Case Header

Maricopa County Superior Court Case CV2013-000741: public docket details, parties, minute entries, documents, and official source links for Jones Skelton Hochuli , P L C.

Case Number

CV2013-000741

County

Maricopa

Caption

Not captured

Filed

1/22/2013

Case Type

Civil

Judge

Warner, Randall

Location

Downtown

Official Court Record

Official Court Record

Parties

Minute Entries

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

01/09/2014 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

01/07/2014

Docket Code 041
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. SALLY SCHNEIDER DUNCAN
C. Keller

Deputy

MANISH THAKRAR
GREGORY G MCGILL

v.

SURENDRA PALA
BIMAL R MERCHANT

BRAD A DENTON

SCHEDULING CONFERENCE SET

The Court is in receipt of the parties’ Stipulation and Joint Motion for Scheduling Order.
Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED approving and adopting the parties’ proposed deadlines as set forth in the
Scheduling Order, signed by the Court on January 6, 2014 and filed (entered) by the Clerk on
January 7, 2014.

Please note: The Court has signed a hard-copy version of the order provided with an
electronically filed pleading. Therefore, a copy of the Proposed Scheduling Order was
placed in the division’s outbox for pickup. After the order has been scanned and docketed by
the Clerk of Court, additional copies of this order may be available through ECR Online at
clerkofcourt.maricopa.gov or through AZTurboCourt.gov and from the Public Access Terminals
at the Clerk of Court’s offices located throughout Maricopa County.

IT IS ORDERED the parties shall participate in private mediation by April 30, 2014

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED setting a Telephonic Pretrial Status/Scheduling
Conference for May 9, 2014 at 10:00 a.m. for the purpose of setting a trial date if the case has
not settled. Time allotted: 15 minutes. Counsel shall have their trial calendars available. Counsel
for Plaintiff shall initiate the conference call by first arranging the presence of all other counsel

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

01/07/2014

Docket Code 041
Form V000A
Page 2

on the conference call and by calling this division at: (602)506-9042 promptly at the scheduled
time. The call should be placed from a land-line telephone in an area with no background noise
as this will prevent the parties from hearing the proceedings in the courtroom. The call may not
be placed from a vehicle. Please do not call from a cellular telephone.

HON. SALLY SCHNEIDER DUNCAN
Maricopa County Superior Court
Central Court Building
201 W. Jefferson, Courtroom 702
Phoenix, AZ 85003
Telephone number: 602-506-9042

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED if a Notice of Settlement is filed the Court will dismiss
the case with prejudice within thirty (30) days from the receipt of the Notice of Settlement.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED if there is a pending status conference scheduled with the
Court, and the parties have settled the case, the parties must file a Motion to Vacate Telephonic
Pretrial Status/Scheduling Conference within three (3) business days prior to the court
appearance or, in the alternative, shall be prepared to place a Rule 80(d) Agreement on the
record.

The parties are encouraged to view Judge Duncan’s online profile located at the Superior
Court’s website wwww.superiorcourt.maricopa.gov for additional information on appearing
before Judge Duncan.

NOTE: This Court utilizes FTR for an electronic record of the proceedings. However,
any party may request the presence of a court reporter by contacting the division three (3) court
business days before the scheduled hearing.

ALERT: The Arizona Supreme Court Administrative Order 2011-140 directs the Clerk's
Office not to accept paper filings from attorneys in civil cases. Civil cases must still be initiated
on paper; however, subsequent documents must be eFiled through AZTurboCourt unless an
exception defined in the Administrative Order applies.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

02/15/2018 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

02/08/2018

Docket Code 028
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. SHERRY K. STEPHENS
C. Ramirez

Deputy

MANISH THAKRAR
GREGORY G MCGILL

v.

SURENDRA PALA
BRYAN K LEVY

TELEPHONIC STATUS CONFERENCE SET

The Court has received and considered Defendant/Counterclaimant’s Motion for
Telephonic Conference Re: Discovery Dispute, filed on February 8, 2018. Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED setting a telephonic Status Conference on February 14, 2018 at 1:30
p.m. (15 minutes).

Counsel for Defendant shall initiate the call by arranging the presence of all parties and
contacting this division at 602-506-4818.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

02/16/2018 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

02/14/2018

Docket Code 029
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. SHERRY K. STEPHENS
T. DeRaddo

Deputy

MANISH THAKRAR
GREGORY G MCGILL

v.

SURENDRA PALA
BRYAN K LEVY

MINUTE ENTRY

East Court Building - Courtroom 712

2:00 p.m. This is the time set for a telephonic Status Conference. Appearing on behalf of
Plaintiff/Counter Defendant is counsel, Gregory G. McGill. Appearing on behalf of Defendant
Surendra Pala is counsel, Bryan K. Levy. Appearing on behalf of Third Party Defendants BIL
Investments, LLC and Usha Thakrar, is counsel, Gregory G. McGill.

A record of the proceedings is made digitally in lieu of a court reporter.

Discussion is held regarding Plaintiffs’ Motion to Compel Production of Documents,
filed on January 31, 2018 and on Defendant/Counterclaimant’s Motion for Telephonic
Conference Re: Discovery Dispute, filed on February 8, 2018.

Discussion is held regarding the types of documents requested by Plaintiff, whether
Defendant Pala may review them, and regarding the possible need for a protective order.

Mr. McGill requests that a protective order be in place.

For the reasons stated on the record,

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

02/14/2018

Docket Code 029
Form V000A
Page 2

Mr. McGill may draft a protective order and send it to Mr. Levy for review. Mr. Pala
shall make not any copies of the records, nor shall he take any records out of the Counsel’s
office. If the parties are unable to come to an agreement, they may contact the court’s Judicial
Assistant, Randy Collins, for the court’s assistance at: [email protected]

Discussion is held regarding Plaintiff’s assertion that Mr. Pala ignored the request for
Production of Documents. Mr. McGill requests $1500.00 in sanctions from Mr. Pala personally.

Discussion is held regarding Plaintiff’s Request for Production of Documents.

For the reasons stated on the record,

IT IS ORDERED granting Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel Production of Documents.

THE COURT FINDS that there exists a violation of the discovery rules. Mr. Pala did not
timely respond to Plaintiff.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED granting Plaintiff’s request for sanctions. Mr. McGill may
file an Application for Attorneys’ Fees for the Court’s review.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if Defendant wishes to do so, he may file a Response
to Plaintiff’s Application for Attorneys’ Fees.

The Court notes that it has granted the parties’ Stipulation to Extend Deadline to Conduct
Settlement Conference.

2:24 p.m. Matter concludes.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

03/06/2015 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

03/04/2015

Docket Code 094
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
JUDGE PRO TEM COLLEEN L. FRENCH
M. Nielsen

Deputy

MANISH THAKRAR
GREGORY G MCGILL

v.

SURENDRA PALA
BIMAL R MERCHANT

ORAL ARGUMENT SET

The Court is in receipt of Plaintiff’s Application for Attorneys Fees and Costs, filed on
February 4, 2015.

IT IS ORDERED setting this matter for oral argument on March 27, 2015 at 11:00
a.m. in this division. Time allotted: 30 minutes. Counsel/parties shall appear in-person.

THE HONORABLE COLLEEN FRENCH
MARICOPA COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT
EAST COURT BUILDING
101 W JEFFERSON
7TH FLOOR, COURTROOM 712
PHOENIX, AZ 85003
602-506-1462 TEL

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all pleadings shall be filed a minimum of five (5)
business days prior to oral argument. The Court will not consider a late filed pleading without
prior approval and may reschedule the oral argument at the Court’s convenience.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

03/04/2015

Docket Code 094
Form V000A
Page 2

Notice Regarding Substantive Motions: The Court will not accept omnibus motions,
responses and replies. All motions, responses and replies shall be filed on individual claims and
counts separately. Counsel shall not combine any motion with a responsive pleading. If omnibus
motions are filed, the Court reserves the right to reject the motions. No motion shall exceed the
page limitation without prior Court approval.

Please note: The Court reserves the right to vacate and reset, at its own discretion,
any hearing for which the parties submit pleadings within 48 hours prior to the
commencement of the hearing, without prior approval from the Court.

NOTE: This Court utilizes FTR for an electronic record of the proceedings. However,
any party may request the presence of a court reporter by contacting the division three (3) court
business days before the scheduled hearing.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

03/13/2018 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

03/08/2018

Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. SHERRY K. STEPHENS
T. DeRaddo

Deputy

MANISH THAKRAR
GREGORY G MCGILL

v.

SURENDRA PALA
SURENDRA PALA
1601 N SABA ST # 247
CHANDLER AZ 85225

MINUTE ENTRY - RULING

The Court has considered the Application for Rule 37 fees filed February 20, 2018 and
the Affidavit in Support of Attorney Fees. No objection was filed.

The Court previously found Defendant did not timely respond to Plaintiff’s discovery
request and that a sanction under Rule 37(a)(5), Ariz.R.Civ.P., is appropriate. Plaintiff requests
the Court order Defendant to pay attorney fees in the amount of $1,500.00 as a sanction for the
discovery violation.

The Court has considered the reasonableness of the billing rate, the hours expended and
the amount of the attorneys’ fees requested. See A.R.S. §12-341.01, A.R.S. § 12-349, Rule 54
(g)(2), Ariz. R.Civ.P., Berry v. 352 E. Virginia, L.L.C., 228 Ariz. 9, 13, 261 P.3d 784, 788 (App.
2011), and ABC Supply, Inc. v. Edwards, 191 Ariz. 48, 51, 952 P.2d 286, 290 (App. 1996), and
Schweiger v. China Doll Restaurant, Inc., 138 Ariz. 183, 673 P.2d 927 (App. 1983). The Court
has also considered Defendant’s lack of objection. See Geller v. Lesk, 230 Ariz. 624, 628 (App.
2012) (once the party requesting fees makes a prima facie case the fees are reasonable, the
burden shifts to the opposing party to establish the amount requested is clearly excessive), Canon
School Dist. No. 50 v. W.E.S. Constr. Co., 177 Ariz. 431, 443, 868 P.2d 1014, 1026 (App.
1993)(opposing party must make specific objections with factual detail pointing out which

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

03/08/2018

Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 2

particular billing entries are unreasonable) and Smith v. American Express Travel Related Servs.
Co., 179 Ariz. 131, 140, 876 P.2d 1166, 1175 (App. 1994)(an opponent must make more than
sweeping and conclusory allegations to demonstrate unreasonableness of a fee request).

The Court finds attorney fees in the amount of $1500.00 are reasonable and were
incurred for the reason stated above and should be awarded pursuant to Rule 37(a)(5),
Ariz.R.Civ.P.

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED Defendant shall pay $1,500.00 for attorneys’ fees incurred in
connection with the discovery violation to Plaintiff on or before May 1, 2018.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

03/28/2018 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

03/23/2018

Docket Code 028
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. SHERRY K. STEPHENS
T. DeRaddo

Deputy

MANISH THAKRAR
GREGORY G MCGILL

v.

SURENDRA PALA
SURENDRA PALA
1601 N SABA ST # 247
CHANDLER AZ 85225

TELEPHONIC STATUS CONFERENCE SET

The Court has received Defendant/Counterclaimant, Surendra Pala’s Motion to Extend
Trial and Other Dates, filed on March 15, 2018; and Plaintiff/Counter Defendant and Third Party
Defendant, BIL Investment, LLC’s Response to in Opposition to Pala’s Motion to Extend Trial,
filed on March 20, 218.

IT IS ORDERED setting a Telephonic Status / Scheduling Conference on March 29,
2018 at 8:15 a.m. (15 minutes).

The parties are expected to be prepared with their calendars as well as the calendars of
any primary witnesses so the Court can set a firm trial date for this matter.

Counsel for Plaintiff shall initiate the call by arranging the presence of all parties and
contacting this division at 602-506-4818.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

04/09/2015 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

03/27/2015

Docket Code 005
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
JUDGE PRO TEM COLLEEN L. FRENCH
S. Ortega

Deputy

MANISH THAKRAR
GREGORY G MCGILL

v.

SURENDRA PALA
BIMAL R MERCHANT

MINUTE ENTRY

East Court Building - Courtroom 712

11:03 a.m. This is the time set for Oral Argument re: Plaintiff’s Attorney Fees. Plaintiff
is represented by counsel, Gregory G. McGill. Defendant is represented by counsel, Bimal R.
Merchant.

A record of the proceedings is made by audio and/or videotape in lieu of a court reporter.

Oral argument is presented.

Based upon matters presented to the Court,

IT IS ORDERED taking this matter under advisement.

11:57 a.m. Matter concludes.

LATER: This matter having been taken under advisement, and the Court having
considered the matters presented,

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

03/27/2015

Docket Code 005
Form V000A
Page 2

The Court has received and reviewed Plaintiff’s Application for Attorney’s Fees and
Costs, Defendant/Counterclaimant Pala’s Objection to Plaintiff’s Application for Attorney’s Fees
and Costs, and the Reply on Plaintiff’s Application for Fees. The Court has also considered all
related documents and pleadings, the arguments of counsel, and all relevant statutes, procedural
rules and case law.

THE COURT FINDS that Plaintiff/Counterdefendant is entitled to an award of his
reasonable attorney’s fees and costs pursuant to A.R.S. § 12-341.01 on Count One of his
Complaint, and regarding the issues surrounding the $8000 loan; fees and costs are awardable
pursuant to the Note underlying the $8,000 loan as well.

THE COURT FURTHER FINDS, however, that the amount of the fees sought by
Plaintiff/Counterdefendant is unreasonable, given all of the circumstances in this case.

THE COURT FURTHER FINDS that an award of attorney’s fees in the amount of
$50,000 and costs in the amount of $1,914.63 to be reasonable, under all of the circumstances
presented. Therefore,

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED entering judgment against Defendant/Counterclaimant
and in favor of Plaintiff/Counterdefendant in the amount of $50,000.00 for attorney’s fees and
$1,914.63 for costs.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff/Counterdefendant submit a proposed from
of judgment within 10 days of the date of the filing of this minute entry.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

04/03/2018 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

03/29/2018

Docket Code 064
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. SHERRY K. STEPHENS
T. DeRaddo

Deputy

MANISH THAKRAR
GREGORY G MCGILL

v.

SURENDRA PALA
SURENDRA PALA
1601 N SABA ST # 247
CHANDLER AZ 85225

JURY TRIAL RESET
FINAL TRIAL MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE RESET

East Court Building - Courtroom 712

8:28 a. m. This is the time set for a telephonic Status Conference on Defendant’s Motion
to Extend Trial and Other dates, filed on March 15, 2018. Appearing on behalf of Plaintiff /
Counterdefendant, is counsel, Gregory McGill. Defendant/Counterclaimant, Surendra Pala,
appears on his own behalf. All parties appear telephonically.

A record of the proceedings is made digitally in lieu of a court reporter.

Discussion is held regarding the status of the case. Counsel for Defendant withdrew from
this case on February 28, and Defendant has not retained counsel. Mr. McGill reports that he has
received a check for $1500.00 from Mr. Levy for sanctions.

Mr. McGill reports that discovery is scheduled for closure on March 31, 2018.
Defendant Pala requests that discovery be extended.

For the reasons stated on the record,

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

03/29/2018

Docket Code 064
Form V000A
Page 2

IT IS ORDERED extending the discovery deadlines that have not already passed, for 4
weeks; thus, discovery is closed on April 30, 2018.

Discussion is held regarding counsel, Paul Conant’s (counsel for Manish Thakrar in the
capacity of Judgment Collection only) Motion for Supplemental Proceeding For Examination of
Judgment Debtor, Surendra Pala, filed on February 26, 2018.

IT IS ORDERED granting Mr. Conant, counsel for Plaintiff Thakrar’s Motion for
Judgment Debtor Exam.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Mr. Conant shall submit an Order for the Court’s
signature regarding the date and time that he will be available to conduct the exam.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if Mr. McGill files a motion for summary judgment, as
he stated he would, the oral argument shall be held on June 5, 2018 at 8:30 a.m.

TRIAL INFORMATION

IT IS ORDERED vacating the Pretrial Management Conference set for April 2, 2018
at 9:00 a.m. and resetting the same for June 5, 2018 at 8:30 a.m. (Time allotted: one hour) in
this division.

LET THE RECORD REFLECT that counsel who will be the lead trial attorneys on the
case are required to be in Court for the Pretrial Management Conference.

FAILURE OF TRIAL COUNSEL TO ATTEND THE PRETRIAL MANAGEMENT
CONFERENCE MAY RESULT IN PERSONAL SANCTIONS.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED vacating the 2-day Jury Trial set for May 7-8, 2018 and
resetting the same for, June 25-26, 2018 at 9:30 a.m. in this division. Trial days begin at 9:30
a.m.

THIS IS A FIRM TRIAL SETTING NO CONTINUANCE SHALL BE GRANTED

Final Joint Pretrial Statement: The Final Joint Pretrial Statement shall be due in this
division by 5:00 p.m. June 5, 2018.

Counsel who will be lead trial lawyers, are required to meet and prepare the final Joint
Pretrial Statement. At this meeting Counsel shall in good faith address and attempt to reach
agreement, at a minimum, on the following:

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

03/29/2018

Docket Code 064
Form V000A
Page 3

 Exhibits: counsel shall go over all exhibits each side proposes to introduce at
time of trial and attempt to reach agreement on the introduction of exhibits.
Written stipulations to admit specific exhibits into evidence are encouraged. All
exhibits shall be exchanged 30 business days prior to the pretrial conference.
The Court will hear and rule on all objections at the final trial management
conference. Any objections to exhibits shall be in writing and shall set forth with
specificity the substantive basis for the objection.
 Depositions: review all deposition summaries, videotaped depositions and
excerpts from deposition transcripts and attempt to reach agreement on their
introduction at trial;
 Statement of case: Counsel are to stipulate to a brief statement of the case the
Court may read to the jury during its voir dire;
 Discovery disputes: Counsel shall discuss and make a good faith effort to resolve
any discovery disputes; and
 Jury instruction: Counsel shall discuss preliminary, standard, and final jury
instructions and attempt to reach agreement on all proposed jury instructions.

At the final trial management conference counsel shall also be prepared to discuss with
the Court:

 Proposed length of counsels’ voir dire, opening statements, examination of
witnesses and closing arguments;
 Jury instructions [preliminary, standard, and final] and juror notebooks;
 Number of jurors and any stipulation regarding the size of the jury panel and
whether alternate juror[s] may deliberate in the verdict;
 Voir dire questions;
 Stipulation regarding invoking the rule of exclusion of witnesses during the
course of trial;
 The need for an interpreter for any witness[es] called at trial.

Motions in Limine: Any Motions in Limine shall be filed no later than May 6, 2018.
Any Motion in Limine not timely filed will be deemed waived. Failure to file a timely response
will be deemed to be consent to granting of the motion. The moving party shall not file a reply
in support of a Motion in Limine.

The parties are reminded that the primary purpose of a Motion in Limine, is to avoid
disclosing to the jury prejudicial matters which may compel a mistrial. State v. Superior Court,
108 Ariz. 396, 397, 499 P.2d 152 [1972].

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

03/29/2018

Docket Code 064
Form V000A
Page 4

Witness Information Form: Lead Counsel will meet prior to the trial management
conference to complete the Witness Information Form which is attached to this minute entry.
The jointly completed form must be brought to the Court at the time of the trial management
conference. The Court will use the Witness Information Form to predict the length of the trial
for the jurors.

Attachment: Witness Information Form.

Depositions to be used at trial: The parties shall comply with the requirements of Rule
16 [d]. To the extent possible, depositions should be summarized. In addition, narrative
summaries with brief excerpts of deposition question and answer testimony are preferred at trial
rather than the reading of many pages of testimony.

Videotape deposition should be edited.

Before a deposition may be used for any purpose at trial, the original transcripts must be
provided to this trial court division’s clerk and an additional copy must be provided to the Court.

As to any deposition testimony which actually will be presented at trial in lieu of live
testimony, counsel shall do the following:

 No less than 10 business days before the pretrial conference identify in writing the
deposition testimony to be presented;
 No less than 5 business days before the pretrial conference opposing counsel shall
submit in writing any objections to the proposed deposition testimony; and
 Assuming there are objections, lead counsel shall meet, prior to the date set for
the pretrial conference in an attempt to amicably resolve the issue; and
 Assuming no agreement is reached the parties shall submit in writing a list of any
objections to the proposed deposition testimony and the specific legal basis for
any such objection[s].

