S DEVELOPMENT COMPANY Et Al v. COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL BUILDING OWNERS ALLIANCE INCORPORATED Et Al Notice of Removal

Case 2:13-cv-00911-PGR Document 1 Filed 05/03/13 Page 1 of 88
A sB #013874)
#026239) SNELL & L.L.P. One Arizona Center 400 E. Van Buren, Suite 1900 Phoenix, Arizona 85004-2202
Telephone
:
2 J 4
5
Facsimile: 602.382.6070
6 7
8
: 602.382.6000
E-Mail asarnloerg@swlaw. com
9 10
IN THE IINITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA THE S DEVELOPMENT COMPANY DBA BELL TOWER APARTMENTS; PRESIDIO NORTH LP,
Plaintiffs,
VS
l1
o o
No. (Maricopa County Superior Court Case No. CV20l2-053 59 l)
I
}r
C)
'=
l2
13 T4
t1
l;3
I
tr
,z r 98.3q
j n
8j d.-@
I ?;<9 r g,"
I
c=
I g I -=-
NOTICE OF REMOVAL
15
COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL
INC.,
I-INDERWzuTERS AT LLOYD'S OF LONDON SUBSCRIBING TO POLICY NOS. N08NA03300, N08NA0330 l, N0 8N403_3_05, _aq{ N0 8N403306, a foreign entity; LEXINGTON INSURANCE
A
I .59 U) ls I
'i
C) I H
t6
t7
l8
t9
20
2t
22
23
INSURANCE COMPANY, a Delaware corporation; ENDURANCE AMEzuCAN SPECIALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, A

ED,
a
24 25
New York
27 28
COMPANY, a Georgia company; and DOES 1 THROUGH 100, inblusive,

Defendants.
2 J 4
5
a
Landmark American Insurance Company (hereinafter ',Landmark,') and V/estchester Fire Insurance Company (hereinafter "Westchester"), defendants in the
above-styled matter, within the time prescribed by law and pursuant to 2S U.S.C. $$ 1441 and 1446 and Local Rule 3.7 of the United States District Court for the
District of
Atizona' file this notice of removal, respectfully showing the Court as follows:
1.
6 7
8
Plaintif The S Development Company d/b/aBell Tower Apartments (hereinafter "Bell Tower") and Presidio North L.P. (hereinafter "Presidio North") in the above-styled
9
10
matter have filed
complaint against Landmark, Westchester, and other various defendants in the Superior Court of the State of Arizona in and for the County of
Maricopa, which county is within the District of this
above and is numbered as Case No. CV2012-053591.
2
1l
I
o
'
court.l The lawsuit is styled
as
l2
l3
t4
ljE;' QDI
r 93 Eq ,r( v -3
I
t -l H: . J ro
slE8P
l nl
iB
of
In their first amended complaint, plaintiffs Bell Tower and presidio North have
raised claims of declaratory relief, breach of contract, and breach of the implied covenant
9l lrl
l5
16
a uo
E
of good faith and fair dealing. Plaintiffs

insurance
seek payment
!
o
for fwo commercial property
I7
18
t9
20
claims. Upon information and belief, plaintif have asserted an aggregate underpayment in excess of $650,000. The damages claimed in the lawsuit by each plaintiff separately and jointly exceed the sum or value of $75,000.00, exclusive of
interest and costs. Landmark and Westchester, however, do not concede that it is guilty any conduct that would warcantthe imposition of any damages alleged by plaintif.
3.
of
2t
22
23
24 25
Bell Tower is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Atizona, with its principal place of business located in paradise Valley, Arizona.
was filed
27 28
ell Tower
estchester
ance, Inc.
-2-
I
2
^ J
Presidio North is a limited partnership organi zed, andexisting under the laws of the State of Arizona, with its principal place of buqiness located paradise in valley, Arizona.
5.
4
5
6 7
8
Upon information and beliet all partners of Presidio North are citizens and residents of the State of Arizona. See Cefftcate and Agreement of Limited partnership
of Presidio North Limited Partnership

partners as citizens
attached as
Ex.
(listing general and limited
of
Arizona).2
6,
t0
o o
ll
l2
l3 t4
15
.!
i9!i
i
?: .,o ' Jri
>
El @X j- I l co
br l
?s
Landmark is a corporation organized, and existing under the laws of the State of oklahoma, with its principal place of business located in Atlanta, Georgia. At no time has Landmark been organized and existing under the laws of the State of Arizona,nor at any time has its principal place of business been located in the State of A zona.
7.
I 93
=lsii8 HI 3E t6 u)t
o
Westchester
is a
Commonwealth
of
corporation organized and existing under the laws of the Pennsylvania, with its principal place of business located
in
t7
18
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
under the laws of the State
At no time has Westchester been
organized and existing
of
Arizona, nor at any time has its principal place of business
t9
20
been located in the State of Arizona.

8
2l
22
23
Defendant Commercial Industrial Building owners Alliance, Inc. d/b/a CIBA

Insurance Services (hereinafter "CIBA") is a corporation organizedand existing under the laws of the State of California, with its principal place of business located in Glendale,
24 25
california. upon information and belief, at no time has CIBA
been orga nized, and
27 28
-3
I
2
J
existing under the laws of the state

business been located in the State of
of
Arizona, nor at any time has its principal place
of
Azona
9
4
5
Defendant certain underwriters at Lloyd's of London subscribing to policy nos.
6 7
I
9
N08N403300, N08N403301, N08N403305, and N08N403306 are foreign enriries, Upon information and beliet no individual or entity that has subscribed to the Lloyd,s of London policies are citizens and residents of the State of Arizona, are organi zed and, existing under the laws of the State of Arizona, or have their principal places of business
located in the State of Azona.
10.
l0
11
o o
Defendant Lexington Insurance company (hereinafter ,,Lexington,,)
I
.1 I
is
i9:i
I = 3l l
"3- l4 >IHi
' J e .
l ;i !E I sr
br
'=
l2
13
?q
!'?:---
si3
3E
s
R
l5 t6 t7
18
corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Delaware, with its principal place of business located in Boston, Massachusetts. Upon information and belief, at no time has Lexington been organizedand existing under the laws of the State of Atizona, nor at any time has its principal place of business been located in the
State
of
Arizona.
ll
Defendant Ironshore Insurance Limited (hereinafter "Ironshore,,) corporation' Upon information and belief, at no time has Ironshore been
existing under the laws of the state
business been located in the State of Arizona,
is a
foreign
t9
20
organized and place
of Arizona, nor at any time has its principal

t2
of
2t
22
23
24
25
its principal place of business located in Schaumburg, Illinois. Upon information and belief,
Defendant The Steadfast Insurance Company (hereinafter ,,Steadfast,,) corporation otganized and existing under the laws of the
State
is a
of Delaware, with
organized and existing under the laws

27 28
of the state of
Atizona, nor at any time has its principal place of business been located in the State of Arizona.
-4-
I
2
3
13.
4
5
Defendant Endurance American Specialty Insurance Company (hereinafter "Endurance") is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Delaware, with its principal place of business located in New york, New york.
Upon
6 7
8
information and beliet at no time has Endurance been organized and existing under the laws of the State of Arizona, nor at any time has its principal place
of business been
located in the State of Arizona,

14.
l0
n
o
Defendant Lancashire Insurance Company (UK) Limited (hereinafter "Lancashire") is a foreign corporation. Upon information and belief, at no time has
Lancashire been otganized and existing under the laws of the State of A rizona,nor at any time has its principal place of business been located in the State of A rizona.
15.
I
.!
l2
13
-EI .r I ca >{is
l1i
YI s
Efi
l4
l5
t6
Defendant Homeland Insurance Company of New York (hereinafter ,,Homeland,,)
dTSc:i
ADI
= l
Q)l
lsi3 '
3
E
3
t7
18
is a corporation organized' and existing under the laws of the State of New york, with its principal place of business located in Boston, Massachusetts. Upon information and belief at no time has Homeland been organizedand existing under the laws of the State of Atizona, nor at any time has its principal place of business been located in the
State
of
t9
20
Arizona.
16. The amount in controversy in this lawsuit exceeds the sum or value of $75,000.00, exclusive of interest and costs, and there is complete diversit y of citizenship between all plaintif and defendants. Accordingly, this case is subject to the original jurisdiction
2t
22
23
of
24
25
this Court under 28 U.S.C. 1332, and this case may be removed to this court pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. $$ 1441 and 1446.
27
28
Plaintiffs Bell Tower and Presidio North commenced this action against Landmark
and Westchester on April 3,2013, by filing their first amended complaint in the Superior
-5-
I
2 J 4
5
Court of the State
of
Arizona in and for the County of Maricopa. Landmark was served
with a copy of the summons and complaint on April 5,2013 by service upon the Arizona Department of Insurance. Westchester was served with a copy of the summons and
complaint on April 5,2013 by service upon the Arizona Department of Insurance.
18.
6 7
8
Pursuant to 28 U'S.C. $ 1446(b), this notice of removal is being filed within thirty
(30) days of service of plaintif Bell Tower and Presidio North's first amended complaint .Westchester. on Landmark and
19.
9 10
Attached to this notice of removal as Exhib
it "2" is a true and correct copy of
1t
9
.g
o o
plaintif Bell Tower and Presidio North's first amended complaint. Attached as Exhibit
l2
13
"3"
li
I n.3o I gS3
J d N
I ri li
IN
are all process, pleadings, and orders served upon Landmark and Westchester in this
case, as required by 28 U.S.C. $ 1446(a), together with all pleadings and other documents
t4
15
,z J 98.33 l?:.r I J g ,"

U)
c li
c) I
filed to date and counsel's verification, as required by Rule 3.7(b) of the Local Rules of the united states District court for the District of Arizona.
20.
I '
t6 t7
l8
I9
20
Defendants CIBA, Homeland, Endurance, Steadfast, Lexington, and Lloyd,s of London all consent to the removal of this case to federal court. 21.
2t
22
23
As of the date of this notice of removal, defendants Ironshore and Lancashire have not yet been served with the summons and complaint, as amended.
22.
24
25
Landmark and Westchester have given written notice of the filing of this notice of removal to plaintif Bell Tower and Presidio North by mailing a copy of this notice to their attorney of record, Peter J. Moolenaar, Esq., DIOGUARDI FLYNN LLp, 7001 N. cotts e Road, Suite 2060, Scottsdale , Arizona 95253
27 28
-6-
I
2
J
a
In compliance with 28 u.s,c. $ 1446(d), Landmark and westchester have given written notice of the filing of this notice of removal to the Clerk of the Superior Court,
Maricopa County, Arizona,2Ol West Jefferson Street, Phoenix, Arizonag5o03, a copy of which is attached to this notice of removal as Exhibit,,4,',
4
5
6 7
8
WHEREFORE, defendants Landmark American Insurance Company and Westchester Fire Insurance Company respectfully pray that the above-captioned lawsuit
be removed to the United States District Court for the District of Arizona.
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED thiS 3'U dAY Of MAY, 2013, SNELL & WILMER L.L.P
9 10
9
'5
o o
ll
t2
By : /s/Ian M. Fischer
4)
t in I --F >lsi: i3i I sEi = Hl 3s Qt) t

i
J eq c.'
l3 t4 l5 t6 t7
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
l8 l9
20
fa
DIOGUARDI FLYNN LLP 7001 North Scottsdale Road, Suite 2060 Scottsdale, Arizona 85253
Peter J. Moolenaar
2t
22
23
24 25
27 28
-7
I
2
J
Paul K. Schrieffer, Esq. BONNETT FAIRBOURN FRIEDMAN & Rena M. Stone, BALINT, PC P.K. S LLP 2325 East Camelback Road, Suite 300 100 North Barranca Ave, Suite 1100 Phoenix, Arizona 85016 West Covina, CA9I79I Jonathan Wallack, Esq.
ll
4
5
dant
ial Building Owners dlbla CIBA Insurance Services

6
N08N4033306
7
's of London 8N403300, , and
I
9 10
11
g
.g
Craig McCarthy, Esq. GUST ROSENFELD P.L.C. One East Washington Street, Suite 1600 Phoenix, Arizona 85004
Celeste A.
CLAUSEN MILLER P.C. 10 S. LaSalle Street Illinois 60603

e
Hill, Esq.
Insurance Company
o o
t2
lr
o IER *
l3 t4 l5
I6 t7
\-
H I
oi
I v>@o I frHg
E , -9
,
c.)
jgsiq
t?:.r I J g r,5
3
I U) le
H
Steven G Randy L. Kingery, RENAUD COOK D MESAROS PA One North Central, Suite 900 Phoenix, Arizona85004 com
Joann Selleck, Esq.
COZEN O'CONNOR 501 V/est B

San
S
ttornevs or H omela'nd Insurance Company of New York
Insurance Company
18
t9
20
2t
22
James K. Kloss LEV/IS BRISBOIS BISGAARD & SMITH LLP Phoenix Plaza Tower II 2929North Central Avenue, Suite 1700 Phoenix, Arizona 85012
Company
23
24
25
lsl Karen Prentice

17t04462.1
27 28
-8-
Exhbt I Certificate And Agreement Of Limited Prtnershp Of Presido l{orth Lmited Purtnershp
.-l
'
F
,
1,.,{ }.(,,1",
CER'IFICATE AND AGREEME*T OF LIMITED PARINERHIP pREsrDro N.RTH,,f,r.o pARrNERsr{r

p
Pursuant to
;:3i:?:1;
A'R'S' $ 29-308., the undersigned partners presidio North Limited p"''-"r'p, ro,'ei ,ii,r.," r"ws of or ,,'l," of Arizona, lil"ilil^rimiteJ
Arizona tmtJi
o"ral::?;e
of the limited partnershp is Presidio North Limited partnership, and
op"r",ion oleal""lL""l"^tral
service or
character of the busness of the partnership is the.acquist;on nd
pri""*"
IiXi:i:i,ot a. Address of the office:
tn"
partnership and the name and address or the asent ror
Presidio Norflr Limited partnership - "7 6402 East Cheney Paradise Valley, Arizona gS2S3
Drive
b.
Name and eddess of statutory agent:
Mark D. Dioguardi
& BALL, LTD. 2999 North 44th Street, Suite S0O Phoenix, Arizona g501g
4.
DIO^GUARDI, POLI
The name and business address of each partnr is as follows a General partnerl
Ilir,n.,ro^elopment companv, an Arizona corporation ("s

Paradi se Valley, Arizona 85253
b.
Lmitd partner: Pat Simone ("Simone,,) 6402 Easr Cheney Drive

Paradise Valley, A,rizona gS2S3
5'
::l jii],""iJ|f:s
a. b.
The amount of cash andlor descripton and statement of the agreed value o. contributed bv each p",tnei andtor which "*n"i has as,eed t.
"""n
S. Development - real property/rgreed value . $g,9OO.OO.

