This case was last updated from San Francisco County Superior Courts on 04/11/2016 at 16:20:47 (UTC).

TIMOTHY DEWITT VS. CRAZY PROTOCOL COMMUNICATIONS, INC. A CALIFORNIA et al

Case Summary

On 05/15/2012 TIMOTHY DEWITT filed a Contract - Business lawsuit against CRAZY PROTOCOL COMMUNICATIONS, INC A CALIFORNIA. This case was filed in San Francisco County Superior Courts, Civic Center Courthouse located in San Francisco, California. The case status is Not Classified By Court.

Case Details Parties Documents Dockets

 

Case Details

  • Case Number:

    *******0809

  • Filing Date:

    05/15/2012

  • Case Status:

    Not Classified By Court

  • Case Type:

    Contract - Business

  • Court:

    San Francisco County Superior Courts

  • Courthouse:

    Civic Center Courthouse

  • County, State:

    San Francisco, California

 

Party Details

Plaintiff and Appellant

DEWITT, TIMOTHY INDIVIDUALLY

Berkeley, CA 94704

Defendants

CRAZY PROTOCOL COMMUNICATIONS, INC A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION

DOES 1 TO 100

MUIR, BRIAN D

LEASURE, JAMES

EHARMONY, INC.

HSBC BANK USA, N.A.

BOSLEY MEDICAL GROUP

MUIR, BRIAN D AN INDIVIDUAL

AVID DATING LIFE INC. DBA ASHLEYMADISON.COM

UNIVERSITY OF PHOENIX, INC.

IAC/INTERACTIVECORP

DEVRY UNIVERSITY, INC.

CRAZY PROTOCOL COMMUNICATIONS, INC. A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION

DIRECTBUY, INC (FROM ALAMEDA COUNTY CASE # RG-12-638207)

SPARK NETWORKS USA LLC

DISH NETWORK , LLC (FROM ALAMEDA COUNTY CASE # RG-12-638207)

Attorney/Law Firm Details

Plaintiff and Appellant Attorneys

DEWITT TIMOTHY A

DEWITT, TIMOTHY A

Attorney at ATTORNEY AT LAW

2729 Dwight Way, No.402

Berkeley, CA 94704

Defendant Attorneys

KRONENBERGER, KARL S.

Attorney at KRONENBERGER ROSENFIELD, LLP

150 Post St Ste 520

San Francisco, CA 94108

KATZ, ELLIOT

Attorney at DLA PIPER LLP (US)

555 Mission Street, Ste 2400

San Francisco, CA 94105-2933

FRENCH, JAMES HOWARD

Attorney at FRENCH & LYON

1990 N Californa Blvd Ste 300

Walnut Creek, CA 94596

SNYDER, JERRY M.

Attorney at HOLLAND & HART LLP

5441 Kietzke Lane, 2Nd Fl

Reno, NV 89511

LANE, MOLLY MORIARTY

Attorney at MORGAN LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP

One Market, Spear Street Tower

San Francisco, CA 94105

WEINER, PERRIE

Attorney at DLA PIPER LLP (US)

2000 Avenue Of The Stars, Ste 400 North Tower

Los Angeles, CA 90067

KIM, RAYMOND

Attorney at REED SMITH

355 S. Grand Ave, Ste 2900

Los Angeles, CA 90071

EMHOFF, DOUGLAS C.

Attorney at VENABLE LLP

2049 Century Park East, Suite 2100

Los Angeles, CA 90067

FU, VICTOR T.

Attorney at LKP GLOBAL LAW, LLP

1901 Avenue Of The Stars, Suite 480

Los Angeles, CA 90067

 

Court Documents

GENERIC CIVIL FILING (NO FEE)

COMPENDIUM OF EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF MTN FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE FOR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION (VOLUME 6) FILED BY DEFENDANT CRAZY PROTOCOL COMMUNICATIONS, INC. A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION MUIR, BRIAN D AN INDIVIDUAL

GENERIC CIVIL FILING (NO FEE)

COMPENDIUM OF EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF MTN FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE FOR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION (VOLUME 8) FILED BY DEFENDANT CRAZY PROTOCOL COMMUNICATIONS, INC. A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION MUIR, BRIAN D AN INDIVIDUAL

GENERIC CIVIL FILING (NO FEE)