Marking Exhibits for Trial: Trial counsel are directed to meet and discuss all exhibits
prior to marking them for trial. Counsel shall attempt to agree on the authenticity, foundation
and admission of as many exhibits as possible. Counsel shall contact the courtroom clerk at 602-
506-1471 and present all exhibits to be used at trial no later than June 15 2018.

Counsel shall present all exhibits with a written list of exhibit description to the Clerk of
this Court at the time scheduled by the clerk. The exhibits will be marked serially as they are
listed in the Pretrial Statement- Plaintiff’s first, Defendant’s second. Counsel will make sure

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

03/29/2018

Docket Code 064
Form V000A
Page 5

they do not bring duplicate copies of exhibits. Counsel shall also present original depositions
for filing at that time.

Attachment to Joint Pretrial Statement: The parties shall exchange the Final Joint
Pretrial Statement and shall attach to this pleading the following:

 Proposed voir dire questions;
 Joint set of agreed-upon preliminary, standard, and final jury instructions. These
jury instruction shall be placed on a CD diskette in Microsoft Word format;
 Separate set of requested instructions that have not been agreed upon. These non-
agreed upon jury instruction also to be placed on a CD diskette in Microsoft Word
format. A copy of any and all case authority relied upon by counsel for the
requested instruction shall be included;
 Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusion of Law if this is to be a bench trial and
a request for findings of fact and conclusion of law has been or will be filed. If no
such request is received, the request shall be deemed waived;
 Jointly-Completed Witness Information Form;
 A brief stipulated statement or summary of the case, which the Court will read to
the jury at the commencement of the trial;
 Any Trial Memorandum [optional] which a party wishes to submit to the Court;
 A comprehensive outline of each expert’s separate opinions and a detailed
description of the factual/substantive basis for each such opinion; and
 A copy of any and all agreed upon material to be included in the jurors’ individual
notebooks.

8:45 a.m. Matter concludes.

WITNESS INFORMATION FORM

WITNESSES FOR PLAINTIFF(S)

WITNESS NAME
DIRECT
CROSS

1

2

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

03/29/2018

Docket Code 064
Form V000A
Page 6

3

4

5

6

DIRECT & CROSS TOTAL: _________________

WITNESSES FOR DEFENDANT(S)

WITNESS NAME
DIRECT
CROSS

1

2

3

4

5

6

DIRECT & CROSS TOTAL: _______________

TOTAL WITNESS TIME ESTIMATE: ___________________________

TIME ESTIMATE FOR:
PLAINTIFF
DEFENDANT
OPENING STATEMENT

CLOSING ARGUMENT
1st:
2nd:

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

03/29/2018

Docket Code 064
Form V000A
Page 7

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

04/05/2018 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

04/03/2018

Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. SHERRY K. STEPHENS
T. DeRaddo

Deputy

MANISH THAKRAR
GREGORY G MCGILL

v.

SURENDRA PALA
GORDON S BUELER

PAUL A CONANT

MINUTE ENTRY

A clerical error having been made,

IT IS ORDERED correcting the minute entry dated March 29, 2018, page 2, to reflect
that the two-day Bench Trial originally set for May 7-8, 2018 was vacated, and a two-day Bench
Trial was reset on June 25-26, 2018 at 9:30 a.m., instead of Jury Trial.

The balance of the minute entry remains unchanged.

The minute entry dated March 29, 2018 is available for viewing at:
http://www.courtminutes.maricopa.gov.

Chris DeRose, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

04/13/2018 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

04/10/2018

Docket Code 022
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. SHERRY K. STEPHENS
T. DeRaddo

Deputy

MANISH THAKRAR
GREGORY G MCGILL

v.

SURENDRA PALA
GORDON S BUELER

PAUL A CONANT

ORDER SIGNED

The Court has received Plaintiff/Counterclaimant’s Motion for Supplemental Proceeding
for Examination of Judgment Debtor Surendra Pala.

IT IS ORDERED approving motion, all in accordance with the formal written Order for
Supplemental Proceeding for Examination of Judgment Debtor, Surendra Pala, signed by the
Court on April 6, 2018 and entered (filed) by the clerk on April 10, 2018.

Please note: The Court has signed a hard-copy version of the order provided with an
electronically filed pleading. After the order has been scanned and docketed by the Clerk of
Court, copies of this order may be available through ECR Online at clerkofcourt.maricopa.gov or
through AZTurboCourt.gov and from the Public Access Terminals at the Clerk of Court’s
offices located throughout Maricopa County.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

04/15/2014 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

04/14/2014

Docket Code 094
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. SALLY SCHNEIDER DUNCAN
C. Keller

Deputy

MANISH THAKRAR
GREGORY G MCGILL

v.

SURENDRA PALA
BIMAL R MERCHANT

STERLING R PETERSON

ORAL ARGUMENT SET

The Court is in receipt of Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel, filed on March 24, 2014 and
Defendant’s Response, filed on April 7, 2014.

IT IS ORDERED setting this matter for oral argument on May 9, 2014 at 10:00 a.m. in
this division in conjunction with the status conference previously set. Time allotted: 15 minutes.
Counsel/parties shall appear in-person.

HON. SALLY SCHNEIDER DUNCAN
Maricopa County Superior Court
Central Court Building
201 W. Jefferson, Courtroom 702
Phoenix, AZ 85003
Telephone number: 602-506-9042

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all pleadings shall be filed a minimum of five (5)
business days prior to oral argument. The Court will not consider a late filed pleading without
prior approval and may reschedule the oral argument at the Court’s convenience.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

04/14/2014

Docket Code 094
Form V000A
Page 2

Notice Regarding Substantive Motions: The Court will not accept omnibus motions,
responses and replies. All motions, responses and replies shall be filed on individual claims and
counts separately. Counsel shall not combine any motion with a responsive pleading. If omnibus
motions are filed, the Court reserves the right to reject the motions. No motion shall exceed the
page limitation without prior Court approval.

The parties are encouraged to view Judge Duncan’s online profile located at the Superior
Court’s website wwww.superiorcourt.maricopa.gov for additional information on appearing
before Judge Duncan.

NOTE: This Court utilizes FTR for an electronic record of the proceedings. However,
any party may request the presence of a court reporter by contacting the division three (3) court
business days before the scheduled hearing.

Effective April 15, 2014 new civil rules and forms are in effect for managing cases
moving to trial. Be sure to review the new Civil Rules 16, 26, 37, 38, 72 through 74 and 77.

Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

04/17/2019 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

04/16/2019

Docket Code 056
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. SHERRY K. STEPHENS
T. DeRaddo

Deputy

MANISH THAKRAR
GREGORY G MCGILL

v.

SURENDRA PALA
GORDON S BUELER

GORDON S BUELER / BUELER JONES
L L P
1300 N MCCLINTOCK DR STE B4
CHANDLER AZ 85226
PAUL A CONANT
JUDGE STEPHENS

EVIDENTIARY HEARING SET

The Court has received Defendant’s Motion to Set Amount of Supersedeas Bond – Rule
7(a)(2), Arizona Rules Civil Procedure, filed on March 15, 2019; Plaintiff’s Response to Motion
to Set Amount of Bond, filed on April 2, 2019, and Defendant Pala’s Reply in Motion to Set
Amount of Supersedeas Bond and Request for Hearing, filed on April 12, 2019.

At the request of Defendant Pala and pursuant to Rule 7(a)(2) Arizona Rules of Civil
Appellate Procedure,

IT IS ORDERED setting an Evidentiary Hearing on May 2, 2019 at 9:30 a.m. (Time
allotted: 30 minutes) in this division.

Honorable Sherry Stephens
Maricopa County Superior Court
101 W. Jefferson, East Court Building, Suite 712
Phoenix, 85003

(602) 506-4818

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

04/16/2019

Docket Code 056
Form V000A
Page 2

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED the parties shall submit exhibits to the clerk by not later
than 3:00 p.m. on April 25, 2019.

All court proceedings are recorded by audio and video method and not by a court
reporter. The parties or counsel may request a CD of the proceedings. For copies of hearings or
trial proceedings recorded previously, please call Electronic Records Services at 602-506-7100.

Pursuant to Local Rule 2.22, if a party desires a court reporter for any proceeding in
which a court reporter is not mandated by Arizona Supreme Court Rule 30, the party must
submit a written request to the assigned judicial officer at least ten (10) judicial days in advance
of the hearing, and must pay the authorized fee to the Clerk of the Court at least two (2) judicial
days before the proceeding. The fee is $140 for a half-day and $280 for a full day.

Chris DeRose, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

04/19/2018 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

04/17/2018

Docket Code 028
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. SHERRY K. STEPHENS
T. DeRaddo

Deputy

MANISH THAKRAR
GREGORY G MCGILL

v.

SURENDRA PALA
GORDON S BUELER

TELEPHONIC STATUS CONFERENCE SET

The court has received Defendant/Counterclaimant’s Motion for Protective Order, filed
on April 13, 2018.

IT IS ORDERED setting a Telephonic Status Conference on April 23, 2018 at 8:15 a.m.
(15 minutes).

Counsel for Defendant shall initiate the call by arranging the presence of all parties and
contacting this division at 602-506-4818.

Chris DeRose, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

04/25/2018 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

04/23/2018

Docket Code 029
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. SHERRY K. STEPHENS
T. DeRaddo

Deputy

MANISH THAKRAR
GREGORY G MCGILL

v.

SURENDRA PALA
GORDON S BUELER

MINUTE ENTRY

East Court Building - Courtroom 712

8:16 a.m. This is the time set for a telephonic Status Conference regarding
Defendant/Counterclaimant Surendra Pala’s Motion for Protective Order. Appearing on behalf
of Plaintiff/Counter Defendant, Manish Thakrar, Third Party Defendant, BIL Investments, LLC,
and Third Party Defendant, Usha Thakrar, is counsel, Gregory McGill. Appearing on behalf of
Defendant/Counter Claimant, Surendra Pala is counsel, Gordon Bueler.

A record of the proceedings is made digitally in lieu of a court reporter.

Discussion is held regarding the status of the case.

For the reasons stated on the record,

IT IS ORDERED denying Defendant Surendra Pala’s Motion for Protective Order.

Discussion is held regarding the scope of the line of questioning in the upcoming
deposition of Surendra Pala. Mr. McGill requests that the Court allow him to take this additional
deposition in order to develop the record regarding Defendant’s counterclaim.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

04/23/2018

Docket Code 029
Form V000A
Page 2

Discussion is held regarding the damages claim.

For the reasons stated on the record,

IT IS ORDERED that the deposition may take place as scheduled, and that discovery
may occur regarding the facts that were discovered not previously addressed in the prior
depositions, to include matters related to late discovery issues.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that limited discovery may take place regarding the recent
findings surrounding the Court of Appeals’ decision regarding certain dates/timelines.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED affirming the Final Trial Management Conference and Oral
Argument on Plaintiff’s April 14, 2018 Motion for Summary Judgment on June 5, 2018 at 8:30
a.m.

8:29 a.m. Matter concludes.

Chris DeRose, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

05/01/2018 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

04/26/2018

Docket Code 029
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. SHERRY K. STEPHENS
N. Johnson

Deputy

MANISH THAKRAR
GREGORY G MCGILL

v.

SURENDRA PALA
GORDON S BUELER

BRAD A DENTON
PAUL A CONANT

MINUTE ENTRY

East Court Building – Courtroom 712

9:47 a.m. This is the time set for a Telephonic Status Conference regarding
Plaintiff/Counterdefendant and Third Party Defendants’ Motion to Quash Subpoenas on Patel
and Kanabar, filed April 16, 2018. Plaintiff/Counterdefendant Manish Thakrar and Third Party
Defendants BIL Investments, LLC and Usha Thakrar are represented by counsel, Gregory G.
McGill and Paul A. Conant. Defendant/Counterclaimant Surendra Pala is represented by counsel,
Gordon S. Bueler. Brad A. Denton is present on behalf of Bipin Kanabar.

A record of the proceedings is made digitally in lieu of a court reporter.

Discussion is held regarding the status of the case and the various delays.

Mr. Denton informs the Court of Mr. Kanabar’s current medical condition.

Discussion continues regarding the status of the case and the extension of deadlines in the
March 29, 2018 minute entry.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

04/26/2018

Docket Code 029
Form V000A
Page 2

Discussion is held regarding the briefing deadlines on Plaintiff/Counterdefendant and
Third Party Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment, filed April 14, 2018.

For the reasons stated on the record,

IT IS ORDERED granting Plaintiff/Counterdefendant and Third Party Defendants’
Motion to Quash Subpoenas on Patel and Kanabar.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant/Counterclaimant shall file a Response to
Plaintiff/Counterdefendant and Third Party Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgement by
May 15, 2018.

10:20 a.m. Matter concludes.

Chris DeRose, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

05/08/2018 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

05/02/2018

Docket Code 029
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. SHERRY K. STEPHENS
T. DeRaddo

Deputy

MANISH THAKRAR
GREGORY G MCGILL

v.

SURENDRA PALA
GORDON S BUELER

MINUTE ENTRY

East Court Building - Courtroom 712

3:10 p.m. This is the time set for a telephonic Status Conference regarding a discovery
dispute during a deposition. Appearing on behalf of Plaintiff is counsel, Gregory McGill.
Appearing on behalf of Defendant is Gordon Bueler.

A record of the proceedings is made digitally in lieu of a court reporter.

The discovery dispute is regarding Defendant, Surendra Pala, and the fact that Counsel
for Defendant, Mr. Bueler did not give notice that an interpreter is being used. Additionally, Mr.
McGill objects to the fact that the deposition is set for two hours, and in the past, Mr. Pala did
not appear to need an interpreter, and using the interpreter will take up part of the time, as well.

For the reasons stated on the record,

IT IS ORDERED that today’s deposition shall proceed using the interpreter. The time
needs to be made up so that Mr. McGill will have a full two hours for the deposition, as ordered
by the court.

3:20 p.m. Matter concludes.

Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

05/07/2019 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

05/02/2019

Docket Code 020
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. SHERRY K. STEPHENS
S. Perez

Deputy

MANISH THAKRAR
GREGORY G MCGILL

v.

SURENDRA PALA
GORDON S BUELER

GORDON S BUELER / BUELER JONES
L L P
1300 N MCCLINTOCK DR STE B4
CHANDLER AZ 85226
JUDGE STEPHENS

MINUTE ENTRY

Prior to commencement of hearing, Defendant’s exhibits 1-8 are marked for
identification.

ECB Courtroom: 712

9:37 a.m. This is the time set for Evidentiary Hearing on Defendant’s Motion to Set
Amount of Supersedeas Bond – Rule 7(a)(2), Arizona Rules Civil Procedure, filed on March 15,
2019; Plaintiff’s Response to Motion to Set Amount of Bond, filed on April 2, 2019, and Defendant
Pala’s Reply in Motion to Set Amount of Supersedeas Bond and Request for Hearing, filed on April
12, 2019. Plaintiff is represented by Counsel Gregory G. McGill. Defendant Surendra Pala,
assisted by Court Interpreter Salman Akbar, is present and represented by Counsel Gordon S.
Bueler.

Argument commences.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

05/02/2019

Docket Code 020
Form V000A
Page 2

Surendra Pala is sworn and testifies with the assistance of a court interpreter.

Defendant’s exhibits 1-8 are received in evidence.

Based on the argument presented,

IT IS ORDERED taking the matter under advisement.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED Plaintiff shall file a supplement briefing to the case law
cited by Defendant’s counsel by 5:00 p.m. on May 7, 2019. Defendant may file as well.

10:42 a.m. Matter concludes.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

05/05/2017 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

05/04/2017

Docket Code 028
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE JOSHUA D. ROGERS
S. Ortega

Deputy

MANISH THAKRAR
GREGORY G MCGILL

v.

SURENDRA PALA
SURENDRA PALA
1601 N SABA ST
UNIT 267
CHANDLER AZ 85225

BRYAN K LEVY

STATUS CONFERENCE SET

The Court having received the Court of Appeals Mandate in this matter,

IT IS ORDERED setting a Telephonic Status Conference on May 16, 2017 at 9:00 a.m.
(time allotted: 15 minutes), in this division.

HONORABLE JOSHUA D. ROGERS
MARICOPA COUNTY SUPERIOR COURT
EAST COURT BUILDING
101 W. JEFFERSON
7TH FLOOR, COURTROOM 712
PHOENIX, AZ 85003
602-506-1603

NOTE: Counsel for Plaintiff is to initiate the telephonic conference by first arranging
the presence of all other counsel or self-represented parties on the conference call and by calling
this division at the scheduled time.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

05/04/2017

Docket Code 028
Form V000A
Page 2

The proceeding will take place in the Superior Court’s “e-courtroom.” A record of the
proceedings will be made digitally in lieu of a court reporter. Should you want an unofficial
copy of the proceedings, the parties or counsel may request a videotape or CD of the proceedings
for a $30.00 charge. If a CD or videotape is requested, please obtain a form from the courtroom
clerk or from the Self Service Center to request a daily copy of a court hearing or trial
proceeding being conducted. Pay the applicable fee at the Self Service Center. Attach the
receipt showing payment of the fee and present both the receipt and the form to the bailiff. For
copies of hearings or trial proceedings recorded previously, please call Electronic Records
Services at 602-506-7100. Should an official transcript be required, you may request that the
court prepare it. The party ordering the transcript must pay for it. To request a transcript, call
602-506-7100 and provide the date of the proceeding, the case number, the case caption, if the
transcript is for an appeal, and your name, address, and telephone number.

With this new technology, a court reporter is likely not required and the parties are
encouraged to experience the court's video recording system before requesting a court
reporter. Pursuant to Local Rule 2.22, if a party desires a court reporter for any proceeding in
which a court reporter is not mandated by Arizona Supreme Court Rule 30, the party must
submit a written request to the assigned judicial officer at least ten (10) judicial days in advance
of the hearing, and must pay the authorized fee to the Clerk of the Court at least two (2) judicial
days before the proceeding. The fee is $140 for a half-day and $280 for a full day.

PLEASE NOTE: This division requires that all motions, responses, replies and other
Court requested filings in this case must be submitted individually. Counsel shall not combine
any motion with a responsive pleading. All motions are to be filed separately and designated as
such. No pleadings will be accepted if filed in combination with another.

NOTE: The Court was unaware of the Mandate until this date, hence the delay in the
setting of the Status Conference.

Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

05/09/2019 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

05/08/2019

Docket Code 926
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. SHERRY K. STEPHENS
T. DeRaddo

Deputy

MANISH THAKRAR
GREGORY G MCGILL

v.

SURENDRA PALA
GORDON S BUELER

GORDON S BUELER / BUELER JONES
L L P
1300 N MCCLINTOCK DR STE B4
CHANDLER AZ 85226
JUDGE STEPHENS

GORDON S BUELER / BUELER JONES
L L P
1300 N MCCLINTOCK DR STE B4
CHANDLER AZ 85226
JUDGE STEPHENS

MINUTE ENTRY - RULING

The Court has considered the Motion to Set Amount of Supersedeas Bond-Rule 7(a)(2),
Arizona Rules Civil Appellate Procedure filed March 15, 2019, the Response to Motion to Set
Bond filed April 2, 2019, the Reply in Motion to Set Amount of Supersedeas Bond and Request
for Hearing filed April 12, 2019, Thakrar’s Supplemental Memorandum Re Bond Amount filed
May 7, 2019, and the evidence and oral argument presented on May 2, 2019. In the motion,
Defendant Pala requests the Court set the supersedeas bond amount at zero dollars pending his
appeal to the Arizona Court of Appeals.

Following a bench trial, the Court awarded zero dollars in actual damages but ordered
Defendant to pay $77,900 to Plaintiff for attorneys’ fees. A judgment was issued in November
2018. Defendant Pala contends collection on the judgment should be stayed and no supersedeas

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

05/08/2019

Docket Code 926
Form V000A
Page 2

bond required, citing to Rule 7(a)(4)(A), Arizona Rules of Civil Appellate Procedure, in effect in
November 2018. Plaintiff Thakrar contends the superseadas bond should be set at an amount that
includes the award of attorneys’ fees, citing to the current version of Rule 7(a)(4)(A),
Ariz.R.Civ.P., City Center Executive Plaza, LLC v. Jantzen, 344 P.3d 339 (2015) and Desert
Mountain Properties v. Liberty Mutual, 225 Ariz. 194 (2010).

