Declaration

Cal. Super. - 6th Dist.December 7, 2020

KOOOQONUl-RUJNH NNNNNNNNNr-‘r-‘r-‘r-‘r-ir-‘Hr-Ar-‘r-A OONONUI-PUJNHOKOOOQONUI-RUJNHO 200V37391 6 Santa Clara - Civil Fred W. Schwinn (SBN 225575) Raeon R. Roulston (SBN 255622) Matthew C. Salmonsen (SBN 302854) CONSUMER LAW CENTER, INC. 1435 K011 Circle, Suite 104 San Jose, California 95 1 12-4610 Telephone Number: (408) 294-6100 Facsimile Number: (408) 294-6190 Email Address: fred.schwinn@sjconsumerlaw.com Attorneys for Plaintiff Electronically Filed by Superior Court of CA, County of Santa Clara, on 1/14/2022 5:12 PM Reviewed By: R. Walker Case #20CV37391 6 Envelope: 8068320 DAVID CHAI SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA DAVID CHAI, individually and 0n behalf Case No. 20CV373916 of all others similarly situated, (Unlimited Civil Case) Plaintiff, Assigned for A11 Purposes t0 V' The Honorable Patricia M. Lucas VELOCITY INVESTMENTS, LLC, a New Jersey limited liability company; DECLARATION OF RAEON R. ROULSTON IN SUPPORT OF nggvcvgiggggfigilgggggg’IINC" PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR CLASS . . ’ CERTIFICATION through 10, 1nc1u31ve, Defendants. Hearing Date: February 23, 2022 Hearing Time: 1:30 p.m. Hearing Dept: 3 I, Raeon R. Roulston, declare under penalty 0f perjury, under the laws of the State 0f California, that the following statements are true: 1. I am an attorney at law duly licensed to practice before all the courts of the State of California and am senior associate attorney of the law firm Consumer Law Center, Inc., attorneys 0f Hearing Location: 191 North First Street San Jose, California record for Plaintiff and proposed Class Representative, DAVID CHAI. 2. I have personal knowledge of the following facts, and if called as a witness, I could and would competently testify thereto. _ 1 _ DECLARATION OF RAEON R. ROULSTON Case No. 20CV373916 KOOOQONUl-RUJNH NNNNNNNNNr-‘r-‘r-‘r-‘r-ir-‘Hr-Ar-‘r-A OONONUI-PUJNHOKOOOQONUI-RUJNHO ADEOUACY OF COUNSEL 3. I am a member in good standing 0f the bars 0f the following courts: Supreme Court 0f California Sacramento, California 2008 U.S. Court 0f Appeals for the Ninth Circuit San Francisco, California 2010 U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California San Francisco, California 2008 U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California Sacramento, California 2008 U.S. District Court for the Central District 0f California Los Angeles, California 2008 4. I am a 2007 graduate of Santa Clara University School 0f Law in Santa Clara, California, and a 2003 graduate magna cum laude 0f Morgan State University in Baltimore, Maryland. I am a member of the State Bar of California, American Bar Association, National Association 0f Consumer Advocates, National Association of Consumer Bankruptcy Attorneys, and Santa Clara County Trial Lawyers Association. 5. My practice is limited exclusively t0 the representation 0f consumers, with particular emphasis 0n representing consumer debtors under the United States Bankruptcy Code. In addition t0 Bankruptcy cases, I handle matters under federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, California Rosenthal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, California Fair Debt Buying Practices Act, Truth in Lending Act, California Rees-Levering Automobile Sales Finance Act, and other laws enacted to protect consumers. My firm, Consumer Law Center, Inc., undertakes representation in many _ 2 _ DECLARATION OF RAEON R. ROULSTON Case No. 20CV373916 KOOOQONUl-RUJNH NNNNNNNNNr-‘r-‘r-‘r-‘r-ir-‘Hr-Ar-‘r-A OONONUI-PUJNHOKOOOQONUI-RUJNHO consumer cases with the expectation of being paid a contingency amount from the proceeds of recovery, 