The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMINUTES - 05162006 - C.17 CLAIM BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY / BOARD ACTION: MAY 16, 2006 Claim Against the County,or District Governed by ) the Board of Supervisors,Routing Endorsements, ) NOTICE TO CLAIMANT and Board Action. All Section references are to ) The copy of this document mailed to California Government Codes. (� you is your notice of the action taken D giml on your claim by the Board of Supervisors. (Paragraph IV below), APR 11 2006 given Pursuant to Government Code AMOUNT: $140.64 COUNTY COUNSEL Section 913 and 915.4.Please note all MARTINEZCALIF. "Warnings". CLAIMANT: SHEILA NEWMANN ATTORNEY: UNKNOWN DATE RECEIVED: APRIL 11, 2006 ADDRESS: 135 DUTRA ROAD BY DELIVERY TO CLERK ON: APRIL 11, 2006 MARTINEZ, CA 94553_ BY MAIL POSTMARKED: APRIL 10, 2006 FROM: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors TO: County Counsel Attached is a copy of the above-noted claim. APRIL 11, 2006 JOHN CULLEN,Clerk Dated: By:. Deputy 11. FROM: County Counsel TO: Clerk of the Board of Su ervisors' (%)f"T' ris claim complies substantially with Sections 910,and 910.2. ( ) This Claim FAILS to comply substantially with Sections 910 and 910.2, and we are so notifying claimant.The Board cannot act for 15 days(Section 910.8). ( ) Claim is not timely filed. The Clerk should return claim on ground that it was filed late and send warning of claimant's right to apply for leave to present a late claim(Section 911.3). O Other: Dated: `f'13-°Co By: f"C r' Deputy County Counsel 111. FROM: Clerk of the Board TO: County Counsel(1) County Administrator(2) O Claim was returned as untimely with notice to claimant(Section 911.3)., 1V.,,BOARD ORDER: By unanimous vote of the Supervisors present: ( This Claim is rejected in full. O Other: 1 certify that this is a true and correct copy of the Board's Order entered in its minutes for this date. Dated: 0&0 JOHN CULLEN,CLERK,By Deputy Clerk WARNI (Gov. code section 913) T Subject to certain exceptions,you have only six(6)months from the date this notice was personally served or deposited in the mail to file a court action on this claim.See Government Code Section 945.6.You may seek the advice of an attorney of your choice in connection with this matter.If you want to consult an attorney,you should do so immediately. *For Additional Warning See Reverse Side of This Notice. AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING I declare under penalty of peijuq that I am now,and at all times herein mentioned, have been a citizen of tine United States, over age 18; and that today I deposited in the United States Postal Service in Martinez, California, postage fully prepaid a certified copy of this Board Order and Notice to Claimant,addressed to the claimant as shown above. DatedJOHN CULLEN, CLERK By Deputy Clerk BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA.COSTA COUNTY y INSTRUCTIONS TO CLAIMANT A. A claim relating to a cause of action for death or for injury to person or to personal properly or growing crops shall be presented not later than six months after the accrual of the cause of action. A claim relating to any other cause of action shall be.presented not later than one year . after the accrual of the cause of action. (Gov. Code § 911.2.) B. Claims must be filed with the Cleric of the Board of Supervisors at its office in Room 106, County Adinibistration Building, 651 Pine Street;Martinez,CA 94553. C. If claim is against a district governed by the Board of Supervisors, rather than the County, the naive of the District should be filled in. D. If the claim is against more than one public eLtty, separate claims must be filed against each. public entity. E. Fraud. See penalty for fraudulent claims,Penal Code Sec. 72 at the end of this form. ■saaaaa■asaaasataaaaaaman aaaaaaaaaasssGa!lasaaaaaaaaaCCenen■!!slaasaatltassssal RE: Claim By: Reserved for Clerk's filing stamp RECEIVED Against the County of Contra Costa or. ) APR 1 1 2006 District) CLERK BOARD OF SUPERVISORS (Fill in the name) ) CONTRA COSTA CO. The undersigned claimant hereby makes claim against the County of Contra Costa or the above-named district in the sum of$ and in support of this claim represents as follows: 1. When did the damage or injury occur? (Give exact date and hour) r i l l 41.00 FIrn L 2. Where did the damage or injury occur? (Include city and county) Co hC�d r CL A \r C,- i .Cc n u r c�-, Gly bra co 3. Haw did the damage or injury occur? (Give fall details;use extra paper if required)GG A ani a.9v +0 - ,rel Ga ,�z& a�� 61 4. What particular act or omission on the part of county or district officers, servants r mplovees cause1td the injuryor'damageT .. ........ 15 6 J 0 5 What are the names of coup or district officers servants�or employees causin the county � g damage or injury? 6."�'' What damage or injufiies do your claimlulted? (Give full extent of injuries or damages claimed. Attach-two estimates for auto damage:) VLn rc al r-,Ab dl.anti av �i 5(��Y�ave` �-�" -�' 3� 7. How was the amount claimed above compute) (Include the estimated amount of any prospective injury or damage.) fie,P S Ce ►-ntA 1"V 6 rA 41' r C C_ e e 8. Names and addresses of wxtn ss s,doctors, and hospitals: 9. List the expenditures you made on account of this accident or injury: DATE TIME AMOUNT Al 0 Fri ■a¢rear¢r¢ranrrraaaaeras■.awoman ■aaaraaar.r.■ta■ear■■aa■■rr�aaarurrrraraaaraaarrrari ) .Gov. Code Sec. 910.2 provides"The claim shall be )signed by the claimant or by some person on his behalf." SEND NOTICES TO: (Attornev) 1 Name and address of Attorney ) (Claimant's Signature) ) K._v a 0( - (Address) n Ll Z �,, 0- 62 Telephone No. )Telephone No._ ...era■errrrrat■taaarraraaa soma..■marssoma■raararaaar■aaaaaraaaraa.rarrraaaanoun Rowel PUBLIC RECORDS NOTICE: Please be advised that this claim form, or any claim filed with the County under the Tort Claims Act, is subject to public disclosure under the California Public Records Act. (Gov. Code, §§ 6500 et seq.) Furthermore, any attachments,addendums, or supplements attached to the claim form, including medical records, are also subject to public disclosure. ■■aars■rracaraaa raaarraa. .■rrarrrrararrrraraar.araarrraaaa■■aaaarr.rraaaa%marararaarl NOTICE: Section 72 of the Penal Code provides: Every person who, with intent to defraud; presents for allowance or for payment to any state board or officer, or to any county, city, or district board or officer, authorized to allow or pay the same if genuine, any false or fraudulent claim, bill, account voucher, or writing, is punishable either by imprisonment in the County jail for a period of not more than one year, by a fine of not exceeding one thousand dollars ($1,000.00), or by both such imprisonment and fine, or by imprisonment in the state prison, by a fine of not exceeding ten thousand dollars ($10,000),or by both such imprisonment and fine. ` . ^ W L-33 I FR F:- 1 C-- 3935 ALHAMBRA AVE MARTINEZ, CA 94553-3819 (925)228-8900, BAR REG# AK R' I.D. CAD053044053 FEDERAL TAX IM 9+2437197 * ' ][ I Nq T 73 ][ ��-7 04/03/06 04/04/06 ITT ;p�� 12:57 PM 11 :03 AM TERR: 7799 PAGE: CTI -NONSIG: 186140T BILL TO: PHILIP NEUMANN ` 135 DUTRA RD MARTINEZ, CA 94553 PHONE 1 . . . . . . . (510>37O-9024 VEH YEAR/MAKE. 98 AUDI PHONE 2. . . . . . VEHICLE MODEL. A4 DATE REQUESTED 04/03/06 VEHICLE COLOR. ` TIME REQUESTED LICENSE/STATE. 