Effective January 4, 2019, Rule 7, Arizona Rules of Civil Appellate Procedure, was
amended. As amended Rule 7, Arizona Rules of Civil Appellate Procedure, requires the Court to
set the amount of the supersedeas bond relating to the monetary award to include total damages,
costs, attorney’s fees and prejudgment interest. The former version stated that the amount of the
supersedeas bond did not include attorney’s fees but only the total amount of damages awarded.
A.R.S. § 12-2108 provides that the amount of the bond necessary to stay execution during the
course of all appeals shall be set at the total amount of damages awarded excluding punitive
damages. In City Center Executive Plaza, LLC v. Jantzen, 237 Ariz. 37 (App. 2015), the Court of
Appeals found the trial court erred in considering attorneys’ fees as damages in setting the
amount of the supersedeas bond. The Court found that word “damages” used in A.R.S. § 12-
1208 does not include attorneys’ fees awarded by statute but means compensation for actual
injury.

Plaintiff contends the current version of Rule 7, Ariz.R.Civ.P., should apply and that
there is an applicable exception in the City Center decision as stated in Desert Mountain
Properties v. Liberty Mutual, 225 Ariz. 194 (App. 2010) (damages” include expenses (attorneys’
fees) when the breach of contract required a party to incur expenses to protect his interest and
thus made it a legal consequence of the original wrongful act). The Court agrees with Plaintiff
that the current version of Rule 7 should apply but recognizes that it is inconsistent with the
provisions of A.R.S. § 12-2108. In City Center, the Court of Appeals relied on the language in
the statute to decide the case. Also see Starr Pass Resort Developments, LLC v. Harrington, 245
Ariz. 495 (App. 2018) (both the legislature and the court have rulemaking power; in the event of
an irreconcilable conflict between a procedural statute and a rule, the rule prevails; however, if
the statute is substantive, the statute controls). The Court disagrees with Plaintiff that the
exception noted in City Center and Desert Mountain applies here. The Desert Mountain case
involved an indemnity clause. Liberty Mutual failed to accept coverage, requiring Desert
Mountain to incur attorneys’ fees and other costs. That Court found those fees and expenses were
damages under the insurance indemnity provision. The facts in this case are more like those in
City Center.

Here, no actual or compensatory damages were awarded by the Court following trial.
Thus, a supersedeas bond of zero dollars is appropriate pursuant to A.R.S. § 12-2108 and City
Center Executive Plaza, LLC v. Jantzen, 237 Ariz. 37 (App. 2015). Also, the Court finds, based
upon the testimony of Defendant Pala on May 2, 2019, that Defendant/Appellant Pala will suffer

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

05/08/2019

Docket Code 926
Form V000A
Page 3

substantial economic hard if required to post a supersedeas bond. See A.R.S. § 12-2108(C) and
Rule 7(a)(9)(B), Arizona Rules of Civil Appellate Procedure.

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED granting the Motion to Set Amount of Supersedeas Bond-Rule
7(a)(2), Arizona Rules Civil Appellate Procedure filed March 15, 2019 and setting the
supersedeas bond in the amount of zero dollars.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

05/16/2014 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

05/09/2014

Docket Code 005
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. SALLY SCHNEIDER DUNCAN
C. Castro

Deputy

MANISH THAKRAR
GREGORY G MCGILL

v.

SURENDRA PALA
BIMAL R MERCHANT

STERLING R PETERSON

MINUTE ENTRY

Courtroom 702 – Central Court Building

10:15 a.m. This is the time set for oral argument on Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel, filed on
March 24, 2014. Plaintiff Manish Thakrar is present telephonically and is represented by counsel,
Gregory G. McGill. Defendant Surendra Pala is represented by counsel, Bimal R. Merchant.
Defendant Bipin Kanabar is represented telephonically by counsel Brad A. Denton.

A record of the proceedings is made by audio and/or videotape in lieu of a court reporter.

Oral argument is presented to the Court.

For the reasons set forth on the record,

IT IS ORDERED granting the Motion to Compel.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant’s counsel shall provide to Plaintiff’s
counsel no later than 12:00 p.m. on May 16, 2014, efforts undertaken to obtain the subject
records.

10:29 a.m. Matter concludes.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

05/25/2017 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

05/16/2017

Docket Code 029
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE JOSHUA D. ROGERS
D. Charbagi

Deputy

MANISH THAKRAR
GREGORY G MCGILL

v.

SURENDRA PALA
BRYAN K LEVY

MINUTE ENTRY

Courtroom 712 (ECB)

9:03 a.m. This is the time set for a Telephonic Status Conference regarding Court
Appeals Mandate. Plaintiff, Manish Thakrar, is represented by counsel, Gregory G. McGill.
Counter Defendant, BIL Investments LLC, is represented by counsel, Gregory G. McGill.
Defendant, Surendra Pala, is represented by counsel, Brian K. Levy.

A record of the proceeding is made digitally in lieu of a court reporter.

Discussion is held regarding the status of the case. The parties state they are ready to
proceed with scheduling trial dates.

Based upon the matters presented,

IT IS ORDERED parties shall file a Proposed Scheduling Order no later than May 30,
2017.

9:09 a.m. Matter concludes.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

05/21/2014 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

05/20/2014

Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. SALLY SCHNEIDER DUNCAN
C. Castro

Deputy

MANISH THAKRAR
GREGORY G MCGILL

v.

SURENDRA PALA
BIMAL R MERCHANT

STERLING R PETERSON

ORDER ENTERED BY COURT

On the Court's own motion,

IT IS ORDERED that the parties file with the Court by 5:00 p.m. on June 20, 2014, a
joint report and proposed scheduling order that complies with Rule 16(b), Arizona Rules of Civil
Procedure and that is substantially in the form set forth in Forms 11-13, Ariz. R. Civ. P. 84,
Appendix of Forms. The Court will review the joint report and proposed scheduling order, and
may adopt or modify the proposed scheduling order, set a scheduling conference to resolve
disputed items, or resolve the disagreements without argument.

If, in addition to these submissions, the parties believe an in-person scheduling
conference would be beneficial, they should request one.

Upon entry of a scheduling order, the Court will set either a status conference or a trial-
setting conference under Rule 16(f), Arizona Rules of Civil Procedure.

Chris DeRose, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

05/25/2018 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

05/24/2018

Docket Code 039
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
COMMISSIONER DAVID W. GARBARINO
L. Brown

Deputy

MANISH THAKRAR
GREGORY G MCGILL

v.

SURENDRA PALA
GORDON S BUELER

MINUTE ENTRY

Courtroom: ECB 813.

11:01 a.m. This is the time set for Judgment Debtor Examination. Plaintiff/Judgment
Creditor Manish Thakrar is represented by counsel, Paul Conant. Judgment Debtor Surendra
Pala is represented by counsel, Gordon S. Bueler.

A record of the proceedings is made digitally in lieu of a court reporter.

Judgment Debtor Surendra Pala is sworn and further proceedings are held outside the
presence of the Court.

11:03 a.m. Matter concludes.

11:46 a.m. The Court reconvenes with all respective parties and counsel present.

A record of the proceedings is made digitally in lieu of a court reporter.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

05/24/2018

Docket Code 039
Form V000A
Page 2

Discussion is held regarding Judgment Debtor’s refusal to provide a phone number
relating to a payment made by his landlord.

IT IS ORDERED denying Plaintiff/Judgment Creditor’s request for an order compelling
the Judgment Debtor to provide the requested phone number.

11:55 a.m. Matter concludes.

Chris DeRose, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

06/07/2018 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

06/05/2018

Docket Code 005
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. SHERRY K. STEPHENS
T. DeRaddo

Deputy

MANISH THAKRAR
GREGORY G MCGILL

v.

SURENDRA PALA
GORDON S BUELER

GORDON S BUELER / BUELER JONES
L L P
1300 N MCCLINTOCK DR STE B4
CHANDLER AZ 85226

MINUTE ENTRY

East Court Building - Courtroom 712

8:30 a.m. This is the time set for a Trial Management Conference and for Oral Argument
on Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment, filed on April 14, 2018. Plaintiff/Counter
Defendant, Manish Thakrar, is present and is represented by counsel, Gregory McGill.
Defendant, Surendra Pala, is present and is represented by counsel, Gordon Bueler.

A record of the proceedings is made digitally in lieu of a court reporter.

The Court has read all briefing on Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment, the Court
of Appeals Opinion, the Complaint, Counterclaim and Answer.

The parties present argument on Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment.

IT IS ORDERED taking this matter under advisement.

9:29 a.m. Matter concludes.

LATER:

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

06/05/2018

Docket Code 005
Form V000A
Page 2

The Court has considered the Motion for Summary Judgment filed April 14, 2018 (with
exhibits), the Statement of Facts (Rule 56) filed April 14, 2018, the Response to Motion for
Summary Judgment filed May 15, 2018, the Statement of Facts in Support of Response to
Motion for Summary Judgment (with exhibits) filed May 15, 2018, the Reply on Motion for
Summary Judgment (with exhibits) filed May 27, 2018, the opinion of the Arizona Court of
Appeals in this case filed November 29, 2016 No. 1 CA-CV 15-0448, and the oral argument
conducted on June 5, 2018.

Plaintiff Thakrar and Bipin Kanabar formed BIL Investments, LLC in April 2012. Also
in 2012 Plaintiff Thankrar and Kanabar entered into a partnership to operate an Indian restaurant
with Defendant Pala. Two partnership agreements were signed and dated September 19, 2012.
The parties agree the written partnership agreements must be read together but disagree about
their meaning.

The partnership agreements provide Pala had 50% of the partnership and Plaintiff and
Kanabar each had 25%. One of the agreements stated: “Surenda Pala has the option of becoming
a 50% share of the LLC name added to the lease and added to the bank account within one years
of the startup date.” Defendant Pala was in bankruptcy in 2012 and agreed to stay out of BIL
Investments, LLC subject to the option. Plaintiff and Kanabar were to contribute $20,000 each as
an initial contribution and Defendant Pala was responsible for the day to day management and
operation of the restaurant, including food inventory, staff, hygiene, cleanliness and customer
relations. Defendant Pala did not contribute any money to the restaurant. Pala was to receive a
monthly salary of $3,000 after the restaurant opened. The agreements provide the partners will
share costs as follows: Defendant Pala 50%, Plaintiff Thakrar 25% and Kanabar 25%.

The restaurant in October 2012 and Pala was no longer involved with Plaintiff or this
restaurant after October 2012. The restaurant opened in November 2012. Plaintiff entered into a
management agreement with others to operate the restaurant in December 2012. The restaurant
operated until it was sold in 2015 for $65,000.

In January 2013, Plaintiff Thakrar filed a complaint alleging claims for breach of
contract, breach of fiduciary duty, and an injunctive claim to oust Pala. In March 2013,
Defendant Pala filed a counterclaim and third party complaint alleging claims for breach of
fiduciary duty, breach of contract, fraud, dissolution of BIL, unjust enrichment, and a request for
an accounting.

Plaintiff filed a motion for summary judgment which was granted in 2015. The Arizona
Court of Appeals reversed the order granting summary judgment and remanded to the trial court.
The Court of Appeals found there were genuine issues of material fact that precluded summary
judgment, including Pala’s alleged management failures, whether the parties intended to create

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

06/05/2018

Docket Code 005
Form V000A
Page 3

partnership separate from BIL, whether Pala became a partner in the partnership or a member in
BIL upon signing either of the partnership agreements, and whether Pala lost the opportunity to
become a member of BIL by not exercising his first agreement option.

In the current motion for summary judgment, Plaintiff Thakrar seeks summary judgment
on liability on the claims in the complaint and counterclaim, arguing Pala failed to exercise the
option to become a member of BIL, LLC. Plaintiff contends he has conducted additional
discover and the record now supports summary judgment. Plaintiff also contends Pala made no
capital contribution to BIL and he can prove no damages. Specifically, Pala cannot show lost
profit with reasonable certainty and Pala was not entitled to any salary because he never worked
for the restaurant after it opened. In addition, he was not a party to the management agreement
Plaintiff negotiated with others to operate the restaurant in December 2012 and is therefore not
entitled to any distributions or profits from that agreement.

Defendant Pala responds that there are material issues of fact precluding summary
judgment. Pala contends he was always a 50% partner and there was no need to exercise an
option. Pala claims Thakrar breached the partnership agreement and improperly froze him out of
the partnership. Thakrar thereby improperly obtained all financial consideration from the
restaurant during its period of operation. Pala contends he is entitled to his share of any
distribution that was made by the partnership. Pala also contends he is entitled to half of the
proceeds from the sale of the restaurant.

Summary judgment is appropriate only if no genuine issue of material fact exists and the
moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Rule 56, Ariz.R.Civ.P., Nat’l Bank of
Ariz. v. Thruston, 218 Ariz. 112 (App. 2008), Colonial Tri-City Ltd. P’ship v. Ben Franklin
Stores, Inc., 179 Ariz. 428, 432 (App. 1993) and Johnson v. Earnhardt’s Gilbert Dodge, Inc.,
212 Ariz. 381, 385, 132 P.3d 825, 829 (2006). Thus, a motion for summary judgment should
only be granted if the acts produced in support of the claim or defense have so little probative
value, given the quantum of evidence required, that reasonable people could not agree with the
conclusion advanced by the proponent of the claim or defense. Orme Sch. v. Reeves, 166 Ariz.
301, 309, 802 P.2d 1000, 1008 (1990). The facts must be viewed in a light most favorable to the
party against whom it was direct and summary judgment is inappropriate if there is any doubt as
to whether an issue of material fact exists. Lennar Corp. v. Transamerica Ins. Co., 227 Ariz.
238, 242 (App. 2011) and Joseph v. Markovitz, 27 Ariz.App. 122, 125, 551 P.2d 571, 574
(1976). A statement of facts is the only means by which a party opposing summary judgment
may create a record showing the existence of those facts which establish a genuine issue of
material fact or otherwise preclude summary judgment in favor of the moving party. See Rule
56, Ariz.R.Civ.P. Where the evidence or inferences would permit a jury to resolve a material
issue in favor of either party, summary judgment is improper. Comerica Bank v. Mahmoodi, 224
Ariz. 289, 292 (App. 2010).

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

06/05/2018

Docket Code 005
Form V000A
Page 4

The opponent of a motion for summary judgment does not raise a genuine issue of fact by
merely stating in the record that such an issue exists. The party must show that competent
evidence is available which will justify a trial on the issue. Flowers v. K-Mart Corp. 126 Ariz.
495, 499 (App. 1980). An unsupported contention that a dispute exists is insufficient to defeat a
motion for summary judgment. Sewell v. Brookbank, 119 Ariz. 422, 426 (App. 1978). A
nonmoving party may not rest on allegation in its pleadings. See Rule 56, Ariz.R.Civ.P. and
MacConnell v. Mitten, 131 Ariz. 22, 25 (1982). Vague or generalized unsupported statements
are not sufficient to withstand a motion for summary judgment. Burrington v. Gila County, 159
Ariz. 320, 767 P.2d 43 (App. 1988).
A plaintiff/counterclaimant has the burden of establishing a contract, its breach, and
damages that resulted from the breach. Savoca Masonry Co. v. Homes & Son Const. Co., 112
Ariz. 392, 542 P.2d 817 (1975) and Graham v. Asbury, 112 Ariz. 184 (1975). When interpreting
contracts, the parties’ intent controls. When a contract is ambiguous (when there is more than
one reasonable interpretation), what the parties intended is a fact question decided on the
contract language and any parole evidence. Taylor v. State Farm, 175 Ariz. 148, 854 P.2d 1134
(1993). The court will look to the plain meaning of the words as viewed in the context of the
contract as a whole to discover and enforce the parties’ intent at the time the contract was made.
Great W. Bank v. LJC Dev., LLC, 238 Ariz. 470, 475 (App. 2015).

Given the quantum of evidence required to establish the claims in the complaint and
counterclaim and, viewing the evidence in a light most favorable to the proponent, the Court
finds there are genuine issues of material fact and summary judgment is not appropriate. The
issues of material fact include: Pala’s alleged management failures; whether the parties intended
to create a partnership separate from BIL, LLC; whether Pala became a partner in the partnership
or a member in BIL, LLC upon signing either of the partnership agreements; if there was a
partnership, when did it terminate; and did Pala lose the opportunity to become a member of
BIL, LLC by not exercising his option and, if so, what significance that had on the terms of the
written agreements. Since the written agreements do not provide any specific requirements
relating to exercising the option, the intent of the parties is important. In addition, since there is
a dispute about the intent of the parties, credibility is key and should be reserved for the trier of
fact at trial. Some or all of these issues may impact the damages to which each party may be
entitled and thus summary judgment is inappropriate on the damages issues as well as the
liability issues.
Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED denying Plaintiffs’ Motion for Summary Judgment filed April 14,
2018.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

06/26/2014 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

06/25/2014

Docket Code 041
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. SALLY SCHNEIDER DUNCAN
C. Castro

Deputy

MANISH THAKRAR
GREGORY G MCGILL

v.

SURENDRA PALA
BIMAL R MERCHANT

STERLING R PETERSON

SCHEDULING CONFERENCE SET

The Court is in receipt of the parties’ Joint Report, filed on June 20, 2014. Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED approving and adopting the parties’ proposed deadlines as set forth in the
Scheduling Order [Proposed], signed by the Court on June 23, 2014, and filed (entered) by the
Clerk on June 25, 2014.

Please note: The Court has signed a hard-copy version of the order provided with an
electronically filed pleading. Therefore, a copy of the Scheduling Order was placed in the
division’s outbox for pickup. After the order has been scanned and docketed by the Clerk of
Court, additional copies of this order may be available through ECR Online at
clerkofcourt.maricopa.gov or through AZTurboCourt.gov and from the Public Access Terminals
at the Clerk of Court’s offices located throughout Maricopa County.

IT IS ORDERED the parties shall participate in private mediation by August 31, 2014.
The parties shall submit a Stipulation and Order re: Alternative to ADR by July 31, 2014.

All counsel and their clients, non-lawyer representatives and insurance adjusters
who have full and complete authority to settle the case, shall personally appear at the
settlement conference and participate in good faith even if no settlement is expected.
Sanctions may be imposed for failure to participate.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

06/25/2014

Docket Code 041
Form V000A
Page 2

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED setting a Telephonic Pretrial Status/Scheduling
Conference on September 11, 2014, at 9:30 a.m. for the purpose of setting a trial date if the
case has not settled. Time allotted: 15 minutes. Counsel shall have their trial calendars available.
Counsel for Plaintiff(s) shall initiate the conference call by first arranging the presence of all
other counsel on the conference call and by calling this division at: (602)506-9042 promptly at
the scheduled time. The call should be placed from a land-line telephone in an area with no
background noise as this will prevent the parties from hearing the proceedings in the courtroom.
The call may not be placed from a vehicle. Please do not call from a cellular telephone.

HON. SALLY SCHNEIDER DUNCAN
Maricopa County Superior Court
Central Court Building
201 W. Jefferson, Courtroom 702
Phoenix, AZ 85003
Telephone number: 602-506-9042

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED if a Notice of Settlement is filed the Court will dismiss the
case with prejudice within thirty (30) days from the receipt of the Notice of Settlement.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED if there is a pending status conference scheduled with the
Court, and the parties have settled the case, the parties must file a Motion to Vacate Telephonic
Pretrial Status/Scheduling Conference within three (3) business days prior to the court
appearance or, in the alternative, shall be prepared to place a Rule 80(d) Agreement on the
record.

The parties are encouraged to view Judge Duncan’s online profile located at the Superior
Court’s website wwww.superiorcourt.maricopa.gov for additional information on appearing
before Judge Duncan.

Chris DeRose, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

06/26/2018 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

06/25/2018

Docket Code 064
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. SHERRY K. STEPHENS
T. DeRaddo

Deputy

MANISH THAKRAR
GREGORY G MCGILL

v.

SURENDRA PALA
GORDON S BUELER

GORDON S BUELER / BUELER JONES
L L P
1300 N MCCLINTOCK DR STE B4
CHANDLER AZ 85226
CITS - OTHER

BENCH TRIAL CONTINUED

East Court Building - Courtroom 712

9:29 a.m. This is the time set for a Bench Trial. Plaintiff, Manish Thakrar, is present and
is represented by counsel, Gregory McGill. Defendant, Surendra Pala, is present and is
represented by counsel, Gordon S. Bueler.

A record of the proceedings is made digitally in lieu of a court reporter.

Discussion is held regarding the fact that Defendant Pala has requested an interpreter, but
an interpreter is not available until tomorrow. Mr. McGill gives the Court and counsel papers
regarding the rules for requesting an interpreter. Mr. McGill has indicated that for almost 5 years
Defendant Pala has “not needed an interpreter” and requests that the Court make a ruling on this
issue.

