'s ("ACF") Motion for Right to Attach Order and Order for Issuance of Writ of Attachment with respect to the Union Bank Account ending in "6694," entitled "Jeff Riebel, Errol J. Gordon, Attorney Client Trust Account for Kimberley Farrise and Simona A. Farrise" (the "Union Bank Account") (Dkt. No. 70 ("Motion")), and
Summary: RIGHT TO ATTACH ORDER AND ORDER FOR ISSUANCE OF WRIT OF ATTACHMENT Re: Dkt. No. 70 YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS , District Judge . Having carefully considered plaintiff ACF 2006 Corp.'s ("ACF") Motion for Right to Attach Order and Order for Issuance of Writ of Attachment with respect to the Union Bank Account ending in "6694," entitled "Jeff Riebel, Errol J. Gordon, Attorney Client Trust Account for Kimberley Farrise and Simona A. Farrise" (the "Union Bank Account") (Dkt. No. 70 ("Motion")), and ..
More
RIGHT TO ATTACH ORDER AND ORDER FOR ISSUANCE OF WRIT OF ATTACHMENT
Re: Dkt. No. 70
YVONNE GONZALEZ ROGERS, District Judge.
Having carefully considered plaintiff ACF 2006 Corp.'s ("ACF") Motion for Right to Attach Order and Order for Issuance of Writ of Attachment with respect to the Union Bank Account ending in "6694," entitled "Jeff Riebel, Errol J. Gordon, Attorney Client Trust Account for Kimberley Farrise and Simona A. Farrise" (the "Union Bank Account") (Dkt. No. 70 ("Motion")), and oral arguments held on May 15, 2018, and good cause appearing therefor, it is hereby ORDERED that:
1. ACF's motion is GRANTED.1
2. The Court finds defendants Simona A. Farrise and Kimberley Farrise (the "Farrise defendants") are natural persons.
3. The claim upon which the application is based is one upon which an attachment may be issued. ACF has established the probable validity of the claim upon which attachment is based. The attachment is not sought for a purpose other than the recovery on the claim upon which attachment is based. The amount to be secured by the attachment is greater than zero.
4. The Farrise defendants have failed to prove that the property described in ACF's application is exempt from attachment.2
5. ACF has filed an undertaking in the amount of $10,000. (Dkt. No. 12.)
6. ACF has a right to attach property of the Farrise defendants in the amount of $1,627,883.12.
7. Accordingly, the Clerk of the Court shall issue forthwith the Writ of Attachment attached hereto as Exhibit 1, for the property of the Farrise defendants that is subject to attachment under California Code of Civil Procedure section 487.010 described as follows: Union Bank account ending in "6694," which is titled as "Jeff Riebel, Errol J. Gordon, Attorney Client Trust Account for Kimberley Farrise and Simona A. Farrise."
8. Upon issuance of this Order and Writ of Attachment, ACF's attorneys shall provide forthwith written instructions to the levying officer to whom the Writ of Attachment is directed, which shall contain the information needed or requested by the levying officer to comply with the provisions of Title 6.5 (commencing with Section 481.010) of Part 2 of the California Code of Civil Procedure. (See Cal. Civ. Proc. Code §§ 488.020, 488.030, 488.040.)
9. As stated on the record at the May 15, 2018 hearing, this Order is in no way meant to interfere with or usurp the Alameda County Superior Court's (the "State Court") ability to adjudicate any and all issues pertaining to the characterization and/or distribution of the Farrise defendants' community estate in the ongoing divorce proceedings before the State Court, in the case entitled In re Marriage of: Simona Farrise v. Kimberley Farrise (Case No. AF14744271) (the "Divorce Proceedings"). To that end, the limitation provided by California Code of Civil Procedure section 488.455(c) shall not apply to orders of the State Court in the Divorce Proceedings.
This Order terminates Docket Numbers 70, 76, and 80.3
IT IS SO ORDERED.
EXHIBIT 1
FootNotes
1. In connection with its motion, ACF filed an administrative motion to file under seal portions of a screen shot photograph of a monthly statement for the Union Bank Account. (Dkt. No. 76.) In response to an order by the Court directing further submission in support of the motion to seal, ACF filed a corrected motion. (Dkt. No. 80.) The Court finds ACF's sealing request is sufficiently justified under the applicable "good cause" standard. See Kamakana v. City & Cty. of Honolulu, 447 F.3d 1172, 1179-80 (9th Cir. 2006). Accordingly, the Court GRANTS the motion to seal the designated portions of the document in question solely for purposes of resolving the instant motion.
2. Only defendant Kimberley Farrise has opposed ACF's motion. Defendant Simona A. Farrise and ACF stipulated to entry of an order granting ACF's initial motion for right to attach order and order for issuance of writ of attachment (Dkt. No. 16) as to the Union Bank Account (Dkt. No. 65). This Court denied the stipulation without prejudice pending briefing by the parties regarding ACF's ability to attach a trust account in the name of a person other than the Farrise defendants. (Dkt. No. 69.)
3. The Court has reviewed the parties' Case Management Conference Statement. (Dkt. No. 90.) Given the update provided therein, no further Case Management Conference is required at this juncture. The Court hereby VACATES the Case Management Conference currently set for Monday, June 11, 2018.
Source: Leagle