Simone - services/agreed value _ $1OO.OO.
6. The times at which or events on the happenirg contributions may be due are as follows:
As declared by the general partner.
of which
additional
7' A limited partner may grsnt the right to another to become an assignee of an, part of that limited partner's interest, an irre terms u"n of that power, are as {ollows
only upon the prior written consent of the general prtner on tenns and conditions acceptatrl to the general partner in its sole discretion.
"Jtions
I' The times at which or events on the happening of which a partner ma terminate his mernbership in the llmited partnershif -un . ,n" amount oi, or rnethod c determining the distrbuton in that event are as follows:
only upon the prior written consent of the general partner on ternrs and conditions cceptb, to the general partner in its sole discretion.
9' The general pattnor shallhave the right to receive distibutions of ninety-rrin, prcent (99%l of th property distrbuted, inctudng th lmted parrne/shp,
"r,-or
the followinnt:;^0,1J^lner
m8v have its initial or subsequent contributions returned ro it upo,
Upcn dissolution and liquidation of the partnership but only after all creditors having clairns against the dstributed assets have bean paid.
1 1' The limited partnershrp shall be dissolved and its affars wound up upon th, occurrence of the following evnts:
H3::.tH,i]'o?f:n"
sale and/or disposition r:r ar assets owned by the parrnership or
o,
The general partner eh,llhavs the exclusive right to mange the buginecc of tho l'mitod partnorship, nc s'trail exeui any and ail agreents, contractr, deeds, documents and instrumnts nocssary or convenient in onneio *ii'trirtr r.nanagomont ond operation or the limited partnership. THE
13'
8j
DEVELOPMENT COMPAN
Byr
PAT SIMONE
STATE OF ARIZONA
) )
County of Maricopa
ss.
The foreg oing instrument was subscribed and sworn to before me, tho unde rsigned notsfy public, this _SS* day of April, l ggg, by Q.r ( the \o./\-of I'he S D evelopment Company, on behalf the corporation.
Notary STATE OF ARIZONA

I
rc
t_
:1t,?11 tt
l/. Lii[R
cii.l\ ctriltY
!\ir:;rrt
tll,t' . Sta:e ol Anzole

.,!,
County of Maricopa
l
1
ss.
L;,,
:.fr -r,i;t,te\
^t"l
I l*6
Tho foregoing instrument was subscribed ond sworn to ' notafy public, ths - day of April, 1gg3 by pat imone.
bef ore me, the undersigned
My Commissinn Expires:
t\\
Notary
3/r{r/f, ffi ./rptl.doc
^r lllitl 'iii:R I
tJ ,r
.r
Ai
Lr.;.( ' Sl:6 ul An;Cvra
l.1Y
,)rr.. ''
tlrli
a.
rgs
ACCEPTANCE BY STATU ORY AGENT OF APPOINTMENT
North Limited Partnership, and do hareby corsent to act in that capaciiy until removal resignation is submitted in accordance with tire Arizona Revised statuts. ttATED: April
l. Mark D. Dioguardi, do hereby accept appointment as Statutory Agent for presidio

or
\-
., 1993.
Mark D.
DIOGUARDI, POLI &
LTD
2999 North 44th Street, Suite 500 Phoenix. Arizona 85018
3/ntt*.lllltrma/il!laCt, rcr
Ptuintils Bell To Frst Am
Exhbit 2
{orth's

Michael K Jeanes, Clclk *** Electronically Filed Kelle Dyer 4/3/2013 3r43:00 PM Filiug ID 5191856
1
Peter J. Moolenaar, Esq. (AZ SBN 024487) pmoolenaar@dioguardiflynn. com
2
3
DIOGUAR-DI F'LYNN LLP 7001 N. Scottsdale Road, Suite 2060

Scottsdale, Arizona 8525 3 Telephone: (480) 951 -8800 Facsimile: (480) 95 I "8824
A tt or neys
4
5
for
P I ant iJfs
7
8
IN TIIE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA IN AND F'OR THE COUNTY OF MARICOPA
THE S DEVELOPMENT COMPAIY dlb I a BELL TOWER APARTMENTS ; PRESIDIO NORTI{ L.P,, Plaintiffs, CASE NO, CV2012-053s91
9
10
1l
12
13
F'IRST AMENDED COMPLAINT

(Hon. Michael Gordon)
v COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL BUILDING O\MNERS ALLIANCE, INC,, a California corporation d/b/a CIBA INSURANCE SERVICES; CERTAIN LINDERV/RITERS AT LLOYD'S OF LONDON SUBSCRIBING TO POLICY NOS. N08N403300, N08N403301, N08NA03 305, and N08N403306 a foreign entity; LEXINGTON INSURANCE COMPANY, a Delaware oorporation; IRONSHORE INSURANCE LIMITED, a foreign entity; WESTCHESTER FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY, a Pennsylvania oorporation; THE STEADFAST INSURANCE COMPANY, a Delaware corporation; ENDURANCE AMERICAN SPECIALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, a New York corporation; LANCASHIRE INSURANCE COMPANY (I.JK) LIMITED, a foreign entity; HOMELAND YORK, a New York corporation; LANDM\RK AMERICAN
t4
15
16
17
18
l9
20
2T
22
23
24
25
26
28
D0082841/10110-003
2 3
INSURANCE COMPANY, a Georgia company; AND DOES I through 100, inclusive,

Defendants.
4
5
6 7
8
Plaintiffs the S Development Company dhlal Bell Tower Apartments

Presidio North L.P, for their First Amendod Complaint hereby allege as follows:
and
PARTIES
9 10
l,
("Be11
Plaintiff The S Development Company lbla Bell Tower
Apartments
Tower") is, and ras at all times relevant to this action, a corporation in good
1l
12
standing, operating and existing under the laws of the State of Arizona.
2.
Plaintiff Presidio North L.P. (;'Presidio North") is, and was at all times
l3 t4
15
relevant to this action, a limited partnership in good standing, operating and existing
the laws of the State of Arizona.
3,
Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and based thereon allege, that
I6 t7
18 19
Defendant CIBA Insurance Services ("CIBA") is now, and at all times relevant to this
action, a California coporation engaged in the business of insurance in tho State of

Anzona,
4.
Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and based thereon allege,
that
20
2L
Defendant Certain Underwriters at Lloyd's of London Subsoribing to Policy Nos. N08N403300, N08N403301, N08N403305, andN08NA03306 ("Lloyds") is a foreign
22
23
entity and/or entities comprised of varjous insutance companies, syndicates and/or

interssted underwriters engaged in the business of insurance in the State of Arizona.
24
25
Plaintiffs will seek leave of court to specify the companies, syndicates and/or interested
underwriters within the Lloyd's of London enterprise to the extent such specification is
appropriate,
26
5.
engaged
Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and based thereon aliege, that
Defendant Lexington Insuranoe Company ("Lexington")

28
is a Delaware corporation
in the business of insurance in the State of Arizona,

2
D0082841/10110-003
6.
Plaintif are informed and believe, and
based 'thereon allege, that
2
3
Defendant Ironshore Insurance Limited ("Ironshore") is a foreign entity engaged in the

business of insurance in the State of Arizona.
4
5
7.
Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and based thereon allege, that
Defendant Westchester Fire Insurance Company ("'Westchester") is a Pennsylvania

corporation engaged in the business of insurance in the State of Ar izona.
6 7
8
8.
that
Defendant Steadfast Insurance Company ("Steadfast")

engaged in the business of insurance in the State of Arizona.
is a
Delaware corporation
l0
11
9.
that
Defendant Endurance American Specialty Insurance Company ("Endurance") is a New
12 13 14
15
York corporation engaged in the business of insurance in the State of Arizona.
10.
Plaintiffs ae informed and believe, and based thereon allege,
that
Defendant Lancashire Insuranoe Company (UK) Linited ("Lancashire") is a foreign entity engaged in the,business of insuranoe in the State of Arizona.
16
11.
Plaintiffs are informed and believe, and based thereon alloge,
that
t7
18 19
Defendant Homeland Insurance Company of New York ("Homeland') is a New York corporation engaged in the business of insurance inthe State of Arizona,
L2.
that
20
2T
Defendant Landmark American Insurance Company ("Landmark")

corporation engaged in the business of insurance in the State of Arizona,
is a Georgia
22
23
13.
Defendant Does 1 through 50 are persons, corporations or other entities
which are authorized to do and do business in the State of Arizona as insurers, The true identities of Does
24 25 26 27
28
through 50 are currently unknown to Plaintiffs. Plaintiffs therefore
pray for leave to amend this cornplaint to assert the proper names of each such insurer
when their identities are discovered.
or entities which reside or are authorized to do and are doing business in the State of
Anzona. Each of Does

D008284r/10110-003
5l
through 100 was the managerial agent, employee,

3
I
2
3
predeoessor, successor, join-venturer, co-conspirator, alter ego ad/or representative
of
one or more of the other defendants named herein or identified as Does 1 through 50, and acted with the permission , authorization and/or ratifioation and consent of the other defendants.
4
5
15.
Plaintiffs are informed, believe, and theeon allege that each fictitiously
6 7
8
narned defendant was in some way responsible for, participated in, or oontributed to the matters that Plaintiffs'complain of, and has legal responsibility for those matters.
16.
17
Defendants have caused events to occur in Maricopa County out of which
9 10
this action arises.
Jurisdiction and venue are proper in this Court,
l1
L2
13
TIIE POLICIES
18, 19.
coverage
During the period of 2006 to 20L1, Plaintiffs were insurod by and through
CIBA for, among other things, liability and property damage,
t4
15
Upon information and belief, CIBA refers to the policies/insurance purchased by Plaintiffs during the period of March 31, 2008 to March 31,
During the period of March 31, 2008 to March 31, 2009, CIBA issued
16
2009 as the CIBA-BASIC Residential Program.
t7
18
19
20,
evidenoes of property insurance indicating Plaintiffs were insureds under the CIBA-
BASIC Residential Program.
20
27
Upon information and belief, during the period of March 31, 2008 to March 3L, 2009, CIBA reinsured, coinsured, and./or delegated certain of its insurer
obligations and duties owed
2I.
to Plaintiffs to,
among others, Defendants Lloyds,
22
23
Lexington, Ironshore, Westchester, Steadfast, Endurance, Lancashire, Homeland, and Landmark.
24
25
22.
Upon information and belief, CIBA is named as an insured under Lloyd's
of London Policy Nos. N08N403300, N08N403301, N08N403305, and N08N403306
26
28
D008284r/10r 10-003
23.
Polices").
Upon information and belief, CIBA is named as an insured under
2
3
Lexington Insurance Company Policy Nos. 8756844 and 8756845 ("Lexington
4
5
24. 25, 26. 27,
Upon information and belief, CIBA is named as an insured under Upon information and belief, CIBA is named as an insurod
P
Ironshore Insurance Limited Policy No, N08N403300 ("lronshore Policy''). under
6 7
8
Westchester Poli cy No. D3 6 I 1 2 323002 ("Westchester
olicy").
Upon information and belief, CIBA is named as an insured under The
9
10
11
Steadfast Insurance Company Polioy No. XPP9258968-01 ("Steadfast Policy").
Upon information and belief, CIBA is named as an insured undet
Endurance American Specialfy Insurance Company Policy No. CPN10000865100

("Endurance Polioy").
T2 13
t4
15
Upon information and belief, CIBA is named as an insured under Lancashire Insurance Company (UK) Limited Policy Nos. N08N403305 and
N08NA03306 ("Lancashire Policies").
28.
T6
17
18
Upon information and belief, CIBA is named as an insured under Homeland Insurance Company of New York Policy Nos. YSP0943 and YSP0947
("Homeland Policies"),
29.
t9
20
2T
30. 31.
Upon information and belief, CIBA is named as an insured
under
Landmark American Insurance Company Policy No. LHD4I4478 ("Landmark Polioy"),
Upon inforrnation and belief, Plaintiffs are insured and have rights and
remedies under the CIBA-BASIC Residential Program, Lloyds Policies, Lexington
22
23
Policies, Ironshors Po1ioy, Westohester Policy, Steadfast Policy, Endurance Policy,

Lancashire Policies, Homeland Policies, and Landmark Policy, and Defendants have
24
25
duties and obligations to Plaintiffs, including without limitation the duty to timely
process and adjust Plaintiffs' respective claims and to indemnify and pay
all sums
26
which Plaintiffs incurred or became obligated to pay as a result of the damage to their
respeotive properties during the effective coverage
28
D0082841/10110-003
32.
Upon information and betief, as part of their agrecments with CIBA,

Lancashire,
2 3
Lloyds, Lexington, Ironshore, Westchester, Steadfast, Endurance,
4
5
Homeland, and Landmark agreed that any claims under the Lloyds Policies, Lexington .Westchester Polioy, Steadfast Policy, Enduranoe Polioy, Polioies, Ironshore Policy, Lanoashire Policies, Homeland Policies, and Landmark Policy would be adjusted on behalf of Defendants by Claims Adjusting Group, a wholly owned subsidiary of CIBA.
6 7
8
33,
Plaintiffs performed each respective covenant and/or condition which on
their part must be performed
in
order
to
obtain insuranoe coverage and/or
9 10
indemnification undor Defendants' policies referenced above or have been exoused from doing so as a result of Defendants' breach of their insurance agreements, including
1l
their failure to timely inspect, prooess, and adjust the Presidio North Claim and Bell
Tower Claim, as defined below, and indemnify Plaintiffs.
t2
t3
L4 15,
PRESIDIq NoRl!-I APABTMENTS
34, 35.
On or about May 2008 through November 2008, termite damage
was
discovered throughout the properby commonly known as Presidio North Apartments.
l6
t7
18
The termites oaused property damage to, among other things, support
columns, support beams, glu lam beams, balcOnios, patio fences,, porches, walkways,
stairoases, stair railings, fasoias,
belly bands, electrical boxes, plywood and roofing
19
throughout the Presidio North Apartment property,
20
36,
37. 38,
damage,
On or about November 2008, Presidio North tendered a claim for
the
2l
22
23
damage to Defendants (the "Presidio North Claim").
Upon information and belief, the Presidio North Claim has been assignod
claim number RP08-192 by Defendants-
Due to substantial safety oonoerns as a resuit of, and to mitigate, the
24
25
property damage, Presidio North engaged engineers, contractors and trades to repair the
26
39
the
additional property damago was discovered
affecting most of the buildings at the Presidio North Apattments

28
D0082841/101 10-003
40,
41. 42,
North Claim.
The additional damage was repaired to ensure the safety of the tenants and
2
3
mitigate the risk of additional damage.
All repairs were done in a workmanlike manner with like materials.