The Court conducts an interview with Defendant, Surendra Pala regarding his possible
need for an interpreter.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

06/25/2018

Docket Code 064
Form V000A
Page 2

IT IS ORDERED granting Defendant’s request to have an interpreter present during the
trial.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED appointing a Hindi interpreter from Court Interpretation
and Translation Services to the case to assist Surendra Pala, Defendant, with all proceedings.
The next scheduled proceedings are set on July 23-24, 2018 at 9:30 a.m. each day.

For the reasons stated on the record,

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED resetting the Bench Trial for July 23, 2018 and July 24,
2018, at 9:30 a.m.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all subpoenas are in full effect and continued through
July 24, 2018.

Due to the fact that the trial has been reset, Mr. McGill requests that the parties be
allowed to file motions in limine. Discussion is held on the issue.

IT IS ORDERED granting Mr. MGill’s oral request to allow the parties to submit
motions in limine.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the motions in limine are due by no later than 5:00
p.m. June 29, 2018.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED setting telephonic Oral Argument on July 11, 2018 at
11:00 a.m. on all motions in limine.

10:05 a.m. The Bench Trial shall resume on July 23, 2018 at 9:30 a.m.

LATER:

IT IS ORDERED that responses to any motions in limine are due by no later than 5:00
p.m. on July 9, 2018.

Chris DeRose, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

07/13/2018 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

07/11/2018

Docket Code 027
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. SHERRY K. STEPHENS
T. DeRaddo

Deputy

MANISH THAKRAR
GREGORY G MCGILL

v.

SURENDRA PALA
GORDON S BUELER

GORDON S BUELER / BUELER JONES
L L P
1300 N MCCLINTOCK DR STE B4
CHANDLER AZ 85226
CITS – OTHER - HINDI

MINUTE ENTRY

East Court Building - Courtroom 712

11:02 a.m. This is the time set for the Final Trial Management Conference. Plaintiff,
Manish Thakrar is present in person, and is represented by counsel, Gregory G. McGill, who is
also present. Appearing telephonically on behalf of Defendant/Counterclaimant, Surendra Pala,
is counsel, Gordon S. Bueler.

A record of the proceedings is made digitally in lieu of a court reporter.

Harinder Chowhan from Court Interpretation and Translation Services is present to assist
Defendant, Surendra Pala.

Due to Mr. Pala not being present telephonically, Mr. Chowhan is excused.

The Court has read all briefing on Plaintiff’s Motion in Limine.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

07/11/2018

Docket Code 027
Form V000A
Page 2

The Court notes that Plaintiff’s Notice of Errata was filed June 23, 2018, concerning CPA
John Griffin; and Defendant’s Objection to “Notice of Errata” and Motion to Strike was filed on
July 3, 2018.

Argument is held on Plaintiff’s Motion in Limine re Defense Trial Exhibits, filed on June
28, 2018.

LET THE RECORD REFLECT that the Court made its ruling on the record.

Due to the complex nature of each of Defendants’ exhibits, Plaintiff may challenge the
admissibility of them; and the Court will rule on the admissibility of each exhibit at trial, subject
to the parties laying proper foundation.

Any exhibits that were marked for identification that were intended to be used for
impeachment purposes will not be ruled on until the appropriate time. The parties must bring in
original documents to add to or replace any exhibits that may have been altered in any way.

LET THE RECORD REFLECT that Harinder Chowhan, Hindi Interpreter, that is
currently scheduled for three trial dates has informed the Court that he cannot attend trial for all
3 days. Mr. Chowhan is unable to attend trial on July 24, 2018. Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED that the current trial dates of July 23, 2018, July 24, 2018 and July 30,
2018 will be changed to: July 23, 2018; July 27, 2018; and July 30, 2018 to accommodate the
translator’s schedule. Trial days begin at 9:30 a.m. each day.

IT IS ORDERED appointing a Hindi interpreter from Court Interpretation and Translation
Services to the case to assist Defendant, Surendra Pala, with all proceedings. The next scheduled
proceeding is for three trial days as follows: July 23, 2018; July 27, 2018; and July 30, 2018. Trial
days begin at 9:30 a.m. each day.

Argument is heard regarding Plaintiff’s Notice of Errata and Motion to Strike, filed on
June 23, 2018; and regarding Defendants’ Objection to “Notice of Errata” and Motion to Strike
on July 3, 2018.

Mr. McGill may file a response/reply to Defendant’s Objection to Notice of Errata and
Motion to Strike and address the issues as discussed on the record.

11:44 a.m. Matter concludes.

Chris DeRose, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

07/20/2018 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

07/19/2018

Docket Code 021
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. SHERRY K. STEPHENS
T. DeRaddo

Deputy

MANISH THAKRAR
GREGORY G MCGILL

v.

SURENDRA PALA
GORDON S BUELER

GORDON S BUELER / BUELER JONES
L L P
1300 N MCCLINTOCK DR STE B4
CHANDLER AZ 85226
JUDGE STEPHENS

NUNC PRO TUNC ORDER

The Court has received and considered Plaintiff’s July 17, 2018 Request to Correct
Minute Entry Entered July 13, 2018.

Good cause appearing,

IT IS ORDERED clarifying the Court’s ruling as follows:

1. Any defense exhibits which include “data from other sample restaurants” are precluded
without proper foundation being provided, including Exhibits 18, 21, 24 and 27.

2. Any defense exhibits containing “summary descriptions, labels or data for evidence not
timely disclosed are precluded, including Exhibits 17, 30-46, 62, 65, and 68.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

07/19/2018

Docket Code 021
Form V000A
Page 2

3. Any marked affidavits or declarations may be offered to impeach a witness.

The remainder of the minute entry stands in effect as stated therein.

The minute entry dated July 11, 2018 is available for viewing at:
http://www.courtminutes.maricopa.gov.

Chris DeRose, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

07/25/2018 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

07/23/2018

Docket Code 012
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. SHERRY K. STEPHENS
T. DeRaddo

Deputy

MANISH THAKRAR
GREGORY G MCGILL

v.

SURENDRA PALA
GORDON S BUELER

GORDON S BUELER / BUELER JONES
L L P
1300 N MCCLINTOCK DR STE B4
CHANDLER AZ 85226
JUDGE STEPHENS

BENCH TRIAL – DAY ONE

East Court Building - Courtroom 712

9:38 a.m. This is the time set for a Bench Trial. Plaintiff, Manish Thakrar, is present and
is represented by counsel, Gregory McGill. Defendant/Counterclaimant, Surendra Pala, is
present and is represented by counsel, Gordon Bueler.

A record of the proceedings is made digitally in lieu of a court reporter.

Prior to today’s proceedings, Defendant’s Exhibits 1-74, and Plaintiff’s Exhibits 75-94
were marked for identification.

FILED:

Deposition of Surendra K. Pala Volume 1
Taken on January 16, 2014

Deposition of Surendra K. Pala Volume II

Taken on June 24, 2014

Deposition of Surendra Kumar Pala

Taken on May 2, 2018

Deposition of Manish Thakrar

Taken on May 3, 2018

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

07/23/2018

Docket Code 012
Form V000A
Page 2

Court Interpreter, Simon Pillai is present and assisting Defendant, Surendra Pala. The
interpreter is sworn.

Discussion is held regarding Plaintiff’s Notice of Errata, filed on June 23, 2018 as related
to John Griffin, and Defendant/Counterclaimant’s Objection to “Notice of Errata” and Motion to
Strike, filed on July 3, 2018.

Counsel for Plaintiff requests that witness, John Griffin, be allowed to testify with respect
to foundational issues as a rebuttal witness, not as an expert witness. Defendant objects.

Due to the fact that both parties have had prior knowledge regarding John Griffin being
disclosed as a witness,

IT IS ORDERED that the issues will be addressed during the trial at the appropriate time.

Plaintiff’s case.

Manish Thakrar and Surendra Pala are sworn.

Opening Statements are made.

Manish Thakrar takes the witness stand and testifies.

Plaintiff’s Exhibits 75, 76 and 77 are received in evidence.

By stipulation of the parties, Plaintiff’s Exhibits 78 and 82 are received in evidence.

After redacting Plaintiff’s Exhibit to remove the cover letter, Plaintiff’s Exhibit 91 is
received in evidence.

By stipulation of the parties, Plaintiff’s Exhibits 92 and 94 are received in evidence.

11:58 a.m. The Court stands at recess.

1:04 p.m. Court reconvenes with the parties and respective counsel present.

A record of the proceedings is made digitally in lieu of a court reporter.

Manish Thakrar continues to testify.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

07/23/2018

Docket Code 012
Form V000A
Page 3

By stipulation of the parties, Plaintiff’s Exhibits 89 and Defendant’s Exhibit 1are
received in evidence.

By stipulation of the parties, Defendant’s Exhibit 14 is received in evidence.

2:30 p.m. The Court stands at recess.

2:40 p.m. Court reconvenes with the parties and respective counsel present.

Manish Thakrar resumes the stand and continues to testify.

By stipulation of the parties, Defendant’s Exhibits 4, 6 and 22 are received in evidence.

By stipulation of the parties, Defendant’s Exhibits 25 and 28 are received in evidence.

Defendant’s counsel handed Plaintiff’s counsel a 3-ring notebook purportedly containing
bank records. Discussion is held. Plaintiff objects to the admission of the records in the
notebook.

Defendant’s Exhibits 33, 35 and 37 are received in evidence.

Defendant’s Exhibits 39, 41, 43 and 45 are received in evidence.

4:05 p.m. Trial to the Court stands in recess until July 29, 2018 at 9:00 a.m.

Chris DeRose, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

08/01/2018 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

07/27/2018

Docket Code 012
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. SHERRY K. STEPHENS
T. DeRaddo

Deputy

MANISH THAKRAR
GREGORY G MCGILL

v.

SURENDRA PALA
GORDON S BUELER

GORDON S BUELER / BUELER JONES
L L P
1300 N MCCLINTOCK DR STE B4
CHANDLER AZ 85226
CITS - OTHER
JUDGE STEPHENS

BENCH TRIAL – DAY TWO

East Court Building - Courtroom 712

9:30 a.m. This is the time set for the continuation of a Bench Trial. Plaintiff, Manish
Thakrar, is present and is represented by counsel, Gregory McGill. Defendant/Counterclaimant,
Surendra Pala, is present and is represented by counsel, Gordon Bueler.

A record of the proceedings is made digitally in lieu of a court reporter.

Simon Pillai, from Court Interpretation and Translation Services is present and assisting
Defendant, Surendra Pala.

Manish Thakrar, having been previously sworn, resumes the witness stand and continues
to testify.

By stipulation of the parties, Defendant’s Exhibit 7 is received in evidence.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

07/27/2018

Docket Code 012
Form V000A
Page 2

10:31 a.m. The Court stands at recess.

10:44 a.m. Court reconvenes with the parties and respective counsel present.

A record of the proceedings is made digitally in lieu of a court reporter.

Manish Thakrar resumes the stand and continues to testify.

Counsel for Plaintiff, Gregory McGill, informs the Court that is dismissing / withdrawing
Count Two, Breach of Fiduciary Duty, and Count Three, Mandatory Injunction Ousting Pala.

Defendant stipulates to the dismissal/withdrawal of Counts Two and Three of Plaintiff’s
Complaint. Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED dismissing Count Two, Breach of Fiduciary Duty, and Count Three,
Mandatory Injunction Ousting Pala of Plaintiff’s Complaint.

Mr. McGill shall move forward with this trial as to Count One, Breach of Contract only.

Plaintiff rests.

Defendant’s case.

Bipin Kanabar is sworn.

12:02 p.m. The Court stands at recess.

1:27 p.m. Court reconvenes with the parties and respective counsel present.

A record of the proceedings is made digitally in lieu of a court reporter.

Bipin Kanabar resumes the stand and continues to testify.

The witness is excused.

2:47 p.m. The Court stands at recess.

2:57 p.m. The Court stands at recess.

Discussion is held regarding scheduling issues.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

07/27/2018

Docket Code 012
Form V000A
Page 3

Surendra Pala, having been previously sworn, takes the witness stand and testifies.

Defendant’s Exhibit 5 is received in evidence.

4:27 p.m. The Court stands at recess until July 31, 2018 at 10:00 a.m.

Chris DeRose, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

08/01/2018 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

07/30/2018

Docket Code 012
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. SHERRY K. STEPHENS
T. DeRaddo

Deputy

MANISH THAKRAR
GREGORY G MCGILL

v.

SURENDRA PALA
GORDON S BUELER

GORDON S BUELER / BUELER JONES
L L P
1300 N MCCLINTOCK DR STE B4
CHANDLER AZ 85226
CITS - OTHER
JUDGE STEPHENS

BENCH TRIAL – DAY THREE

East Court Building - Courtroom 712

10:02 a.m. This is the time set for the continuation of a Bench Trial. Plaintiff, Manish
Thakrar, is present and is represented by counsel, Gregory McGill. Defendant/Counterclaimant,
Surendra Pala, is present and is represented by counsel, Gordon Bueler.

A record of the proceedings is made digitally in lieu of a court reporter.

Simon Pillai, from Court Interpretation and Translation Services is present and assisting
Defendant, Surendra Pala.

Defendant’s case continues.

Surendra Pala, having been previously sworn, takes the witness stand continues to testify.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

07/30/2018

Docket Code 012
Form V000A
Page 2

12:00 p.m. The Court stands at recess.

1:01 p.m. Court reconvenes with the parties and respective counsel present.

A record of the proceedings is made digitally in lieu of a court reporter.

Surrendra Pala resumes the stand and continues to testify.

By stipulation of the parties, Plaintiff’s Exhibit 85 is received in evidence.

2:25 p.m. The Court stands at recess.

2:44 p.m. Court reconvenes with the parties and respective counsel present.

A record of the proceedings is made digitally in lieu of a court reporter.

Surrendra Pala resumes the stand and continues to testify.

Plaintiff’s Exhibit 83 is received in evidence.

Discussion is held regarding scheduling issues.

4:25 p.m. The Court stands at recess until July 31, 2018 at 1:00 p.m.

Chris DeRose, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

08/03/2018 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

07/31/2018

Docket Code 012
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. SHERRY K. STEPHENS
T. DeRaddo

Deputy

MANISH THAKRAR
GREGORY G MCGILL

v.

SURENDRA PALA
GORDON S BUELER

GORDON S BUELER / BUELER JONES
L L P
1300 N MCCLINTOCK DR STE B4
CHANDLER AZ 85226
CITS - OTHER
JUDGE STEPHENS

BENCH TRIAL – DAY FOUR

East Court Building - Courtroom 712

2:15 p.m. This is the time set for the continuation of a Bench Trial. Plaintiff, Manish
Thakrar, is present and is represented by counsel, Gregory McGill. Defendant/Counterclaimant,
Surendra Pala, is present and is represented by counsel, Gordon Bueler.

A record of the proceedings is made digitally in lieu of a court reporter.

Harinder Chowhan, from Court Interpretation and Translation Services is present and
assisting Defendant, Surendra Pala in Hindi.

Defendant’s case continues.

Surendra Pala, having been previously sworn, takes the witness stand continues to testify.

Counsel for Defendant requests the Court to take Judicial Notice of the Complaint and
the exhibits thereto.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

07/31/2018

Docket Code 012
Form V000A
Page 2

LET THE RECORD REFLECT that the Court will take Judicial Notice of the Complaint
and the exhibits thereto.

Defendant rests.

Rebuttal.

3:15 p.m. The Court stands at recess.

3:20 p.m. Court reconvenes with the parties and respective counsel present.

Mr. McGill gives the Court and Mr. Bueler a memorandum. Mr. Bueler requests that he
may respond to Plaintiff’s memorandum.

IT IS ORDERED Mr. Bueler may file a memorandum consistent with what Mr. McGill
has filed, by August 2, 2018 at 5:00 p.m., should he wish to do so.

Closing arguments are presented.

Mr. Bueler gives the Court an accounting/memorandum. Mr. McGill objects.

IT IS ORDERED Mr. McGill may file a memorandum consistent with what Mr. Bueler
filed, by August 2, 2018 at 5:00 p.m., should he wish to do so.

IT IS ORDERED taking these matters under advisement.

IT IS ORDERED that the clerk permanently release all exhibits not offered in evidence
to the counsel or party causing them to be marked, or to their written designee. Counsel/party
shall have the right to refile relevant exhibits as needed in support of any appeal. Refiled exhibits
must be accompanied by a Notice of Refiling Exhibits and presented to the Exhibits Room of the
Clerk’s Office. The court’s exhibit tag must remain intact on all refiled exhibits.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that counsel/party or written designee take immediate
possession of all exhibits referenced above.

ISSUED: Exhibit Release Forms (2)

FILED: Trial Worksheet, Exhibit Worksheet.

4:30 p.m. Trial to the Court concludes.

Chris DeRose, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

08/13/2018 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

08/07/2018

Docket Code 926
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. SHERRY K. STEPHENS
T. DeRaddo

Deputy

MANISH THAKRAR
GREGORY G MCGILL

v.

SURENDRA PALA
GORDON S BUELER

GORDON S BUELER / BUELER JONES
L L P
1300 N MCCLINTOCK DR STE B4
CHANDLER AZ 85226
JUDGE STEPHENS

RULING/VERDICTS

Following a bench trial on the merits for the remaining claim alleged in the Complaint
filed January 22, 2013, the Court finds as follows:

(1) On Count I, Breach of Contract:

The Court finds in favor of Plaintiff Thakrar.

The Court further finds the full actual damages to be zero dollars.

Following a bench trial on the merits for the remaining claims alleged in the
Counterclaim filed on March 26, 2013, the Court finds as follows:

(1) On First Claim for Relief, Breach of Fiduciary Duty:

The Court finds in favor of Counterdefendant Thakrar.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

08/07/2018

Docket Code 926
Form V000A
Page 2

(2) On Second Claim for Relief, Breach of Contract:

The Court finds in favor of Counterclaimant Pala.

The Court further finds the full actual damages to be zero dollars.

(3) On Fifth Claim for Relief, Unjust Enrichment:

The Court finds in favor of Counterdefendant Thakrar.

(4) On Sixth Claim for Relief, Request for Accounting:

The Court finds in favor of Counterdefendant Thakrar.

IT IS ORDERED Plaintiff shall submit a form of judgment for the Court’s
consideration.

Chris DeRose, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

08/13/2018 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

08/07/2018

Docket Code 028
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. SHERRY K. STEPHENS
T. DeRaddo

Deputy

MANISH THAKRAR
GREGORY G MCGILL

v.

SURENDRA PALA
GORDON S BUELER

JUDGE STEPHENS

TELEPHONIC STATUS CONFERENCE SET

The Court has received Plaintiff/Counterdefendant’s Motion for Leave to Take
Deposition of 3rd Party Sayed Zubair Tahir, M.D., filed on July 18, 2018.

IT IS ORDERED setting a Telephonic Status Conference on August 22, 2018 at 8:30
a.m. (15 minutes).

Counsel for Plaintiff shall initiate the call by arranging the presence of all parties and
contacting this division at 602-506-4818.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

08/19/2014 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

08/18/2014

Docket Code 094
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. SALLY SCHNEIDER DUNCAN
C. Castro

Deputy

MANISH THAKRAR
GREGORY G MCGILL

v.

SURENDRA PALA
BIMAL R MERCHANT

STERLING R PETERSON

ORAL ARGUMENT SET

The Court is in receipt of Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment Re: Loan, filed on
July 8, 2014, and Defendant’s Opposition and Separate Statement of Facts, filed on
August 6, 2014.

IT IS ORDERED setting this matter for oral argument on September 22, 2014, at 2:30
p.m. in this division. Time allotted: 45 minutes. Counsel shall appear in-person.

HON. SALLY SCHNEIDER DUNCAN
Maricopa County Superior Court
Central Court Building
201 W. Jefferson, Courtroom 702
Phoenix, AZ 85003
Telephone number: 602-506-9042

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all pleadings shall be filed a minimum of five (5)
business days prior to oral argument. The Court will not consider a late filed pleading without
prior approval and may reschedule the oral argument at the Court’s convenience.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

08/18/2014

Docket Code 094
Form V000A
Page 2

Notice Regarding Substantive Motions: The Court will not accept omnibus motions,
responses and replies. All motions, responses and replies shall be filed on individual claims and
counts separately. Counsel shall not combine any motion with a responsive pleading. If omnibus
motions are filed, the Court reserves the right to reject the motions. No motion shall exceed the
page limitation without prior Court approval.