0r being paid based 0n an award 0f fees pursuant to fee shifting statutes such as the federal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, California Rosenthal Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, California Fair Debt Buying Practices Act, Truth in Lending Act, California Rees-Levering Automobile Sales Finance Act and California Unruh Act. 6. I have given a number of lectures to consumers and professional groups 0n consumer law issues, including Community Legal Services in East Palo Alto, Pro Bono Project in San Jose (where our firm runs a twice-monthly clinic), and the Veterans’ Administration in Menlo Park, California. 7. In 2013, I was honored as “Attorney 0f the Year” by the Community Legal Services in East Palo Alto non-profit. My firm was also recently honored With the “2019 Outstanding Volunteer Award” by the Pro Bono Project Silicon Valley for our support of their Bankruptcy and Debtor’s Rights Clinics. 8. I have been a member 0f the National Association of Consumer Advocates since 2008 and have attended at least seven (7) national conferences exclusively on consumer law issues. 9. I am one of my firm’s primary trial counsel on collection defense matters, and I have tried most 0f the cases my firm has taken t0 trial in the past 13 years. I have represented numerous consumers in both chapter 7 and chapter 13 bankruptcies, and been involved in many consumer cases involving a range of consumer protection laws. 10. I have been counsel 0f record 0r materially assisted 0n several cases that have resulted in reported decisions favorable t0 consumers including: CALIFORNIA SUPREME COURT o Meza v. Portfolio Recovery Assocs., LLC, 6 Cal. 5th 844 (Cal. 2019) (CiV. Proc. Code § 98(a) requires affiant’s personal presence at location Within 150 miles 0f place of trial for a reasonable _ 3 _ DECLARATION OF RAEON R. ROULSTON Case No. 20CV373916 KOOOQONUl-RUJNH NNNNNNNNNr-‘r-‘r-‘r-‘r-ir-‘Hr-Ar-‘r-A OONONUI-PUJNHOKOOOQONUI-RUJNHO /// /// period within the 20 days prior to trial if personal service of trial subpoena would ordinarily be necessary t0 secure that affiant’s attendance at trial). APPELLATE COURTS Timlick v. Nat’l Enter. Sys., Ina, _Cal. App. 5th_ (Cal. App. lst Dist. 2021) (trial court had jurisdiction t0 hear and grant renewed discovery motion that was pending When order granting summary judgment motion, which was later reversed 0n appeal, was entered). Davis v. Mandarich Law Grp., 790 F. App’X 877 (9th Cir. 2020) (reversing and remanding FDCPA judgment for Defendants). Meza v. Portfolio Recovery Assocs., LLC, 762 F. App’x 431 (9th Cir. 2019) (vacating and remanding district court’s summary judgment order dismissing FDCPA class-action claims). Timlick v. Nat’l Enter. Sys., Ina, 35 Cal. App. 5th 674 (Cal. App. lst Dist. 2019) (debt collector cannot unilaterally “pick off” the named plaintiff and avoid class action litigation). Professional Collection Consultants v. Lujan, 23 Cal. App. 5th 685 (Cal. App. lst Dist. 2018) (Delaware 3-year statute 0f limitations applies in California debt buyer’s collection cases). Meza v. Portfolio Recovery Assocs., LLC, 860 F.3d 1218 (9th Cir. June 22, 2017) (certifying question 0f state law t0 California Supreme Court). Professional Collection Consultants v. Lauron, 8 Cal. App. 5th 958, (Cal. App. 6th Dist. Feb. 16, 2017) (Delaware 3-year statute of limitations applies in California debt buyer’s collection cases). Tye v. Salomon (In re Salomon), 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 23221 (9th Cir. Dec. 23, 2016) (affirming denial of motion to extend time for filing appeal). Johnson v. CFS II, Ina, 628 Fed. Apr. 505 (9th Cir. Cal. 2016) (affirming judgment