Defendants deiayed and failed to timely investigate and adjust the Presidio
4
5
6 7
43. Defendants did not inspect the property damage for several months
following Presidio North's tender of its olaim.
I
9 10
11
44. 45,
As a result of Defendants' delay in investigating and adjusting the claim,
plaintiff was forced to incur costs to investigate, adjust, and repair the property damage.
Defendants,
by and through Mr. Chris
Oberhaus,
initially informed
Presidio North that the property damage was not covered under Defendants'polioies'
"12
13
46.
Subsoquently, Mr. Oberhaus informed Presidio North that Defendants'
policies provided coverage for the property damage and that an insurance adjuster would inspect and adjust the damage to the property'
r4
15
47. 4g.
Three
to four months later, Mr. Jff
Guildbault
of VeriClaim, [nc.
16 17
18
inspeoted the property on behalf of Defendants'
Despite presidio North's continuous efforJs to provide information to Mr.
investigation Guildbault, upon information and belief, VeriClaim did not complete its
and adjustment of the Presidio North Claim'
19
20
49.
Upon information and belief, VeriClaim forwarded its documentation and
2t
22
23
findings to Defendants in eatly 2010.
50,
51. 52.
Upon information and belief, to date, Defendants have not
processed
VeriClaims' findings,
Upon information and belief, to date, Defendants have not investigated,
24
25
processed, or adjusted the Presidio North Claim'
To date, Defendants have not provided Presidio North with a coverage
27
28
damage at the oosts incurred to investigate, adjust, mitigate and repair the property Presidio North APartments.
D0082841/101 10403
I
2
3
BELL TOWER
53,
54.
On or about Novembor 2008, termite <lamage was discovered throughout

wood The termites caused property damage to, among other things,
the property commonly known as the Bell Tower Apartments'
4
5
6 7
8
Apartments' framing, wood molding and stucco throughout the Bell Tower Defendants Bell Tower timely tendered a claim for the property damage to
55.
("8e11Tower Claim").
56.
assigned Upon information and belief, the Bell Tower claim has been
olaim number RP08-285 by Defendants'
10
11
57, Defendants
Tower Claim.
Bell delayed and failed to timely investigate and adjust the
t2
13
58.
Sg.
ultimately, Defendants, by and through Mr. Jeff Guildbault of vericlaim'

the Due to substantial safety concerns as a result of, and to mitigate,
inspected the property damage at the Bell Tower Apartments'
t4
15
16
rcpair the damage' property damage, Bell Tower engaged oonhactors and ades to All repairs wele done in a workmanlike mann with like materials'
t7
18
60. 61.
upon information
and belief,
to date, Defendants have not investigated,
processed or adjusted the Bell Tower Claim'
19
62.
costs
To date,
Defendants have not provided Bell Tower with
oovelage
20
2l
22
23
for the substantial determination and has not indemnified or reimbursed Beli Tower damage at the Bell insurred to inves figate,adjus! mitigate and repair the property
Tower Apartments.
FIRST CAUSE OF ACTIQN

DeclaratorY Retief
A.R.S. $$ 12-1831, et seq. all of
the allegations contained in Paragraphs
1.
24
25
26 27
28
through 62 of this Complaint'
D0082841/101 l0-003
I
2
3
64.
As set forth above, Defendants, among other things, agreed to investigate,
pfocess, adjust, and indemnify Plaintiffs as to any claims on acoount of property in the insurance damage caused by an occurence falling within the coverage, as defined policies referenced above.
4
5
65.
plaintiffs were forced to inour investigative, loss, repair, mitigation, and
6 7
8
adjustment fees, costs and expenses as a result
of property
damage caused
by
an
ocoufionce falling within the coverage, as deftned in the insurance policies referenced
above.
66.
An aotual controversy exists between Plaintiffs and Defendants regarding
l0
11
Defendants' obligations to indemnify and/or reimburse Plaintiffs for fees, costs and expenses incurred by them to investigato, mitigate, repair, and adjust their respective
claims.
L2
13
67. A declaatory judgment
is
neoessary and appropriate
to determine
the
14 15 16 17 18
rights and duties of the Partis under the insurance policies referenced abovo, 6g. A dispute has arisen between Plaintiffs and Defendants in that Plaintiffs
oontcnd that: had a duty to timely investigate, pocess, and adjust Plaintiffs'
a. Defendants
claims
l9
20
b.
Defendants are obligated to
fully indemnify and/or reimburse Plaintiffs
for all amounts they expended, or are currently obligated to expend, for repair, loss,
adjustment, and mitigation of their respective claims'
2l
22 23 24 25 26
c. Defendants acted in bad faith in failing

adjust Plaintiffs' respective claims.
to timely iuvestigate, process, and
d.
Defendants acted in bad faith
in failing to indemnify and/or reimburse
plaintiffs for all amounts they expended, or are currently obligated to expond, for repair,
los, adjustment, and mitigation of their respective claims'
69.
plaintiffs ars informed and believe that Defendants dispute each of
28
plaintiffs' oontentions as stated above. An actual controversy exists between Plaintiffs and Defendants regarding these contentions. A declratory judgment is therefore
D0082841/101 10403 9
necessaly and appropriate to detennine the rights and duties of the Parties under the
insurance polioies,
2
3
WHERBFORE, Plaintiffs request judgment against Defendants as follows
4
5
1. For a declaration determining

Defendants under the terms
deolaration that:
the rights and obligations between Plaintiff and
of the
insurance policies at issue herein including a
7
8
a. b.
Defendants had a duty
to timely investigate, process, and adjust
Plaintiffs' respective claims;

Defendants had a duty to indemnify and/or reimburse Plaintiffs for
9 10
11
all amounts they expended, or are currently obligated to expend, for the repair, loss,
adjustment, and mitigation of their respective olaims;
t2
13
2,
For attorneys' fees and costs inoured in bringing this action; and
as this Court may deem
3. For all such other and furrer relief
just
and proper.
T4
SECOND CAUSE OT'ACTION Breach of Contract
l5
16 17 18
70.
Plaintiffs repeat,reallege, and inoorporate by this reference each and all of
the allegations conained in Paragraphs 1 through 69 of this Cornplaint,
71,. Plaintiffs
Defendants' breaoh
have performed each and every covenant and/or condition of
t9
20
Defendants' insurance policies or have been excused from so performing as a result of
of their insurance agreements, including its failure to timely
2t
22 23
investigate, process, and adjust Plaintffs' respeotive claims and indemnify and/or
reimburse Plaintiffs.
72,
Defendants, among other things, agreed
or are otherwise required
to
investigate, process, adjust, and indemnify Plaintiffs as to any claims on account of
24
25
property damage caused by an occurrence falling within the coverage of Defendants'

insuranoe policies
with Plaintiffs.
26
27 28
investigation and adjustment of Plaintiffs' claims.
D0082841/101 10-003
10
74.
As a result of Plaintif' claims, eash Plaintiff was required to incur loss,
2
3
adjustment, repair, and investigative costs because of property damage caused by an

occurrence falling within the coverage of Defendants' insuranoe polioies with Plaintiffs.
4
5
75,
Defendants breached the insurance policies by, among other things, failing
to timely investigate, process, and adjust Plaintiffs' respective claims and by failing to
indemnify and reimburse Plaintiffs for all amounts incurred to investigate, adjust,
mitigate and repair the proporty damage.
7
8
76,
Defendants, through their officers, agents and/or employees, have refused
9 10
11
and continue to refuse to indemnify and/or reimburse Plaintiffs for their respective costs
incurred to investigate, adjust, mitigate and repair the property damage,

77
As a direct and proximate result of Defendants' breaoh of their contractual
L2
13
duties, Plaintiffs have incurred substantial costs in investigating, adjusting, mitigating

and repairing the property damage, and other oosts and exponses
the
in an amount within
14 1s 16
jurisdictional limits of this Court, according to proof.
78, , Plaintiffs are entitled to recover all of their respeotive damages as

referenced in the above paragraphs, and other damages according to proof, with interest thereon,
t7
18
79.
Plaintiffs are entitled to recover their attorneys' fees and costs inourred in
t9
20
21
tlris matter pursuant to A,R,S. $$ 72-341, 34I.01, and the insurance agreements
referenced herein,
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs request judgment against Defendants as follows:
22
23
1.
2. 3. 4.
For compensatory damages in excess of the minimum jurisdictional limits
of this Court an according to proof;
For attorneys' fees and incuned in bringing this aotion;

For oosts incurred in bringing this action; and
24
25
For all such other and further relief
as
this Court may deem just and proper,
26 27
28
D0082841/10r l0-003
11
I
2
3
THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION

Breach of the Implied Covenant of Good F'aith and Fair Dealing
80,
81.
above.
Plaintiffs repeat, reallege, and incorporate by this reference each and all
4
5
contained in Paragraphs
I through
79 of this Complaint.
Defendants, at all material times, had a duty to act fairly and in good faith
6 7
8
with Plaintiffs in canying out it responsibilities under the insurance policies referred to
82,
Pursuant
to the insurance policies referenced above, Defendants
have
implied obligations
to
promptly and reasonably investigate, Process, and adjust
l0
11
Plaintif' claims and to make rrasonable coverage decisions,
83.
following:
Plaintiffs allege on information and belief that Defendants breached their
l2
13
obligations to act fairly and
in good faith toward Plaintiffs by one or more of
the
t4
15
a. Failing to conduct
Piaintiffs' respective claims;
reasonable, prompt and unbiased investigations into
L6
b. Delaying and/or failing to reach a decision as to whethet to indemnify

and/or reimburse Plaintiffs for their respective olaims;
t7
l8
1,9
c.
Plaintiffs;
Intentionally, or with callous disregard
of the rights of its insureds,

to
ignoring andlor disregarding information/documentation establishing obligations

20
2t
22
23
d, Delaying andlor failing to make any offer of payrnent toward the indemnification or reimbursement of Plaintif' respeotive costs incurred in
investigating, adjusting, mitigating and repairing the propetty damage;
e. Taking the above-described
aotions for the purpose of forcing Plaintiffs to
24
25
forgo the benefts to which they are entitled;
f:
Ignoring correspondence, requests, and information presented by
27 "28
D0082841/101 10-003
12
g,
Taking the actions referenced in subparagraphs (a) through
(f)
above
as
)
3
part of a systematio and deliberate soheme to withhold insuranoe policy benefits that
otherwise be due to Plaintiffs.
4
5
84.
Plaintiffs are also informed and believe that the respeotive offcers, agents
and/or employees of Defendants participated in, authorized, and/ot ratified the wrongful conduct of Defendants as alleged herein.
6 7
8
85. As a direct and proximate result of Defendants' bad faith oonduct,

have incuned substantial costs
in
investigating, adjusting, mitigating, and
9 10
repairing the property damage, and other costs and expenses
in an amount within
the
jurisdiotional limits of this Court, according to proof,
l1 t2
13
86. Plaintiffs are entitled to recover all of their respective damages as refeenoed il the abovo paragtaphs, and other damages according to proof, with interest
thereon,
t4
15 L6
87.
Plaintiffs are entitled to recover their attomeys' fees and costs incurred in
this mater pursuant to A.R,S. $$ t2-341, 341.01, and the insurance agreements
referonced herein.
t7 l8
19
88.
The above desoribed conduct of Defendants have been and continues to be
unreasonable, capricious, and arbittary, and oonstitutes a breach of the covenant of good
faith and fair dealing contained in the insurance policies referred to abovo.
20
89.
Upon information rd belief, the above desoribed oonduot of Defendants
2l
22 23
was aggravated, outrageous, malicious and engaged in by Defendants with an evil

motive and a conscious awareness and disregard of the needs and rights of Plaintiffs and
each of Defendants' obligations under the insuranoe policies, so as to justify an award
of punitive and exemplary damages,

24
25
90,
Upon information and belief, Defendants' acts as described in the above
Paragraphs constitute a systematic scheme to improperly, unfairly and unreasonably deprive its policyholders, such as Plaintiffs, thebenefits of insurance coverage to which they are entitled,
26
28
D0082841/101 10-003
13
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs request judgnreut agairrst Defendants as follows:
)
3
1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
For compensatory damages in excess of the minimunt jurisdictiorral limits
this Court and according to proof;