Please note: The Court reserves the right to vacate and reset, at its own discretion,
any hearing for which the parties submit pleadings within 48 hours prior to the
commencement of the hearing, without prior approval from the Court.

The parties are encouraged to view Judge Duncan’s online profile located at the Superior
Court’s website wwww.superiorcourt.maricopa.gov for additional information on appearing
before Judge Duncan.

NOTE: This Court utilizes FTR for an electronic record of the proceedings. However,
any party may request the presence of a court reporter by contacting the division three (3) court
business days before the scheduled hearing.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

08/21/2014 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

08/20/2014

Docket Code 083
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. SALLY SCHNEIDER DUNCAN
C. Castro

Deputy

MANISH THAKRAR
GREGORY G MCGILL

v.

SURENDRA PALA
BIMAL R MERCHANT

STERLING R PETERSON

MINUTE ENTRY

On the Court's own motion,

IT IS ORDERED vacating the Telephonic Pretrial Status/Scheduling Conference on
September 11, 2014, at 9:30 a.m. and resetting same to September 22, 2014, at 2:30 p.m. in
conjunction with the oral argument on summary judgment currently scheduled in this division.

Chris DeRose, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

08/22/2018 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

08/21/2018

Docket Code 028
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. SHERRY K. STEPHENS
T. DeRaddo

Deputy

MANISH THAKRAR
GREGORY G MCGILL

v.

SURENDRA PALA
GORDON S BUELER

GORDON S BUELER / BUELER JONES
L L P
1300 N MCCLINTOCK DR STE B4
CHANDLER AZ 85226
JUDGE STEPHENS

TELEPHONIC STATUS CONFERENCE SET

The Court has received Plaintiff’s Request for Telephonic Status Conference to Set Briefing
Schedule on Fees & Costs, filed on August 16, 2018, and

IT IS ORDERED setting a Telephonic Status / Scheduling Conference on September 5,
2018 at 9:00 a.m. (15 minutes).

Counsel for Plaintiff shall initiate the call by arranging the presence of all parties and
contacting this division at 602-506-4818.

Chris DeRose, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

08/24/2018 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

08/22/2018

Docket Code 029
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. SHERRY K. STEPHENS
T. DeRaddo

Deputy

MANISH THAKRAR
GREGORY G MCGILL

v.

SURENDRA PALA
GORDON S BUELER

GORDON S BUELER / BUELER JONES
L L P
1300 N MCCLINTOCK DR STE B4
CHANDLER AZ 85226
JUDGE STEPHENS

MINUTE ENTRY

East Court Building - Courtroom 712

8:33 a.m. This is the time set for a telephonic Status Conference. All parties appear
telephonically. Appearing on behalf of Plaintiff, Manish Thakrar, on the judgment collection
matter is counsel, Paul Conant. Appearing on behalf of Defendants, Surrendra Pala and Dr.
Tahir, is counsel, Gordon Bueler.

A record of the proceedings is made digitally in lieu of a court reporter.

The Court has read and considered all briefing on the motions to be discussed today.

Discussion is held regarding Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to Take Deposition of 3rd Party
Sayed Zubair Tahir, M.D., filed on July 18, 2018.

For the reasons stated on the record,

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

08/22/2018

Docket Code 029
Form V000A
Page 2

IT IS ORDERED granting Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to Take Deposition of 3rd Party
Sayed Zubair Tahir, M.D. The deposition shall be limited to 90 minutes, and the scope shall be
limited to the nature and purpose of the funds provided to Mr. Pala.

Discussion is held regarding Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel Chetan Pala’s Compliance
with Subpoena Duces Tecum, filed on July 19, 2018.

The Court needs to have Exhibit A to Plaintiff’s subpoena duces tecum before it makes
its ruling on the motion to compel. Mr. Conant will send the required document(s) to the court.

Mr. Conant is requested to state a date by which he would like the deposition to take
place.

8:55 a.m. Matter concludes.

LATER:

The court has considered the Motion to Compel Chetan Pala’s Compliance With
Subpoena Duces Tecum filed July 19, 2018. Based upon a review of the documents and the oral
argument conducted earlier today, the Court finds there is good cause to grant the motion.
Specifically, Chetan Pala is in business with Defendant Pala, his father. Plaintiff is entitled to
inquire about the nature of that business relationship and the income generated from that
business venture. Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED granting the Motion to Compel Chetan Pala’s Compliance With
Subpoena Duces Tecum filed July 19, 2018.

Chris DeRose, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

08/30/2018 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

08/28/2018

Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. SHERRY K. STEPHENS
T. DeRaddo

Deputy

MANISH THAKRAR
GREGORY G MCGILL

v.

SURENDRA PALA
GORDON S BUELER

GORDON S BUELER / BUELER JONES
L L P
1300 N MCCLINTOCK DR STE B4
CHANDLER AZ 85226
JUDGE STEPHENS

MINUTE ENTRY

The Court has considered Defendant’s Motion for Reconsideration filed August 24,
2018. The Court found both parties breached the contract at issue. Defendant did not establish
he was owed any monetary damages at trial. Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED denying Defendant’s Motion for Reconsideration filed August 24,
2018.

Chris DeRose, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

09/07/2018 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

09/05/2018

Docket Code 094
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. SHERRY K. STEPHENS
T. DeRaddo

Deputy

MANISH THAKRAR
GREGORY G MCGILL

v.

SURENDRA PALA
GORDON S BUELER

GORDON S BUELER / BUELER JONES
L L P
1300 N MCCLINTOCK DR STE B4
CHANDLER AZ 85226
JUDGE STEPHENS

TELEPHONIC ORAL ARGUMENT SET

East Court Building - Courtroom 712

9:12 a.m. This is the time set for a telephonic Status Conference. Appearing on behalf of
Plaintiff, Manish Thakrar, is counsel, Gregory McGill. Appearing on behalf of
Defendant/Counterclaimant, Surendra Pala, is counsel, Gordon S. Bueler.

A record of the proceedings is made digitally in lieu of a court reporter.

Mr. McGill requested this conference and requests that the Court set a briefing schedule
on Plaintiff’s Application for Attorneys’ fees and costs, especially with respect to the
“reasonableness and entitlement of the amount of attorneys’ fees.”

Discussion is held.

The parties may submit briefing on this issue if they wish to do so.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

09/05/2018

Docket Code 094
Form V000A
Page 2

IT IS ORDERED the Applications for Attorneys’ Fees and Costs shall be submitted
simultaneously by not later than September 24, 2018 at 5:00 p.m.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED the parties may submit their oppositions thereto according
to the rules.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED no replies shall be filed.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED setting telephonic Oral Argument on October 10, 2018 at
8:45 a.m.

9:18 a.m. Matter concludes.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

09/16/2014 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

09/15/2014

Docket Code 094
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. SALLY SCHNEIDER DUNCAN
C. Castro

Deputy

MANISH THAKRAR
GREGORY G MCGILL

v.

SURENDRA PALA
BIMAL R MERCHANT

STERLING R PETERSON

ORAL ARGUMENT SET

The Court is in receipt of Plaintiff’s Objection to Settlement and Request for Disclosure,
filed on September 9, 2014, and Defendant Kanabar’s Response, filed on September 12, 2014.

IT IS ORDERED setting this matter for oral argument on September 22, 2014, at 2:30
p.m. in conjunction with the oral argument currently scheduled in this division.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all pleadings shall be filed a minimum of five (5)
business days prior to oral argument. The Court will not consider a late filed pleading without
prior approval and may reschedule the oral argument at the Court’s convenience.

Notice Regarding Substantive Motions: The Court will not accept omnibus motions,
responses and replies. All motions, responses and replies shall be filed on individual claims and
counts separately. Counsel shall not combine any motion with a responsive pleading. If omnibus
motions are filed, the Court reserves the right to reject the motions. No motion shall exceed the
page limitation without prior Court approval.

Please note: The Court reserves the right to vacate and reset, at its own discretion,
any hearing for which the parties submit pleadings within 48 hours prior to the
commencement of the hearing, without prior approval from the Court.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

09/19/2014 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

09/16/2014

Docket Code 042
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. SALLY SCHNEIDER DUNCAN
M. Nielsen

Deputy

MANISH THAKRAR
GREGORY G MCGILL

v.

SURENDRA PALA
BIMAL R MERCHANT

STERLING R PETERSON

CASE DISMISSED

The Court has received the parties’ Stipulation for Dismissal With Prejudice, filed on
August 25, 2014. Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED dismissing the above-entitled action with prejudice, each party to bear
their own attorneys’ fees and costs, all in accordance with the formal written Order of Dismissal
With Prejudice signed by the Court on September 3, 2014, and filed (entered) by the Clerk on
September 16, 2014.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

09/23/2014 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

09/22/2014

Docket Code 021
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. SALLY SCHNEIDER DUNCAN
M. Nielsen

Deputy

MANISH THAKRAR
GREGORY G MCGILL

v.

SURENDRA PALA
BIMAL R MERCHANT

STERLING R PETERSON
DOCKET-CIVIL-CCC

NUNC PRO TUNC ORDER

IT IS ORDERED nunc pro tunc amending the minute entry dated September 16, 2014, to
indicate partial case dismissal with prejudice as to Defendant and Counterclaimant Surendra Pala
and Third-Party Defendants Bipin and Sandhya Kanabars only, in place and instead of a full
dismissal.

The remainder of the minute entry stands in effect as stated therein.

The minute entry dated September 16, 2014, is available for viewing at:
http://www.courtminutes.maricopa.gov.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

09/25/2014 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

09/22/2014

Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. SALLY SCHNEIDER DUNCAN
S. Uppendahl

Deputy

MANISH THAKRAR
GREGORY G MCGILL

v.

SURENDRA PALA
BIMAL R MERCHANT

STERLING R PETERSON

ORAL ARGUMENT/ RULING/ HEARING SET

Courtroom 702 – Central Court Building

2:47 p.m. This is the time set for Oral Argument. Plaintiff Manish Thakrar is present
and is represented by counsel, Gregory G. McGill. Defendant/Counterclaimant is represented by
counsel, Bimal R. Merchant. Third Party Defendants are represented by counsel, Sterling R.
Peterson.

A record of the proceedings is made by audio and/or videotape in lieu of a court reporter.

Oral argument is held on the following:

 Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment Re: Loan, filed July 8, 2014;

IT IS ORDERED granting Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment Re: Loan as to
liability, but not as to damages.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED setting an Evidentiary Hearing on the value of the jewelry
on October 30, 2014 at 10:30 a.m. in this division. Time allotted: 1 hour.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED Defendants shall have until October 2, 2014 to identify an
independent appraiser who is unrelated and neutral to all parties in this matter.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

09/22/2014

Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 2

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED Plaintiff shall have until October 9, 2014 to have the
jewelry appraised.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED the appraiser shall have until October 16, 2014 to provide
an appraisal valuation of the jewelry.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED the parties shall have until October 16, 2014 to either file
an appraisal or reach an agreement and file a notice to vacate the scheduled hearing.

Discussion is held on the following:

 Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment on the Option, filed August 26, 2014;
and,

 Defendants’ Notice of Settlement and Plaintiff’s Objection to Settlement and
Request for Disclosure, filed September 9, 2014.

The Court notes Plaintiff’s objection and Defendants’ response. The objection is
overruled.

IT IS ORDERED granting Defendants’ Stipulation for Dismissal.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED setting Oral Argument on November 14, 2014 at 1:30 p.m.
on Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment on the Option and Cross-Motion in this division.
Time allotted: 1 hour.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED vacating the Evidentiary Hearing regarding value of the
jewelry on October 30, 2014 at 10:30 a.m. and resetting same on November 14, 2014 at 1:30
p.m. in conjunction with Plaintiff’s Motion for Summary Judgment on the Option and Cross-
Motion in this division. Time allotted: 1 hour.

3:16 p.m. Hearing concludes.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED counsel shall deliver their exhibits to the Clerk for marking
no later than October 31, 2014. Please provide exhibits in a three-ring binder, each separated by
a tabbed numbered divider. Please also provide a separate copy of exhibits to be referenced by
the Judge during the hearing in a three-ring binder, each separated by a tabbed numbered divider.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

09/22/2014

Docket Code 019
Form V000A
Page 3

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED if counsel intends to submit more than 50 exhibits, please
do not provide a separate copy of exhibits in a three-ring binder for the Judge. Instead, please
provide a courtesy copy of the exhibits in a thumb drive (flash drive) for the Judge to access on
her laptop computer. If any exhibits are spread sheets, please provide an additional hard copy.

Please note: The Court reserves the right to vacate and reset, at its own discretion,
any hearing for which the parties submit pleadings within 48 hours prior to the
commencement of the hearing, without prior approval from the Court.

Chris DeRose, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

09/26/2018 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

09/25/2018

Docket Code 029
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. SHERRY K. STEPHENS
T. DeRaddo

Deputy

MANISH THAKRAR
GREGORY G MCGILL

v.

SURENDRA PALA
GORDON S BUELER

GORDON S BUELER / BUELER JONES
L L P
1300 N MCCLINTOCK DR STE B4
CHANDLER AZ 85226
PAUL A CONANT
COMM. GARBARINO

MINUTE ENTRY

East Court Building - Courtroom 712

2:19 p.m. This is the time set for a telephonic Status Conference regarding a discovery
dispute. Counsel, Paul Conant, appears on behalf of Plaintiff/Counterdefendant, Manish Thakrar
in the judgment collection effort aspect of this case only. Counsel, Gordon Bueler, counsel for
Defendant/ Counterclaimant, Surendra Pala, appears.

A record of the proceedings is made digitally in lieu of a court reporter.

Counsel, Paul Conant, reports that on July 18, 2018, he filed a Motion for Leave to Take
Deposition of 3rd Party Sayed Zubair Tahir, M.D. On August 22, 2018, the parties participated
in a telephonic Status Conference wherein the Court granted Plaintiff’s motion.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

09/25/2018

Docket Code 029
Form V000A
Page 2

The Court ordered that “the deposition shall be limited to 90 minutes, and the scope shall
be limited to the nature and purpose of the funds provided to Mr. Pala.”

Mr. Conant is currently attempting to take the deposition of Dr. Tahir, and asserts that
Mr. Bueler (who is not counsel of record for Dr. Tahir) is interfering with that process.

Mr. Conant requests that the Court direct Mr. Bueler to follow the deposition rules and
not interfere, or make speaking objections.

Discussion is held.

For the reasons stated on the record,

IT IS ORDERED that Mr. Bueler shall follow the deposition rules, specifically, Mr.
Bueler shall not make speaking objections.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if Mr. Bueler has an objection, he shall state that he
has an objection and the nature of the objection only.

2:25 p.m. Matter concludes.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

09/29/2017 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

09/26/2017

Docket Code 094
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. SHERRY K. STEPHENS
T. DeRaddo

Deputy

MANISH THAKRAR
GREGORY G MCGILL

v.

SURENDRA PALA
BRYAN K LEVY

TELEPHONIC ORAL ARGUMENT SET

The Court has received Plaintiff’s Motion to Quash Subpoena on Chase Bank, filed on
September 11, 2017.

IT IS ORDERED setting telephonic Oral Argument on October 19, 2017 at 9:30 a.m.
(Time allotted: 15 minutes).

Counsel for Plaintiff shall initiate the call by arranging the presence of all parties and
contacting this division at 602-506-4818.

NOTE: All court proceedings are recorded by audio and video method and not by a
court reporter. Should you want an unofficial copy of the proceedings, the parties or counsel
may request a videotape or CD of the proceedings for a $30.00 charge. If a CD or videotape is
requested, please obtain a form from the Self Service Center to request a daily copy of a court
hearing or trial proceeding being conducted. Pay the applicable fee at the Self Service Center.
Attach the receipt showing payment of the fee and present both the receipt and the form to the
courtroom clerk or bailiff. For copies of hearings or trial proceedings recorded previously,
please call Electronic Records Services at 602-506-7100. Should an official transcript be
required, you may request that the court prepare it. The party ordering the transcript must pay
for it. To request a transcript, call 602-506-7100 and provide the date of the proceeding, the case

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

09/26/2017

Docket Code 094
Form V000A
Page 2

number, the case caption, if the transcript is for an appeal, and your name, address, and telephone
number.

NOTE: Pursuant to Local Rule 2.22, if a party desires a court reporter for any
proceeding in which a court reporter is not mandated by Arizona Supreme Court Rule 30, the
party must submit a written request to the assigned judicial officer at least ten (10) judicial days
in advance of the hearing, and must pay the authorized fee to the Clerk of the Court at least two
(2) judicial days before the proceeding. The fee is $140 for a half-day and $280 for a full day.

Effective February 15, 2017, Rule 9.8 of the Maricopa County Superior Court Local
Rules of Practice (Reporting of Oral Arguments and Hearings) has been abrogated. See Arizona
Supreme Court Order No. R-16-0044.

Failure to timely request a court reporter will be deemed consent to proceed without a
court reporter.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
10/04/2013 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2013-000741
10/03/2013
Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. SALLY SCHNEIDER DUNCAN
C. Keller
Deputy
MANISH THAKRAR
GREGORY G MCGILL
v.
SURENDRA PALA
BIMAL R MERCHANT
BIPIN KANABAR
NO ADDRESS ON RECORD
SANDHYA KANABAR
NO ADDRESS ON RECORD
COMM. MORROW
MINUTE ENTRY
This division has received Defendant/Counterclaimant/Third-Party Plaintiff’s e-filed
Application for Entry of Default against Third-Party Defendant(s) Bipin Kanabar and
Sandhya Kanabar in the above-captioned case.
IT IS ORDERED that no action will be taken by this division on the above referenced
document(s).
The parties are advised that Commissioners handle Rule 55(b) Default Judgment
proceedings and that the default proceedings in this matter are to be heard by Commissioner
James R. Morrow.
IT IS ORDERED that all documents necessary to support the entry of a default judgment
must be e-filed.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2013-000741
10/03/2013
Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 2
Pursuant to Supreme Court Administrative Order No. 2010-117, default judgment
packets are not permitted to be e-filed. Accordingly, parties are directed to hand-deliver a
default coversheet and copies of the necessary filed documents to the Commissioner’s division
for the entry of a default judgment.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, no further action will be taken by the assigned
Commissioner until the necessary filed documents and coversheet are delivered to the division.
The parties/counsel can find the default judgment coversheet on the Court’s website at:
http://www.superiorcourt.maricopa.gov/SuperiorCourt/CivilDepartment/forms.asp
The parties/counsel can find additional information in the form of frequently asked
questions at:
http://www.superiorcourt.maricopa.gov/SuperiorCourt/CivilDepartment/howDol.asp
ALERT: The Arizona Supreme Court Administrative Order 2011-140 directs the Clerk's
Office not to accept paper filings from attorneys in civil cases. Civil cases must still be initiated
on paper; however, subsequent documents must be eFiled through AZTurboCourt unless an
exception defined in the Administrative Order applies.

Chris DeRose, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

10/05/2018 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

10/04/2018

Docket Code 028
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. SHERRY K. STEPHENS
T. DeRaddo

Deputy

MANISH THAKRAR
GREGORY G MCGILL

v.

SURENDRA PALA
GORDON S BUELER

GORDON S BUELER / BUELER JONES
L L P
1300 N MCCLINTOCK DR STE B4
CHANDLER AZ 85226
PAUL A CONANT
JUDGE STEPHENS

STATUS CONFERENCE SET

East Court Building - Courtroom 712

10:04 a.m. This is the time set for a return Hearing on an Order to Show Cause for
Chetan Pala to show cause, if any he has, as to why he should not be held in contempt and be
required to pay Thakrar’s fees and costs. Counsel, Paul Conant, appears on behalf of Plaintiff /
Counterdefendant / Claimant, Manish Thakrar. Counsel, Gordon Bueler appears on behalf of
non-party, Chetan Pala.

A record of the proceedings is made digitally in lieu of a court reporter.

LET THE RECORD REFLECT that counsel, Gordon Bueler filed a Notice of
Appearance yesterday to represent Chetan Pala.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

10/04/2018

Docket Code 028
Form V000A
Page 2

Argument is presented.

Mr. Conant requests that Mr. Chetan Pala submit to a deposition and that he bring the
documents requested. Mr. Conant further requests that Mr. Chetan Pala submit to a Debtor’s
Examination. Mr. Conant also requests that the Court hold in abeyance Mr. Conant’s application
for attorneys’ fees, costs, and sanctions.