COMPENDIUM OF EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF MTN FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE FOR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION (VOLUME 9) FILED BY DEFENDANT CRAZY PROTOCOL COMMUNICATIONS, INC. A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION MUIR, BRIAN D AN INDIVIDUAL

GENERIC CIVIL FILING (NO FEE)

COMPENDIUM OF EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF MTN FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE FOR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION (VOLUME 10) FILED BY DEFENDANT CRAZY PROTOCOL COMMUNICATIONS, INC. A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION MUIR, BRIAN D AN INDIVIDUAL

GENERIC CIVIL FILING (NO FEE)

COMPENDIUM OF EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF MTN FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE FOR SUMMARY ADJUDICATION (VOLUME 11) FILED BY DEFENDANT CRAZY PROTOCOL COMMUNICATIONS, INC. A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION MUIR, BRIAN D AN INDIVIDUAL

GENERIC CIVIL FILING (NO FEE)

TENTATIVE STATEMENT OF DECISON RE: DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

ORDER

ORDER DENYING IN PART AND GRANTING IN PART DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT, OR IN THE ALTERNATIVE, SUMMARY ADJUDICATION.

JUDGMENT FOR DEFENDANT

THE COURT ORDERED THE FOLLOWING JUDGMENT ENTERED: IT IS ADJUDGED THAT PLAINTIFF DEWITT, TIMOTHY INDIVIDUALLY TAKE NOTHING FROM DEFENDANT MUIR, BRIAN D AN INDIVIDUAL COSTS TO BE DETERMINED LATER .SEE SCANNED DOCUMENT

ORDER TO SET ASIDE DEFAULT/JUDGMENT/LEAVE TO DEFEND

ORDER TO SET ASIDE DEFAULT/JUDGMENT/LEAVE TO DEFEND AS TO DEFENDANT IAC/INTERACTIVECORP DEFAULT OF MAR-16-2015 SET ASIDE AS TO ABOVE-NAMED PARTIES ONLY

COMPLAINT

BUSINESS TORT, COMPLAINT FILED BY PLAINTIFF DEWITT, TIMOTHY INDIVIDUALLY AS TO DEFENDANT CRAZY PROTOCOL COMMUNICATIONS, INC. A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION MUIR, BRIAN D AN INDIVIDUAL DOES 1 TO 100 SUMMONS ISSUED, JUDICIAL COUNCIL CIVIL CASE COVER SHEET FILED CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE SCHEDULED FOR OCT-17-2012 PROOF OF SERVICE DUE ON JUL-16-2012 CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT DUE ON OCT-02-2012 (Fee:410.00)

PROOF OF SERVICE OF (GENERIC)

PROOF OF SERVICE OF SUMMONS; COMPLAINT; NOTICE FILED BY PLAINTIFF DEWITT, TIMOTHY INDIVIDUALLY SERVED JUL-18-2012, MAIL ON DEFENDANT CRAZY PROTOCOL COMMUNICATIONS, INC. A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION

DISMISSAL

DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE OF COMPLAINT AS TO DEFENDANT CRAZY PROTOCOL COMMUNICATIONS, INC. A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION MUIR, BRIAN D AN INDIVIDUAL

Order To Show Cause

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE SET FOR AUG-19-2014 IN DEPARTMENT 610 AT 10:30 AM FOR FAILURE TO FILE DOE AMENDMENT OR DISMISS DOES 1-100. MAY-20-2014 CRC 3.1385 OSC IS OFF CALENDAR. NOTICE SENT BY COURT.

Proof of Service

PROOF OF SERVICE RE REPLY TO OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO QUASH (TRANSACTION ID # 15088171) FILED BY DEFENDANT EHARMONY, INC.

DECLARATION OF

DECLARATION OF TIMOTHY A. DEWITT IN OPPOS TO MOTION TO QUASH SERVICE OF SUMMONS FILED BY PLAINTIFF DEWITT, TIMOTHY INDIVIDUALLY

Declaration of Ellit Katz in Support of Defendant IAC Interactivecorps

DECLARATION OF ELLIT KATZ IN SUPPORT OF DEFENDANT IAC INTERACTIVECORP'S REPLY TO OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO QUASH SERVICE OF SUMMONS (TRANSACTION ID # 57633246) FILED BY DEFENDANT IAC/INTERACTIVECORP

Order Continuing Case Management Conference

CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE OF SEP-16-2015 CONTINUED TO FEB-24-2016 AT 10:30 AM IN DEPARTMENT 610. NOTICE SENT BY COURT.