For attorneys' fees incured in bringing this action; For punitive and exemplary daurages; For costs iucured in bringing thi.s action; and For all fruther relief as this Court may deem just and proper.
4
5
6 7
I
9
DATED this 3'd day of April, 2013.
DIOGUARDI FLYNN LLP
r0
11
72
Peter J.
, Esq,
t3
I4
15 l('
l7
18
t9
20
2l
22
23
24
t\
26
28
D0082841/101 10-003
T4
Exhibit 3 Verifiction of lun Fischer; AA Pleadings And Other Documents

o a o o
I
2 J 4
5
a
(ASB #013874) Amy M. Sam sB #02623e) Ian M. F ischer L.L.P SNELL & One Arizona Center 400 E. Van Buren, Suite 1900 Phoenix, Arizona 85004-2202
Telephone
Facsimile: 602.382.607 E-Mail
: 602.382.6000
0
com w.com
6
7
8
Attornevs for D Landmrk American Insurance Company & Westchester Fire Insurance Company
9 10
11
a
.g
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA THE S DEVELOPMENT COMPANY DBA BELL TOWER APARTMENTS; PRESIDIO NORTH LP, Plaintif,
VS.
No. (Maricopa County Superior Court Cas No. CV2012-05359)
t2 l3 t4 l5 t6
t7
18
ti ()
.
l I eS
oiE.-9 . iLo N
sie
,z
o
U)
H
j9B3E
3E I ls
o
VERIFICATION OF IAN F'ISCHER
I ?: I r g i:
t9
20
COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL BUILDING OWNERS ALLIANCE, INC., a California corporation dba CIBA INSURANCE SERVICES ; CERTAIN TINDER\MRITERS AT LLOYD'S OF LONDON SUBSCRIBING TO POLICY NOS. NO8NAO33OO, N08N40330 1, N08N403305, and N08N403306, a foreign entity; LEXINGTON INSURANCE COMPANY, a Delaware R
Pennsylvania corporation; THE STEADFAST INSU.ANCE CMPANY, a DelawaTe corporation; ENDURANCE AMERICAN
2l
22
23
24
25
SPECIALTY INSI'RANCE COMPANY, A CASHIRE New York LIMITED, C INS CE foreign entity; HO COMPANY OF NEW YORK, a New York
LANDMARK AMERICAN
26 27
company; and DOES inclusive,
I THROU
100,
Defendants. 28
I
2 J
a
I, Ian Fischer, veriff as follows:
l.
associate
I am an active
member in good standing of the State Bar
of
Arizona and an
with the law f,rrm of Snell & Wilmer,L.L.P., counsel of record for Landmark
4
5
American Insurance Company and'Westchester Fire Insurance Company. I have firsthand knowledge of the matters set forth herein. I submit this verif,rcation pursuant to L.R. Civ.
6
7
8
P.3.7 and Fed. R. Civ. P. I l.
2.
Attached to this verification are all pleadings and other documents that were
previously filed with the state court in the civil action originally commenced in the
Superior Court of the State of Arizona, in and for the County of Maricopa, styled as above
and is numbered as Case No. CV20l2-053591.
9
10
11
I veriff that the foregoing is true and correct.

Executed this 3'd day of May,2013, at Phoenix, Arizona. s/Ian Fischer Ian Fischer
t7 104703.1
l2
l3
I4
15
>Igii ' - rO;.r i ^^ i:: c)l =lsi3 I

,
r
;+ lgt"3-
9l trl
ifi
UDI
I6
.3
t7 t8
T9
20
2t
22
23
24
25
27 28
--2--
).17:
Peter J. Moolenaar (State Bar No. 024487) pm ool enaar@di oguardifl Ynn.com
2
3
DIOGUARDI 'LYNN LLP 7001 N. Scottsdale Road, Suite 2060

Scottsdale, Arizona 85253 Tetephone: 480-95 1 -8800 Facsimile: 480-95 I -8824
4
5
A t to r n ey s fo
P I aint
ilfs
6 7
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA
I
9
IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF *f+f9t'DEVELOPMENT COMPANY d/b/a BELL TOV/ER APARTMENTS; PRESIDIO NORTH L.P., THE
S
Case No.
bzse\
l0
lr
t2
PLAINTIFFS' CERTIFICATE OF
COMPULSORY ARBITRATION
Plaintiffs,
v,
l3
l4
l5
16
COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL BUILDING OWNERS ALLIANCE, INC. d/b/a CIBA INSURANCE SERVICES; DOES I through 100, inclusive,
Defendants.
l7
18
l9
20
Undersigned counsel certifies that he knows the dollar limits and any other Iimitations set forth by the local rules of practice for the Maricopa County Superior
2t
22 23
Court, and further certifies that this oase is not subject to compulsory arbihation, provided by Rules 72 through 76 of the Arizona Rules of Civil Prooedure,
day of JulY,2012
as
24
DATED this
13th
26
27 28
By
z
Peter J. Moolenaar, Esq, Plaintffi Attorneys
D0074344/l 0l I 0-003
.i
I
1
2
3
ORJGINAL of the foregoing Filed with the Clerk of the Court this l3th day of July,2012.
4
5 6
By:
7
8
9 10
1l
12 13
t4
15
I6
t7
l8
l9
20
2t
22 23 24 25
27
28
D0074344/10t r0-003
IICHAEL
Clerk
t'
Peter J. Moolenaar, Esq, (AZ SBN 024487) pmoolenaar@dio guardi flYnn-com
of
Bv
K. JTANES the 9uperior Court

TLEe 1219:5(
2
3
DIOGUARDI FLYNN LLP 7001 N. Scottsdale Road, Suite 2060

Scottsdale, Arizona 85253
hscrtlon 0120u-0ffi91 301.m ct(lll Mt fflflnlil --msEH

TOTfiL
Dde
fi/lr/flU
ffiian $i, Ifli

An^nt
flfifiI
ilt.m
4
5 6
Tclephone; (480) 95 1-8800 Facsimile: (480) 95 1'8824
RueiPt f;/i,EI
for Plaintffi
7
8
IN TIIE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA
IN A\D FOR THE COUNTY OF MARICOPA

THE DEVELOPMENT COMPANY d/b/a BELL TOV/ER APARTMENTS; PRESIDIO NORTH L.P.,
S
I
l0
CASE NO.
CV2A12*CS 3591
COMPLAINT FOR:
ll
l2
I3
Plaintiffs,
l4
l5
r6
r7
18
COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL BUILDiNG OWNERS ALLIANCE, INC. d/b/A CIBA INSURANCE SERVICES; DOES I through 100, inclusive,
Defendants,
AND FAIR DEALING
Jury Trial Requested
l9
20
Plaintiffs The S Development Company dlb/a Bell Tower Apartments

Presidio North L'P' hereby allege as follows:
and
2l
)J
23
PARTfES
Development company dJbla Bell Tower Apartments corporation in good (..Bell Tower") is, and was and at all timos relevant to this aotion, a operating and existing under the laws of the State of Arizona'
1.
Plaintiff The
24
25
standing,
North'
27 28
is and was
at all times
operating and existing relevant to this action,. a limited partnership in good standing, undei the laws of the State of Arizona.
D0073493
3,
plaintiffs are informed and believe, and based thereon alloge, that
)
3
Defendant Commercial Industrial Building Owners Alliance, lnc, dlbla CIBA Insurance
ces (,,CIBA")
is now, and at all times relevant to this action, a
California
4
5
corporation duly authorized to do business as an insurance compary in the State of Arizona.
6
7
8
4.
Defendants Does
though 50 are persons, corporations or other entities
which are authorizedto do and do business in the State of Arizona as insurers, Th true
identities of Doos 1 through 50 are cunently unknowrt to Plaintiffs, Plaintiffs therefore pray for leave to amend this complaint to assert the proper names of each suoh insuer
when their identities are discovered.
9 10
l1 t2
13
5.
Defendants Does 51 through 100 are persons, corporations
or
other
entities which reside or are authorized to do and are doing business in the State of
Arizona. Each of Does 5l through 100 was the managerial agent,

one or more of the other defendants named herein or identified as Does
and acted
employee,
14
15
predecesso, successor, joint-venturer, co-conspirator, alter ego and/or representative of
through 50,
16
with the perrnission, authorization and/or ratification and consent of the other Plaintiffs are informed, believe, and thereon allege that each fictitiously in some way responsible for, participated in, or contributed to the
t7 t8 t9
20
defendants,
6.
named defendant was
rnatters that Plaintiffs complain of, and has legal responsibility for tho.se matters,
2t
22
7, 8.
Defendants have caused events to occur in Maricopa County out of which
this action arises.
)1
24
25
Jurisdiction and venue are proPer in this Court'
PRESTpIO NORTI{ APARTMENTS
27 28
discoveed throughout the property commonly known as Presidio North Apartments.
D00't3493
I
2
porches' walkways' beams, baloonies, patio fences, colurnns, support beams, glu lam roofing belly bands, electrioal boxes' plywood and staircases, stair railings, fascias,
l0.Thetermitescausedpropertydamageto'amongotherthings'support
4
5
throughoutthoPresidioNorthApartmontproperty'
ll.OnoraboutNovember200s,PresidioNorthtenderedaclaimforthe
propertY damage to CIBA'
6 7
I
9
12,Uponinformationandbelief,thePresidioNorthclaimhasbeenassigned olaim number RP08-192 bY CIBA' and to mitigate, the 13, Due to substantial safety concems as a result of,
l0
t1
trades to repair the engaged engineers, contractors and North Presidio damage, property
damage.
t2
13
l4
affeotirrg most
Throughouttherepairprocess'additionalproPertydamagewasdiscovered Apartments' of the buildings at the Presidio North
r4
15.Theadditionaldamagewasrepairedtoensurethesafetyofthetenants
damage' and mitigate the risk of additional
l5 I6
t7.
18
T9
l6.Allrepairswerodoneinaworkmanlikemannerwithlikematerials.
17.
claim.
and adjust Presidio North's CIBA delayed and failod to timely investigate
18'CIBAdidnotinspectthepropertydamageforseveralmonthsfollowirtg
Presidio North's tender of its clairn'
20
2l
22 23
19'AsaresultofClBA,sdelayininvestigatingandadjustingtheclaim,
property damage' invostigate, adjust' and repair the Plaintiff was forced to inour costs to
20,CIBA,byandthroughMr.Chrisoberhaus,initiallyinformedPresidio
under the CIBA policies' North that property damage was not oovered
24
26
2l,subsequently,Mr.oberhausinformedPresidioNor,ththatthe200sCIBA policy did provide coverage for the proporty

wouldinspectandadjustthedamagetotheproperty
2'l
28
D0073493
I
2 3
ZZ. 23.
Three to four months later, Mr. Jeff Guildbault of Vericlaim inspected the
property on bhalf of CIBA,
to Mr, Despite presidio North's oontinuous efforts to provide information
4
5
Guildbault, upon information and beliof, Vericlaim did not complete its investigation
and adjustment of the claim'
6
7
24: 25,
findings,
Upon information and belief Vericlaim forwarded its documentation and Upon information and belief, to date, CIBA has not processed Veriolaim's
findings to CIBA in earlY 2010.
I
9
r0
11
26,
Upon information and belief, to date, CIBA has not investigated,
processed, or adjusted Presidio North's claim'
12
27. To date, CIBA has not provided Presidio North with a coverage
for the substantial determination and has not indemnified or reirnbursed Presidio North property damage- at the costs incurred to investigate, adjust, mitigate and repair the
Presidi o North APartments.
I3
14 15
l6
t7
pELL,TOWER
Zg. 29. 30. 31. lZ.

claim.
On or about November 2008, terrnite damage was discovered throughout
l8
t9
20
21
the property conrmonly known as the Bell Tower Apartments.
The termites caused Property damage to, among other things, wood
Bell Tower timely tendered a claim for the property damage to CIBA' Uon information and belief, the Bell Tower claim has been assigned
framing, wood molding and stucco throughout thE Bell Tower Apartmonts'
22 23
claim numberRP0S-285 bY CIBA.
24
25
CIBA detayed and failed to timely investigate and adjust Bell Tower's
ultimately, CIBA, by and through Mr, Jeff Guildbault of Vericlaim,
26
27 28
33.
inspected the property damage at the Bell Tower Apartments.
D0073493
34. 35. 36.
Due to substantial safety concerns as a result of, and to mitigate, the
2
3
property damage, Bell Tower engaged contractors and trades to repair the damage'
4
5
All repars were done in a workmanlike rnanner with like materials, Upon information and belief, to date, CIBA has not investigated,
processed or adjusted Bell Tower's claim.
37. To date, CIBA has not provided Bell Tower with a coverage
determination and has not indemnified or reimbursed Bell Tower for the substantial
costs incurred to investigate, adjust, mitigate and ropair the proporty damage at the Bell
7
8
Tower Apartments,
l0
THE POLICIES
ll
l2
l3
38. 39, 40. 41.
During the period of 2006 to 201I Plaintiffs were insured by and through
CIBA for, among other things, liability and property damage,
Plaintiffs provided timely notice
of the damage to their
respective
l4
15
properties to CIBA.
CIBA assigned olaim number RP08-192 for the Presidio North claim and
t6
t7
claim number RP08-285 for the Bell Tower claim'
Upon information and belief, Plaintiffs are insured for the
respective
l8
property damage under oertain policies with CIBA, and CIBA is obligated to indemnify
and pay all sums which Plaintiffs incurred or became obligated to pay as a result of the
l9
20
damage
to their respective properties during the effective coverage period of

Plaintif performed
the
2l
7)
z5 24
25
2
insurance policies.
42.
eaoh respective oovenant and/or condition which on
their part must be performed
in
order
to
obtain insurane coverage and/or
indemnification under the CIBA policies referenced above or have been excused from
doing so as a result of CIBA's breach of its insurance agreements, including its failure
27
28
/t
ll
D0073493
5
I
2
3
FI4.SF,
pAIrsE oF AcrroN
DeclaratorY Relief
A.R.S. $$ l2-1831, et seq.
4
5
43. 4,
,
plaintiffs repeat, reallege, and incoorate by this reference each and all of
the allegations contained in Paragraphs 1 through 42 of this Complaint'
6 7 8
As set forth above, CIBA, among other things, agreed to investigate, adjust, and indemnify Plaintiffs as to any claims on account of property
within the ooverage, as defined in the insurane
darnage caused by an occurrence falling

pol icies referenced above'
t0
1l
45.
plaintiffs were forced to incur investigative, loss, repair, mitigation,
and
adjustment fees, oosts and expenses as a result
of property
damage oaused by an
t2
referenced occurrence falling within the coverage, as defined in the insurance policies above.
l3
l4
l5
t6
L7
46, An actual controversy exists between Plaintiffs and CIBA regarding