The parties stipulate that Mr. Chetan Pala shall be deposed and bring the requested
documents.

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED Mr. Chetan Pala shall submit to a deposition on October 18, 2018 at
1:00 p.m. in the Office of Mr. Conant and bring all documents requested by Mr. Conant.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED setting a Status Conference on the Order to Show Cause
Hearing for November 1, 2018 at 8:45 a.m.

10:14 a.m. Matter concludes.

Chris DeRose, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

10/12/2018 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

10/10/2018

Docket Code 029
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. SHERRY K. STEPHENS
T. DeRaddo

Deputy

MANISH THAKRAR
GREGORY G MCGILL

v.

SURENDRA PALA
GORDON S BUELER

GORDON S BUELER / BUELER JONES
L L P
1300 N MCCLINTOCK DR STE B4
CHANDLER AZ 85226
PAUL A CONANT
JUDGE STEPHENS

MINUTE ENTRY

East Court Building - Courtroom 712

8:58 a.m. This is the time set for a telephonic Oral Argument on the parties’ Application
for Attorneys’ Fees. Appearing on behalf of Plaintiff is counsel, Gregory McGill. Appearing on
behalf of Defendant/Counterclaimant, Surendra Pala, is counsel, Gordon S. Bueler.

A record of the proceedings is made digitally in lieu of a court reporter.

The Court has read and considered all briefing on Plaintiff’s Application for Attorney’s
Fees and Costs, filed on September 23, 2018 and on Defendant’s Application for Award of
Attorneys’ Fees and Costs, filed on September 24, 2018.

The Court notes that Mr. Bueler did not file a Response to Plaintiff’s Application for
Attorneys’ Fees and Costs.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

10/10/2018

Docket Code 029
Form V000A
Page 2

Argument is heard on the motions.

IT IS ORDERED taking these matters under advisement.

9:23 a.m. Matter concludes.

LATER:

The Court has considered Plaintiff’s Application for Attorney’s Fees & Costs filed
September 23, 2018, the Declaration of Counsel In Support of Plaintiff’s Fee Application (with
exhibits) filed September 25, 2018, Pala’s Application for Award of Attorneys’ Fees and Costs
filed September 24, 2018, the Affidavit of Counsel in Support of Application for Award of
Attorneys’ Fees and Costs (with exhibits) filed September 24, 2018, the Response in Opposition
to Pala’s Application for Fees & Costs (with exhibits) filed October 8, 2018, Plaintiff’s Notice of
Errata Re Response to Pala Fee App filed October 9, 2018, and the oral argument conducted on
October 10, 2018. No written response to Plaintiff’s Application for Attorney’s Fees & Costs
was filed.

Following a bench trial, the Court found for the parties as follows.

Count One of the Complaint, Breach of Contract, in favor of Plaintiff Thakrar, damages
are zero dollars.

Claim One of the Counterclaim, Breach of Fiduciary Duty, in favor of Counterdefendant
Thakrar.

Claim Two of the Counterclaim, Breach of Contract, in favor of Counterclaimant Pala,
damages are zero dollars.

Claim Five of the Counterclaim, Unjust Enrichment, in favor of Counterdefendant
Thakrar.

Claim Six, of the Counterclaim, Accounting, in favor of Counterdefendant Thakrar.

Summary judgment was granted on another breach of contract claim in favor of Plaintiff
Thakrar with damages in the total amount of $11,906.35.

Plaintiff Thakrar seeks attorney fees of $171,390.00 and taxable costs in the sum of
$4,940.51. Plaintiff argues he is entitled to attorneys’ fees because he was the successful party
on two breach of contract claims. In addition he argues the other claims which he defended

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

10/10/2018

Docket Code 029
Form V000A
Page 3

successfully against arose out of a contract (the partnership agreements) citing to A.R.S. § 12-
341.01 (in any contested action arising out of a contract, express or implied, the court may award
the successful party reasonable attorney fees). Plaintiff also seeks attorneys’ fees pursuant to
A.R.S. § 12-349 (the court shall assess reasonable attorney fees if a party unreasonably expands
or delays the proceeding). Plaintiff argues Defendant Pala’s unreasonable conduct throughout the
five years this matter has been pending resulted in unnecessary delays and expenses. Plaintiff
also argues he is entitled to court costs pursuant to A.R.S. § 12-341 (the successful party to a
civil action shall recover from his adversary all costs expended or incurred therein unless
otherwise provided by law).

Defendant Pala seeks attorneys’ fees in the amount of $49,143.00 and costs in the amount
of $2,123.68 as the successful party on one contract claim.

The Court finds the verdict forms reflect both parties prevailed on certain claims at trial.
Plaintiff Thakrar prevailed on a summary judgment motion on a contract claim and
Defendant/Counterclaimant Pala prevailed on appeal of that summary judgment ruling on other
issues. Attorney fees were not ordered by the appellate court. The original attorneys’ fees
ordered by the Court in connection with granting the summary judgment motion were not
included in the judgment entered on that contract count. Considering all facts and circumstances,
the Court finds Plaintiff Thakrar was the prevailing party and some attorneys’ fees should be
awarded pursuant to A.R.S. § 12-341.01. The Court does not find Defendant/Counterclaimant
Pala unreasonably expanded or delayed the proceedings and is declining to award attorneys’ fees
pursuant to A.R.S. § 12-349.

The Court has considered the merits of the parties’ claims, whether litigation could have
been avoided or the case could have settled, whether assessing fees against either of the parties
would cause extreme hardship, which party prevailed with respect to the relief sought, whether
the legal question presented was novel or had been previously adjudicated, and whether a fee
award would discourage other parties with tenable claims from litigation. The Court finds the
litigation could have been avoided or the case settled (Plaintiff Thakrar offered to settle prior to
trial and Defendant Pala refused the offer), assessing attorneys’ fees will cause some hardship to
both parties, the legal questions presented were not novel and a fee award will not discourage
other parties with tenable claims. The Court has also considered whether the amount of fees
requested by Plaintiffs is disproportionate to the outcome of the case and finds it is somewhat
disproportionate. The Court has also considered the reasonableness of the billing rate, the hours
expended and the amount of the attorneys’ fees requested. See A.R.S. §12-341.01, A.R.S. § 12-
349, Rule 54 (g)(2), Ariz. R.Civ.P., Berry v. 352 E. Virginia, L.L.C., 228 Ariz. 9, 13, 261 P.3d
784, 788 (App. 2011), and ABC Supply, Inc. v. Edwards, 191 Ariz. 48, 51, 952 P.2d 286, 290
(App. 1996), and Schweiger v. China Doll Restaurant, Inc., 138 Ariz. 183, 673 P.2d 927 (App.
1983).

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

10/10/2018

Docket Code 029
Form V000A
Page 4

The Court also considered the written and oral objections from the opposing party to each
application. See Geller v. Lesk, 230 Ariz. 624, 628 (App. 2012) (once the party requesting fees
makes a prima facie case the fees are reasonable, the burden shifts to the opposing party to
establish the amount requested is clearly excessive), Canon School Dist. No. 50 v. W.E.S. Constr.
Co., 177 Ariz. 431, 443, 868 P.2d 1014, 1026 (App. 1993)(opposing party must make specific
objections with factual detail pointing out which particular billing entries are unreasonable) and
Smith v. American Express Travel Related Servs. Co., 179 Ariz. 131, 140, 876 P.2d 1166, 1175
(App. 1994)(an opponent must make more than sweeping and conclusory allegations to
demonstrate unreasonableness of a fee request).

A superior court awarding attorneys’ fees pursuant to A.R.S. § 12-341.01 has broad
discretion to determine what fees are reasonable. The amount awarded need not equal or relate to
the attorney fees actually paid or contracted. Flood Control District of Maricopa County v.
Paloma Investment Ltd. Partnership, 230 Ariz. 29, 279 P.3d 1191 (App. 2012). There is no
presumption that attorneys’ fees should be awarded in a contested contract action. Associated
Indem. Corp. v. Warner, 143 Ariz. 567, 694 P.2d 1181 (1985).

The Court has considered the qualities of the advocate for Defendant, the character of the
work accomplished, the work actually performed by attorney for Defendant, and the result and
benefits derived by Defendant. See Burke v. Arizona State Retirement System, 2016 Ariz. 269, 77
P.3d 444 (App. 2003) and Schweiger v. China Doll Restaurant, Inc., 138 Ariz. 183, 673 P.2d 927
(App. 1983).

The Court finds the billing rates set forth in the Plaintiff’s application were reasonable
and most of the hours expended were reasonably expended for the purpose stated in counsel’s
declaration.

The Court further finds the taxable costs awarded below were authorized by statute, were
necessarily incurred, and the amounts requested were reasonable under the circumstances.

The Court finds attorney fees in the amount of $74,500.00 and costs in the amount of
$3,400.00 are reasonable and should be paid to Plaintiff Thakrar by Defendant/Counterclaimant
Pala.

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED awarding attorneys’ fees to Plaintiff Thakrar in the amount of
$74,500.00 and costs in the amount of $3,400.00.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

10/10/2018

Docket Code 029
Form V000A
Page 5

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED Plaintiff Thakrar shall submit a proposed form of
judgment consistent with the verdicts, this minute entry and applicable law on or before October
30, 2018. Defendant/Counterclaimant Pala may submit an objection to the proposed form of
order as provided in the Arizona Rules of Civil Procedure.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

10/23/2017 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

10/19/2017

Docket Code 005
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. SHERRY K. STEPHENS
T. DeRaddo

Deputy

MANISH THAKRAR
GREGORY G MCGILL

v.

SURENDRA PALA
BRYAN K LEVY

ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE
RESOLUTION - CCC

REFERRAL TO ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION

East Court Building - Courtroom 412

9:36 a.m. This is the time set for a telephonic Oral Argument on Plaintiff’s Motion to
Quash Subpoena to Chase Bank, filed on September 11, 2017. Appearing on behalf of Plaintiff /
Counter Defendant Manish Thakrar, and Counter Defendant BIL Investments, LLC, is counsel,
Gregory McGill. Appearing on behalf of Defendant / Counter Claimant Surendra Pala is
counsel, Bryan K. Levy.

A record of the proceedings is made digitally in lieu of a court reporter.

The Court has read all of the briefing on Plaintiff’s Motion to Quash Subpoena to Chase
Bank and on Defendant’s Motion to Compel.

The parties present arguments on the motions.

Discussion is held regarding the accounting practices and tax statements in this matter.

Further discussion is held regarding the opinion rendered by the Court of Appeals.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

10/19/2017

Docket Code 005
Form V000A
Page 2

For the reasons stated on the record,

IT IS ORDERED denying Plaintiff’s Motion to Quash Subpoena to Chase Bank.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED denying Defendant’s Motion to Compel.

Discussion is held regarding settlement efforts. The Court encourages the parties to
attempt to resolve this matter.

For the reasons stated on the record,

IT IS ORDERED referring this case to the Court’s Alternative Dispute Resolution
Office for the appointment of a Judge Pro Tempore to conduct a settlement conference. Counsel
and/or the parties will receive a minute entry from ADR appointing the Judge Pro Tempore.
Counsel and any “pro per” parties will contact the appointed Judge Pro Tempore to arrange the
date, time and location for the settlement conference. The Judge Pro Tempore is requested to
conduct a settlement conference not later than January 17, 2018. The Office of Alternative
Dispute Resolution will not do the scheduling of the settlement conference so please do not
contact that office.

All counsel and their clients, or non-lawyer representatives who have full and complete
authority to settle this case, shall personally appear and participate in good faith in this settlement
conference even if no settlement is expected.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED affirming the Trial Setting Conference set on January
18, 2018 at 9:00 a.m.

10:09 a.m. Matter concludes.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

10/23/2014 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

10/22/2014

Docket Code 094
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. SALLY SCHNEIDER DUNCAN
C. Watling/C. Keller

Deputy

MANISH THAKRAR
GREGORY G MCGILL

v.

SURENDRA PALA
BIMAL R MERCHANT

ORAL ARGUMENT SET

The Court is in receipt of Plaintiff’s Motion to Strike Kanabar Affidavit, filed on
October 9, 2014 and Defendant/Counterclaimant Pala’s Response to Plaintiff/Counterclaimant’s
Motion to Strike Kanabar Affidavit, filed on October 16, 2014.

IT IS ORDERED setting these matters for oral argument on November 14, 2014 at 1:30
p.m. in conjunction with the evidentiary hearing currently scheduled in this division.

HON. SALLY SCHNEIDER DUNCAN
Maricopa County Superior Court
Central Court Building
201 W. Jefferson, Courtroom 702
Phoenix, AZ 85003
Telephone number: 602-506-9042

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all pleadings shall be filed a minimum of five (5)
business days prior to oral argument. The Court will not consider a late filed pleading without
prior approval and may reschedule the oral argument at the Court’s convenience.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

10/22/2014

Docket Code 094
Form V000A
Page 2

Notice Regarding Substantive Motions: The Court will not accept omnibus motions,
responses and replies. All motions, responses and replies shall be filed on individual claims and
counts separately. Counsel shall not combine any motion with a responsive pleading. If omnibus
motions are filed, the Court reserves the right to reject the motions. No motion shall exceed the
page limitation without prior Court approval.

Please note: The Court reserves the right to vacate and reset, at its own discretion,
any hearing for which the parties submit pleadings within 48 hours prior to the
commencement of the hearing, without prior approval from the Court.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
10/24/2013 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2013-000741
10/23/2013
Docket Code 094
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. SALLY SCHNEIDER DUNCAN
C. Castro
Deputy
MANISH THAKRAR
GREGORY G MCGILL
v.
SURENDRA PALA
BIMAL R MERCHANT
BRAD A DENTON
ORAL ARGUMENT SET
The Court is in receipt of Plaintiff’s Motion for Telephonic Discovery and Scheduling
Conference, filed on October 16, 2013, Third Party Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss, filed on
October 10, 2013, and Defendant and Counterclaimant and Third Party Plaintiff’s Response, filed
on October 21, 2013.
IT IS ORDERED
setting these matters for a telephonic
oral argument on

November 26, 2013, at 9:15 a.m. in this division. Time allotted: 15 minutes. Telephone number:
602-506-9042. Counsel for Plaintiff shall initiate the conference call at the aforesaid date and time.
The call should be placed from a land-line telephone in an area with no background noise as this
will prevent the parties from hearing the proceedings in the courtroom. The call may not be
placed from a vehicle. Please do not call from a cellular telephone.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all pleadings shall be filed a minimum of five (5)
business days prior to oral argument. The Court will not consider a late filed pleading without
prior approval and may reschedule the oral argument at the Court’s convenience.
Notice Regarding Substantive Motions: The Court will not accept omnibus motions,
responses and replies. All motions, responses and replies shall be filed on individual claims and
counts separately. Counsel shall not combine any motion with a responsive pleading. If omnibus

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2013-000741
10/23/2013
Docket Code 094
Form V000A
Page 2
motions are filed, the Court reserves the right to reject the motions. No motion shall exceed the
page limitation without prior Court approval.
The parties are encouraged to view Judge Duncan’s online profile located at the Superior
Court’s website wwww.superiorcourt.maricopa.gov for additional information on appearing
before Judge Duncan.
NOTE: This Court utilizes FTR for an electronic record of the proceedings. However,
any party may request the presence of a court reporter by contacting the division three (3) court
business days before the scheduled hearing.
ALERT: The Arizona Supreme Court Administrative Order 2011-140 directs the Clerk's
Office not to accept paper filings from attorneys in civil cases. Civil cases must still be initiated
on paper; however, subsequent documents must be eFiled through AZTurboCourt unless an
exception defined in the Administrative Order applies.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
11/01/2013 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2013-000741
10/31/2013
Docket Code 095
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. SALLY SCHNEIDER DUNCAN
C. Keller
Deputy
MANISH THAKRAR
GREGORY G MCGILL
v.
SURENDRA PALA
BIMAL R MERCHANT
BRAD A DENTON
ORAL ARGUMENT RESET
The Court has received and considered the parties’ Stipulation to Continue Oral
Argument, filed on October 24, 2013.
IT IS ORDERED vacating oral argument set for November 26, 2013 and resetting same
to December 16, 2013 at 9:15 a.m. (time allotted: 15 minutes) in this division, all in accordance
with the formal written Order signed by the Court on October 28, 2013 and filed (entered) by the
Clerk on October 31, 2013, on the following motions:
•
Plaintiff’s Motion for Telephonic Discovery and Scheduling Conference, filed on
October 16, 2013,
•
Third Party Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss, filed on October 10, 2013, and
•
Defendant and Counterclaimant and Third Party Plaintiff’s Response, filed on
October 21, 2013.
HON. SALLY SCHNEIDER DUNCAN
Maricopa County Superior Court
Central Court Building
201 W. Jefferson, Courtroom 702

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2013-000741
10/31/2013
Docket Code 095
Form V000A
Page 2
Phoenix, AZ 85003
Telephone number: 602-506-9042
The parties are encouraged to view Judge Duncan’s online profile located at the Superior
Court’s website wwww.superiorcourt.maricopa.gov for additional information on appearing
before Judge Duncan.
NOTE: This Court utilizes FTR for an electronic record of the proceedings. However,
any party may request the presence of a court reporter by contacting the division three (3) court
business days before the scheduled hearing.
ALERT: The Arizona Supreme Court Administrative Order 2011-140 directs the Clerk's
Office not to accept paper filings from attorneys in civil cases. Civil cases must still be initiated
on paper; however, subsequent documents must be eFiled through AZTurboCourt unless an
exception defined in the Administrative Order applies.

Chris DeRose, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

11/02/2018 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

11/01/2018

Docket Code 029
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. SHERRY K. STEPHENS
T. DeRaddo

Deputy

MANISH THAKRAR
GREGORY G MCGILL

PAUL A CONANT

v.

SURENDRA PALA
GORDON S BUELER

GORDON S BUELER / BUELER JONES
L L P
1300 N MCCLINTOCK DR STE B4
CHANDLER AZ 85226
JUDGE STEPHENS

MINUTE ENTRY

East Court Building - Courtroom 712

9:02 a.m. This is the time set for a telephonic Status Conference. Appearing on behalf of
Plaintiff, Mahish Thakrar, regarding the judgment collection efforts is counsel, Paul Conant.
Appearing on behalf of Defendant, Surrendra Pala, is counsel, Gordon Bueler.

A record of the proceedings is made digitally in lieu of a court reporter.

Discussion is held regarding the status of the results of the hearing on Order to Show
Cause, and the efforts made by Mr. Conant to conduct a deposition of Chetan Pala.

Mr. Conant intends to file an Application for Attorneys’ Fees and Costs with respect to
these efforts. Mr. Bueler may file a Response to Plaintiff’s motion. Either party may request an
Evidentiary Hearing.

8:57 a.m. Matter concludes.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

11/14/2014 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

11/12/2014

Docket Code 003
Form V003
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. SALLY SCHNEIDER DUNCAN
M. Corriveau

Deputy

MANISH THAKRAR
GREGORY G MCGILL

v.

SURENDRA PALA
BIMAL R MERCHANT

HEARING VACATED AND RESET

On the Court's own motion,

IT IS ORDERED vacating Evidentiary Hearing set for November 14, 2014 at 1:30 p.m.
and resetting same for December 2, 2014 at 1:30 p.m. before this division. Time allotted: 90
minutes.

HON. SALLY SCHNEIDER DUNCAN
Maricopa County Superior Court
Central Court Building
201 West Jefferson, Courtroom 702
Phoenix, AZ 85003
Telephone number: 602-506-9042

Chris DeRose, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

11/19/2018 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

11/16/2018

Docket Code 028
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. SHERRY K. STEPHENS
T. DeRaddo

Deputy

MANISH THAKRAR
GREGORY G MCGILL

v.

SURENDRA PALA
GORDON S BUELER

GORDON S BUELER / BUELER JONES
L L P
1300 N MCCLINTOCK DR STE B4
CHANDLER AZ 85226
JUDGE STEPHENS

TELEPHONIC STATUS CONFERENCE SET

IT IS ORDERED setting a Telephonic Status Conference on November 20, 2018 at 8:30
a.m. (15 minutes).

Counsel for Plaintiff shall initiate the call by arranging the presence of all parties and
contacting this division at 602-506-4818.

Clerk of the Superior Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

11/19/2019 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

11/18/2019

Docket Code 062
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HONORABLE DAVID W. GARBARINO
L. Brown

Deputy

MANISH THAKRAR
GREGORY G MCGILL

v.

