Free Response in Opposition to Motion - District Court of Arizona - Arizona


File Size: 59.7 kB
Pages: 3
Date: August 10, 2005
File Format: PDF
State: Arizona
Category: District Court of Arizona
Author: unknown
Word Count: 855 Words, 5,189 Characters
Page Size: Letter (8 1/2" x 11")
URL

https://www.findforms.com/pdf_files/azd/24070/118.pdf

Download Response in Opposition to Motion - District Court of Arizona ( 59.7 kB)


Preview Response in Opposition to Motion - District Court of Arizona
I
' GAONA LAW FIRM
-) .*\%’IIOcEGSlON.¤1| [Zl)I?I-TJIIJRTICN
7 :3101 Mears CENTRAL Ave. SUITE me
__ PHOENIX, ARIZONA aemz
.1 .
I (602) 230-2636 Fax (602} 230-1377
5 David F. Gaena
State Bar Ne. IIOTEQI
6
. Attorney thr PIaintiI·`t`
7
LJNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
8
DISTRICT OF ARIZON1-\
9
The United States et` .~’\meriea fer the
II) benetit and use ef Standard C`ens1.rueti0n Nu. CIV (J2 23 I 3 PIIX ROS (LEAD)
C·;m1I1a1"1)-·‘, Ine.. an Arizeiia eerporaimn. Ne. CIV U3-I)I3I PI IX ROS
I I Ne. CIV O4- I 36(I PHX ROS
Plaintiff.
I2 S'l`ANIDARD’S RESPONSE TO
vs. 'IRAVEI.-ERS’ STATEMENT OF l~`AC'l`S
Ig AND STANDARD (IONS'l`RUC'I`lON’S
Traveiers Casualty 8.: Surety COI‘1't])LllI}*` ef SE PARA'I`E STATEMENT OF FACTS IN
I4 Anieriea. a Cenneetieut eerperatien; EPC SLIPPORT OF ITS RESPONSE IN
Curperatieii. an Arizona eerperatinn, OPPOSITION TO TRA\-·’ELERS’
I5 MOTION FOR SIjMI\-‘lARYJlJDGI\*1l£NT
Defendants.
I6
I? 'I`I1e United States (II`}`xl`I'1CI`ICl1 fer the
benefit and use eI` ILPC C.`c.‘»I`IJer:-1tie11. an
III Arizenia eerperatien,
I I) Piainti II`.
211 “‘·
., I 'IiI'El\·’€3I€I'S CasuaIty 8; Surety (Qeinpatty ui`
Amertea. a enneetieut eer eration;
9 I I)CI"CI]t`I(i[`II5. I
23 Use I‘IainLit`I` Standard C`enstruetien CUI`[`II`l{;lII}*`. [ne., ("SCC`I"). fer its response tn Trax-··eIers’
24 Statement e·I` Faets Iiled in SUQIJLIFI 0I` its I\-Ierien Ihr Sumrnary Judgment reIating 10 Iaek 0I` netiee 0I`
25 Standard C`enst1‘uetien, respends as I`nIInws:
26 I. No ebjeetien.
N 2. N0 0IJ_Ieetien.
Case 2:02-cv-02313-ROS Document 118 Filed 08/1 O/2005 Page 1 013

I
1 3. No objection.
2 4. No objection.
3 5. No obj ection.
fl 6. No objection.
5 T', No objection.
0 8, ()h_jection. Sec SCC`l`s separate Statement of Facts in support of its response in
il opposition to 'l"raveler’s Y\/lotion For Summary Judgment lound below.
8
Q SCCPS Sl*ZPARA"I`E STATEMENT OF F/—\(Z'I`S IN SUPPORT OF ITS RESPONSE IN
` OPPOSITION TO 'I`l{*\VE.l.-ERS’ MOTION FOR SLlNIMARY JUD(_}MENT:
10
S H l. After the prime contractor, Bcneco. tiled tor bankruptcy protection. and thereafter
E ck 12 terminated its contract with EPC. Standard Constnuction. knowing that an automatic stay was in
[Z; Q H existence. believed it was unable to submit a specitie notice of claim to Beneco based upon the
gi g M bankruptcy laws. C`onseuuently. SCCI. within eo days after being terminated. submitted a Notice of
22 E l5 Claim to Travelers. the surety on the project, Affidavit ot` Steve Sutton attached hereto and
§ ii 16 attachments to his Aftidavit, including S(`.`(i`l`s ?\-'larch 23. 2002 letter,
E I-}, 2. On April S. 2002, still within the 90-day time tranie following termination. Travelers
IS sent a letter to SCCI confirming its receipt ot` S(2CYl’s Notice of Claim and. providing SCC} with an
IQ Affidavit ol`Claim document to till out. See Steve Sutton`s Attidavit. paragraph 0 and attachments
20 thereto. including "l`ravelers‘ April 5, 2002 correspondence.
21 3. On May 2. 2002, SCCI lillcd out the Affidavit of Claim and provided further
22 information to Travelers consistent with Travelers request after receipt ol` the Notice of Claim. See
23 Aftidavit of Steve Sutton. paragraph T and attachments thereto. including the May T, 2002
24 correspondence and the Affidavit of Claim.
25
26
27
2
Case 2:02—cv—02313—ROS Document 118 Filed 08/10/2005 Page 2 of 3

] DATED this _[¢KLday of August, 2005.
2 GAONA L-AW FIRM
3
4 _“EY‘f1”il,_ ‘ ,0,. u. SLE
_ David F. Gaona
D 3101 N.C`cn1ra1 Ax-‘c.. Suite: T20
( Phoenix, Arizona 85012
) Attorncys for Use Plaintiff Standard Construction
7
()RlQLy_/\L electronically tiled
8 this Jgflttlaiy ot` August, 2005, with:
Q '1`hc ljnitezd States District Court
I0 and cotzjcis of thc torcgoing mailed
G 1 I this ot`August, 2005, to;
;.__ cj; E a William l~. Haag, lnsq.
L1-. (L § _ Jnmcs 1.. Csontos, Esq.
ME § g l° Jcnnings, Haug & Cunninghan, LLP
ji, § 14 28001\orth Ccntral, Suite 1800
(E Phoenix, Arizona 85004-1049
E Q 15 Attorncys tor Dcfcndant Travclcrs
65 g lo Jay M. Mann, Esq.
§ Mann Bercns & Wisncr 1.1..P
12 2920 N. C`cntra1 Ave., Sto. 1600
Phoenix, Arizona 85012-2160
18 Altorncys for l`)ct`cndant EPC Corporation
19 Patricia A. Krcis, Esq.
,0 Shaw Bcncco, lnc.
“ 7090 South Union Park Avcnuc. Suite 500
,,1 Midvalc, Utah 840426050
,2 Troy Aramhum, Esq.
“ Snell 8; Wilmer
,, 15 Wcst South '1`cmplc- Suitc 1200
“J Ga\t€way‘ '|`ow€1‘ \Vcst
,4 Salt lfakc City, Utah 84101
as · is · · fi
26 l
22
3
Case 2:02—cv—02313—ROS Document 118 Filed 08/10/2005 Page 3 of 3

Case 2:02-cv-02313-ROS

Document 118

Filed 08/10/2005

Page 1 of 3

Case 2:02-cv-02313-ROS

Document 118

Filed 08/10/2005

Page 2 of 3

Case 2:02-cv-02313-ROS

Document 118

Filed 08/10/2005

Page 3 of 3