The Old Orchard Conservancy vs. City of Santa Ana

Motion Other

Cal. Super. - 4th Dist.April 3, 2014

10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Deborah M. Rosenthal, State Bar No. 128893 Natalie N. FitzGerald, State Bar No. 259351 FitzGerald Yap Kreditor LLP 16148 Sand Canyon Avenue Irvine, California 92618 Tel: (949) 788-8900 Fax: (949) 788-8980 ELECTRONICALLY FILED Superior Court of California, County of Orange 12/08/2015 at 02:42:00 PM Clerk of the Superior Court By Sarah Loose Deputy Clerk Attorneys for Petitioner The Old Orchard Conservancy SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF ORANGE - CIVIL COMPLEX CENTER THE OLD ORCHARD CONSERVANCY, a California non-profit public benefit corporation, Petitioner, VS. CITY OF SANTA ANA, a California municipal corporation, Case No.: 30-2014-00714225-CU-WM-CXC [Assigned for all purposes to the Honorable Robert J. Moss, Dept. CX102] NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO TAX CIVIC PROPERTY GROUP, INC.’S COSTS; MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT THEREOF; AND DECLARATION OF NATALIE N. FITZGERALD Respondent. Hearing: Reservation # 72280088 Date: February 5, 2016 LUTHERAN HIGH SCHOOL OF Time: 9:00 a.m. ORANGE COUNTY, a California religious | Dept.: CX102 corporation, CONCORDIA UNIVERSITY FOUNDATION, a California religious foundation, and DOES 1 through 10, inclusive, Real Parties in Interest. == Notice of Motion and Motion to Tax Civic Property Group, Inc.’s Costs 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 TO ALL PARTIES AND THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD: You are hereby notified that on February 5, 2016 at 9:00 a.m., in Department CX102 of the above-captioned Court, petitioner THE OLD ORCHARD CONSERVANCY (the “Conservancy”) will, and hereby does, move for an order taxing the Memorandum of Costs filed by Real Party in Interest CIVIC PROPERTY GROUP, INC. (the “RPI”). Specifically, the Conservancy seeks an order taxing the costs sought by RPI in connection with ordering a transcript of the August 3, 2015 hearing on the Conservancy’s Petition for Writ of Man- date (item 9). This motion is made on the grounds that pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure section 1033.5 and Cal. Rules of Court, Rule 3.1700, the Memorandum of Costs contains items that are unrecoverable. This motion is based upon this Notice of Motion, the accompanying Memorandum of Points and Authorities, the Declaration of Natalie N. FitzGerald, all pleadings and docu- ments on file herein, and such other and further evidence as may be presented at the hearing on this matter. December 8, 2015 FITZGERALD YAP KREDITOR, LLP dls Deborah M. Rosenthal Natalie N. FitzGerald Attorneys for Petitioner Lr -2- Notice of Motion and Motion to Tax Civic Property Group, Inc.’s Costs 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES INTRODUCTION Petitioner THE OLD ORCHARD CONSERVANCY (the “Conservancy”) brought this action to prevent demolition and redevelopment of the historic Sexlinger Orchard under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) and the City of Santa Ana’s Municipal Code. On August 3, 2015, the parties appeared before the Court for the hearing on the Con- servancy’s Petition for Writ of Mandate. A court reporter, secured by Real Party in Interest, CIVIC PROPERTY GROUP, INC. (“RPI”), was also present at the hearing for purposes of making a transcript of the proceeding. (Declaration of Natalie N. FitzGerald (“NNF Decl.”), 12) Following the August 3 hearing, the Court entered a judgment denying the Petition in its entirety. (NNF Decl., § 4.) Thereafter, RPI submitted a Memorandum of Costs in which RPI seeks to charge the Conservancy $250 for procuring a transcript of the proceed- ing. (NNF Decl., § 5.) In that this transcript was not ordered by the Court, RPI has no right to recovery of these costs by statute. TRANSCRIPTS NOT ORDERED BY THE COURT ARE BARRED FROM RECOVERY BY STATUTE. Under California law, the right to costs is governed