3XBJ216 / CA RETURN PARTS. . YES ODOMETR IN/OUT 715O4 / 71504 SALESMAN. . . . " . 009 / 007 PRIOR INVOICE. 094483 ACCOUNT # r'O0 TC CUCT# TYPE/STATE PAYMENT METHOD 779QO0*)l 2 N N\65 0 CA CHECK �� T�� 0Y ��KI�7� ��S U0��l� LINE TOTAL 00 2!9��Y7N�V R � V / 0CON TOURING CONTACT Uk95 00 U4.9525 � & [ N9 0721 044'204R { lIKE 0lSPD�� CHARG 2.V0 .VV 2.00 009 072 041'263 C. KEW YALYE -TEM 1.50 .VV 1.5V N? 072 l WH EEL R A LAHC E - COMPUTER SPIN l.00 8.00 9.V0 ' 009 072 093-001 8 l TIRE {NSTALLA7lON .00 3.50 3.50 ALL OF US HERE A7 N & S TlRE WANT TO THANK YOU FOR YOVS DUB1NESS, PLEASE CON[ BACK AND SEE US. IF ARPLICADL . ' l ACvNOWLED5E NOTICE AND 011RAL APDROVAL OF AN INCREASE JN THE ORIGINAL ESTIMATE IDRlCE. SIAWATUIRE l UNDERSTAND THAT ALL CUSTOM WHEEL LU0 NUTS MUST ERE R[-TOR LIED AFTER 25 MILES AND CHECKED PERIODICALLY. `,/oo^m/y PARTS TOTAL........ 119.45 LABOR TOTAL........ 11.50 CH[C AM0UN ....... �4V'64 �0 T0T�......... 13N.95 U7.4� SALE lAX........ 9.6Y AUTHORIZATION � �� I AY-5, �P . HlKI N MANN[ �C'0.. �R AUT, HONEE.-... 0VV-V VV AUTH DATE. X8 AUTH TIME..... 0Y/00 AM REVISED TOTAL. \3N.95 N01 AMOUNT- 108.07 8E1PlKS 08C.. ALL � �� 1 �� ,ZQ�-�FZ Ki -17 11771 ir-N 5N.0 17� F-R FR 44 R,J-I-'y' T. PJ F---C3 F:Z M ff!::tn'-r T C-3 No - FORM#GBMS-009 05/02 . CLAIM BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY (� BOARD ACTION: MAY 16, 2006 Claim Against the County,or District Governed b ) the Board of Supervisors,Rou'rig�I I NOTICE TO CLAIMANT and Board Action. All Section ref i es are to The copy of this document mailed to California Government Codes. (((SSS�� APR 12 2046 you is your notice of the action taken COUNTY COUNSEL on your claim by the Board of MARTINEZ CALIF. Superyisors. (Paragraph IV below), given Pursuant to Government Code DAMAGES WITHIN THE JURISDICTION Section 913 and 915.4.Please note all AMOUNT: OF THE SUPERIOR COURT' "Warnings". CLAIMANT: TINA ALISIA CURIEL ATTORNEY MICHAEL D. MEADOWS DATE RECEIVED: APRIL 12, 2006 ANDREW C. SCHWARTZ ADDRESS: CASPER, MEADOWS, SCHWARTZ BY DELIVERY TO CLERK ON:APRIL 12, 2006 & COOK 2121 N. CALIFORNIA BLVD., #1020 HAND DELIVERED WALNUT CREEK, CA 94596 BY MAIL POSTMARKED: FROM: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors TO: County Counsel Attached is a copy of the above-noted claim. APRIL 12 2006 JOHN CULLEr Dated: By: Deputy 11. FROM: County Counsel TO: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors ( fhis claim complies substantially with Sections 910 and 910.2. ( ) This Claim FAILS to comply substantially with Sections 910 and 910.2, and we are so notifying claimant.The Board cannot act for 15 days(Section 910,8). ( ) Claim is not timely filed. The Clerk should return claim on ground that it was filed late and send warning of claimant's right to apply for leave to present a late claim(Section 911.3). O Other: Dated: y--13--L9tp By: GYtC. _ _ Deputy County Counsel 111. FROM: Clerk of the Board TO: County Counsel(1) County Administrator(2) O Claim was returned as untimely with notice to claimant(Section 911.3). IV.BOARD ORDER: By unanimous vote of the Supervisors present: (� This Claim is rejected in full. O Other: I certify that this is a true and correct copy of the Board's Order entered in its minutes for this date. Dated:/76L e&-4-X JOHN CLJLLEN,CLERK,By _ Deputy Clerk WARNf (Gov. code section 913) Subject to certain exceptions,you have only six(6)months from the date this notice was personally served or deposited in the mail to rile a court action on this claim.See Government Code Section 945.6.You may seek the advice of au attorney of your choice in connection with this matter.If you want to consult an attorney,you should do so humediately. *For Additional Warnutg See Reverse Side of this Notice. AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING I declare under penalty of peljuly that I ant now,and at all times herein mentioned, have been a citizen of the United States, over age 18; and that today 1 deposited in the United States Postal Service in Nlartinez, California, postage fully prepaid a certified copy of this Board Order mud Notice , to Claimmnl,addressed to the claimant as shown above. Dated: t JOHN CULLEN,CLERK By eputy Clerk BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA CUb-1A L;uur,a r INSTRUCTIONS TO CT,®i NT A. A claim relating to a cause of action for death or for injury to person or to personal property or growing crops shall be presented not later than six months after the accrual of the cause of action. A claim relating to any other cause of action shall be presented not later than one year after the accrual of the cause of action. (Gov. Code § 911.2.) B. Claims must be filed with the Cleric of the Board of Supervisors at its office in Room 106, County Administration Building, 651 Pine Street, Martinez, CA 94553. C. If claim is against a district governed by the Board of Supervisors, rather than the County, the name of the District should be filled in. D. If the claim is against more than one public entity, separate claims must be filed against each public entity. E. Fraud. See penalty for fraudulent claims,Penal Code Sec. 72 at the end of this form. ■e essnone eeeeBeeswax noon e■eeeeeeereese..■.reeeeeeeerMEN s■.o".....■..■..eoeeeeel RE: Claim By: Reserved for Clerk's filing stamp TM ALISIA CMIEL ) RECEI9®E® APR 1 2 2006 Against the County of Contra Costae ) CLERK.BOARD OF SUPERVISORS District) CONTRA COSTA CO. (Fill in the name) ) The undersigned claimant hereby makes claim against the County of Contra Costa or the above-named district in the sum of S* and in support of this claim represents as follows: *Damages.within the Jurisdiction of the Superior Court 1. When did the damage or injury occur? (Give exact date and hour) 10/19/05 at approximately 8:30 pm to 10/20/05. at approximately 10:00 am 2. Where did the damage or injury occur? (Include city and county) 1050 Hunsaker Road, Lafayette, Contra Costa County, California 3. How did the damage or injury occur? (Give full details; use extra paper if required) See attached statement for details of the incident and the acts which caused injuries to the claimant. 4. What particular act OT omission on the part of county or district officers, servants, or employees caused the injury or damage? See attached statement for details of the incident and the acts which caused injuries to the claimant. 