for consumer Plaintiff in FDCPA case). Montgomery v. GCFS, Ina, 237 Cal. App. 4th 724 (Cal. App. lst Dist. 2015) (construing Cal Fin. Code § 22340(a)). Lauron v. Prof’l Collection Consultants, 2014 Cal. App. Unpub. LEXIS 8983 (Cal. App. 6th Dist. Dec. 18, 2014) (denying debt collectors’ interlocutory appeal). Lujan v. Prof’l Collection Consultants, 2014 Cal. App. Unpub. LEXIS 8555 (Cal. App. 1st Dist. NOV. 26, 2014) (denying debt collectors’ interlocutory appeal). Tye v. Salomon (In re Salomon), 2014 Bankr. LEXIS 897 (B.A.P. 9th Cir. Mar. 7, 2014) (affirming denial 0f motion t0 extend time for filing appeal). Target National Bank v. Rocha, 216 Cal App. 4th Supp. 1 (Cal. Super. Ct. 2013) (holding that Code 0f Civil Procedure § 98 declarants must be physically present within 150 miles 0f the place of trial). Fontaine v. Superior Court, 175 Cal. App. 4th 830 (Cal. App. 6th Dist. 2009) (Peremptory writ 0f mandate was issued. Venue proper in Santa Clara County pursuant t0 California Code 0f Civil Procedure § 395(b)). Resurgence Financial, LLC v. Chambers, 173 Cal. App. 4th Supp. 1 (Cal. Super. Ct. 2009) (Superior Court erred in failing to apply Delaware’s three year statute of limitations required by contract choice-of-law clause). -4- DECLARATION OF RAEON R. ROULSTON Case N0. 20CV373916 KOOOQONUl-RUJNH NNNNNNNNNr-‘r-‘r-‘r-‘r-ir-‘Hr-Ar-‘r-A OONONUI-PUJNHOKOOOQONUI-RUJNHO U.S. DISTRICT COURTS (previous five years only) Griego v. Tehama Law G171, P.C., 2020 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 152306 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 21, 2020) (granting motion to remand Rosenthal case). Credit Consulting Servs. v. Scott, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 29660 (N.D. Cal. Feb. 25, 2019) (granting motion to remand FDCPA class action cross-complaint). Izett v. Crown Asset Mgmt, LLC, 2018 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 211459 (N.D. Cal. Dec. 14, 2018) (granting motion t0 strike affirmative defenses in FDCPA case). Timlick v. Nat’l Enter. Sys., 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 130921 (ND. Cal. Aug. 16, 2017) (granting motion to remand RFDCPA class action case). Carlson v. Gatestone & C0. Int’l, Ina, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 93348 (ND. Cal. June 16, 2017) (granting motion to remand RFDCPA class action case). Garcia v. Stanley, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 32550 (ND. Cal. Mar. 7, 2017) (granting motion for attorney fees and costs in FDCPA case). Jacobson v. Persolve, LLC, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 173058 (N.D. Cal. Dec. 14, 2016) (granting motion for attorney fees and costs in class action FDCPA case). Garcia v. Creditors Specially Serv., 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 159686 (N.D. Cal. NOV. 16, 2016) (granting summary judgment in a FDCPA case). Ciganek v. Portfolio Recovery Assocs., LLC, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 74905 (ND. Cal. June 7, 2016) (construing Cal. Code 0f Civil Procedure § 98). Datta v. Asset Recovery Solutions, LLC, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 36446 (N.D. Cal. Mar. 18, 2016) (granting class certification under Rule 23(b)(3) in a FDCPA class action case). DeLeon v. Elite Self Storage Mgmt., LLC, 2016 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 29744 (E.D. Cal. Mar. 7, 2016) (granting motion to strike affirmative defenses in part in B&P 17200 case). U.S. BANKRUPTCY COURTS Tye v. Salomon (In re Salomon), 2013 Bankr. LEXIS 354 (Bankr. N.D. Cal. Jan. 29, 2013) (granting discharge after trial in non-discharageability case). 