SURENDRA PALA
GORDON S BUELER

WELLS FARGO BANK
LEVY PROCESSING MAC S4001-01E P
O BOX 29779
PHOENIX AZ 85038-9779
GORDON S BUELER / BUELER JONES
L L P
1300 N MCCLINTOCK DR STE B4
CHANDLER AZ 85226
MELISSA ANNE EMMEL
COMM. GARBARINO

MINUTE ENTRY

Courtroom: ECB 813.

1:30 p.m. This is the time set for Order to Show Cause Hearing Re: Garnishee to Appear
and Answer. No one appears.

A court reporter is neither present nor are the proceedings electronically recorded.

No one appearing,

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

11/18/2019

Docket Code 062
Form V000A
Page 2

IT IS ORDERED quashing the Order to Show Cause and vacating the hearing set this date.

Matter concludes.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

11/28/2017 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

11/20/2017

Docket Code 094
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. SHERRY K. STEPHENS
T. DeRaddo

Deputy

MANISH THAKRAR
GREGORY G MCGILL

v.

SURENDRA PALA
BRYAN K LEVY

GEORGE H KING

ORAL ARGUMENT SET

The Court has received the briefing on Defendant/Counterclaimant’s Motion to Compel,
filed on September 11, 2017.

IT IS ORDERED setting Oral Argument on December 20, 2017 at 9:00 a.m. (Time
allotted: 30 minutes) in this division.

Honorable Sherry Stephens
Maricopa County Superior Court
101 W. Jefferson, East Court Building, Suite 712
Phoenix, 85003

(602) 506-4818

NOTE: All court proceedings are recorded by audio and video method and not by a
court reporter. Should you want an unofficial copy of the proceedings, the parties or counsel
may request a videotape or CD of the proceedings for a $30.00 charge. If a CD or videotape is
requested, please obtain a form from the Self Service Center to request a daily copy of a court
hearing or trial proceeding being conducted. Pay the applicable fee at the Self Service Center.
Attach the receipt showing payment of the fee and present both the receipt and the form to the
courtroom clerk or bailiff. For copies of hearings or trial proceedings recorded previously,

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

11/20/2017

Docket Code 094
Form V000A
Page 2

please call Electronic Records Services at 602-506-7100. Should an official transcript be
required, you may request that the court prepare it. The party ordering the transcript must pay
for it. To request a transcript, call 602-506-7100 and provide the date of the proceeding, the case
number, the case caption, if the transcript is for an appeal, and your name, address, and telephone
number.

NOTE: Pursuant to Local Rule 2.22, if a party desires a court reporter for any
proceeding in which a court reporter is not mandated by Arizona Supreme Court Rule 30, the
party must submit a written request to the assigned judicial officer at least ten (10) judicial days
in advance of the hearing, and must pay the authorized fee to the Clerk of the Court at least two
(2) judicial days before the proceeding. The fee is $140 for a half-day and $280 for a full day.

Effective February 15, 2017, Rule 9.8 of the Maricopa County Superior Court Local
Rules of Practice (Reporting of Oral Arguments and Hearings) has been abrogated. See Arizona
Supreme Court Order No. R-16-0044.

Failure to timely request a court reporter will be deemed consent to proceed without a
court reporter.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

11/22/2017 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

11/20/2017

Docket Code 023
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. SHERRY K. STEPHENS
T. DeRaddo

Deputy

MANISH THAKRAR
GREGORY G MCGILL

v.

SURENDRA PALA
BRYAN K LEVY

GEORGE H KING

EXTEND DEADLINES
RESET TRIAL SETTING CONFERENCE

The court has received and considered the parties’ Stipulation to Extend Deadline to
Complete Discovery, Depositions, Final Supplemental Disclosures, Expert Witnesses Opinions
and Rebuttal, Dispositive Motions and Settlement Conference, filed on November 17, 2017.

IT IS ORDERED approving and granting the parties’ request, all in accordance with the
electronically signed Order granted on November 20, 2017.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED vacating the Trial Setting Conference set for January 18,
2018, and resetting same for April 2, 2018 at 9:00 a.m.

Defendant will initiate the call by arranging for the presence of all other counsel and self-
represented parties, and by calling this division at 602-506-4818.

Chris DeRose, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

11/21/2018 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

11/20/2018

Docket Code 094
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. SHERRY K. STEPHENS
T. DeRaddo

Deputy

MANISH THAKRAR
GREGORY G MCGILL

v.

SURENDRA PALA
GORDON S BUELER

GORDON S BUELER / BUELER JONES
L L P
1300 N MCCLINTOCK DR STE B4
CHANDLER AZ 85226
PAUL A CONANT
JUDGE STEPHENS

MINUTE ENTRY

East Court Building - Courtroom 712

8:33 a.m. This is the time set for a telephonic Status Conference. Appearing on behalf of
Plaintiff / Counter Defendant, Manish Thakrar, is counsel, Gregory G. McGill. Appearing on
behalf of Defendant / Counter Claimant, Surendra Pala, is counsel, Gordon S. Bueler.

A record of the proceedings is made digitally in lieu of a court reporter.

Discussion is held regarding recently filed documents as follows:

 Plaintiff’s Notice of Lodging Proposed Form of Judgment, filed on October 29, 2018.
 Defendant’s Objection to Proposed Form of Judgment, filed on November 7, 2018.
 Plaintiff’s Reply to Defendant’s Objection to Proposed Form of Judgment, filed on
November 20, 2018.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

11/20/2018

Docket Code 094
Form V000A
Page 2

 Defendant’s Motion to Rescind Protective Order, filed on November 1, 2018.
 Plaintiff’s Response to Defendant’s Motion to Rescind Protective Order, filed November
20, 2018.

 Defendant’s Motion for Reconsideration Regarding Attorneys’ Fees Award, filed on
October 25, 2018.
 Plaintiff’s Notice re The Rule on Reconsiderations [Rule 7.1(e)(2).], filed on October 29,
2018.

For the reasons stated on the record,

The Court shall hold in abeyance signing the proposed Form of Judgment due to the other
pending filings.

IT IS ORDERED Mr. Bueler may file a Reply to Defendant’s Motion to Rescind
Protective Order.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED authorizing Mr. McGill to file a brief Response to
Defendant’s Motion for Reconsideration Regarding Attorneys’ Fees Award.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED setting a telephonic Oral Argument on November 27, 2018
at 11:00 a.m. (Time allotted: 15 minutes)

8:39 a.m. Matter concludes.

Chris DeRose, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

11/28/2018 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

11/27/2018

Docket Code 005
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. SHERRY K. STEPHENS
T. DeRaddo

Deputy

MANISH THAKRAR
GREGORY G MCGILL

v.

SURENDRA PALA
GORDON S BUELER

GORDON S BUELER / BUELER JONES
L L P
1300 N MCCLINTOCK DR STE B4
CHANDLER AZ 85226
JUDGE STEPHENS

MINUTE ENTRY

East Court Building - Courtroom 712

11:31 a.m. This is the time set for telephonic Oral Argument on pending motions. Both
parties appear telephonically. Appearing on behalf of Plaintiff, Manish Thakrar, is counsel,
Gregory McGill. Appearing on behalf of Defendant, Surendra Pala, is counsel, Gordon Bueler.

A record of the proceedings is made digitally in lieu of a court reporter.

The Court has received and considered the following filings: after the benefit of oral
argument, and for the reasons stated on the record, the Court makes its ruling as follows:

 Defendants’ Motion to Rescind Protective Order, filed on November 1, 2018;
 Plaintiff’s Response in Opposition to Motion to Rescind Protective Order, filed on
November 19, 2018; and
 Defendant’s Reply to Motion to Rescind Protective Order, filed on November 21, 2018.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

11/27/2018

Docket Code 005
Form V000A
Page 2

IT IS ORDERED denying Defendants’ Motion to Rescind Protective Order with the
understanding that the records produced pursuant to the Protective Order are available to Mr.
Pala for appeal purposes. Also, any exhibit admitted at trial is currently a public record and the
Protective Order shall not cover records admitted at trial. Thus, the Protective Order remains in
place.

The Court has received and considered the following filings: after the benefit of oral
argument, and for the reasons stated on the record, the Court makes its ruling as follows:

 Defendant’s Motion for Reconsideration Regarding Attorneys’ Fees Award, filed on
October 25, 2018; and
 Plaintiff’s Notice Re The Rule on Reconsiderations, filed on October 29, 2018.
 Plaintiff’s Response to Defendant’s Motion for Reconsideration Regarding Attorneys’
Fees Award, filed on November 27, 2018.

IT IS ORDERED taking this matter under advisement.

12:13 p.m. Matter concludes.

LATER:

IT IS ORDERED denying Defendant’s Motion for Reconsideration Regarding
Attorneys’ Fees Award.

Chris DeRose, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

11/29/2018 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

11/28/2018

Docket Code 094
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. SHERRY K. STEPHENS
T. DeRaddo

Deputy

MANISH THAKRAR
GREGORY G MCGILL

v.

SURENDRA PALA
GORDON S BUELER

PAUL A CONANT

ORAL ARGUMENT SET

The Court has received the briefing regarding Plaintiff/Counterdefendant’s Motion for
Sanctions Against Gordon S. Bueler, Esq., filed on October 30, 2018.

IT IS ORDERED setting Oral Argument on December 12, 2018 at 9:30 a.m. (Time
allotted: 30 minutes) in this division.

Honorable Sherry Stephens
Maricopa County Superior Court
101 W. Jefferson, East Court Building, Suite 712
Phoenix, 85003

(602) 506-4818

NOTE: All court proceedings are recorded by audio and video method and not by a
court reporter. Should you want an unofficial copy of the proceedings, the parties or counsel
may request a CD of the proceedings for a $30.00 charge. For copies of hearings or trial
proceedings recorded previously, please call Electronic Records Services at 602-506-7100.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

11/28/2018

Docket Code 094
Form V000A
Page 2

Pursuant to Local Rule 2.22, if a party desires a court reporter for any proceeding in
which a court reporter is not mandated by Arizona Supreme Court Rule 30, the party must
submit a written request to the assigned judicial officer at least ten (10) judicial days in advance
of the hearing, and must pay the authorized fee to the Clerk of the Court at least two (2) judicial
days before the proceeding. The fee is $140 for a half-day and $280 for a full day.

Chris DeRose, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

11/29/2018 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

11/28/2018

Docket Code 049
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. SHERRY K. STEPHENS
T. DeRaddo

Deputy

MANISH THAKRAR
GREGORY G MCGILL

v.

SURENDRA PALA
GORDON S BUELER

PAUL A CONANT
JUDGE STEPHENS

JUDGMENT SIGNED

IT IS ORDERED approving and settling the formal written Judgment against Defendant,
Surendra Pala, signed by the Court and filed (entered) by the clerk on November 28, 2018.

Please note: The Court has signed a hard-copy version of the judgment provided with an
electronically filed pleading. After the order has been scanned and docketed by the Clerk of Court,
copies of this order may be available through ECR Online at clerkofcourt.maricopa.gov or through
AZTurboCourt.gov and from the Public Access Terminals at the Clerk of Court’s offices located
throughout Maricopa County.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

12/05/2014 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

12/02/2014

Docket Code 004
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. SALLY SCHNEIDER DUNCAN
M. Corriveau

Deputy

MANISH THAKRAR
GREGORY G MCGILL

v.

SURENDRA PALA
BIMAL R MERCHANT

HEARING CONTINUED

Courtroom: CCB 702

1:34 p.m. This is the time set for Evidentiary Hearing. Plaintiff, Manish Thakrar, is
present and is represented by counsel, Gregory G. McGill. Defendant/Counterclaimant,
Surendra Pala, is present and represented by counsel, Bimal R. Merchant.

Court Reporter, Tara Kramer, is present and a record of the proceedings is also made by
audio and/or videotape.

Prior to commencement of hearing Plaintiff’s exhibits 1 and 2 and
Defendant/Counterclaimant’s exhibits 3 and 4 are marked for identification.

On stipulation of counsel, exhibits 1 through 4 are received in evidence.

Plaintiff’s case:

Greg Allen Lynch is sworn and testifies.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

12/02/2014

Docket Code 004
Form V000A
Page 2

The witness is excused.

Plaintiff rests.

Defendant/Counterclaimant’s case:

2:25 p.m. Court stands at recess.

2:37 p.m. Court reconvenes with respective Counsel and parties present.

Court Reporter, Tara Kramer, is present and a record of the proceedings is also made by
audio and/or videotape.

Discussion is held regarding availability of Defendant/Counterclaimant’s expert witness.

Defendant/Counterclaimant’s counsel orally moves to continue this matter to permit his
expert witness to appear. Counsel further requests that the witness be permitted to appear
telephonically.

IT IS ORDERED continuing this hearing to December 10, 2014 at 10:00 a.m., before
this Court. Time allotted: 1 hour.

Maricopa County Superior Court
Central Court Building
201 West Jefferson, Courtroom 702
Phoenix, AZ 85003
Telephone number: 602-506-9042

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED denying Defendant/Counterclaimant’s request for their
expert witness to appear telephonically.

NOTE: All court proceedings are recorded by audio method and not by a court reporter.
Any party may request the presence of a court reporter by contacting this division (602-506-
9042) at least three (3) business days before the scheduled hearing.

Argument is presented to the Court regarding Plaintiff/Third Party Defendant’s Motion to
Strike Kanabar Affidavit filed October 9, 2014 and Plaintiff/Third Party Defendant’s Motion for
Summary Judgment on the Option filed August 26, 2014.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

12/02/2014

Docket Code 004
Form V000A
Page 3

LET THE RECORD REFLECT that Plaintiff/Third Party Defendant’s Motion to Strike
Kanabar Affidavit filed October 9, 2014 is withdrawn.

LET THE RECORD FURTHER REFLECT that the Court takes notice of Plaintiff/Third
Party Defendant’s Notice of Objection in Lieu of Motion to Strike Kanabar Affidavit filed
October 24, 2014.

Further argument is presented to the Court regarding Plaintiff/Third Party Defendant’s
Motion
for
Summary
Judgment
on
the
Option
filed
August
26,
2014
and
Defendant/Counterclaimant Pala’s Response in Opposition to Motion for Summary Judgment
Re: Option and Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment Re: Ownership Interests filed September
24, 2014.

3:20 p.m. Court stands at recess.

3:37 p.m. Court reconvenes with respective Counsel and parties present.

Court Reporter, Tara Kramer, is present and a record of the proceedings is also made by
audio and/or videotape.

Further argument is presented to the Court.

For the reasons set forth on the record,

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED granting count 1 in Plaintiff/Third Party Defendant’s
Motion for Summary Judgment on the Option.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED denying count 3 in Plaintiff/Third Party Defendant’s
Motion for Summary Judgment on the Option.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED denying Defendant/Counterclaimant Pala’s Cross-Motion
for Summary Judgment Re: Ownership Interests.

4:07 p.m. Matter concludes.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

12/08/2014 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

12/05/2014

Docket Code 094
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. SALLY SCHNEIDER DUNCAN
C. Watling

Deputy

MANISH THAKRAR
GREGORY G MCGILL

v.

SURENDRA PALA
BIMAL R MERCHANT

ORAL ARGUMENT SET

Central Court Building – Courtroom 702

3:20 p.m. This is the time set for a status conference. All parties appear telephonically.
Appearing on behalf of the Plaintiff is counsel, Greg McGill. Appearing on behalf of the
Defendant, Counterclaimant and Third Party Plaintiff is counsel, Bimal R. Merchant.

A record of the proceedings is made by audio and/or videotape in lieu of a court reporter.

Discussion is held regarding Defendant and Counterclaimant & Third Party Plaintiff’s
Motion to Vacate Continued Evidentiary Hearing Currently Set for December 10, 2014 at
1:30 p.m., filed on December 4, 2014.

For the reasons set forth on the record,

IT IS ORDERED setting this matter for a telephonic oral argument in place and instead
of the Evidentiary Hearing scheduled on December 10, 2014 at 1:30 p.m. in this division. Time
allotted: 1 hour. Telephone number: 602-506-9042. Counsel for Plaintiff(s) shall initiate the
conference call at the aforesaid date and time. The call should be placed from a land-line
telephone in an area with no background noise as this will prevent the parties from hearing the
proceedings in the courtroom. The call may not be placed from a vehicle. Please do not call
from a cellular telephone.

3:23 p.m. Matter concludes.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

12/08/2017 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

12/07/2017

Docket Code 094
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. SHERRY K. STEPHENS
T. DeRaddo

Deputy

MANISH THAKRAR
GREGORY G MCGILL

v.

SURENDRA PALA
BRYAN K LEVY

ORAL ARGUMENT SET

The Court has received the briefing on Plaintiff’s Motion to Quash Subpoenas, filed on
November 8, 2017.

IT IS ORDERED setting Oral Argument on December 19, 2017 at 9:45 a.m. (Time
allotted: 30 minutes) in this division.

Honorable Sherry Stephens
Maricopa County Superior Court
101 W. Jefferson, East Court Building, Suite 712
Phoenix, 85003

(602) 506-4818

NOTE: All court proceedings are recorded by audio and video method and not by a
court reporter. Should you want an unofficial copy of the proceedings, the parties or counsel
may request a videotape or CD of the proceedings for a $30.00 charge. If a CD or videotape is
requested, please obtain a form from the Self Service Center to request a daily copy of a court
hearing or trial proceeding being conducted. Pay the applicable fee at the Self Service Center.
Attach the receipt showing payment of the fee and present both the receipt and the form to the
courtroom clerk or bailiff. For copies of hearings or trial proceedings recorded previously,

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

12/07/2017

Docket Code 094
Form V000A
Page 2

please call Electronic Records Services at 602-506-7100. Should an official transcript be
required, you may request that the court prepare it. The party ordering the transcript must pay
for it. To request a transcript, call 602-506-7100 and provide the date of the proceeding, the case
number, the case caption, if the transcript is for an appeal, and your name, address, and telephone
number.

NOTE: Pursuant to Local Rule 2.22, if a party desires a court reporter for any
proceeding in which a court reporter is not mandated by Arizona Supreme Court Rule 30, the
party must submit a written request to the assigned judicial officer at least ten (10) judicial days
in advance of the hearing, and must pay the authorized fee to the Clerk of the Court at least two
(2) judicial days before the proceeding. The fee is $140 for a half-day and $280 for a full day.

Effective February 15, 2017, Rule 9.8 of the Maricopa County Superior Court Local
Rules of Practice (Reporting of Oral Arguments and Hearings) has been abrogated. See Arizona
Supreme Court Order No. R-16-0044.

Failure to timely request a court reporter will be deemed consent to proceed without a
court reporter.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

12/15/2014 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

12/10/2014

Docket Code 005
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. SALLY SCHNEIDER DUNCAN
K. Ballard

Deputy

MANISH THAKRAR
GREGORY G MCGILL

v.

SURENDRA PALA
BIMAL R MERCHANT

HEARING

Courtroom: CCB-702

1:36 p.m. Evidentiary hearing continues from December 2, 2014 (regarding
determination of damages in relation to Plaintiff’s July 8, 2014 Motion for Summary Judgment
re: Loan). Plaintiff/Counterdefendant Manish Thakrar and Third-Party Defendants BIL
Investments, LLC and Usha Thakrar are represented (telephonically) by Gregory M. McGill.
Defendant/Counterclaimant/Third-Party Plaintiff Surendra Pala is represented (telephonically)
by Counsel Bimal R. Merchant.

A record of the proceedings is made by audio and/or videotape in lieu of a court reporter.

Counsel confirm that there is no further evidence to present.

Defendant’s counsel requests that the Court consider the report previously submitted
without testimony.

The Court will not accept the expert report without testimony from the expert; therefore,
the Court will not consider the expert report.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

12/10/2014

Docket Code 005
Form V000A
Page 2

Closing arguments are presented.

The Court finds that the jewelry is valued at $2,025.00, based on the testimony of Mr.
Lynch, which the Court found to be credible testimony. Namely, the necklace is valued at
$1,610.00 and the earrings are valued at $415, for a total of $2,025.00.

Further, the Court finds that the assessment of the late fee is appropriate pursuant to the
parties’ agreement. Therefore, the Court is going to provide for the offset in the amount valued
for the jewelry. The interest that has accrued is that which was set forth in the Motion and is
otherwise due and owing.

IT IS ORDERED that Plaintiff’s counsel shall submit a form of order no later than
December 24, 2014, consistent with today’s rulings with respect to the July 8, 2014 Motion for
Summary Judgment.