5 What are the names of county or district officers, servants, or employees causing the damage or injury? Law enforcement personnel from the Contra Costa County Sheriff's office who entered the premises identified in item number 2, on the dates and times identified in item number 1, including, but not limited to, Sergeant J. Mahoney, Detective J. Barnes, Sergeant R. .Daly, Detective Sean Pate, Detectives Clark, Moore, Uyeda, and Van Zelf, and other sheriff's deputies who were on the scene but whose names have not yet been ascertained. t® 'd' wto 9b: ZT 9eeZ-90-6cAle 6. What damage or injuries do your claim resulted? (Give full extent of injuries or damages claimed..Attach two estimates for auto damage:) Extreme psychological and emotional trauma resulting in nightmares, flashbacks, sleep disturbances, inability to concentrate, pervasive anxiety, and otherpsychological and emotional manifestations. 7. How was the amount claimed above computed? (Include the estimated amount of any prospective injury or damage.) Based on the life-threatening nature of the incident and the apparent threat to family members, and the claimant, and the degree of future medical treatment which will be required. 8. Names and addresses of witnesses,doctors and hospitals:Witnesses include all claimants at the residence at the.time of the incl2ent, medical personnel at Kaiser, Walnut Creek, the Oasis Center, Walnut Creek, St. Perpetua Church, Lafayette, CA, and school counselors who provided counseling and therapy to claimant. 9. List the expenditures you made on account of this accident or injury: DATE TIME AMOUNT October, 2005 and continuing. Various amounts to the Oasis Center for psychotherapy soars.ae..■a.s.o.a...r.. ■■.■■.....e...oea...■...o.■■■■■■■.■■r....o...aaaoa...a■..a■■a. Gov. Code Sec. 910.2 provides"The claim shall be signed by the claimant or by some person on his behalf." SEND NOTICES TO: (Attorney) Name and address of Attorney ) MICHAEL D. MEADOWS ) ANDREW C. SCHWARTZ ) (Claimant's.Signature) CASPER, MEADOWS, SCHWARTZ & COOK) MICHAEL D. MEADOWS 2121. N. California Blvd., #1020 ) Walnut Creek, CA 94596 ) (Address) ) ) ) Telephone No. 925-947-1147 ) Telephone No. ■■....■a....ooao.maoaa■.amaoa......■■■■■■r■■r.■.r..r..�....a....oa..a..oa..■..■.■..■.� PUBLIC RECORDS NOTICE: Please be advised that this claim form,or any claim filed with the County under the Tort Claims Act, is subject to public disclosure under the California Public Records Act. (Gov. Code, H 6500 et seq.) Furthermore, any attachments, addendums, or supplements attached to the claim form, including medical records, are also subject to public disclosure. ■■■b■■■■..C.9......a......9......A.............■.a...i.l............■O............... NOTICE: Section 72 of the Penal Code provides: Every person who, with intent to defraud, presents for allowance or for payment to any state board or officer, or to any county, city, or district board or officer, authorized to allow or pay the same if genuine, any false or fraudulent claim, bili, account voucher, or writing, is punishable either by imprisonment in the County jail for a .period of not more than one year, by a fine of not exceeding.one thousand dollars ($1,000.00), or by both such imprisonment and fine, or by imprisonment in the state prison, by a fine of not exceeding ten thousand dollars ($10,000),or by both such imprisonment and fine. Z:0 "d, Wti 9V: ZL 9002-S0-?ldti ATTACHMENT TO CLAIM FORM RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS 3 AND 4 At the time of the incident which is the subject of this claim, claimants, Frederick and Kimberly Curiel, owned the residence located at 1050 Hunsaker Canyon Road in Lafayette, California. Residing with them were their children, Maria, Tina, and Julia Curiel, ages 16, 14 and 11, respectively. Also occupying the residence were Hazel McClure and Michael Jason Sikkema, a married couple, who were graduate students at St. Mary's College, and their children, Dagan McClure-Sikkema, age 3, and Celia McClure-Sikkema, age 2. All were present in the home on October 19, 2005 at approximately 8:35 pm, when more than ten Contra Costa County Sheriffs officers, wearing black windbreakers, burst into the residence, unannounced, with guns drawn, without seeking permission,the, to enter from any of the occupants. Their apparent purpose was to locate and apprehend Scott Dyleski, who was not in the home when entry was made. Warrants had not been issued authorizing the entry into, or search of, the residence, and an arrest warrant had not been issued for Dyleski. Nevertheless, the officers fanned out through the house, and as they encountered the occupants, ordered them, at gunpoint, to"get the fuck down" and threatening claimants with comments such as "get the fuck down or we'll blow your head off'. While lying face down, as demanded, Fred Curiel had his face pushed against the floor by one of the officers, breaking his eyeglasses. He and claimant, Michael Sikkema, were then hand-cuffed by the officers in front of their children. 11 year old Julia Curiel had an officer press her shoe against her back to keep her on the floor. When the claimants were finally allowed up from their prone positions on the floor, they were ordered to sit and remain stationary in the living room. Any movement, including going to the bathroom, had to be with permission of the officers. The claimants were not allowed to communicate, by telephone, or other means, with anyone outside the home until the next morning. The initial entry into the home was unwarranted, and without legal authority of any kind. As stated, the officers' were there to locate and apprehend Scott Dyleski, a suspect in a homicide. However, within five minutes after entry, the officers knew he was not at the residence and were told by the occupants where he could be found. He was soon thereafter located and arrested at the location provided to the sheriffs by the claimants. ATTACHMENT TO CLAIM FORM RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS 3 AND 4 A warrant for the search of the premises, and an arrest warrant for Scott Dyleski, were subsequently delivered to the officers. These warrants weren't signed by a judicial officer until 10:55 that evening, and specifically limited service of the warrant to daytime hours. At approximately 2:00 am, another search warrant, authorizing night service, was finally obtained, and a search of Dyleski's property was commenced. At the time of the original entry, the police had no information that any of the occupants present in the home presented any danger to the officers to justify holding theme at gunpoint. No weapons were found in the home. The police had no information that any of the occupants intended to hide or destroy evidence pertinent to the investigation into Scott Dyleski, and none of the occupants had any history of criminal activity. The conduct of the sheriffs' deputies described above was unlawful and violated claimants' state and federal constitutional rights and also amounted to trespass, false imprisonment, and assault and battery, all under color of state law. CLAIM BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY BOARD ACTION: MAY 16, 2006 Claim Against the County,or the Board of Supervisors,Rout D NOTICE TO CLAIMANT and Board Action. All Section re ces re to The copy of this document mailed to California Government_Codes. PR 2 2006 you is your notice of the action taken COUNTY COUNSEL on your claim by the Board of MARTINEZ CALIF. Supervisors. (Paragraph IV below), given Pursuant to Government Code DAMAGES WITHIN THE JURISDICTION Section 913 and 915.4.Please note all AMOUNT: OF THE SUPERIOR COURT` "Warnings". CLAIMANT: JULIA MICHELLE CURIEL ATTORNEY: MICHAEL D. MEADOWS DATE RECEIVED: APRIL 12, 2006 ANDREW C. SCHWARTZ ADDRESS: &SCK, MEADOWS, SCHWARTZ BY DELIVERY'1'O CLERK ON:APRIL 12, 2006 2121 N. CALIFORNIA BLVD., #B10 MAIL POSTMARKED: HAND DELIVERED WALNUT CREEK, CA 94596 FROM: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors TO: County Counsel Attached is a copy of the above-noted claim. APRIL 12, 2006 JOHN CULLEN, er c Dated: By: Deputy IL FROM: County Counsel TO: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors (41rhis claim complies substantially with Sections 910 and 910.2. ( ) This Claim FAILS to comply substantially with-Sections 910 and 910.2, and we are so notifying claimant. The Board cannot act for 15 days(Section 910.8). ( ) Claim is not timely filed. The Clerk should return claim on ground that it was filed late and send warning of claimant's right to apply for leave to present a late claim(Section 911.3). O Other: Dated: 4 1 3"CK6 By: o_n Deputy County Counsel 11I, FROM: Clerk of the Board TO: County Counsel(1) County Administrator(2) O Claim was returned as untimely with notice to claimant(Section 911.3). 1 V. OARD ORDER: By unanimous vote of the Supervisors present: ( This Claim is rejected in full. O Other: I certify that this is a true and correct copy of the Board's Order entered in its minutes for this date. Dated _ �JOHN CULLEN,CLERK,By Deputy Clerk WARNI (G(;v.code section 913) Subject to cettahn exceptions,you have only six(6)montins front(lie date this notice was personally served or deposited in the mail to file a court action on this claim.See Government Code Section 945.6.You may seek the advice of an attorney of your choice in connection with this matter.If you want to consult au attorney,you should do so immediately. *For Additional Wanting See Reverse Side of This Notice. AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING I declare under penalty of perjury that I ant now,and at all times herein mentioned,have been a citizen of the United States, over age 18; and that today I deposited in the United States Postal Service in Martinez, California, postage fully prepaid a certified copy or this Board Order and Notice to Claimant,addressed to the claimant as shown above. Dated ff& 0� JOHN CULLEN,CLERK By Deputy Clerk : BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY INSTRUCTIONS TO C..AIMANT A. A claim relating to a cause of action for death or for-injury to person or to personal property or growing crops shall be presented not later than six months after the accrual of the cause of action. A claim relating to any other cause of action shall be presented not later than one year after the accrual of the cause of action. (Gov. Code § 911.2.) B. Claims must be filed with the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors at its office in Room 106, County Administration Building, 651 Pine Street,Martinez, CA 94553. C. If claim is,against a district governed by the Board of Supervisors, rather than the County, the name of the District should be filled in. D. If the claim is against more than one public entity, separate claims must be filed againsteach public entity. E. Fraud. See penalty for fraudulent claims,Penal Code Sec. 72 at the end of this form. ■■ssssmsssesssssssesss■s■■ssson soss..s■■■s.ssssssssss■'ss...■■■■■s■■■ssssssssssi RE: Claim By: Reserved for Clerk's filing stamp JULIA MICHELLE CMIEL ) RECEIVED' Against the County of Contra Costa am ) District] APR 1 2 2006 (Fill in the name) ) C:ERR BOARD OF SUPERVisORS CONTRA COSTA CO. The undersigned claimant hereby makes claim against the County of Contra Costa or the above-named district in the sum of S* and in support of this claim represents as follows: *Damages .within the jurisdiction of the Superior Court 1. When did the damage or injury occur? (Give exact date and hour) 10/19/05 at approximately 8:30 pm to 10/20/05 at approximately 10:00 am 2. Where did the damage or injury occur? (Include city and county) 1050 Hunsaker Road, Lafayette, Contra Costa County, California 3. How did the damage or injury occur? (Give full details; use extra paper if required) See attached statement for details of the incident and the acts which caused injuries to the claimant. 4. What particular actor omission on the part of county or district officers, servants, or employees . caused the injury or damage? See attached statement for details of the incident and the acts which caused injuries to the claimant. 5 What are the names of county or district officers, servants, or employees causing the damage or injury? Law enforcement personnel from the Contra Costa County Sheriff's office who entered the premises identified in item number 2, on the dates and times identified in item number 1, including, but not limited to, Sergeant J. Mahoney, Detective J. Barnes, Sergeant K-' -Daly, Detective Sean Pate, Detectives Clark, Moore, Uyeda, and Van Zelf, and other sheriff's deputies who.were on the scene but whose names have not yet been ascertained. TO wo Sb: ZT 900Z-90—Natl 6. What damage or injuries do your claim resulted? (Give full extent of injuries or damages claimed. Attach two estimates for auto damage:) Extreme psychological and emotional trauma resulting in nightmares, flashbacks, sleep disturbances, inability to concentrate, pervasive anxiety, and other psychological and emotional manifestations. .7. How was the amount claimed above computed? (Include the estimated amount of any prospective injury or damage.) Based on the life-threatening nature of the incident and the apparent threat to family members, and the claimant, and the degree of future medical treatment which will be required. 8. Names and addresses of witnesses,doctors and hospitals:Witnesses include all claimants at the residence at the-time of the incident, medical personnel at Kaiser, Walnut Creek, the Oasis Center, Walnut Creek, St. Perpetua Church, Lafayette, CA, and school counselors who provided counseling and therapy to claimant. 9. List the expenditures you made on account of this accident or injury: DATE TIME AMOUNT October, 2005 and continuing Various amounts to the Oasis Center for psychotherapy ■mamaeawaaeeaemaaewarewPw.ewawaaaasaamaaaoawaaawww■■.■■■.■.w■wawaoil Monaco aaaaa■e...