Order Continuing Case Management Conference

CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE OF FEB-24-2016 CONTINUED TO JUN-22-2016 AT 10:30 AM IN DEPARTMENT 610 FOR STATUS OF APPEAL. NOTICE SENT BY COURT.

121 More Documents Available

 

Docket Entries

  • 02/09/2016
  • View Court Documents
  • PROOF OF SERVICE (TRANSACTION ID # 16039067) FILED BY DEFENDANT LEASURE, JAMES

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/09/2016
  • View Court Documents
  • CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT (TRANSACTION ID # 16039067) FILED BY DEFENDANT LEASURE, JAMES JURY DEMANDED, ESTIMATED TIME FOR TRIAL: 3.0 DAYS

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/09/2016
  • View Court Documents
  • CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE OF FEB-24-2016 CONTINUED TO JUN-22-2016 AT 10:30 AM IN DEPARTMENT 610 FOR STATUS OF APPEAL. NOTICE SENT BY COURT.

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/08/2016
  • View Court Documents
  • CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE BY MAIL FILED BY PLAINTIFF DEWITT, TIMOTHY INDIVIDUALLY

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/08/2016
  • View Court Documents
  • CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT FILED BY PLAINTIFF DEWITT, TIMOTHY INDIVIDUALLY JURY DEMANDED, ESTIMATED TIME FOR TRIAL: 7.0 DAYS

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 02/03/2016
  • View Court Documents
  • CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT (TRANSACTION ID # 58520412) FILED BY DEFENDANT SPARK NETWORKS USA LLC JURY DEMANDED, ESTIMATED TIME FOR TRIAL: 7.0 DAYS

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/29/2016
  • View Court Documents
  • CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT (TRANSACTION ID # 100013050) FILED BY DEFENDANT HSBC BANK USA, N.A. ESTIMATED TIME FOR TRIAL: 4.0 HOURS

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/21/2016
  • View Court Documents
  • PROOF OF SERVICE RE ANSWER (TRANSACTION ID # 16020056) FILED BY DEFENDANT LEASURE, JAMES

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/21/2016
  • View Court Documents
  • ANSWER TO COMPLAINT (TRANSACTION ID # 16020056) FILED BY DEFENDANT LEASURE, JAMES

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 01/11/2016
  • MINI MINUTES FOR JAN-11-2016 09:30 AM FOR DEPT 302

    Read MoreRead Less
221 More Docket Entries
  • 09/06/2012
  • View Court Documents
  • OPPOSITION TO DEMURRER AND MEMO P/A IN SUPPORT THEREOF FILED BY PLAINTIFF DEWITT, TIMOTHY INDIVIDUALLY

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/17/2012
  • COURT REPORTING SERVICES LESS THAN 1 HOUR FILED BY DEFENDANT CRAZY PROTOCOL COMMUNICATIONS, INC. A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION MUIR, BRIAN D AN INDIVIDUAL (Fee:30.00)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/17/2012
  • View Court Documents
  • MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF DEMURRER FILED BY DEFENDANT CRAZY PROTOCOL COMMUNICATIONS, INC. A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION MUIR, BRIAN D AN INDIVIDUAL

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/17/2012
  • View Court Documents
  • PROOF OF SERVICE OF MOTION DEMURRER FILED BY DEFENDANT CRAZY PROTOCOL COMMUNICATIONS, INC. A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION MUIR, BRIAN D AN INDIVIDUAL

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 08/17/2012
  • View Court Documents
  • DEMURRER TO COMPLAINT APPENDIX OF NON CAALIFORNIA AUTHORITIES FILED BY DEFENDANT CRAZY PROTOCOL COMMUNICATIONS, INC. A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION MUIR, BRIAN D AN INDIVIDUAL HEARING SET FOR SEP-20-2012 AT 09:30 AM IN DEPT 302 (Fee:900.00)

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/25/2012
  • View Court Documents
  • SUMMONS ON COMPLAINT FILED BY PLAINTIFF DEWITT, TIMOTHY INDIVIDUALLY SERVED JUL-24-2012, SUBSTITUTE SERVICE ON NATURAL PERSON ON DEFENDANT MUIR, BRIAN D AN INDIVIDUAL