CIBA's obligarions to indemnify and/or reimburse Plaintiffs for fees, costs
claims.
and
expenses incurred by them to investigate, mitigate, repair, and adjust their respective
t8
47'. A declaratory judgment
is nocessary and appropriate to determine the
l9
20
rights and duties of the Parties under the insurance policies referenced abovs.
48. A dispute has arisen between Plaintiffs and CIBA in that Plaintif
contend that:
2t
22
a.. b,
SIBA had a duty to timely investigate, process, and
adjust
)a
24
25
Plaintiffs' respective claims.
CIBA is obligated to fully indemnify and/or reimburse Plaintiffs for all amounts they expended, or are currently obligated to expend, for repair, loss,
adjustrnent, and rnt
c
26
27 28
ve
CIBA acted in bad faith in failing to timely investigate,
process,
adjust Plaintiffs' respective olains.
D00?3493
d.
CIBA acted in bad faith in failing to indemnify and/or reimburse
2
3
plaintiffs for all arnounts they expended, or are currently obligated to expend, for repair,
loss, adustment, and mitigation of their respective claims'
4
5
49,
contsntions
each of Plaintiffs' Plaintiffs are informed and believe that CIBA disputes Plaintiffs and CIBA as stated above. An actual controvelsy exists betwesn
6
7
regarding those contentions.
'A
declaratory judgment
is
therefore necessary and
I
9
Parties under the insurance policies' appropriate to determine the rights and duties of the as follows: WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs request judgment against clBA
l0
1'Foradeclarationdeterminingtherightsan<l.obligationsbetweenPlaintiffs herein including a and GIBA under the terms of the insurance policies at issue
declaration that:
ll
l2
l3 t4
a. b.
Plaintiffs' CIBA had a duty to timely investigate' procsss, and adjust
respective claims;
l5
all amounts CIBA had a duty to indemnify and/or reimburse Plaintiffs for the repair, loss, adjustment' and they expended, or are currently obligated to expend, for mitigation of their respective claims;
l6
t7
l8 l9
20
2, 3,
proper.
action; and For attorneys' fees and costs incurred in bringing this just and all such other and further relief as this Court may deem
For
2l
22
23
FEcNp- cAllss" oF ApTJ,qN Breach of Contract

each and all of Plaintif repeat, reallege, und it.otporate by this reference the allegations contained in Paragraphs I through 49 of this Complaint' 51. Plaintiffs have performed each and every covenant anor condition of performing as a result of CIBA's insuranoe policies or has been excused from so
50.
24
25
27 28
and/or reimburs procoss, and a-djust Plaintiffs' respective claims and indemnify
Plaintiffs,
D0073493
52.
CIBA, among other things, agteed or is otherwise required to investigate,
2
3
process, adjust, and indemnify Plaintiffs as damage caused
to any claims on account of
property
by an occurrence falling within the coverage of CIBA's
insurance
4
5
policies with Plaintiffs,
53. 54.
ourrone
CIBA further had a duty to conduct an adequate and timely investigation

Plaintiffs' claims,
As a result of Plaintiffs' claims, each Plaintiff was required to incur loss,
6
7
and adjustment of
8 9 10
adjustment, repair, and investigative costs booause of property damage caused by an
falling within the coverage of CIBA's insuance policies witb Plaintiffs. CIBA breached the insurance policies by, among other things, failing to
55.
1l
12 13
timely investigate, process, and adjust Plaintiffs' respective claims and by failing to indemnify and reimburse Plaintiffs for all amounts incurred to investigate, adjust,
mitigate and repair the property darnage.
l4 ls
16
56.
CIBA, tlrrough its offrcers, agents and/or employees, have refused and
continue to refuse to indemnify and/or reimburse Plaintiffs for their respective costs
incurred to investigate, adjust, mitigate and repair the property damage'
l7
l8 l9
20
57,
As a direot and proximate result of CIBA's breach of its
contractual
duties, Plaintiffs have incurred substantial costs in investigatirtg, adjusting, mitigating

and repairing the property damage, and other costs and expenses in an amount within
the
jurisdictional limits of this Court, according to proof.
2t
58.
thereon,
Plaintiffs are entitled
to
recover
all of their respective
damages
as
),
23
referenced in the above paragraphs, and other damages according to proo with interest
24
25
59.
Plaintifls are entitled to reoover their attorneys' fees and costs incurred in
agreements
this matter pursuant to A.R.S. $$ 12-341,341.01, and the insurance

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs request judgment against CIBA as follows:
27 28
D0073493
I
L
l. 7. 3. 4.
proper,
For componsatory damages in excess of the minimum jurisdictional limits
.}
of this Court and according to proof;

For attorneys' fees incuned in bringing this action;
For costs incuned in bringing this action; and
4
5
For all such other and further relief as this Court may deem just THIRD CAUSE OF ACTION
Breach of the Implied Covenant of Good Faith and Falr Dealing
and
6
7.
60. 61.
above.
Plaintiffs repeat, reallege, and incoporate by this reference each an all
l0
11
allegations contained in Paragraphs 1 through 59 of this Complaint'
CIBA, at all material times, had a duty to act fairly snd in good faith with
t2 l3
T4
Plaintiffs in carrying out its responsibilities under the insurance policies referred to
62.
Pursuant to the insurance polioies referenced above, CIBA has implied
l5
16
obligations to promptly and reasonably investigate, process, and adjust Plaintiffs' claims
and to make reasonable coverage decisions,
t7 I8
19
63.
following:
Plaintiffs allege on information and belief that CIBA breached its
obligations to act fairly and in good faith toward Plaintiffs by one or more of the
20
a. b. c,
Plaintiffs;
Failing to conduct reasonable, prompt and unbiased investigations
2l
into Plaintiffs' respective claims;
,)
23
Delaying and/or failing to reach
decision as
to whether
to
indemnify and/or reimburse Plaintiffs for the clairns;
24
25
lntentionally, or with callous disregard of the rights of its insureds,
ignoring and/or disregarding information/documentation establishing obligations to
26 )'l
28
D0073493
I
2
d.
indemnification
Delaying and/or failing to make any offcr of payment toward the
or
reimbursement
of
Plaintiffs' respective costs incurred
in
investigating, a-djusting, mitigating and repairing the proaerty damage.
4
5
e, f.
Plaintiffs;
Taking tho above-described actions for the purpose of forcing

Ignoring correspondence, requests, and information presented by
Plaintiffs to forgo the benefits to which they are entitled;
6
7 8 9
g.
above as part
Taking the actions referenced in subparagraphs (a) through (f)

and deliberato soheme
of a systematic
to withhold
insurance policy
l0
benefits that would otherwise be due to Plaintiffs.
ll
l2
l3
plaintiffs aro also informed and believe that the respective offtcers, agents and/or employees of CIBA participated in, authorized, and/or ratifted the wrongful
conduct of CIBA as alleged herein'
64.
l4
l5
t7 l8
65.
As a direct and proximate result of CIBA's bad faith conduct, Plaintiffs
the have incurred substantia costs in investigating, adjusting, mitigating and repairing
l6 property
jurisdictional damage, and other oosts and expenses in an amount within the
limits of this Court, according to proof.
66.
thereon.
plaintiffs are cntitled to recover all of their respective damages
as
l9
20
21
referenoed in the above paragraphs, and other damages according to proof, with interest
67.
plaintiffs are entitled to recoverthcir attorneys' fees and costs incurred in

agleements
))
23
this matter pursuant to A.R.S. $$ 12-341,341,01, and the insurance

referensed herein.
24
68.
The above described conduct of CIBA has been and continues to be and constitutes a breach oftho oovenant ofgood crous and
Upon information and belief, the above described conduct of CIBA was
26
27
28
faith and fair dealing contained in the insurance policies refered to above.
69,
aggravated, outrageous, malicious and engged in by CIBA
*i f, un evil motive and a
D0073493
10
conscience awareness and disregard of the needs and rights
of Plaintiffs and each of
2 3
punitive cIBA's obligations under the insurance policies, so as to justify an award of

and exemplary damages.
4
5 6 7 8 9
Upon information and belief, CIBA's acts as described in the above unreasonably Paragraphs consti.tute a systematic soheme to improperly, unfairly and
70.
coverage to which deprive its policyholders, such as Plaintiffs, the benefits of insuranoe
they are entitled.
WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs requcstjudgment against CIBA as follows: jurisdictional limits For oompensatory damages in exsess of the minirnum
l.
l0
of this Court and aoaoring to proof;
ll
l2
13
2.Forattorneys'feesincunedinbringingthisaction;
t4
r5
3. 4. 5.
For punitive and exemplary damages;
For costs inourred in bringing this action; and
just and proper. For all further relief as this court may deem
l6
t7
r8
DATED this
13'h daY
of
Jul 2012'
DIOGUARDI FLYNN LLP
l9
20
21
By:
Peter J. Esq
22 23
24
26
27
28
D0073493
ll
il
t-
,r-y11
1
1'/
E;'H
t s' t
'oET*
Petcr J, Moolenaar, Esq' (AZ SBN 024487)

p m oo
I
o8,fi
l'-lodi'Pb8,l'ol'
enaar@d
o gu
ard i fl
2
3
)nn.cog
DIOGUARDI FLYNN LLP

7001 N. Scottsdale Road, Suite 2060 Scottsdale, Arizon 85253 Telephone: (480) 95 I -8800 Facsimile: (480) 95 l'8824
At
to
.12 JUL
l6
Pl{ 2s hT
'FILED
4
5
r n eys
lor
P I a t n t itls
ORIGINAL
BYtJ49gg':Jl!i@"DP
6
7 8
INTHESUPERIORcoURToFTHESTATEoFARIZoNA
IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF MARICOPA
I
10
THE S DEVELOPMENT COMPANY dtbI a BELL TOVTER APA RTMENT S ; PRESIDIO NORTH L,P., Plaintiffs,
v. COMMERCIAL TNDUSTRIAL BUILDINC OWNERS .A.LLIANCE, INC. d/b/a CIBA INSURANCE SERVICES; DOES I through 100, inclusive,
Defendants"
caseNo.:CV 2 0 1 2- 0 5 3 59
SUMMONS
-
ll
t2
l3
t4
15
'' #,Y.i',ii'lii'#'iiul"f *
602-2574494
or
www. lauyyerilnderu'otg'
,,
u
l6
L7
18
n"^#E"Jt3v, lS,orr"tron
l9
2Q
THE STATE OF ARIZONA
TO:
2r
22 23 24
Cornmercial Industril Buildlng owners Alliance; Inc. d/b/a CIBA lnsurance Services C/O Dlrector of Insurance -. 2910 N.44th Street, Ste 210 (2nu Floor) Phoenlx, AZ 850f 8
within the YOU ARE HEREBV SUMMONED and required to appear and defend' Arizona, you must appear and time applicable, in this astion in this Court, If served within and Certificate defend within 20 days after the seryice of the Summons, Complaint,
z5
If served out Compulsory Arbitration upon you, exclusive of the day of servioc' of the
State
of Arizona
whether
27 28
publication
you will appear and defend within 30 days aftei the service of the Summons'
D00743 l5/l 0l l0-003
Cornplaint, and Certificate Regarding Compulsory Arbitration upon you
is
complete,
exclusive of the day of service. Where process is served upon the Arizona Director of
Insurance as an insuror's attorney to receive'servie of legal process against it in"this state, insurer
date
4
5 6 7
will not be required to appear,
answor or plead
until expiration of 40 days after
of such service upon the Director. Service by registered or certifed mail without the
State
of Arizona is complete 30 days after the date of receipt by the party.teing'served.

when made. Service upon the Arizona Motor Vehicle Superintendent is
Service by publication is oomplete 30 days after the date of first publication. Direct service
I is complete
9
complete 30 days after fling the Affdavit of Compliance and return receipt or Offcer's
l0
t1
Return. Ariz.R.Civ,., Rul., 4,4.1,4,2 ad lz(a),
YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED that in
case
of your failure to appear and defend
t2
l3
herewith the time applicable, judgment by default may be rendered against you for the relief
demanded in the Complaint,
l4 l5 l6
t7
YOU ARE CAUTIONED that in.order to appear and defend, you must file
an
Answer or proper response in wiiting with the Clerk of this Court, accompanied by the
necessary
filing fee, within the time required, and you are required to serve a copy of any
l8
t9
20
Answer or response upon the Plaintif' attorney, whose name and address are set forth
below. Ariz.R.Civ.P,, Rules 5 and l0; A.R.S. $ 12-31l.