strictly by statute. (Hogan v. Ingold (1952) 38 Cal.2d 814.) Thus, a trial court has no discretion to award costs not statutorily authorized. (Ladas v. California State Auto Ass'n (1993) 19 Cal.App.4th 761.) Nor does a trial court have any discretion to award costs which are expressly prohibited by statute, such as the costs claimed here by RPL The allowable costs are expressly set forth in Code of Civil Procedure section 1033.5, subdivision (a). With respect to transcripts, section 1033.5 provides as follows: (a) The following items are allowable as costs under Section 1032: (9) Transcripts of court proceedings ordered by the court. -3- Notice of Motion and Motion to Tax Civic Property Group, Inc.’s Costs 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Section 1033.5, subdivision (b), goes on to expressly identify those costs that are not allowable. These costs include the following: (b) The following items are not allowable as costs, except when expressly authorized by law: (5) Transcripts of court proceedings not ordered by the court. (Emphasis added.) By way of the Memorandum of Costs, RPI seeks $250 for securing a court reporter to prepare a transcript of the August 3, 2015 hearing on the Conservancy’s Petition for Writ of Mandate. (NNF Decl., § 5.) But pursuant to the express and unambiguous language of Code of Civil Procedure section 1033.5, subdivisions (a)(9) and (b)(5), the transcripts must have been ordered by the court to be recoverable. It is undisputed that the Court did not order either party to secure a transcript of this hearing; instead, this transcript was voluntarily ordered by RPI. (NNF Decl., 9 2, 3.) Accordingly, RPI is not entitled to these costs by statute. III. CONCLUSION Based on the foregoing, the Conservancy respectfully requests that the Court tax the costs sought by RPI in the amount of $250. December 8, 2015 FITZGERALD YAP KREDITOR, LLP oad J Deborah M. Ros8nthal Natalie N. FitzGerald Attorneys for Petitioner -4- Notice of Motion and Motion to Tax Civic Property Group, Inc.’s Costs 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 DECLARATION OF NATALIE N. FITZGERALD I, NATALIE N. FITZGERALD, declare as follows: 1. I am an attorney licensed to practice law in the courts of the State of Califor- nia. I am an associate at the law firm of FitzGerald Yap Kreditor LLP counsel of record for petitioner THE OLD ORCHARD CONSERVANCY (the “Conservancy”) in the above- captioned action. I have personal knowledge of the facts contained within this Declaration based upon my first-hand experience, and if called upon to testify to them I could and would competently do so. 2. On August 3, 2015, 1, in addition to Deborah M. Rosenthal, appeared before this Court on the Conservancy’s Petition for Writ of Mandate. Appearances were also made by Jeffrey T. Melching, on behalf of Real Party in Interest CIVIC PROPERTY GROUP, INC. (“RPT”), and Michelle Ouellette, on behalf of CITY OF SANTA ANA (the “City”). Also present at the hearing was a court reporter, whom I understood to be retained by Mr. Melching’s office. 3. Prior to the August 3 hearing there were some communications between my- self and counsel for the City and RPI concerning securing a court reporter for the hearing, however, there was never any understanding that the Conservancy would pay for the tran- script costs. 4. On or about October 4, 2015, the Court entered a judgment denying the Con- servancy’s Petition in its entirety. 5. Attached hereto as Exhibit “1” is a true and correct copy of RPI’s Memo- randum of Costs. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the fore- Natalie N. Flees -5- Notice of Motion and Motion to Tax Civic Property Group, Inc.’s Costs EXHIBIT 1 MC-010 ATTORNEY OR PARTY WITHOUT ATTORNEY (Name, state bar number, and address): FOR COURT USE ONLY | Jeffrey Melching (SBN 180351) Rutan & Tucker, LLP 611 Anton Blvd, Suite 1400 Costa Mesa, CA 92626 TELEPHONE No; (714) 641-5100 Fax No. (714) 546-9035 ATTORNEY FOR (Name): Real Parties in Interest Civic Property Group, Inc. INSERT NAME OF COURT, JUDICIAL DISTRICT, AND BRANCH COURT, IF ANY: Orange County Superior Court Civil Complex Center "PLAINTIFF: The Old Orchard Conservancy DEFENDANT: City of Santa Ana MEMORANDUM OF COSTS (SUMMARY) 30.2014.00714225 The following costs are requested: TOTALS 1. Filing and motion fees ........ccccovviiiiiiiicnil) RE RS SE A PRT FESR ER 1.