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/19/2012
  • View Court Documents
  • PROOF OF SERVICE OF SUMMONS; COMPLAINT; NOTICE FILED BY PLAINTIFF DEWITT, TIMOTHY INDIVIDUALLY SERVED JUL-18-2012, MAIL ON DEFENDANT CRAZY PROTOCOL COMMUNICATIONS, INC. A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 07/19/2012
  • View Court Documents
  • SUMMONS ON COMPLAINT FILED BY PLAINTIFF DEWITT, TIMOTHY INDIVIDUALLY SERVED JUL-18-2012, SUBSTITUTE SERVICE ON NATURAL PERSON ON DEFENDANT CRAZY PROTOCOL COMMUNICATIONS, INC. A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/15/2012
  • View Court Documents
  • NOTICE TO PLAINTIFF

    Read MoreRead Less
  • 05/15/2012
  • View Court Documents
  • BUSINESS TORT, COMPLAINT FILED BY PLAINTIFF DEWITT, TIMOTHY INDIVIDUALLY AS TO DEFENDANT CRAZY PROTOCOL COMMUNICATIONS, INC. A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION MUIR, BRIAN D AN INDIVIDUAL DOES 1 TO 100 SUMMONS ISSUED, JUDICIAL COUNCIL CIVIL CASE COVER SHEET FILED CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE SCHEDULED FOR OCT-17-2012 PROOF OF SERVICE DUE ON JUL-16-2012 CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT DUE ON OCT-02-2012 (Fee:410.00)

    Read MoreRead Less

Complaint Information

' JAMES 11 FRENCH, (State Bar No. 53555) PATRICIA H. LYON (State Bar No. 126761)

SOPHIA R. PRIOLA (State Bar No. 299339) ELECTRONICALLY jfrench@frenchandlyon.com FILED FRENCH & LYON Superior Court of Calfffornia, Attorneys At Law County of San Francisco A Professional Corporation 02/27/2015 1990 N. California Blvd., Suite 300 Clerk of the Court Walnut Creek, CA 94596 BY:MAURA RAMIREZ Telephone: 415-597-7800 Deputy Clerk

Attorneys for Defendant, HSBC BANK USA, N.A.

SUPERIOR COURT OF UNLIMITED JURISDICTION STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO

TIMOTHY A. DEWITT, an individual, ) Case No.: CGC-12-520809 ) Plaintiff, ) } DEFENDANT HSBC BANK USA, Vs, ) N.AJS ANSWER TO COMPLAINT OF

) TIMOTHY DEWITT CRAZY PROTOCOL )

COMMUNICATIONS, INC., a California ) corporation; BRIAN D, MUIR, an ) Complaint filed: May 15, 2012 individual, and DOES 1 through 100, ) Trial Date: TBD inclusive, ) ) ) Defendants. %

Defendant HSBC BANK USA, N.A., (“HSBC”) (sued as *DOE 6” pursuant to Amendment to Complaint Designating Doe Defendants dated January 28, 2015) hereby answers the Complaint of Plaintiff TOMOTHY A, DEWITT (*Plaintiff”), as follows:

GENERAL DENIAL

1. Pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure § 431.30(d), HSBC denies, generally and specifically, each and every allegation in the unverified Complaint, and further denies that Plaintiff is entitled to the relief requested, or that Plaintiff has been damaged in any

| amount, or at all,

AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES

As and for separate and affirmative defenses to the Complaint, and each of its purported causes of action, HSBC alleges the following affirmative defenses.

HSBC reserves the right to amend its Answer, to assert additional affirmative defenses and to supplement, alter or change its answer and affirmative defenses upon revelation of more definitive facts to HSBC and upon the undertaking of discovery and investigation in this matter.

FIRST AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

1. The Complaint, and each of its purported causes of action, fails to state facts sufficient to constitute a cause of action against HSBC,

SECOND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

2. Each and every claim asserted by Plaintiff is barred by the applicable statutes of limitations, including, without limitation, Code of Civil Procedure §§ 340(a) and 338(a).

THIRD AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

3. FEach and every claim asserted by Plaintiff is barred as due process forbids relation back to the date of the filing of the original Complaint as: {(a) the charging allegations do not state a valid claim against HSBC; (b) Plaintiff was not ignorant of HSBC’s identity or the facts rendering HSBC allegedly liable when the original complaint was filed; and/or (c) PlaintifP’s claims against HSBC do not refer to the same general set of facts or injuries forming the basis for the claims alleged in the original complaint.

FOURTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

4, Plaintiff suffered no general or special damages as a result of any conduct of HSBC, and any such damages were the result of other causes and/or the acts or omissions of others, including Plaintiff.

FIFTH ATFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

5. Any damages and/or injuries allegedly suffered by Plaintiff (which damages and/or injuries are expressly denied) are barred as speculative and not foreseeable to HSBC.

SIXTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

0. The Complaint, and each of its purported causes of action, is barred by the “doctrine of unclean hands.

SEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

7. The Complaint, and each of its purported causes of action, are preempted by, : among other laws, the Federal CAN-SPAM Act (15 U.S.C. §§ 7701, et seq.)

EIGHTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

8. Plaintiff failed to mitigate the damages and/or injuries (which damages and/or

injuries are expressly denied) referred to in the Complaint.

NINTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

9. HSBC is informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that Plaintiff has inexcusably delayed the filing of this action, gave no prior notice, and that by said conduct, and other acts, Plaintiff is barred from recovery under the legal doctrine of unjust enrichment.

TENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

10. Each and every claim asserted by Plaintiff is barred by the doctrine of laches.

ELEVENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

11. Each and every claim asserted by Plaintiff is barred by the doctrine of estoppel.

TWELFTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

12. Each and every claim asserted by Plaintiff is barred by the doctrine of waiver.

THIRTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

13. Any damages and/or injuries allegedly suffered by Plaintiff (which damages and/or injuries are expressly denied) are subject to reduction pursuant to Bus. & Profs. Code §17529.5.

FOURTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

14. The injuries and damages of which Plaintiff complains, which injuries or damages are expressly denied, were proximately caused by the negligence, and other fault of other persons, firms, and corporations, including Plaintiff, and other Defendants, and should judgment be rendered against HSBC, which should not occur, such judgment should be reduced, abated, and discharged in accordance with the percentage of negligence or other fault charged against such other persons, firms, and corporations, including Plaintiff, and other Defendants.

FIFTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

15. Ifit should be established that HSBC, or any of the Defendants, are in any manner legally responsible for Plaintiff’s alleged damages, which damages are denied, then any such Defendant is entitled to indemnity and/or contribution from the other parties named in this litigation or as yet unnamed in this litigation in direct proportion to the negligence or other actionable conduct which proximately caused or contributed to the alleged damages, if any.

SIXTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

16, To the extent the Complaint secks punitive damages, it violates HSBC’s right to procedural due process under the 14th Amendment of the United States Constitution and the Constitution of the State of California, and it further violates HSBC’s right of protection from eXcessive finés as provided in the 8th Amendment of the United States Constitution and in Article I, Section 17 of the Constitution of the State of California, and it further violates HSBC’s right to substantive due process as provided in the 5th and 14th Amendments of the United States Constitution and the Constitution of the State of California.

SEVENTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

17. HSBC alleges that Plaintiff’s claims are barred, in whole or in part, as to HSBC as

they are frivolous and in violation of California Code of Civil Procedure Section 128.5.

EIGHTEENTH AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

18. If it should be established that HSBC, its agents or employees, did commit any act

or omission alleged in the Complaint, which acts or omissions are expressly denied, HSBC is

informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that Plaintiff, by reason of the knowledge, statements

informed and believes, and thereon alleges, that Plaintiff, by reason of the knowledge, statements and conduct of himself, his agents and employees, has herctofore consented to all of the acts or omissions on the part of HSBC.

and conduct of himself, his agents and employees, has herctofore consented to all of the acts or omissions on the part of HSBC.

PRAYER

WHEREFORE, Defendant HSBC prays for judgment as follows:

a. That HSBC has judgment against Plaintiff, order of dismissal of Plaintiff’s Complaint, and a finding that Plaintitf take nothing by reason of the Complaint as to HSBC;

b. That HSBC recover its costs of defense, including without, limitation attorneys’ fees and costs; and

c. That this Court grants HSBC such other and further relief as it may deem just and proper.

Dated: February 26, 2015 FRENCH & LYON A Professional Corporation

"SOPHIA R, PRIOLA

Attorneys for Defendant HSBC BANK USA, N.A,