Copies of the pleadings filed herein may be obtained by contacting the Clerk of the Superior Court, Maricopa County, located at20l rWest Jefferson, Phoenix, Arizona.
Requests
zt
22 23 24 25
for reasonable accommodation for persons with disabilities must be made

case
to the divisin assigned to the
by parties at least 3 judicial days in idvance of
scheduled court proceeding. Local rules
of Practice for the Superior Court, Maricopa
27
28
D00?43 I 5/l
0l
10-003
I
2
3
The name and address of plaintiff s attorney is:
Peter J. Moolenaar
Dioguardi FlYnn LLP

7001 N, Scottsdale Road, Suite 2060 Scottsdale, Arizona 85253
4
5
6 7
8
GNED AND SEALED thiS
JUL
dAtC:
E 2012
Michael K. Jeanes Clerk of the Superior Court

MICHAET
l0
K dEANES
ll
tz
t3 By:
Deputy
l4
l5
l6 l7
t8
19
20
2l
22 23
24
26
27 28
D0074315/l0l l0-003
3

j
KTN'I
Process Service
Phx- Phoon!:r@kiwips.com Oder No: 135657
-IIICIIAL
BY
11.
JEANES, CLTRI{
OEP
RECEIVEO HE LOBBY
DOCUI4ENT t)EPOSITORY
cllent Ret 10374.001
12 JUL
IN THE MARICOPA COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT
FOR THE 5TATE OF ARIZONA
l5
Pll'2: tr?
'FILED
THE S DEVELOPMENT COMPANY d/b/A BELL TOWER APARTMENTS;

ET AL.,
BYWllti+'tt*OP
Plaintlff(s)/Petitioner,
vs.
CASE NO.: CV2012-053591
COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL BUILDING OWNERS ALUANCE. INC. d/b/A CIBA

TNSURANCE SERVICES
; ET AL,
DECI.ARANON OF SERVICE
Defendant(s)/ResPondent'
Marlcopa County ond I am tully Tom 8nnst, the undersigned, certllies under the penalty of peljury: I am licensed private process servr in case' I received for service the qualified pursunt to the regulations governing Service ol Process in the State of Arizona to serve plocess in thls
following documents
i5 6tion:
SUMMONS; GOMPLATNT; CERTIFTCATE OF COMPUISORY ARBNRANON
I personally served coples of MporENAgE Wittr olgGuARDI FLVNN ILP located ln Phoenir Arilona on !!!s-ot2 E:9pt9AJ!1. noted were made in PHoENIX, where except All services time llsted below, the documents llsted above on thcse named ln the manner, date, and
from
?lfR
ARIZONA.
ENITIY:
COMMERCIAL INDUSRAL BUILDING OWNERS ALUANCE, INC
C/O DIRECTOR OF INSURANCE

DATE 6 TIMEI ADDRESS;
7/L3/20L21:13:00 PM
2910 N 44th 5t Suite 210, Phoenix, Az 85018, the usual place of business. by serving Amanda Buettner, a person authorized to accept service'
MANNER: DESCRIPIION:
NOTES:
ate
SRVC
July 16,2012
lom
16.00 20,80 25,00
Bcnnett #7574
UILEAGE
1U5H
FES
ADDITIONAL MILEAGES
TOCAT
MVD
TRACE
iKIP
SPECIAL HANDUNG STAKEOUT
DOCUMENT PREPARATON
10.00 7L.EO
OTAL
Olfice Distribution
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA MARICOPA COUNTY
r*l;lLll)t+
t2Jll)l2olz
b' Surrinr Cou Atlntin un bchlf 0l' Clsrk rra' the Suxrior Court
t2n5t2t l2
COURT ADMTNISTRATION
Ct, Adnrin Depuly
CASE NUMIIER: CV20l2-053591

S Devclopment ComPanY, The
v.
Conrmerciul lndusfrial Building Orvncrs Allince Inc
The Jurlge ussigned lo this actiorr is thc Honorrble Michael D Gordon

I.5O
DAY ORDER
This .gicn was file<J more than l-50 clays
bctween this orcler und any orcler lrom thc notice of requiremenls' Pulsuanl lo provides ,,**igi"a iu.lge, the a.ssigned juclge's orcler governs. This order procedure. actions, including those subject to civil all to Rule 38.1 appliei nulJ S. i'. Rironu RulJs of vi
tgo. tt lhere is any conllict
rbitrution.
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:
The purt ies shall lile and serve Rule 3g.l of the Arizona Rules ol'Civil Proccdure will be strictly enlorcecl' on courl und counsel the following documnts:
A nrolion to Set and Ccrtificare ot'Reildincss or an Appeul from Arhitration shrll be filed on or is not 4lgt2}lj t2:00r00AM. (The mor'ron shll include ane.stimate ol'the ength of triul) Il'Rule 38'l be disnrissed it will ubove und shown dte on the Calendar placed on lnrctive be complicd wirh, th .or. *il purslant ro Rule 38.1, without furfher notce. on orafier 611012013 l2:00:004M' "
bcl'ore
to witnesses und exhibits listed by other purties must be submitted rvith witne.sses or exhibits until time o[trial will or srared in rhe Joinr pretrial Siatemcnt. Reserving all objections to not bc pcrnlitted.
Z- All purties' specific objccrions
LATE DISCOVERY. A Motion to

orrrplcle or
will
accordancc with the Rule.
filed, lLocnl Rulc 3.4
$et and Certificate of:Rcadincss certifies that the parties huve the nrdion i's huve had a reasonablc c,pporlunity to complete discovcry within 60 drrys dter complctcd in be should and Rule 3g. t (t) Arzonr Rule s of civil Proceclurel Discovery
this cose IS su bj ect to nrandutory urbitrotion Ru le I 4 (b) ol IF TH IS IS AN ARBITRATION CAS , s. the arbitration hcarng. In light ol' the thc Arizonu Ru les of c vil Proced ure estnbli shes he time for beginnin
Anzo
Rules
of Civil Procedure,
coun.sel shou ld be sure thrl
arbitrutor.s under R u le 3 8
prov ides, an (d) for motions to let. As Rule 76(a) of the Arizona Rules of ci vt Proccdure cf Cerlificute to Set and on Mot lt place ol rn A ppe from Arbi tration nd Mblon to Sel lor Trial serves Rendiness under R ule 3 B (a) Arizon Rules of' Civil Procedure.
31 1 .
ME: l5O Py Mlnute
Entry
Rport Vrslont {CV023B I '0'2
Saturday, 15 December, 2012

Paoe 1 of 2
Otfrce Distribution
SUPERIOR OURT OF ARIZONA
ttlill.FDr+ tzll9t20l2
h' SuJrr:rior Cuun dnn on br:hnll'of Clck of the
MARICOPA COUNTY
Su*rior Coun
Ct. Adnrin t2lt5120t2 COURT ADMINISTRATION

Deputy
CASE NUMBER: Cv20l2-0s3s9l

S Developmcnt ComPanY"Ihc
v.
Commercial Industrial Building Orvncrs Alliuncc Inc
the EXTENStoNS oF TIME'l'o sERVE pRocESS, If there has been un extension of tirnc to serve ol' copy mily not rcccive u sumnlons and complaint,'(u) Rglc 38.I .still lpplies and (b) some panies ancl counsct letter. this order. plaintiff'shoul<l sencl copes to crch ol'thcnl and retuin a copy ol the trrnsmittal
Rules of Civil Procedures'
counse resolvi with l

"'iup"i"
rding the f'ensibilitY ol nrediution or urbitration ounsel shll discuss wth their clicnts the resolulion of counscl' rhrough an alremarive dispure rcsolution nreod prior to the conprence with opposing
TRELIEF FROM RUL 38,l DEADLTNES; CONTINUANCES ON INACTTVE CALENDAR' The Discovery i.s to be completed ubout rules require a Motion to Set within nine nronlhs fter the aclion is flecl. (he t*o ronth, lter (see Late Dissovery above). A motion lo vtcate or abate this ordcr will not chnrrge Procedures. dead.lines. A prernature Motion to Ser violates Rule I l, Arizona Rules ol'Civil
Inactve For good cause, the ussignecl judge mrry oxtond time for disnrissal or contintre the action on date ol the l'ulure, the nelr in sct is Catendar to an ilppropriate dte, ll'an arUtrrtion hearing ha.s been held, or Inactive on to conlinue or snould b inclutled in any motion to extend llule 38.1 deadlines that hcaring -stipulations to continus un,l ,l"luy* lbr settlement negotiations are not good cuuse, Except in Culendar. cont tunces based on late discovery. e xtraordinaryuses, the court will not grrnt trial
31 1
- ME: f 50 Day Minute
Entry
Beporl Version: {CV023B 1 '0'2
Saturday, 15 December, 2012 Page 2 ol ?,
Information System Superior Court of Maricopa County - ntegytgd Court Endorsee PartY Listing
Casc Numher: CV20I 2'05359
I
ParlY
Nme
Attorney Namc
Pctor Jon Moolcnttur
Prcsidio Nrnh L P S DcvcloPurent CouPunY.'[hc
Pctcr Jen Mo0lcntur
Bar lD: 02441{7 Bar lD: O244ll7
,/
HICHAEL K. JEAXTS, CLI:Nh RECEIVEO F C LOBSY
Peter J. Moolenaar, Esq. (AZ

DIOGUARDIFTYNN tTP
53 62at7)
oocuHEHl
i][zCirrnp'
omoolenaar@dioquardiflvnn.com
7OO1 N. Scottsdale Road, Suite 2060
t3
APR
-5 Atl 8: 16
DEP
Scottsdale, Arlzona 85253
Telephone: (180)951-8800
Facsimil e: (4801951-8824
SY
Atto
r ey s lo
P Ia
ntfls
IN THE SUPERJOR COURT OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF MARICOPA
THE S DEVETQPMENT COMPANY d/b/A BELI TOWER APARTMENTS; PRESIDIO NORTH 1.P.,
Plaintiff,
V.
IN RE: MATTERS OF: Case No. CV 2Ot2-053591
COMMERCIAT INDUSRIAI BUILDING OWNERS AILIANCE, lNC,, A Callfornla corPoraton d/b/a CIBA INSURANCE SERVICES; CERTAIN UNDERWRITERS AT LTOYD's OF TONDON SUBSCRIBING TO POTICY
NOs. N08NAO33O0, N08N403301' N08N403305, and N08NA03306 a
forelgn entity
LEXINGTON
INSURANCE COMPANY, a Delaware corporation; I RoNSHoRE lNsuRANcE
!lMITED, a foreign entity;

WESTCHESIER FIRE INSURNCE COMPANY, a Pennsylvanla corporation; THE Sf EADTAST INSURANCE
COMPANY,' a Delaware corPoration;

ENDURANCE AMERICAN
SPECIATTY INSURNCE COMPANY, a New York corPoration; LANCASHIE
INsURANCE COMPANY (UKI INSURANCE COMPANY OF NEW
YORK, a New York corporatlon
:y
I.ANDMARI( AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY, A Georgia
company;AND DOES
incluslve,
through 100
AFFIDAVIT OF RETURN OF SERVICE
BY PRIVATE PROCESS SERVER
Defendants,
which it was served' havlng serve process within the county in l, MichaelYancey am licensed to been so aPPointed bY the Court'
from Peter l' Moolenaar' on April 4,2o13l received documents Summons / First Amended ComPlaint
Esq'
DioBuardl tlynn LLP:
at the time' in the the above rnentioned documents l, Michael Yancey personally served shown below: rrn,'t.r, at the place and upon the pefson vALATTHE ARlzoNA r,Jprvr I PEsgNAtLY sERvED oN ApRtL 4, zoLtArAPPioxlMATEtY alZgfO N.44rH STREET-SUITE 210' PHOENIX DE'ARTMENT Ot TNSURANCE TOCATED AMERICAN INSURANCE CoMPANY'
ARTZONA
ur'oruARK 85018. VAL ACGEPIED sERvlc ron
correct and I certify
that the facls are true and and know of my own knowledge I have read the foregoing document in the county above'
ii oru,
I am authorized
to serve process
Michael
Officer of the SuPerlor Court
No,8345 6LSE. PaloVerde Drive Phoenix, AZ 85012 602-697-6983
f'
lltcHAtL
02/14871 Peter t. Moolenaar, Esq' (AZ SBN
00cllHF{r 1"''(r I lfiL'
r(, JEANES. Cl.l-ilK RECIVEO F C LOBI]Y
va
Elnool ena ar@d!euardlflrEIl'com DIOGUARDI ILYNN LtP 70ol N. Scottsdale Road, Sulte 2060
,13 APR
-5 Al{ I'
l?
Scottsdale, Arizona 85253 Telephone: {4801951-8800 Faciimile; (4s0)951'8824
BY
DEP
Attorn eY s fo r PlaI n tts
OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA COURT SUPERIOR THE IN
INANDF0RTHEcoUNTYoFMARICOPA
THE S DEVELOPMENT COMPANY
d/b/a BEIL ToWER APARTMENTS;

PRESIDIO NORTH I.P.,
Plalntlff,
v
COMMERCIAL INDUSfRIAT
IN RE: MATERS OF: Case No, CV 2012-053591
b/a
OF UNDERWRITERS AT IIOYD,S LONDON SUBSCRIBIN6 TO POLICY
CIBA
NOS, NO8NAo33O0, N08N403301' a N08NAO33O5, and N08N403305
forelgn entltY;
LEXINGTON
Delaware INSURANCE COMPANY, a
corporaton; IRONSHORE INSURANCE LlMlfED, a forelgn entitY;
WESTCHESER FIRE INSURNCE COvtpenY, a Pennsylvanla corporatlon; THE STEADFAST INSURANCE COMPA', a Delaware corporation;
ENDURANCE ATERICAN SPECIALTY INSURNCE COMPANY'
, n"*
York corPoratlon; IANCASHIRE
LI MfED,
a foreign entW; H OM INSUANC COMPANY OF NEW
YORK, a New York corporatlon;
TANDMARK AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY, A Georgia
company; AND OOES l through 100

Itrcluslve, AFFIDAVIT OF RETURN OF SERVICE
Defendants,
it was served, having l, Mlchael yancey am llcensed to serve process withln the countv ln which been so appointed bY the court.
en April 4, ZOt3l recelved documents from Peter J. Moolenaar,

Summons
Esq.
/ Dioguardl
Flynn LLP:
Flrst Amended ComPlaint
INSURANCE COMPANY' ARIZONA 85018. VAL ACCEPTED SERVICE FOR TEXINGTON
at the time' in the l, Michael Yancey personally served the above mentioned documents manner, at the place and upon the person shown belowl VAt AT THE ARIZONA oN APRI! 4, 2OL3AT APPROXIMATETY 1:o0PM I PERSONALIY SERVED 210, pHoENrx surrE DE'ARTMENT oF rNsuRANcE [ocATED AT z91o N. 44H STREET -
above' correct and I certifothe bove. I am authorized to serve process ln the county
that the facts are true and t have read the foregoing document and know of my own knowledge
Michael
No. 8345
Officer of the SuPerior Court
615 E. Palo Verde Drive Phoenix, AZSSOL? 602-697-6983