$ 890.00 2. JUIY FEES otitis eet eerste secs eae be see ea beac see sete eh ent ees sabes eRe emer eas eterno 2.3% 3: Jiry food Ana I0UGING convents eter eeeeae ha thereat eee a eae tee seat ee saen terre stat rnran 3.3 A, DIepOSHION COSES .....venereeroiasiine so sisundisamasssesssssrrmsnsssmasiss ss ivassss5sseTn ank amos THTHY SHARE ST EET RS REAR SORTA EA Se ee 4. % B. SEIVICE Of PIrOCESS, vuucrvsmcsuinsissesmessssassss sus soni oss saas is (6515558 16608 (F504 0T08005 Kui Eo ST00 4 S00 E03 43003 oH WE 0FE HE TAHT aE SH STE 5% [1] 6. AMACHIIEHT EXDETISES wussuuusrsssosnssssmesisysssss osm sisisssss svsnt isms 850s S48 55x £45 (FEE V HS (HS PS E4 FSS FHP Ea 6.9% [1] 7. Surety bond PrEMIUMS ...c.oiuiiiiriiiir creer seria es teesecee sre sre erae ese c so eeasesaersesesesesseas esse eneenseemnet ar aene srs sraseraeas 7.% | 8. WINESS FEES vivre ee ead By EER sessrares 8% 9. Courbordered ATANSCIIPS ovvvveerseseverreessessees reese essseeesesasesessesesaeen esse ssaesssses eases resestss seb as sete mses eben best esenreen noes 9.% 250.00 10. Attorney fees (enter here if contractual or statutory fees are fixed without necessity of a court determination; otherwise a noticed Motion is FeQUITEd) ..............cvcveeeeeriecevveiiincemereesieaearessessessssssescennneee 10. $ 1] 11. Models, blowups, and photocopies of exhibits ........c.ccccviiiieincieisic rere cao 11. 12. Court reporter fees as established by statute ...........cccvincinn 12. $ AB. ONT .ecoooeveovssamsaaeessses nesses sss Rr 13.$ 92.45 TOTAL COSTS oii erciesesaesseesee re er se ebe bse tanec sees eases bees a eee sess ab ar bse seb shes ener ene ssa shennan $ 1,232.45 | am the attorney, agent, or party who claims these costs. To the best of my knowledge and belief this memorandum of costs is correct and these costs were necessarily incurred in this case. Date: Novemberl18, 2015 F Ml Jeffrey T. Melching » ( Jeditoss J i (TYPE OR PRINT NAME) 77 C 7 (SIGNATURE) (Proof of service on reverse) Form Approved for Optional Use MEMORANDUM OF COSTS (SUMMARY) Code a. Judicial Council of California MC-010 [Rev, July 1, 1999] American LegalNet, Inc. www.FormsWorkFlow. com SHORT TITLE: CASE NUMBER: The Old Orchard Conservancy v. City of Santa Ana 30-2014-00714225 PROOFOF [] MAILING [] PERSONAL DELIVERY 1. At the time of mailing or personal delivery, | was at least 18 years of age and not a party to this legal action. 2. My residence or business address is (specify): 3. | mailed or personally delivered a copy of the Memorandum of Costs (Summary) as follows (complete either a or b): a. [J Mail. | am a resident of or employed in the county where the mailing occurred. (1) I enclosed a copy in an envelope AND (a) il deposited the sealed envelope with the United States Postal Service with the postage fully prepaid. (b) 1 placed the envelope for collection and mailing on the date and at the place shown in items below following our ordinary business practices. | am readily familiar with this business’ practice for collecting and processing correspondence for mailing. On the same day that correspondence is placed for collection and mailing, it is deposited in the ordinary course of business with the United States Postal Service in a sealed envelope with postage fully prepaid. (2) The envelope was addressed and mailed as follows: (a) Name of person served: (b) Address on envelope: (c) Date of mailing: (d) Place of mailing (city and state): b. [] Personal delivery. | personally delivered a copy as follows: (1) Name of person served: (2) Address where delivered: (3) Date delivered: (4) Time delivered: | declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct. Date: {TYPE OR PRINT NAME) (SIGNATURE OF DECLARANT) MC-010 [Rev. July 1, 1998) MEMORANDUM OF COSTS (SUMMARY) Page two American LegalNet, Inc. 5 www. FormsWorkFlow.com & MC-011 | SHORT TITLE: The Old Orchard Conservancy v. City of Santa Ana CASE NUMBER: 30-2014-00714225 MEMORANDUM OF COSTS (WORKSHEET) 1. Filing and motion fees Paper filed a. Answer to Complaint (8/15/14) ($435 per entity) Stipulation and Order re Briefing Schedule b. (1/20/2015) g. [1 Information about additional filing and motion fees is contained in Attachment 1g. $ $ Filing fee 870.00 20.00 TOTAL 1. |[$ 890.00 2. Jury fees Date Fee & mileage a. $ b. $ c. $ d. $ e. [1 Information about additional jury fees is contained in Attachment 2e. TOTAL 2. |$ 0.00 3. Juror food: $ and lodging: $ TOTAL 3. |$ 0.00 4. Deposition costs Name of Video- deponent Taking Transcribing Travel taping Subtotals a. $ $ $ $ $ 0.00 b. 3 $ $ $ $- 0.00 c. $ $ $ $ $ 0.00 d. $ $ $ $ $ 0.00 e. [] Information about additional deposition costs is contained in Attachment 4e. TOTAL 4. [§ 0.00 Page 1 0of4 (Continued on reverse) Form Approved for Optional Use Judicial Council of California MC-011 (Rev, July 1, 1989] MEMORANDUN OF COSTS (WORKSHEET) American LegalNel, Inc. .USCourtForms.com) Code of Chvil Procedure §5 1032,1033.5 | SHORT TITLE: The Old Orchard Conservancy v. City of Santa Ana CASE NUMBER: 30-2014-00714225 5. Service of process Name of person Public Registered Other served officer process Publication (specify) a. $ $ $ $ b. $ $ $ $ c. $ $ $ $ d. [] Information about additional costs for service of process is contained in Attachment 5d. TOTAL 5. |$% 0.00 6. Attachment expenses (SPEC): . . «coi i i ee ee ie ea 6. | $ 7. Surety bond premiums (ifemize bonds and amounts): . ...... oo. eee 7. 13 8. a. Ordinary witness fees Name of witness Daily fee Mileage Total (1) days at $/day miles at ¢g/mile .... $ 0.00 2) days at $/day miles at ¢/mile .... $ 0.00 (3) days at $/day miles at ¢imile .... § 0.00 @) days at $/day miles at dimile .... $ 0.00 (5) "days at $/day miles at ¢imile .... § 0.00 6) [1 Information about additional ordinary witness fees is contained in Attachment 8a(6). SUBTOTAL 8a. [$ 0.00 (Continued on next page) Page 2 of 4 MG-011 [Rev. July 1. 1299] MEMORANDUM OF COSTS (WORKSHEET) American LegalNet, Inc. .USCouriForms.com) | SHORT TITLE: The Old Orchard Conservancy v. City of Santa Ana CASE NUMBER: 30-2014-00714225 MEMORANDUM OF COSTS (WORKSHEET) (Continued) 8. b. Expert fees (per Code of Civil Procedure section 998) Name of withess Fee mn hours at $ hr... $ 0.00 3) hours at $ hr... $ 0.00 3) hours at $ hr... $ 0.00 4) hoursat$ ir. .$ 0.00 (6) [1 Information about additional expert witness fees is contained in Attachment 8b(5). SUBTOTAL 8b. |$ 0.00 c. Court-ordered expert fees Name of witness Fee 1) hours at $ hr... $ 0.00 2) hoursat$ mr... $ 0.00 3) [1 Information about additional court-ordered expert witness fees is contained in Attachment 8¢(3). SUBTOTAL 8c. |$ 0.00 TOTAL (8a, 8b, & 8c) 8% 0.00 9. Court-ordered transcripts (specify). Hearing on Motion (August 3, 2015) 9. |% 250.00 10. Attorney fees (enter here if contractual or statutory fees are fixed without necessity of a court determination; otherwise a noticed motion is required): ..... ... i a cea 10. | $ 11. Models, blowups, and photocopies of exhibits (specify): 11. |$ 12. Court reporter fees (as established by statute) a. (Name of reporter): Fees: $ b. (Name of reporter): Fees: §$ ¢. [1 Information about additional court reporter fees is contained in Attachment 12c. TOTAL 12. {$ 0.00 13. Other (specify): Courier Fees (See Attached) 13. |$ 92.46 TOTAL COSTS i ooocmoms ams ms anes wi ses 56 85 65 905s 68 (56908 65 98 556 £8 16s 8/0 § 4% 8 908 8 195 9 100s 806 $105 8 0 8 Ea 0% $ 1,232.45 (Additional information may be supplied on the reverse) Page 3of4 MC-011 Rev, July 1, 1999] MEMORANDUM OF COSTS (WORKSHEET) American LegaiNel, Inc. www. US CourtForms.com; | SHORT TITLE: CASE NUMBER: The Old Orchard Conservancy v. City of Santa Ana 30-2014-00714225 