■ . Gov. Code Sec. 910.2 provides "The claim shall be signed by the claimant or by some person on his behalf." SEND NOTICES TO: (Attorney) ) Name and address of Attorney ) L—f MICHAEL D. MEADOWS ) ANDREW C. SCHWARTZ } (Claimant's Signature) CASPER, MEADOWS, SCHWARTZ & COOK) MICHAEL. D. MEADOWS 2121.N. California Blvd., #1020 ) Walnut Creek, CA 94596 ) (Address) ) ) ) Telephone.No. 925-947-1147 ) Telephone No. Mao now MEN waaaaaamal a mom as a unsung ME.w■.■■■.■low.along aoawaoaaaaw ao Do/ea wonew gap wa......, PUBLIC RECORDS NOTICE: Please be advised that this claim form,or any claim filed with the County under the'Tort Claims Act, is subject to public disclosure under the California Public Records Act. (Gov. Code, §§ 6500 et seq.) Furthermore, any attachments, addendums, or supplements attached to the claim form, including medical records, are also subject to public disclosure. e■.■■..■.9 a 0 a a E w m o a■w w o o a a i w■www■e■■•■.■■■e w■w w■O a•o a a e e e o 0 0 o a a w e w w w w e P■w P w P..P..... NOTICE: Section 72 of the Penal Code provides, Every person who, with intent to defraud, presents for allowance or for payment to any state board or officer, or to any county, city, or district board or officer, authorized to allow or pay the same if genuine, any false or fraudulent claim, bill, account voucher, or writing, is punishable either by imprisonment in the County jail for a period of not more than one year, by a fine of not exceeding one thousand dollars (SI,000.00), or by both such imprisonment and fine, or by imprisonment in the state prison, by a fine of not exceeding ten thousand dollars ($10,000),or by both such imprisonment and fine. Ze 'd. wti 9ta: ZT 9002-50-2id0 ATTACHMENT TO CLAIM FORM RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS 3 AND 4 At the time of the incident which is the subject of this claim, claimants, Frederick and Kimberly Curiel, owned the residence located at 1050 Hunsaker Canyon Road in Lafayette, California. Residing with them were their children, Maria, Tina, and Julia Curiel, ages 16, 14 and 11, respectively. Also occupying the residence were Hazel McClure and Michael Jason Sikkema, a married couple, who were graduate students at St. Mary's College, and their children, Dagan McClure-Sikkema, age 3, and Celia McClure-Sikkema, age 2. All were present in the home on October 19, 2005 at approximately 8:35 pm, when more than ten Contra Costa County Sheriffs officers, wearing black windbreakers, burst into the,residence, unannounced, with guns drawn, without seeking permission, beforehand, to enter from any of the occupants. Their apparent purpose was to locate and apprehend Scott Dyleski, who was not in the home when entry was made. Warrants had not been issued authorizing the entry into, or search of, the residence, and an arrest warrant had not been issued for Dyleski. Nevertheless, the officers fanned out through the house, and as they encountered the occupants, ordered them, at gunpoint, to "get the fuck down" and threatening claimants with comments such as "get the fuck down or we'll blow your head off'. While lying face down, as demanded, Fred Curiel had his face pushed against the floor by one of the officers, breaking his eyeglasses. He and claimant, Michael Sikkema, were then hand-cuffed by the officers in front of their children. 11 year old Julia Curiel had an officer press her shoe against her back to keep her on the floor. When the claimants were finally allowed up from their prone positions on the floor, they were ordered to sit and remain stationary in the living room. Any movement, including gong to the bathroom, had to be with permission of the officers. The claimants were not allowed to communicate, by telephone, or other means, with anyone outside the home until the next morning. The initial entry into the home was unwarranted, and without legal authority of any kind. As stated, the officers'were there to locate and apprehend Scott Dyleski, a suspect in a homicide. However, within five minutes after entry, the officers knew he was not at the residence and were told by the occupants where he could be found. He was soon thereafter located and arrested at the location provided to the sheriffs by the claimants. ATTACHMENT TO CLAIM FORM RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS 3 AND 4 A warrant for the search of the premises, and an arrest warrant for Scott Dyleski, were subsequently delivered to the officers. These warrants weren't signed by a judicial officer until 10:55 that evening, and specifically limited service of the warrant to daytime hours. At approximately 2:00 am, another search warrant, authorizing night service,was finally obtained, and a search of Dyleski's property was commenced. At the time of the original entry, the police had no information that any of the occupants present in the home presented any danger to the officers to justify holding them at gunpoint. No weapons were found in the home. The police had no information that any of the occupants intended to hide or destroy evidence pertinent to the investigation into Scott Dyleski, and none of the occupants had any history of criminal activity. The conduct.of the sheriffs' deputies described above was unlawful and violated claimants' state and federal constitutional rights and also amounted to trespass, false imprisonment, and assault and battery, all under color of state law. CLAIM BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY BOARD ACTION: MAY 16, 2006 Claim Against the County,or ' t ' t e ned b� the Board of Supervisors,Rou B 1 NOTICE OTICE TO CLAIMANT and Board Action.All Section rences are to The co of this document mailed to California Government Codes, APR 1 2 2006 you is your notice of the action taken COUNTY COUNSEL on your claim by the Board of MARTINEZ CALIF. Supervisors. (Paragraph IV below), given Pursuant to Government Code DAMAGES WITHIN THE JURISDICTION Section 913 and 915.4.Please note all AMOUNT: OF THE SUPERIOR COURT` "Warnings". CLAIMANT: MARIA TERESE CURIEL ATTORNEY: MICHAEL D. MEADOWS DATE RECEIVED: APRIL 12, 2006 ANDREW C. SCHWARTZ ADDRESS: COOK, MEADOWS, SCHWARTZ BY DELIVERY TO CLERK ON:APRIL 12, 2006 2121 N. CALIFORNIA BLVD., #1020HAND POSTMARKED: D DELIVERED WALNUT CREEK, CA 94596 FROM: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors TO: County Counsel Attached is a copy of the above-noted claim. APRIL 12, 2006 JOHN CULLEN, c Dated: By: Deputy 11, FROM: County Counsel TO: Clerk of the Board of Supervi or's ( 'his claim complies substantially with Sections 910 and 910.2. ( ) This Claim FAILS to comply substantially with Sections 910 and 910.2, and we are so notifying claimant.The Board cannot act for 15 days(Section 910.8). ( ) Claim is not timely filed. The Clerk should return claim on ground that it was filed late and send warning of claimant's right to apply for leave to present a late claim(Section 911.3). O Other: Dated: By/� Deputy County Counsel 11I. FROM: Clerk of the Board TO: County Counsel(1). County Administrator(2) O Claim was returned as untimely with notice to claimant(Section 911.3). 