11. Ihave been approved and appointed as adequate class counsel in several consumer class action cases including: Case Name Court Case N0. / Date Judge Leedeman v. Sunrise Credit Services, Inc. Santa Clara County 19CV342137 Lucas (June 9, 2021) Timlick v. NCB Management Services, Inc. Lake County CIV-4 1 69 1 9 Lunas (February 2, 2021) Chambers v. Merchants & Medical Credit Santa Clara County 18-CV-324210 Kulkarni Corporation, Inc. (November 23, 2020) Brady v. Patenaude & Felix, APC Santa Clara County 18-CV-338737 Lucas (August 25, 2020) -5- DECLARATION OF RAEON R. ROULSTON Case N0. 20CV373916 KOOOQONUl-RUJNH NNNNNNNNNr-‘r-‘r-‘r-‘r-ir-‘Hr-Ar-‘r-A OONONUI-PUJNHOKOOOQONUI-RUJNHO Credit Consulting Services, Inc. v. Scott San Benito County CL-l8-00541 Rodriguez (January 9, 2020) Pajarit v. Grassy Sprain Group, Inc. San Mateo County 18-CIV-05015 Weiner (November 18, 2019) Scribner v. Simm Assocs., Ina, et al. Santa Clara County 17-CV-3 12803 Kuhnle (October 7, 2019) Guzman v. Mandarich Law Group, LLP, et Santa Clara County 18-CV-322871 Walsh al. (August 16, 2019) Homer v. Crown Asset Management, LLC Santa Clara County 17-CV-315221 Kuhnle (March 8, 2019) Carlson v. Gatestone & C0. International, Santa Clara County 17-CV-306698 Kuhnle Ina, et a1. (November 30, 2018) Lock v. Global Credit & Collection Santa Clara County 2015-1-CV-283297 Kuhnle Corporation, ez‘ al. (November 13, 2018) Pajarit v. Velocity Investments, LLC San Mateo County 17-CIV-O3046 Weiner (October 19, 2018) Newsom v. Cavalry SPVI, LLC Santa Clara County 16-CV-299973 Kuhnle (October 12, 2018) Corso v. ML. Zager, P.C., et a1. Santa Clara County 16-CV-298607 Kirwan (June 29, 2018) Atlantic Credit & Finance Special Finance Santa Cruz County CIS-CV-182328 Burdick Unit III, LLC v. Nevarez, et al. (June 25, 2018) Davis v. Cavalry SPVI, LLC Santa Clara County 2016-1-CV-301730 Kuhnle (April 2, 2018) Datta v. Asset Recovery Solutions, LLC Northern District of 5:15-CV-00188-LHK Koh California (January 13, 2017) Jacobson v. Persolve, LLC Northern District 0f 5:14-CV-00735-LHK Koh California (June 7, 2016) Gold v. Midland Credit Management, Inc Northern District 0f 5:13-CV-02019-BLF Freeman California (October 7, 2014) EVIDENCE OFFERED IN SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR CLASS CERTIFICATION 12. On or about October 25, 2021, Defendant, VELOCITY INVESTMENTS, LLC, (“VELOCITY”) served Second Supplemental Responses by Defendant Velocity Investments, LLC t0 Plaintiff’s Special Interrogatories. Interrogatory No. 9 asks Defendant to state “the number, names, addresses, and telephone numbers of all California residents to whom CONVERGENT DECLARATION OF RAEON R. ROULSTON _ 6 _ Case No. 20CV373916 \OOOflOUl-RUJNr-A NNNNNNNNNr-tr-tr-tr-tr-tr-‘r-tr-Ar-‘r-A OOQONUI-PUJNHOKOOOQQUI-PUJNF-‘O OUTSOURCING, INC., sent, 0r caused to be sent, collection letters in the form of Exhibit “1” on YOUR behalf from December 7, 2019, through the present, in an attempt t0 collect a charged-off consumer debt originally owed to CITIBANK, N.A., which was sold or resold to YOU 0n or after January 1, 2014.” In response, VELOCITY states that “letters in the form 0f Exhibit 1 were sent to approximately 602 persons by Convergent Outsourcing, Inc. from December 7, 2019 to the present regarding charged-off debt owed to Citibank, NA.” A true and correct copy 0f the said Sec_ond Su lemental Res onses b Defendant Veloci Investments LLC to Plaintiff’s S ecial Interro atories is attached as Exhibit “B” to the document titled Evidence Offered in Support 0f Plaintiff’s Motion for Class Certification filed concurrently herewith. Executed this 14th day of January, 2022, at San Jose, California. Raeon R. Roulston _ 7 _ DECLARATION OF RAEON R. ROULSTON Case No. 20CV373916