';r
{1)
*jilff$rdiFiq*;"^
Peter l. Moolenaar, Esq, (AZ SBN 02448?) pmooleEaar@dioruardifl vnn.com
DIOGUARD FTYNN LLP 7001N. Scosdale Road, Sulte 2060
13 APR
-5 All 8: l7
DEP
Telephone: (4Eo)951-8800 Facsimile: (4801951-8824 Attorn eys lot Pl o I nt ilfs
gY
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF IVTARICOPA
THE S DEVELOPMENT COMPANY dl bl a BELL TOWE APABTM ENTS; PRESIDIO NORTH 1.P.,
Plalntlff, v,
COMMERCIAL INDUSRIAT BI'ILDING OWNERS AITIANCE, lNC., A californla corpontlon d/b/a CIBA INSURANCE SERVICES; CERTAIN UNDERWRITERS AT ![OVD,S OT TONDON SUBSCRIBING TO POTICY NOS. 08N403300, N08NAO33o1, NO8NAO3305, and N08N403306 a
IN RE: MATTERS OF: Case No. CV 2012-053591
foreign entity; t(INGTON

INSURANCE COMPANY, a Delaware corporatlon; IRONSHOBE INSU RANCE
LIMITED, a forelgn entitY; WESTCHESTER FIRE INSURNCE COMPANY, a Pennsylvanla corporatlon; THE STEADFAST NSURANCE COMPANY, a Delaware corPoration; ENDURANCE AMERICAN SPECIATTY INSURNCE COMPANV, a New York corporatlon; LANCASHIRE rNsuANcE COMPANY {Ul() INSURANCE COMPANY OF NEW
YORK, a ew York corPoratlon;

,,l
I.ANDMARK AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY, A Georgla company; AND DOES t though 100
lncluslve,
Defendants,
ln which lt was served, having l, Mlchael Yancey arn licensed to serve process within the county
been so appointed bYthe Court,
Esq'/ Dioguardl Flynn LLP: On April 4,2OL3l received documents from Peterl. Moolenaar,
Summons
/ tlrst Amended ComPlalnt
at the time, in the l, Michael Yancey personally served the above mentloned documents manner, at the place and upon the person shown below: VAI AT THE ARIZONA oN APRIL 4, ilOn3AT APPROXMATETY 1r00PVl I PERSONATLY SERVEO srREFf - sutrE 210, PHoENlx DEpARTMENT oF rNsuRANcE LocATED AT z91o N.44tH INSURANCE COMPANY' ARIZONA 85018. VAT ACCEPTED SERVICE FORTHE STEADFA5T
I have read
facts are true and the foregoing document and know of my own knowledge that the process in the county above' correct and I certlfy the bove. I am authorlzed to serve
d Officer of the SuPerior Court
No.8345
615 E. Palo Verde Drive Phoenlx, AZ 85012 502-697-6983
j" f
'iffT..''{#i:il',T'u''8i:Peter J, Moolenaar, Esq. (AZ SBN pmool enaar@dioruardlflvnn'com DIOGUARDI FTYNN LtP 7001 N' Scottsdale Road, Sulte 2060 Scottsdale, Arizona 85253
0214871
13 APR
-5
All 8: l?
TelePhone: (tS0)951-E800 Facslmlle: (480)951'8824
BY
ettor n eYs f o t
P I t
ntifis
STATE OF ARIZONA IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE
INANDFoRTHEcoUNTYoFMARICoPA
THE S DEVETOPMENT COMPANY APARTMENTS; d I b I a }ELL fOlll/ER L'P., PRESIDO NORTH
Plaintiff,
IN RE: MATTERS OF:

Case No. CV20t2'053591
v
COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAT
BUI'* lNc INS
d/b/a clBA
IN
OF UNDERWRITERS AT LLOYD'S POTICY TO SUBSCRIBING LONDON
NOS, NOSNA 0?300, N08NAO3301'
a N08NAO33O5, and N08N403306
Delaware
NSURANCE
LIMITED, a foreign
entitv;
WESTCHESTER FIRE INSUNCE
COMPANY, a Pennsylvanla corporation; THE SADFAS INSURANCE COMPANY, a Delawars corPoralioni ENDURANCE AMERICAN
SP ECIALTV INSURNCE
COMPANY'
RE
LIMITED, a forelgn entiry; HOME]AND INSURANCE COMPANY OF NEW
tNsu
YORK, a New York corporation;
LANDMARK AMERICAN I NSUANCE COMPANY, A Georgla
company; AND inclusive,
DOES
through 100
AFFIDAVIT OF RETURN OF SERVICE BY PRIVATE PROCE5S SERVER
Defendants,
it served, having l, Mlchael yancey am licensed to serve process within the county ln which was been so appointed bY the Court'
on April 4,IOL| I recelved documents from Peter Summons / Flrst Amended ComPlaint
J.
Moolenaar, Esq,
Dioguardi Flynn
LLP:
time, in the l, Michael Yancey personally served the above mentioned documents at the manner, at the place and upon the person shown below: ARIZONA oN ApRtr 4, 2OttAT APPROXIMATETY trOOPM I PERSONATLY SERVED VAL AT THE 210 PHoENlx DEpARTMENT oF tNsuRANcE [ocATED AT z91o N. 44rH STREET- SulrE INSURANCE COMPANY' ARIZONA 85018. VAI ACCEPTED SERVICE FOR WESTCHESTER FIRE that the facts are true and I have read the foregolng document and know of my own knowledge process in the county above' correct and I certlfy the bove. I am authorlzed to serve
Micha
No.
d Officer of the SuPerior Court
615 E. Palo Verde Drive Phoenix, AZ850Lz 602.697'6983
,;6fti4,iif
Peter J. Moolenaar, Esq. (AZ SBN 02rt487)
p
lfqff;ii-'
l1
mogl
e na a
r@ d lor u a rdiflvn n.
com
8: 13 APR -S A{
DIOGUARDIFLYNN LLP 7001N. Scottsdale Road, Sulte 2060
Scottsdale, Arlzona 85213 Tetephone: {4301951'8800

Facsimile: (t8o)951-8824
BY
DEP
Attorn
eYs o r
P I i
ntills
IN THE SUPEzuOR COURT OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA
INANDFORTHEcoUNTYoFMARICOPA
THE 5 DEVELOPMENT COMPANY d/b/a BEtt TOWER APARTMENTS; PRESIDIO ]iIORTH 1.P.,
Plaintiff, v
COMMECIAI INDUSTRIAL BUILDING OWNERS ALIIANCE, lNC., A Callfornla corporation d/b/a CIBA
INSURANCE SERVICES; CRTAIN UNDEWRITERS AT LLOYD,S OF LONDON SUBSCRIBING TO POLICY
IN E: MATTERS OF: Case No. CV 2012-053591
NOS. NO8NAo330o, N0ENAO3301, NOBNAO3305, and N08N403306 a
loreliln entttyi IEXINGTON

INSURANCE COMPANY, a Delaware torporation; IRONSHORE INSURANCE
LMITED, a forelgn entltY;

WESTCHESTER FIRE ]NSURNCE
COMPANY, a Pennsylvania corporation

THE STEADFAST INSURANCE COMPANY, a Delaware corPoration; ENDURANCE AMERICAN SPECIALTY INSURNCS COMPANY, a New York corporatlon LANCASHIRE TNSURANCE COMPANY (UK) LlMI.TED, forelSn enttyt lleME'ANtr INSURANCE COMPANY OF NEW
YORK, a New York corPoration;
I.ANDMARK AMERCAN INSURANCE COMPANY, A Georgla
compeny AND DOES l through 100 lncluslve,

Defendants,
l, Michaelyancey am licensed to serue process within the county in whlch it was served, having
been so appointed bythe Court.
On Aprif 4, ZeLg I recelved documents from Peter J. Moof enaar, Esq.
Ologuardl Flynn
LLP:
summons
Frst Amended ComPlaint
l, Michael Yancey personally served the above mentioned documents at the time, in the manner, at the place and upon the person shown below: ON ApRIL 4, 2OL7 AT APPROXMATELY 1;00PM I PERSONATLY SERVED VAt AT THE ARIZONA DEpARTMENT OF tNsuRANc LocATED AT 2910 N. 44rH STREET - SUITE 210, PHoENlx
ARIZONA 85018. VAL ACCEPED SERVICE FOR ENDURANCE AVIERCAN SPCIAITY NSURANCE COMPANY. I have read the foregoing document and know of my own knowledge that the fasts are true and correct and I certifythe above. f am authorized to serve process fn the county above,
Officer of the Superlor Court
No.8345
615 E. Palo Verde Drlve Phoenix, AZ 85012
602-697-6983

i
HIEHAEt K. JEAI{ES. CLENK
Peter
l. Moolenaar,
Esq. (AZ SBN 0244871
ftECEIVTO F C LOBBY rFr i r'rr\ Docul.lE
{r
oEoolenoar@dlosuarCiflvnn.con!
DIOGUARDIFTYNN ttP 7001 N. Scottsdale Road, Suite 2060
13APR-5 AH 8 l?
Scottsdals, Arhona 85253 Telephone: 4801951-8Eoo Facsimile: (1801951-8824 Atorneys lo r Pl al ntffs
BY
41""::*t
DEP
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF MARICOPA
THE 5 DEVEI.OPMENT COMPANY
d/b/A BEt[ TOWER APARTMENTS;

PRESIDIO NORTH t.P,,
Plalntlff,
v
COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAt BUILDING OWNERS ALIIANE, lNC,, A California corporatlon d/b/a clBA
INSURANCE SERVICES; CERTAI N UNDRWRITERS AT ILOYD,S OF LONDON SUBSCRIBING TO POI.ICY
lN
RE; MATTERS OF:
Case No. CV 2012-053591
NOS, N08N403300, N08N403301, NOBNA033O5, and N08N403305 a foreign entfty; tEXl NGTON
NSURANCE COMPANY, a Delaware
corporatlon; IRONSHORE I NSURANCE tlMlTED, a foreign entlty;

WESTCHESTER FIRE INSURNCE
COMPANY, a Pennsylvania corporatlon; THE SEAFAST INSURANCE COMPANY, Delaware corPoratlon ENDURANCE AMEICAN SPECIALTY I NSU RNCE COMPANY, a New York corporatlon; LANCASHIRE TNSURANCE COMPANY {UKl INSURANCE COMPANY OF NFW YORK, a New York corPoration;
TANDMAKAMERICAN
INSURANCE COMPANY, A Georgia
company; AND lncluslve,
DOES
t thrcugh 1)
Defendartts,
was served, havlng l, MichaelYancey am licensed to serve process wlthin the county in which lt been so apPointed bY the Court.
4,2}lgl received docqments from Peter J' Moolenaar, Summons / Firs Amended ComPlaint
On April
Esq'
Dioguardl Flynn
LLP:
at the time, in the l, Michael Yancey personally served the above mentioned documents manner, at the place and upon the person shown below:
THE ARIZONA oN APRIL4, 2013 AT APPROXIMATELY 100PM I PERSONALLY SERVED VAL AT pHoENrx 210, DE'ARTMENT oF rNsuRANcE rocATED AT z9r0 N. 44rH sTREEf -surrE INSURANCE COMPANY OF NEW ARIZONA 85018. VALACCEPTED SERVICE FOR HOMETAND
YORK.
of my own knowredge that the facts are true and the county above' correct and I certlfy the bove. I am authorized to serve pfocess ln
r have read the foregoing document and know
Michae
Officer of the SuPerior Court
No,8345 615 E. Palo Verde Drive Phoenlx, AZ85OI2 602-697-6983

Michael K Jcancs. Clerk of
,r.,r,*
lectroni cally Fil ed Michellc Paigen 4151201310:08:00 AM

F-
Iiling lD
5194832
Peter J. Moolenaar, Esq. (AZ SBN 024487) pmoolenaar@dioguardifl ynn. com
2
.-1
DIOGUARDI FLYNN LLP ?001 N. Scottsdale Road' Suite 2060

4
5
Telephone: (480) 95 1-8800 Facsimile: (480) 951-8824
Attorneysr Plaintffi
6
7
8
INTHESUPERIORCOURToF,THESTATEoFARIZONA
THE DEVELOPMENT COMPAI.TY S; d lb I a BELjL TOWER APARTMENT PRESIDIO NORTIT L,P.,
S
9 10
11
CASE NO. CV2012-053s91
t2
13
Plaintifl's,
MOTION TO CONTINUE ON INACTWE CLENDAR

(Hon. Michael Gordon)
14
COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL BUILDING OWNERS ALLIANCE' INC., a California corporationdlbla CIBA 15 INSURANCE SERVICES ; CERTAIN 16 TINDERWRITERS AT I,LOYD'S OF TO POLICY t7 LONDON SUBSCRIBING 1, N08N40330 NOS. N08N403300, a 18 N08N403305, and N08N403306 foreign entity; LEXINGTON 19 INSURANCE COMPANY, a Delaware 20 corporation; IRONSHORE INSURANCE LMITED, a foreign entitY; 2I V/ESTCHESTER FIRE INSURANCE 22 COMPAtrY, a Pennsylvania corporation; THB STEADFAST INSURANCE 23 COMPANY' a Delaware colporatioll; AMERICAN 24 ENDURANCE SPECTALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, 25 a New York corPoration; LANCASHIRE INSURANCE COMPANY (UK)
26 27 28
INSIIRANCE COMPANY YORK, aNew York corPoration; LAND MARK.AMERICAN
D0084464/101 10-003
)
3
INSLIRANCE COMPANY, a Georgia company; AND DOES I through 100' inclusive,

Defcndants.
4
5
After engaging in informal discovery with Defendant commercial Industrial