1V. OARD ORDER: By unanimous vote of the Supervisors present: (V� This Claim is rejected in full. O Other: 1 certify that this is a true and correct copy of the Board's Order entered in its minutes for this date. Dated l Q&9L JOHN CULLEN CLERK By A94Deputy Clerk WARNI (Gov. section 913) SuUiect to certain exceptions,you have only six(6)months from the date this notice was personally served or deposited in the nutil to file a court action on this claim.See Government Code Section 945.6.You may seek the advice of an attorney of your choice in connection with this matter.If you want to consult all attorney,you should do so unntediately. *For Additional Warnhig See Reverse Side of This Notice. AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING I decljre under penally of perjury that I ant now,and at all times herein mentioned,have been a citizen of the United States, over age 18, and that today I deposited in the United States Postal Service ill N111-tinez, California, postage fully prepaid a certified copy of this Board Order and Notice to Claituant,addressed to the claimant as shown above. Dated: / JOHN CULLEN,CLERK By Deputy Clerk BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY INSTRUCTIONS TO CLAIMANT A. A claim relating to a cause of action for death or for injury to person or to personal property or growing crops shall be presented not later than six months after the accrual of the cause of action. A claim relating to any other cause of action shall be presented not later than one year after the accrual of the cause of action. (Gov. Code § 911.2.) B. Claims must be filed with the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors at its office in Room 106, County Administration Building, 651 Pine Street, Martinez, CA 94553. C. If claim is against a district governed by the Board of Supervisors, rather than the County, the name of the District should be filled in. D. If the claim is against more than one public entity, separate claims must be filed against each public entity. E. Fraud. See penalty for fraudulent claims,Penal Code Sec. 72 at the end of this form. goal msmemom■mmmmmmmmmemos moo moo was ■■■■■.■■■■.1.26601 RE: Claim By: Reserved for Clerk's filing stamp MARIA TERESE CURIEL ) REM � E® Against the County.of Contra Costa em ) APR 1 2 2006 CLER"BOARD District) CONTRA�o ipP ;iVISORS (Fill in the name) ) srA Co. The undersigned claimant hereby makes claim against the County of Contra Costa or the above-named district in the sum of S* and in support of this claim represents as follows: *Damages:.within the jurisdiction of the Superior Court 1. When did the damage or injury occur? (Give exact date and hour) 10/19/05 at. approxi,mately 8:30 pm to 10/20/05. at approximately 10:00 am 2. Where did the damage or injury occur? (Include city and county) 1050 Hunsaker Road, Lafayette, Contra Costa County, California 3. How did the damage or injury occur? (Give full details;use extra paper if required) See attached statement for details of the incident and the acts which caused injuries to the claimant_ 4. What particular act or omission on the part of county or district officers, servants, or employees caused the injury or damage? See attached statement for details- of the incident and the acts which caused injuries to the claimant. 5 What are the names of county or district officers, servants, or employees causing the damage or injury? Law enforcement personnel from the Contra Costa County Sheriff's office who entered the premises identified in item number 2, on the dates and times identified in item number 1, including, but not limited to, Sergeant J. Mahoney, Detective J. Barnes, Sergeant K. .Daly, Detective Sean Pate, Detectives Clark, Moore, Uyeda, and van Zelf, and other sheriff's deputies who were on the scene but whose names have not yet been ascertained. T0 'd Wti St,: Zi 9002-S0-21dV 6. What damage or injuries do your claim resulted? (Give full extent of injuries or damages claimed. Attach two estimates for auto damage:) Extreme psychological and emotional trauma resulting in nightmares, flashbacks, sleep disturbances, inability to concentrate, pervasive anxiety, and other psychological and-emotional manifestations. 7. How was the amount claimed above computed? (Include the estimated amount of any prospective injury or damage,) Based on the life-threatening nature of the incident and the apparent threat to family members, and. the claimant, and the degree of future medical treatment which will be required. S. Names and addresses of witnesses,doctors and hospitals:Witnesses include all claimants at the residence at the.time .of the incident, medical personnel at Kaiser, Walnut Creek, the Oasis Center, Walnut Creek, St. Perpetua Church, Lafayette, CA, and school counselors who provided counseling and therapy to claimant. 9. List the expenditures you made on account of this accident or injury: DATE TIME AMOUNT October, 2005 and continuing Various amounts to the Oasis Center for psychotherapy ■Does.®ea®aasaeoetlatl��oov■■•■■tl�o�os■�atltlas■�o��ovo•■■■■■•tl■r■■■�tle��aeaotlemtlm■a�tl■■■e Gov, Code Sec. 910.2 provides"The claim shall be signed by the claimant or by some person on his behalf." SEND NOTICES TO: (Attorney) ) Name and address of Attorney ) MICHAEL D. MEADOWS ) ANDREW C. SCHWARTZ ) (Claimant's Signature) CASPER. MEADOWS, SCHWARTZ 6 COOK) MICHAEL D. MEADOWS 2121 N. California Blvd., #1020 ) Walnut Creek, CA 94596 ) (Address) ) ) Telephone.No. 925-947-1147 ) Telephone No. ■■■•m•■dtltlO.00®�0009O tY 6tl®■-O0■■tlOBo■■■■■•■•o■■•■■•0�0��Y��O AB�BC OY S■iFOPG�9■■■m■■■•■■t PUBLIC RECORDS NOTICE: Please be advised that this claim form, or any claim filed with the County under the'Tort Claims Act, is subject to public disclosure under the California Public Records Act. (Gov, Code, §§ 6500 et seq.) Furthermore, any attachments,addendums, or supplements attached to the claim form, including medical records, are also subject to public disclosure. •a■evem■etlaa®aoamea■o��■ea■��.•■.■.