FILED: Exhibit Worksheet and Trial/Hearing Worksheet

2:00 p.m. Matter concludes.

Chris DeRose, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

12/13/2018 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

12/12/2018

Docket Code 005
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. SHERRY K. STEPHENS
T. DeRaddo

Deputy

MANISH THAKRAR
GREGORY G MCGILL

v.

SURENDRA PALA
GORDON S BUELER

GORDON S BUELER / BUELER JONES
L L P
1300 N MCCLINTOCK DR STE B4
CHANDLER AZ 85226
PAUL A CONANT

MINUTE ENTRY

East Court Building - Courtroom 712

9:30 a.m. This is the time set for Oral Argument regarding Plaintiff / Counterdefendant’s
Motion for Sanctions Against Gordon S. Bueler, Esq., filed on October 30, 2018. Appearing on
behalf of Plaintiff/Counterdefendant, Manish Thakrar in the judgment portion of the matter, is
Paul Conant. Appearing on behalf of Defendant, Surendra Pala, is counsel, Gordon Bueller.

A record of the proceedings is made digitally in lieu of a court reporter.

The Court has read all briefing regarding Plaintiff’s Motion for Sanctions Against
Gordon S. Bueler, Esq.

The parties present argument.

For the reasons stated on the record,

IT IS ORDERED denying Plaintiff’s Motion for Sanctions Against Gordon S. Bueler,
Esq.

9:56 a.m. Matter concludes.

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court
*** Electronically Filed ***
12/24/2013 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2013-000741
12/16/2013
Docket Code 005
Form V000A
Page 1
CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. SALLY SCHNEIDER DUNCAN
J. Kiraly/C. Castro
Deputy
MANISH THAKRAR
GREGORY G MCGILL
v.
SURENDRA PALA
BIMAL R MERCHANT
BRAD A DENTON
MINUTE ENTRY
Courtroom 702 – Central Court Building
9:18 a.m. This is the time set for Oral Argument on Third Party Defendant’s Motion to
Dismiss filed on, October 10, 2013. Plaintiff, Manish Thakrar, is present in the courtroom and
represented by counsel, Gregory G. McGill. Defendant, Surendra Pala, is present in the
courtroom and is represented by counsel, Bimal R. Merchant. Defendants Bipin Kanabar and
Sandhya Kanabar are represented by counsel, Sterling Peterson who appears telephonically.
A record of the proceedings is made by audio and/or videotape in lieu of a court reporter.
Arguments are presented.
For the reasons stated on the record,
IT IS ORDERED denying the Motion to Dismiss in part, and granting in part. The Motion
to Dismiss is denied as to the fraud counterclaim and granted as to breach of fiduciary duty
counterclaim.
Discussion is held on Plaintiff’s Motion for Telephonic Discovery and Scheduling

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2013-000741
12/16/2013
Docket Code 005
Form V000A
Page 2
Conference filed on, October 16, 2013.
IT IS ORDERED requiring Defendant’s counsel to file a formal motion with the Court
requesting an interpreter for his client, shall bear the expense of the interpreter and file a motion
for reallocation of costs.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED the deposition of Defendant is not limited to 4 hours to
allow a reasonable amount of time to accommodate the interpreter.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED as follows:
Counsel and/or the parties shall meet in person to discuss all of the matters set forth in
Ariz. R. Civ. P. Rule 16(b). Counsel and/or the parties shall prepare and file with the Court, no
later than 5:00 p.m. on January 6, 2014, a Joint Proposed Scheduling Order, for discovery,
motion and disclosure deadlines.
If the parties agree to the dates, they should prepare an Order in the form attached
hereto, containing the provisions which are applicable to their case.
The Joint Proposed Scheduling Order shall include specific dates (“June 5, 2012”, rather
than “45 days prior to trial”). Please do not incorporate a firm trial date in the proposed Order.
This Court will set a firm trial date only after discovery has been completed and the parties have
in good faith participated in a mediation or settlement conference.
If counsel and/or the parties are unable to agree on any of the items that are to be included
in the Order, the reasons for their inability to agree shall be set forth in their proposed Order.
Once the initial Joint Pretrial Scheduling Memorandum is submitted, the Court will review
the Proposed Scheduling Order and schedule a telephonic pretrial status/scheduling conference
(via separate minute entry). At the telephonic pretrial status/scheduling conference, if the
parties have completed discovery and are ready for trial, the Court will set a firm date for
the Final Trial Management Conference and trial. If the parties are not ready for trial, the
matter may be placed on the Court’s calendar for dismissal.
If, at any time, the parties believe a telephonic or in-person pretrial conference is
necessary or warranted, they should address the reasons in the Joint Proposed Scheduling Order.
Notice Regarding Substantive Motions: The Court will not accept omnibus motions,

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2013-000741
12/16/2013
Docket Code 005
Form V000A
Page 3
responses and replies. All motions, responses and replies shall be filed on individual claims and
counts separately. Counsel shall not combine any motion with a responsive pleading. If omnibus
motions are filed, the Court reserves the right to reject the motions. No motion shall exceed the
page limitation without prior Court approval.
If a Joint Proposed Scheduling Order is not timely submitted as ordered, the Court will
place the matter on the Court’s calendar for dismissal.
IT IS ORDERED if a Notice of Settlement is filed the Court will dismiss the case with
prejudice within thirty (30) days from the receipt of the Notice of Settlement.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED if there is a pending status conference scheduled with the
Court, and the parties have settled the case, the parties must file a Motion to Vacate Telephonic
Pretrial Status/Scheduling Conference within three (3) business days prior to the Court
appearance or, in the alternative, shall be prepared to place a Rule 80(d) Agreement on the record.
The parties are encouraged to view Judge Duncan’s online profile located at the Superior
Court’s website wwww.superiorcourt.maricopa.gov for additional information on appearing
before Judge Duncan.
9:24 a.m. Matter concludes.
ALERT: The Arizona Supreme Court Administrative Order 2011-140 directs the Clerk's
Office not to accept paper filings from attorneys in civil cases. Civil cases must still be initiated
on paper; however, subsequent documents must be eFiled through AZTurboCourt unless an
exception defined in the Administrative Order applies.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2013-000741
12/16/2013
Docket Code 005
Form V000A
Page 4
PROPOSED SCHEDULING ORDER
Ariz. R. Civ. P. Rule 16(b)
The Court having received the parties Joint Pretrial Scheduling Memorandum,
IT IS ORDERED entering the following schedule for disclosure as set forth unless the
parties obtain written modifications by the Court:
The parties shall mutually and simultaneously disclose areas of expert testimony by 5:00
1.
p.m. on __________. [OR]
a. Plaintiffs shall disclose areas of expert testimony by 5:00 p.m. on __________.
b. Defendants shall disclose areas of expert testimony by 5:00 p.m. on __________.
The parties shall mutually and simultaneously disclose the identity and opinions of their
2.
expert witnesses by 5:00 p.m. __________. [OR]
a. Plaintiffs shall disclose the identity and opinions of their expert witnesses by 5:00
p.m. on __________.
b. Defendants shall disclose the identity and opinions of their expert witnesses by
5:00 p.m. on __________.
Any and all discovery requests shall be served by 5:00 p.m. on __________.
3.
The parties shall disclose all non-expert testimony by 5:00 p.m. on __________. [OR]
4.
a. Plaintiffs shall disclose areas of non-expert testimony by 5:00 p.m. on
__________.
b. Defendants shall disclose areas of non-expert testimony by 5:00 p.m. on
__________.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2013-000741
12/16/2013
Docket Code 005
Form V000A
Page 5
The parties shall mutually and simultaneously disclose their rebuttal expert witnesses and
5.
opinions by 5:00 p.m. on __________.
All discovery shall be completed by 5:00 p.m. on __________.
6.
The parties shall have exchanged up-to-date final Rule 26.1 Supplemental Disclosure
7.
Statements by 5:00 p.m. on __________.
This Order does not replace the parties’
obligation to seasonably disclose on an on-going basis under Rule 26.1 as information
becomes available.
The parties shall file dispositive motions no later than 5:00 p.m. on __________.
8.
Settlement conference (choose one):
9.
The parties shall participate in private mediation by (120 days out).
[OR]
IT IS ORDERED the parties shall participate in a Settlement Conference. This case is
referred to the Court's Office of Alternative Dispute Resolution for the appointment of a Judge
Pro Tempore to conduct a Settlement Conference. Counsel and/or the parties will receive a
minute entry from ADR appointing the Judge Pro Tempore. Counsel and any "pro per" parties
will contact the appointed Judge Pro Tempore to arrange the date, time and location for the
Settlement Conference. The Judge Pro Tempore is requested to conduct a Settlement
Conference no later than (120 days out). The Office of Alternative Dispute Resolution will not
do the scheduling of the Settlement Conference so please do not contact that office.
If counsel prefer to use a private mediator to conduct the Settlement Conference, a
Stipulation and Order re: Alternative to ADR must be presented to the Court no later than
5:00 p.m. on (90 days out).
All counsel and their clients, non-lawyer representatives and insurance adjusters
who have full and complete authority to settle the case, shall personally appear at the
settlement conference and participate in good faith even if no settlement is expected.
Sanctions may be imposed for failure to participate.

No expert witnesses, expert opinions, lay witnesses, or exhibits shall be used at trial other
10.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY
CV 2013-000741
12/16/2013
Docket Code 005
Form V000A
Page 6
than those disclosed in a timely manner, except for good cause shown or written
agreement of the parties.
Should any discovery disputes arise, counsel, prior to filing discovery motions, shall meet
11.
and confer pursuant to Rule 37, Ariz. R. Civ. P.
The dates set forth in this Order are FIRM dates and will not be extended or modified
12.
absent good cause. Lack of preparation will not ordinarily be considered good cause.
This case is removed from the Inactive Calendar and all requirements of Rule 38.1, Ariz.
13.
R. Civ. P., are waived unless and until otherwise ordered by the Court.
A Telephonic Pretrial Status/Scheduling Conference is set for __________, at _____
14.
a.m./p.m. for the purpose of setting a trial date if the case has not settled. Time allotted:
15 minutes. Counsel shall have their trial calendars available. Counsel for Plaintiff shall
initiate the conference call by first arranging the presence of all other counsel on the
conference call and by calling this division at: (602)506-9042 promptly at the scheduled
time. The call should be placed from a land-line telephone in an area with no background
noise as this will prevent the parties from hearing the proceedings in the courtroom. The
call may not be placed from a vehicle. Please do not call from a cellular telephone.
NOTE: This Court utilizes FTR for an electronic record of the proceedings. However,
any party may request the presence of a court reporter by contacting the division three (3) court
business days before the scheduled hearing.
Dated: __________
HON. SALLY SCHNEIDER DUNCAN
JUDICIAL OFFICER OF THE SUPERIOR COURT

Michael K. Jeanes, Clerk of Court

*** Electronically Filed ***

12/21/2017 8:00 AM
SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

12/19/2017

Docket Code 089
Form V000A
Page 1

CLERK OF THE COURT
HON. SHERRY K. STEPHENS
T. DeRaddo

Deputy

MANISH THAKRAR
GREGORY G MCGILL

v.

SURENDRA PALA
BRYAN K LEVY

PAUL A CONANT

TRIAL TO THE COURT SET

East Court Building - Courtroom 712

9:48 a.m. This is the time set for Oral Argument on Plaintiff’s Motion to Quash
Subpoenas, filed on November 8, 2017. Plaintiff, Manish Thakrar is present and is represented
by counsel, Gregory G. McGill and Paul Conant. Appearing on behalf of Defendant is counsel,
Surendra Pala.

A record of the proceedings is made digitally in lieu of a court reporter.

Discussion is held regarding the status of the case.

Argument is heard on Plaintiff’s Motion to Quash Subpoenas.

For the reasons stated on the record,

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

12/19/2017

Docket Code 089
Form V000A
Page 2

IT IS ORDERED granting Plaintiff’s motion in part and denying in part as follows: the
Court grants the request to quash the subpoenas as currently written. Mr. Levy may re-issue the
subpoenas with the limitations of the date range of January 1, 2012 through May 15, 2015.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED instead of requiring the recipients of the subpoenas to
provide the documents as a matter of limitation, the subpoenas will need to specify a list of the
type of documents that the recipients may have and the dates that are covered by the documents
that are responsive to the language in the subpoenas.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED each recipient of the subpoenas shall then, without turning
over the documents to counsel, provide a list of the documents in their possession to both
counsel that are compliant to the request for the specified dates.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that if the parties have a discovery dispute, they shall first
meet and confer in an attempt to settle the matter(s) on their own. Otherwise, counsel for the
movant shall contact the Court’s Judicial Assistant, and all other counsel to advise them of
his/her request for a telephonic hearing. The parties shall thereafter e-mail to the Court’s Judicial
Assistant a one-paragraph summary of the dispute. Once the Court receives a summary, the
Court’s Judicial Assistant will contact the parties to schedule a telephonic conference, or instruct
counsel to file a motion. The Judicial Assistant is Randy Collins who may be reached at
[email protected]

Pending is Plaintiff’s Request for Production of documents propounded on Defendants.
Mr. McGill asserts that he needs the document(s) that Defendant used to support its multi-count
counterclaim.

Mr. Levy avows that he will contact and confer with Defendant regarding this issue.

Discussion is held regarding the status of the case and the parties advise the Court that
they are prepared to set a trial date. Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED as follows:

1. Setting a Trial Management Conference on April 2, 2018 at 9:00 a.m. (time
allotted: 30 minutes). All parties must appear in person and cannot appear
telephonically.

2. Setting a Trial to the Court for the dates of May 7-9, 2018 at 9:30 a.m. (time
allotted: three (3) days).

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

12/19/2017

Docket Code 089
Form V000A
Page 3

Duties Prior to the Trial Management Conference

3. Motions in Limine: All Motions in Limine shall be filed no later than March 12, 2018
and such motions must meet the test of State v. Superior Court, 108 Ariz. 396, 397; 499
P.2d 152 (1972): The primary purpose of a Motion in Limine is to avoid disclosing to
the jury prejudicial matters which may compel a mistrial. See also, Ariz. R. Evid.
103(c). A written response to a Motion in Limine may be filed no later than March 22,
2018 . The Court may rule on Motions in Limine without oral argument. No replies
shall be filed. The parties must comply with Rule 7.2(a) Ariz.R.Civ.P., prior to filing
any Motion in Limine.

PLEASE NOTE: This division requires that all motions, responses, replies and
other Court requested filings in this case must be submitted individually. Counsel
shall not combine any motion with a responsive pleading. All motions are to be filed
separately and designated as such. No pleadings will be accepted if filed in
combination with another.

4. Joint Pretrial Statement: Counsel shall file, no later than March 26, 2018 , a Joint
Pretrial Statement signed by all counsel. In addition to the information required by Rule
16, the Joint Pretrial Statement shall include,

 A Final Trial Witness List. This list shall contain the name of each witness a
party actually intends to call at Trial, the day on which they intend to call
each witness and the estimated time needed for direct, cross and re-direct
examination. (see Witness Information Form attached)

 Whether or not the Rule of Exclusion of Witnesses is being invoked.

5. Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law: This matter is set for a trial to the
bench. Any party who requests Rule 52 Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law
shall file a written request no later than thirty (30) days prior to trial. A party who
makes this request shall file Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law no
later than twenty (20) days after the trial concludes, unless otherwise ordered by the
Court. Any party who did not request Rule 52 findings may file its own Proposed
Findings of Fact and Conclusion of Law by the same deadline. In addition to filing
the Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, an electronic version in Word
or Word-compatible format shall be provided to the Division’s Judicial Assistant. If
Proposed Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law are not filed as ordered, the
request shall be deemed waived.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

12/19/2017

Docket Code 089
Form V000A
Page 4

Duties at Trial Management Conference

6. Counsel/parties shall be prepared to discuss:

a) Agreed-upon deposition summaries and excerpts from deposition
transcripts and the editing of any videotaped depositions.

b) Any special scheduling or equipment issues.

c) Any information contained in the Joint Pretrial Statement.

Exhibits

7. Counsel or their assistants are to contact the clerk of this division at 602-506-1471, no
later than April 23, 2018, regarding the proper procedures for submitting exhibits to
be marked for trial in this division.

No later than April 30, all parties shall deliver their exhibits. The parties are directed
to meet in person to exchange the exhibits before coming to court and, to the extent
possible, remove any duplicate exhibits. The parties should not reserve exhibit
numbers for all Defendants’ exhibits, all Plaintiffs’ exhibits, miscellaneous
demonstrative exhibits, and the like. The parties shall also present original
depositions for filing at that time.

Exhibits are marked in numerical order per party, making it necessary to mark all of
one party’s exhibits before marking the other party’s. Accordingly, the Defendant’s
exhibits numbering shall start at the next number following the last of Plaintiff’s
exhibits. (For example, Plaintiff submits 82 exhibits, which are marked Exhibit 1
through 82. Defendant submits 63 exhibits, which are marked 83 through 145). Please
do not combine the parties’ exhibits. Each side’s exhibits must be submitted
separately and in numerical order.

IT IS ORDERED that any exhibit in excess of 20 pages shall be bates stamped.

With regard to trial exhibits, the parties are strongly discouraged from marking
exhibits they do not anticipate using during trial. Each exhibit must be separately and
securely bound by a staple, prong, in in a binder of some sort. Exhibits not securely
bound or are bound with only a binder clip or rubber band will not be accepted and
will be returned.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

12/19/2017

Docket Code 089
Form V000A
Page 5

8. The dates set forth in this Order are FIRM dates and will not be extended or modified
by this Court absent good cause. Lack of preparation will not ordinarily be
considered good cause.

A trial date now having been set, the parties may, without leave of the Court, modify the
deadlines previously set in the previously filed Scheduling Order using the trial date as a
guideline for the new dates. Should the parties reach an impasse in their discussions to modify
the deadlines, they may contact the Court for the setting of a telephonic status conference.

NOTE: All court proceedings are recorded by audio and video method and not by a
court reporter. Should you want an unofficial copy of the proceedings, the parties or counsel
may request a videotape or CD of the proceedings for a $30.00 charge. If a CD or videotape is
requested, please obtain a form from the Self Service Center to request a daily copy of a court
hearing or trial proceeding being conducted. Pay the applicable fee at the Self Service Center.
Attach the receipt showing payment of the fee and present both the receipt and the form to the
courtroom clerk or bailiff. For copies of hearings or trial proceedings recorded previously,
please call Electronic Records Services at 602-506-7100. Should an official transcript be
required, you may request that the court prepare it. The party ordering the transcript must pay
for it. To request a transcript, call 602-506-7100 and provide the date of the proceeding, the case
number, the case caption, if the transcript is for an appeal, and your name, address, and telephone
number.

NOTE: Pursuant to Local Rule 2.22, if a party desires a court reporter for any
proceeding in which a court reporter is not mandated by Arizona Supreme Court Rule 30, the
party must submit a written request to the assigned judicial officer at least ten (10) judicial days
in advance of the hearing, and must pay the authorized fee to the Clerk of the Court at least two
(2) judicial days before the proceeding. The fee is $140 for a half-day and $280 for a full day.

Effective February 15, 2017, Rule 9.8 of the Maricopa County Superior Court Local
Rules of Practice (Reporting of Oral Arguments and Hearings) has been abrogated. See Arizona
Supreme Court Order No. R-16-0044. Failure to timely request a court reporter will be deemed
consent to proceed without a court reporter.

10:42 a.m. Matter concludes.

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

12/19/2017

Docket Code 089
Form V000A
Page 6

WITNESS INFORMATION FORM

Please note that there are approximately 5 hours of trial time which includes two 15-minute
breaks and 1½ hours for lunch.

WITNESSES FOR PLAINTIFF(S)

WITNESS NAME
DIRECT &
RE-DIRECT
CROSS

1

2

3

4

5

6

DIRECT, RE-DIRECT & CROSS
TOTAL:_________________

WITNESSES FOR DEFENDANT(S)

WITNESS NAME
DIRECT &
RE-DIRECT
CROSS

1

2

3

4

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA
MARICOPA COUNTY

CV 2013-000741

12/19/2017

Docket Code 089
Form V000A
Page 7

5

6

DIRECT, RE-DIRECT & CROSS
TOTAL:_______________

TOTAL WITNESS TIME ESTIMATE:___________________________

TIME ESTIMATE FOR:
PLAINTIFF
DEFENDANT
OPENING STATEMENT

CLOSING ARGUMENT
1st:
2nd:

TOTAL ESTIMATED TRIAL TIME:

Should not exceed 15 total hours

Documents