MEMORANDUM OF COSTS (WORKSHEET) (Continued) 1 13. Other - Courier Fees co 2 Answer to Complaint (8/15/2014) $7.95 3 Verified Answer to First Amended Petition (12/12/14) $7.95 4 Stipulation Continuing Briefing Schedule (1/20/2015) $7.95 5 Opposition to Motion to Modify Briefing Schedule (1/26/2015) $7.95 6 Real Parties in Interests’ Statement of Issues (2/20/2015) $7.95 7 City's and RPI's Response to Opening Brief (4/20/2015) $7.95 8 Lodging of Excerpts of Record (5/15/2015) $5.00 9 Notice of Lodging of Excerpts of Record (5/15/2015) ) $7.95 10 Joint Objections to Request for Judicial Notice re Reply Brief (5/21/2015) $7.95 11 Proposed Order Denying Petition for Writ of Mandate (9/9/2015) $7.95 12 Proposed Judgment Denying Petition for Writ of Mandate (9/18/2015) $7.95 13 Response to Petitioner's Objections to Proposed Judgment (9/29/2015) $7.95 14 Total: $92.45 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 Page 4 of 4! MGC-011 [Rev. July 1, 1898] MEMORANDUM OF COSTS (WORKSHEET) American LagaliNel, Ino. Category 01 Filing Fee 01 Filing Fee 09 Court Reporter 13 - Courier 13 - Courier 13 - Courier 13 - Courier 13 - Courier 13 - Courier 13 - Courier 13 - Courier 13 - Courier 13 - Courier 13 - Courier 13 - Courier Vendor Court Court Transcript One Legal One Legal One Legal One Legal One Legal One Legal Nationwide One Legal One Legal One Legal One Legal One Legal Date 8/15/2014 1/21/2015 7/29/2015 ‘8/15/2014 12/12/2014 1/21/2015 1/26/2015 2/20/2015 4/20/2015 5/15/2015 5/15/2015 5/21/2015 18/21/2015 9/21/2015 9/29/2015 Item First Appearance Fee (x2 entities) Proposed Stipulation and Order Hearing Transcript (for.08/03/2015) Answer to Complaint Verified Answer Stipulation re Briefing Schedule Opposition and Joinder Statement of Issues : Response to Petitioner's Opening Brief. . . Lodging Administrative Record Notice of Lodging Excerpts of Record Joint Objections to RIN re Reply Brief Proposed Order Denying Writ of Mandate Proposed Judgment Denying Writ of Mandate Response to Objections to Judgment Amount 870.00 20.00 250.00 7.95 7.95 7.95 7.95 7.95 7.95 5.00 7.95 7.95 7.95 7.95 7.95 “ n n n , n S$ 1,232.45 Subtotals $ 890.00 $ 250.00 S$ 92.45 1232.45 iY oO 0 0 O N wn 10 1 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 PROOF OF SERVICE (The Old Orchard Conservancy c. City of Santa Ana, et al., OCSC, Central Case No. 30-2014-00714225-CU-WM-CXC) STATE OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF ORANGE I am employed by the law office of Rutan & Tucker, LLP in the County of Orange, State of California. I am over the age of 18 and not a party to the within action. My business address is 611 Anton Boulevard, Suite 1400, Costa Mesa, California 92626-1931. My electronic notification address is hdall@rutan.com. On November 18, 2015, I served on the interested parties in said action the within: MEMORANDUM OF COSTS (SUMMARY) as stated below: (BY MAIL) by placing a true copy thereof in sealed envelope(s) addressed as shown on the attached mailing list. In the course of my employment with Rutan & Tucker, LLP, I have, through first-hand personal observation, become readily familiar with Rutan & Tucker, LLP’s practice of collection and processing correspondence for mailing with the United States Postal Service. Under that practice, I deposited such envelope(s) in an out-box for collection by other personnel of Rutan & Tucker, LLP, and for ultimate posting and placement with the U.S. Postal Service on that same day in the ordinary course of business. If the customary business practices of Rutan & Tucker, LLP with regard to collection and processing of correspondence and mailing were followed, and I am confident that they were, such envelope(s) were posted and placed in the United States mail at Costa Mesa, California, that same date. 1 am aware that on motion of party served, service is presumed invalid if postal cancellation date or postage meter date is more than one day after date of deposit for mailing in affidavit. (BY E-MAIL) by transmitting a true copy of the foregoing document(s) to the e-mail addresses set forth on the attached mailing list. Executed on November 18, 2015, at Costa Mesa, California. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct. Heather Dall /s/ Heather Dall (Type or print name) (Signature) 809/032195-0001 8331958.1 al1/18/15 SERVICE LIST Deborah M. Rosenthal Natalie N. FitzGerald FitzGerald Yap Kreditor, LLP 16148 Sand Canyon Avenue Irvine, California 92618 Email: drosenthal@fyklaw.com nfitzgerald@fyklaw.com Attorneys for Petitioner The Old Orchard Conservancy 809/032195-0001 8331958.1 all/18/15 Sonia R. Carvalho Sandra Schwarzmann City of Santa Ana Office of the City Attorney 20 Civic Center Plaza Santa Ana, CA 92701 Email: SCarvalho@santa-ana.org Sschwarzmann@santa-ana.org Attorneys for Respondent City of Santa Ana Michelle Ouellette Sarah E. Owsowitz Best, Best & Krieger LLP 3390 University Avenue, 5th Floor P.O. Box 1028 Riverside, CA 92502 Email: michelle.ouellette@bbklaw.com sarah.owsowitz@bbklaw.com Attorneys for Respondent City of Santa Ana 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 PROOF OF SERVICE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF ORANGE I, the undersigned, am employed in the aforesaid county, State of California. Iam over the age of 18 years and not a party to the within action. My business address is 16148 Sand Canyon Avenue, Irvine, California. On December 8, 2015, I affected regular U.S. mail and electronic service of the foregoing document described as: NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION TO TAX CIVIC PROPERTY GROUP, INC.’S COSTS; MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT THEREOF; AND DECLARATION OF NATALIE N. FITZGERALD on inter- ested parties in this action listed below: Sonia R. Carvalho, Esq. Joel D. Kuperberg, Esq. Sandra Schwarzmann, Esq. Jeffrey T. Melching, Esq. Ryan Hodge, Esq. Rutan & Tucker City of Santa Ana 611 Anton Blvd., Suite 1400 Office of the City Attorney Costa Mesa, CA 92626 20 Civic Center Plaza Email: jkuperberg@rutan.com Santa Ana, CA 92701 Email: jmelching@rutan.com Email: scarvalho@santa-ana.org Attorneys for Real Parties in Interest Email: sschwarzmann(@santa-ana.org Email:rhodge@santa-ana.org Attorneys for City of Santa Ana Sarah E. Owsowitz, Esq. Michelle Ouellette, Esq. Best Best & Krieger LLP Best Best & Krieger LLP 2001 N. Main St., Suite 390 3390 University Ave., 5th Floor - Walnut Creek, CA 94596 Riverside, CA 92501 Email: Sarah.owsowitz@bbklaw.com Email: Michelle.ouellette@bbklaw.com Attorneys for City of Santa Ana Attorneys for City of Santa Ana X (MAIL) (C.C.P. § 1013(a)) Pursuant to CCP § 1013(a) and under firm practice said envelope would be deposited with the U.S. Postal Service on the same day with postage thereof fully prepaid at Irvine, California in the ordinary course of business. Iam readily familiar with FitzGerald Yap Kreditor LLP’s ordinary business practice of collection and processing correspondence for mailing. I followed this business practice and I placed the envelope for collection and mailing on the date identified above. I am aware that on motion of the party served, service is presumed invalid if postage cancellation date or postage date is more than one day after date of deposit for mailing in affidavit. -1- Proof of Service 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 [X] (ELECTRONIC SERVICE) (CCP § 1010.6(a)(4)) I caused such document(s) to be electronically served, via One Legal Attorney Service, served on all interested parties in this action shown by Electronic-Filing through One Legal Attorney Service which is then printed and maintained with the original documents in our office. Electronic ser- vice is complete at the time of transmission. My electronic notification address is 16148 Sand Canyon Avenue, Irvine, CA 92618. E-mail: dmatura@fyklaw.com. [X] (STATE) I certify (or declare) under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on December 8, 2015, at Irvine, California. 4 J IL A Fn, CC -= "Debra Matura -2- Proof of Service