■•■■■■a•■■•es•a■r�■��s Yl�Ytlo■tla•■m■■■■■■•■••tl, NOTICE: Section 7.2 of the Penal Code provides; Every person who, with intent to defraud, presents for allowance or for payment to any state board or officer, or to any county, city, or district board or officer, authorized to allow or pay the same if genuine, any false or fraudulent claim, bill, account voucher, or writing, is punishable either by imprisonment in the County jail for a period of not more than one year, by a fine of not exceeding one thousand dollars ($1,000.00), or by both such imprisonment and fine, or by imprisonment in the state prison, by a fine of not exceeding ten thousand dollars ($10,000),or by both such imprisonment and fine. Z0 'd Wil 9b: Z T 900Z-50^?ld" ATTACHMENT TO CLAIM FORM RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS 3 AND 4 At the time of the incident which is the subject of this claim, claimants, Frederick and Kimberly Curiel, owned the residence located at 1050 Hunsaker Canyon Road in Lafayette,.California. Residing with them were their children, Maria, Tina, and Julia Curiel, ages 16, 14 and 11, respectively. Also occupying the residence were Hazel McClure and Michael Jason Sikkema, a married couple, who were graduate students at St. Mary's College, and their children, Dagan McClure-Sikkema, age 3, and Celia McClure-Sikkema, age 2. All were present in the home on October 19, 2005 at approximately 8:35 pm, when more than ten Contra Costa County Sheriffs officers, wearing black windbreakers, burst into the residence, unannounced, with guns drawn, without seeking permission, beforehand, to enter from any of the occupants. Their apparent purpose was to locate and apprehend Scott Dyleski, who was not in the home when entry was made. Warrants had not been issued authorizing the entry into, or search of, the residence, and an arrest warrant had not been issued for Dyleski. Nevertheless, the officers fanned out through the house, and as they encountered the occupants, ordered them, at gunpoint, to "get the fuck down" and threatening claimants with comments such as "get the fuck down or we'll blow your head off'. While lying face down, as demanded, Fred Curiel had his face pushed against the floor by one of the officers, breaking his eyeglasses. He and claimant, Michael Sikkema, were then hand-cuffed by the officers in front of their children. 11 year old Julia Curiel had an officer press her shoe against her back to keep her on the floor. When the claimants were finally allowed up from their prone positions on the floor, they were ordered to sit and remain stationary in the living room. Any movement, including going to the bathroom, had to be with permission of the officers. The claimants were not allowed to communicate, by telephone, or other means, with anyone outside the home until the next morning. The initial entry into the home was unwarranted, and without legal authority of any kind. As stated, the officers' were there to locate and apprehend Scott Dyleski, a suspect in a homicide. However, within five minutes after entry, the officers knew he was not at the residence and were told by the occupants where he could be found. He was soon thereafter located and arrested at the location provided to the sheriffs by the claimants. ATTACHMENT TO CLAIM FORM RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS 3 AND 4 A warrant for the search of the premises, and an arrest warrant for Scott Dyleski, were subsequently delivered to the officers. These warrants weren't signed by a judicial officer until 10:55 that evening, and specifically limited service of the warrant to daytime hours. At approximately 2:00 am, another search warrant, authorizing night service, was finally obtained, and a search of Dyleski's property was commenced. At the time of the original entry, the police had no information that any of the occupants present in the home presented any danger to the officers to justify holding them'at gunpoint. No weapons were found in the home. The police had no information that any of the occupants intended to hide or destroy evidence pertinent to the investigation into Scott Dyleski, and none of the occupants had any history of criminal activity. The conduct-.:of the sheriffs' deputies described above was unlawful and violated claimants' state and federal constitutional rights and also amounted to trespass, false imprisonment, and assault and battery, all under color of state law. CLAIM / 130ARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY BOARD ACTION: MAY 16, 2006 Claim Againstthe County,or Di i G ned_by the Boaranddof f Supervisors,Roulin lJ� NOTICE TO CLAIMANT. and Board Action. All Section re ences are to The copy of this document mailed to California Government Codes. APR 12 2006) you is your notice of the action taken COUNTY COUNSEL on your claim by the Board of MARTINEZ CALIF. Supervisors. (Paragraph IV below), given Pursuant to Government Code DAMAGES WITHIN THE JURISDICTION Sectioni 913 and 915.4.Please note all AMOUNT: OF THE SUPERIOR COURT` "Warnings". CLAIMANT: FREDERICK MICHAEL CURIEL ATTORNEY: MICHAEL D. MEADOWS DATE RECEIVED: APRIL 12, 2006 ANDREW C. SCHWARTZ ADDRESS: CASPER, MEADOWS, SCHWARTZ BY DELIVERY TO CLERK ON:APRIL 12, 2006 & COOK 2121 N. CALIFORNIA BLVD., 10 MAIL POSTMA[ZKED: HAND DELIVERED WALNUT CREEK, CA 94596 FROM: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors TO: County Counsel Attached is a copy of the above-noted claim. APRIL 12' 2006 JOHN CULLE C' r} Dated: By: Deputy� ll. FROM: County Counsel TO: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors (t,).,Tlnis claim complies substantially with Sections 910 and 910.2. ( ) This Claim FAILS to comply substantially with Sections 910 and 910.2, and we are so notifying claimant.The Board cannot act for 15 days(Section 910.8). ( ) Claim is not timely filed. The Clerk should return claim on ground that it was filed late and send warning of claimant's right to apply for leave to present a late claim(Section 911.3). O Other: Dated: 1 bSo By: Deputy County Counsel 11I. FROM: Clerk of the Board TO: County Counsel(1) County Administrator(2) ( ) Claim was returned as untimely with notice to claimant(Section 911.3). 1V. OARD ORDER: By unanimous vote of the Supervisors present: (V This Claim is rejected in full. O Other: I certify that this is a true and correct copy of the Board's Order entered in its minutes for this date. Dated: AK OHN CULLEN,CLERK,Bey Deputy Clerk WARNINGov. code section 913) Subject to certain exceptions,you have only six(6)months front the date this notice was personally served or deposited in the mail to file a count action on this claim.See Government Code Section 945.6.You may seek the advice of an attorney of your choice in counection with this matter.If you want to consult an attorney,you should do so unntediately. *For Additional Warning See Reverse Side of This Notice. AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING I declare under penalty of perjury that I am now,and at all times herein mentioned, have been a citizen of the United States, over age 18; and that today I deposited in the United States Postal Service in Martinez,California, postage fully prepaid a certified copy of this Board Order and Notice to Claimant,addressed to the claimant as shown above. Dated:7-/,7,24-4.6 JOHN CULLEN,CLERK By Deputy Clerk BOARD OF SIUPERVISORS OF CONTRA CUb d A l;V u 1v a S INSTRUCTIONS TO CLAIMANT A. A claim relating to a cause of action for death or for injury to person or to personal property or growing crops shall be presented not later than six months after the accrual of the cause of action. A claim relating to any other cause of action shall be presented not later than one year after the accrual of the cause of action. (Gov. Code § 911.2.) B. Claims must be filed with the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors at its office in Room 106, County Administration Building, 651 Pine Street, Martinez,CA 94553. C. If claim is against a district governed by the Board of Supervisors, rather than the County, the name of the District should be filled in. D. If the claim is against more than one public entity, separate claims must be filed against each public entity. E. Fraud. See penalty for fraudulent claims,Penal Code Sec. 72 at the end of this form. swap 0■m e60220e00.62202■■■■n0one m022202■■■.