Building Owners Alliance, Inc, dlblal CIBA Insurance Services, Plaintiff's discovered in this nine (9) additional parties which should properly be included as defendants
2013 and matter, Therefore, plaintif filed their First Amended Complaint on April 3, Amended Complaint are in the process of effecting service of the summonses and First
6
,7
9 10
11
l2
13
on Defendants-primarily through the Arizona Department of Insurance' Plairtiffs August 5, request this matter be continued on the inactive calendar for 120 days until
pleading period 2013 so the Defendants may appear within the extended responsive
parties rnay provided for service through the Arizona Department of Insurane and the i initial disclosures. It is anticipated that the parties will then seek a Rule 16
engge
t4
15
l6
T7
scheduling conference. A proposed form of Order is being lodged herewith'
18
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED this 5'h day of April, 2013' DIOGUARDI FLYNN LLP
Mool
t9
20
2l
By:
22
23 lsl
Peter J, Moolenaat, Esq
Attorneysr Plaintffi
24
25
26
28
D00844641',t01l0-003
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on April 5, 20L3,I electronically f-rled the foregoing Motion to Continue n the nactive Calendar to the Clerk of the Superior Court, Maricopa County, using the AZTurbo Court oniine e-filing system'
Copy of the foregoing to be electronically forwarded to:
Honorable Michael Gordon Maricopa County SuPerior Court 18380 N. 40th Street Phoenix, Arizona 85032
2
3
4
5
6 7
8
9 10
11
By
lsl
lz
13
l4
l5 t6
17 18
T9
20
21
22
23
24
25
26 27
28
D0084464/101 10-003
Michael
as Submitted
page***
K J ernes, Clerk **i' Electronically Filed * *+{

Marv Minkow
4tl0l2(tl3 8:00:00 AM
Filing ID 5196462
)
5
Petel J. Moolenaar, Esq. (AZ SBN 024487) pmoolenaar@dioguardiflYnn'com
DIOGUARDI FLYNN LLP

7001 N. Scottsdale Road, Suite 2060 Scottsdale, Arizona 85253 Telephone: (480) 95 l-8800 Att orn.ey s for
Facsirnile: (480) 951-8824 P I ai nliJl s
6 7
INTHESUPERIORCOURTOFTIIESTATEOFARIZoNA
TFIE S DEVELOPMENT COMPANY dlb I a BELL TO\MER APARTMENTS ; PRESIDIO NORTFI L.P.,
I
9 10
11
cAsE NO. CV2012-053591

ORDER TO CONTINUE ON INACTIVE CALENDAR
(FIon, Michael Gordon)
t2
13
Plaintiffs.
t4
COMMER.CIAL INDUS TRIAL tsUILDING O\MNERS ALLIANCE' INC., a Califomia corporation d/b/a CIBA 15 INSTIRANCE SERVICES ; CERTAIN 16 LTNDERWRITERS AT LLOYD'S OF POLICY t7 LONDON SUBSCRIBING TO NOS. N08N403300, N08N40330 1, 18 N08N4033 05, and N08N403306 a fbreign entity; LEXINGTON 19 INSTIRANCE COM)ANY, a Delaware 20 corporation; IRONSHORE INSURANCE LIMITED, a t'oreign entitY; 2t WESTCTIESTER FIRE INSI]RANCE 22 COMPANY, a Pennsylvania corporation; TFIE STEADFAST INSIJRANCE 23 COMPANY, a l)elaware cotPoration; AMERICAN 24 ENDIIRANCE SPECIALTY INST.]RANCE COMPANY, 25 a Nsw York corPoration; LANCASHIRE
27 28
LIMITED, a foreign erfitY; H INSURANCE COMPAITY oF NEW YORK, a New York corPoration; LANDMARK AMERICAN
D0084481/101 l0-003
,)
INSURANCE COMPANY, a Georgia oompany;AND DOES I through 100,

inclusive,
Defendants. 4
5
on Inactive The Court having received Plaintiff's' Motion to Continue Case

Calendar, and for good cause appearing;
6 7
I
9
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:
until August 5' This case will continue on the Inactive Calendar for 120 days
2013
10
11
SO ORDERBD:
2013
l2
13
t4
15
HONORABLE MICHAEL GORDON
16
t7
18
t9
20
2l
')')
23
24
25
27
28
D0084481i 101 l0-003
eSignature Page 1 of I
FirinsrD:ug,u,n1u^r",r!,3,Hf
Granted as Submitted
ig:cv2012'0535e1
/S/ Miohael Gordon Dale 41512013 or Cou rt Judicial Office rofS
Case
Number CV 2012-053
59
Endorsement Page Signatu'e D'te
4 I 5 I 20
13
E-Filing ID #:5196462
Pctcr.Jon Moolenaar
Filecl Date: 4/1012013 8:00:00 AM
Commccial Industrial Builcling Owners Alliancc lnc No Adclress on llecord
Exhibit 4
The Clerk OThe ricop CountY, ona,
I
2
J
Amv M. Sambere (ASB #013874) Ian M. Fischer (sB #026239) SNELL & WILMER L.L.P. One Arizona Center 400 E. Van Buren, Suite 1900
Phoenix, Telephone: Facsimile:
202
4
5
6 7
ComPanY 'Westchester Fire Insurance Company
&
I
9
10
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF ARIZONA IN AND FOR THE COLTNTY OF MARICOPA THE S DEVELOPMENT COMPANY DBA BELL TOWER APARTMENTS; PRESIDIO NORTH LP,
Plaintiffs,
vs.
t1
o
No. CV2012-053591
lr
C)
I 'i
I2
13
II g "3o s3
r E" rX , foss
r y () I
E
tr
l:
I 9
NOTICE OF REMOVAL TO FEDERAL COURT

lAssisned to the Honorable 4ichael Gordon)
t4
15
'
ils d I 3s U) lr
o
t6
l7
18
COMMERCIAL INDUSTzuAL BUILDING OWNERS ALLIANCE, INC., California corporation dba CIBA INSURANCE SERVICES ; CERTAIN LINDERWRITERS AT LLOYD'S OF LONDON SUBSCRIBING TO POLICY
t9
20
2l
22
23
foreien entitv: WESTCHESTER FIRE INSRANCB cOvrpANY, a Pennsylvania
24
26 27 28
COMP ANY, a Georgia comPanY; and DOES I THROUGH 100, inclusive,

Defendants.
AMERI
CE
I
2
J
TO THE CLERK OF THE MARICOPA COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT AND PLAINTIFFS AND THEIR COUNSEL OF RECORD:
notified that Defendants Landmark American Insurance Company 'Westchester Fire Insurance Company (hereinafter (hereinafter "Landmark") and You hereby
are
4
5
,,'Westchester") have this date filed a notice of removal in the United States District Court
6 7
for the District of Arizona, removing this action from the Superior Court of the State of Arizona in and for the County of Maricopa to the United States District Court for the
District of Arizona, together with copies of all pleadings and papers served on Landmark
and Westchester and all pleadings filed to date.
I
9 10
A copy of the notice of removal filed in
the federal court is attached hereto as Exhibit "1" and filed with this Court, as provided by 28 u.S.C. $ 1446(d).
l1
a a
.g
t2
13
DATED this
3'd day
of MaY,2013.
l r --Efi :+ I iriS,^r
9I ct
i
SNELL & WILMER L.L.P.
>lHi: t4
r ?YIa =lJu'ac) I F. l o UDI o
.
oe
Pg3
l5
T6
By : lsllan M. Fischer
74)
400 E. Van Buren, Suite 1900
t7
o
18
t9
20
E-FILED this 3'd day of May,2013.

CQPY of the foregoing mailed this 3'o day of May, 20l3,to:
The Honorable Michael Gordon MARICOPA COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT 18380 North 40th Street Phoenix, Arizona 85032
Peter J. Moolenaar
2l
22
23
24
25

27
or
28
a
I
2 J
Jonathan Wallack, Esq.
BONNETT FAIRBONN FRIEDMAN & BALINT, PC

2325 East Camelback Road, Suite 300 Phoenix, Arizona85016
4
5
nt Building Owners Alliance, Inc.

Services
6 7
8
Michael T. Kennick, Esq. KENNICK & ASSOCIATES The Chapman Building 110 E. Wilshire Ave, Suite 401 Fullerton, CA92832 ing Owners Alliance, Inc. dlbla CIBA Insurance Services
Craig McCarthy, Esq. GUS ROSENFELD P.L.C. One East Washington Street, Suite 1600 Phoenix, Arizona 85004
9 10
11
9
.v
t2
13
ln"aI
9I trl +
Efi
>lgi:
"rioeg cO r >V lcr
-tJgx c) I
t4 l5
t6
Paul K. Schrieffer, Esq. Rena M. Stone, Esq. P.K. SCHRIEFFER LLP 100 North Barranca Ave, Suite 1100 West Covina, CA9l79l
-{;*3
F.
.3
dl UDI
o
t7
18
t9
20
2l
22
23
atLloyd 's of London Certain subscribing to Policy Nos. NO 8N403300, N08N403301, NO8N403305, andN0SN A033306
Steven G. Mesaros, Esq. Randv L. Kineerv. Esq. RENUD COOK-ONRY MESAROS PA One North Central, Suite 900 Phoenix, Arizona 85004
24 25 26 27 28
Attorneys
--3
Celeste A.
2
J
CLAUSEN MILLER P.C l0 S. LaSalle Street Illinois 60603 chi
Hill, Esq.
t
Insurance CompanY
Joann Selleck, Esq.
4
5
6 7
8
COZEN O'CONNOR 501 West San Die
te 1610
101
Insurance ComPanY of New York
9
10
11
o o
iewts
James K. Kloss
Phoenix Plaza Tower II 2929North Central Avenue, Suite 1700 Phoenix, Arizona 85012 Company
s/ Karen Prentice
BzusBoIS BISGAARD & sMITH LLP
l2
l3 t4
15
17t03972.t
;+ l gr.3-
9l t
Ei
>lHr:
3 r eYia : I rvx l ,i gDI

E
;ioe3
T6
t7
o
l8 l9
20
2t
22
23
24 25 26 27 28
--4--

S DEVELOPMENT COMPANY Et Al v. COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL BUILDING OWNERS ALLIANCE INCORPORATED Et Al Notice of Removal

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

S DEVELOPMENT COMPANY Et Al v. COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL BUILDING OWNERS ALLIANCE INCORPORATED Et Al Notice of Removal

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Case 2:13-cv-00911-PGR Document 1 Filed 05/03/13 Page 1 of 88

E-Mail asarnloerg@swlaw. com

IN THE IINITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

No. (Maricopa County Superior Court Case No. CV20l2-053 59 l)

INSURANCE COMPANY, a Delaware corporation; ENDURANCE AMEzuCAN SPECIALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, A

COMPANY, a Georgia company; and DOES 1 THROUGH 100, inblusive,

Case 2:13-cv-00911-PGR Document 1 Filed 05/03/13 Page 2 of 88

matter have filed

court.l The lawsuit is styled

of good faith and fair dealing. Plaintiffs

for fwo commercial property

Case 2:13-cv-00911-PGR Document 1 Filed 05/03/13 Page 3 of 88

of Presidio North Limited Partnership

(listing general and limited

?: .,o ' Jri

At no time has Westchester been

organized and existing

Arizona, nor at any time has its principal place of business

been located in the State of Arizona.

Defendant Commercial Industrial Building owners Alliance, Inc. d/b/a CIBA

california. upon information and belief, at no time has CIBA

been orga nized, and

Case 2:13-cv-00911-PGR Document 1 Filed 05/03/13 Page 4 of 88

existing under the laws of the state

Arizona, nor at any time has its principal place

Defendant certain underwriters at Lloyd's of London subscribing to policy nos.

Defendant Lexington Insurance company (hereinafter ,,Lexington,,)

organized and place

of Arizona, nor at any time has its principal

organized and existing under the laws

Case 2:13-cv-00911-PGR Document 1 Filed 05/03/13 Page 5 of 88

located in the State of Arizona,

Defendant Homeland Insurance Company of New York (hereinafter ,,Homeland,,)

Case 2:13-cv-00911-PGR Document 1 Filed 05/03/13 Page 6 of 88

Court of the State

Arizona in and for the County of Maricopa. Landmark was served

Attached to this notice of removal as Exhib

it "2" is a true and correct copy of

,z J 98.33 l?:.r I J g ,"

Case 2:13-cv-00911-PGR Document 1 Filed 05/03/13 Page 7 of 88

t in I --F >lsi: i3i I sEi = Hl 3s Qt) t

Case 2:13-cv-00911-PGR Document 1 Filed 05/03/13 Page 8 of 88

ial Building Owners dlbla CIBA Insurance Services

's of London 8N403300, , and

CLAUSEN MILLER P.C. 10 S. LaSalle Street Illinois 60603

Joann Selleck, Esq.

COZEN O'CONNOR 501 V/est B

ttornevs or H omela'nd Insurance Company of New York

lsl Karen Prentice

Case 2:13-cv-00911-PGR Document 1 Filed 05/03/13 Page 9 of 88

Case 2:13-cv-00911-PGR Document 1 Filed 05/03/13 Page 10 of 88

CER'IFICATE AND AGREEME*T OF LIMITED PARINERHIP pREsrDro N.RTH,,f,r.o pARrNERsr{r

of the limited partnershp is Presidio North Limited partnership, and

character of the busness of the partnership is the.acquist;on nd

IiXi:i:i,ot a. Address of the office:

partnership and the name and address or the asent ror

Name and eddess of statutory agent:

Ilir,n.,ro^elopment companv, an Arizona corporation ("s

Case 2:13-cv-00911-PGR Document 1 Filed 05/03/13 Page 11 of 88

Lmitd partner: Pat Simone ("Simone,,) 6402 Easr Cheney Drive

S. Development - real property/rgreed value . $g,9OO.OO.

sale and/or disposition r:r ar assets owned by the parrnership or