■■2640■usage 26.■■■■.■■■■■■■■■4006462 RE: Claim By: Reserved for Clerk's filing stamp FREDERICK MICHAEL CDRlEL ECEIVED APR. 1 2 Against the County of Contra CostaU ) 2006 CLERK BOARD OP SUPERVISORS District) CONTRA COSTA CO. (Fill in the name) ) The undersigned claimant hereby makes claim against the County of Contra Costa or the above-named district in the sum of S* and in support of this claim represents as follows: *Damages within the jurisdiction of the Superior Court 1. When did the damage or injury occur? (Give exact date and hour) 10/19/05 at approximately 8:30 pm to 10/20/05 at approximately 10:00 am 2. Where did the damage or injury occur? (Include city and county) 1050 Hunsaker Road, Lafayette, Contra Costa County, California 3. How did the damage or injury occur? (Give full details; use extra paper if required) See attached statement for details of the incident and the acts which caused injuries to the claimant. 4. What particular act or omission on the part of county or district.officers, servants, or employees caused the injury or damage? See attached statement for details of the incident and the acts which caused injuries to the claimant. 5 What are the names of county or district-officers, servants, or employees causing the damage or injury? Law en orcement personnel from the Contra Costa County Sheriff's office who entered the premises identified in item number 2, on the dates and times identified in item number 1, including, but not limited to, Sergeant J. Mahoney, Detective J. Barnes, Sergeant K: Daly, Detective Sean Pate, Detectives Clark, Moore, Dyeda, and Van-Zelf, and other sheriff's deputies who. were on the scene but whose names have not yet been ascertained. Te -d wd Sb: ZT 9eeZ-9e-ad0 6 "What-damage or injuries do your claim resulted? (Give full extent of injuries or damages claimed. Attach two estimates for auto damage:) Extreme psychological and emotional trauma resulting in nightmares, flashbacks, sleep disturbances, inability. to concentrate, pervasive anxiety, and other psychological and emotional manifestations. 7. How was the amount claimed above computed? (Include the estimated amount of any prospective injury or damage.) Based on the life-threatening nature of the incident and the apparent threat to family members, and the claimant, and the degree of future medical treatment which will be required. 8. Names and addresses of witnesses,doctors, and hospitals: Witnesses include all claimants at the residence at the time of the incident, medical personnel at Raiser, Walnut Creek; the Oasis Center, Walnut Creek, and St-:�Perpetiia-cChureh :.Lafayette, CA. 9. List the expenditures you made on account of this accident or injury: DATE TIME AMOUNT October, 2005 $300.00 for broken eye_glasses October, 2005 and continuing Various amounts to the Oasis Center for psychotherapy Wmasaa,saa0aaasa0asaaaaaaar■s■r a a a a a a a a a a 05osaaaWaa■■■■■■aaaa■■aaae90aa0aaaa0aaaa■a■■� Gov. Code Sec. 910.2 provides"The claim shall be signed by the claimant or by some person on his behalf." SEND NOTICES TO: (Attorney) Name and address of Attorney ) MICHAEL D. MEADOWS ) ANDREW C. SCHWARTZ ) Claimant's Signature) CASPER, MEADOWS, SCHWARTZ & .COOK) MICHAEL D. MEADOWS 2121 N..California Blvd., #1020 ) Walnut Creek, CA 94596 ) (Address) Telephone No. 925-947-1147 ) Telephone No. ■aW■aa■aaaeaasaosaw sssaaaaaWaaseas■■■s■■■aa■r■■wawa@aWaalanoa9W9aaaaaaaaaa■oWa■a■■a.. PUBLIC RECORDS NOTICE: Please be advised that this claim form,or any claim filed with the County under the"fort Claims Act, is subject to public disclosure .under the California Public Records Act. (Gov. Code, §§ 6500 et seq.) furthermore, any attachments,addendums, or supplements attached to the claim form, including medical records,are also subject to public disclosure. ■■■■aboa eeeaseaWsaWsMons env Wass■aa■■■■■■■s■a■sa■asWoaWwas Now asoameow Now sa■a■W■■■■■■■. NOTICE: Section 72 of the Penal Code provides: Every person who,with intent to defraud, presents for allowance or for payment to any state board or officer, or to any county, city, or district board or officer, authorized to allow or pay the same if genuine, any false or fraudulent claim, bill, account voucher, or writing, is punishable either.by imprisonment in the County jail for a period of not more than one year, by a fine of not exceeding one thousand dollars ($1,000.00), or by both such imprisonment and fine, or by imprisonment in the state prison, by a fine of not exceeding ten thousand dollars ($10,000),or by both such imprisonment and fine. Zg d wo 9V: Zr 9092-99—ads ATTACHMENT TO CLAIM FORM RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS 3 AND 4 At the time of the incident which is the subject of this claim, claimants, Frederick and Kimberly Curiel, owned the residence located at 1050 Hunsaker Canyon Road in Lafayette, California. Residing with them were their children, Maria, Tina, and Julia Curiel, ages 16, 14 and 11, respectively. Also occupying the residence were Hazel McClure and Michael Jason Sikkema, a married couple, who were graduate students at St. Mary's College, and their children, Dagan McClure-Sikkema, age 3, and Celia McClure-Sikkema, age 2. All were present in the home on October 19, 2005 at approximately 8:35 pm, when more than ten Contra Costa County Sheriffs officers, wearing black windbreakers, burst into the residence, unannounced, with guns drawn, without seeking permission, beforehand, to enter from any of the occupants. Their apparent purpose was to locate and apprehend Scott Dyleski, who was not in the home when entry was made. Warrants had not been issued authorizing the entry into, or search of, the residence, and an arrest warrant had not been issued for Dyleski. Nevertheless, the officers fanned out through the house, and as they encountered the occupants, ordered them, at gunpoint, to "get the fuck down"and threatening claimants with comments such as"get the fuck down or we'll blow your head off'. While lying face down, as demanded, Fred Curiel had his face pushed against the floor by one of the officers, breaking his eyeglasses. He and claimant, Michael Sikkema, were then hand-cuffed by the officers in front of their children. 11 year old Julia Curiel had an officer press her shoe against her back to keep her on the floor. When the claimants were finally allowed up from their prone positions on the floor, they were ordered to sit and remain stationary in the living room. Any movement, including going to the bathroom, had to be with permission of the officers. The claimants were not allowed to communicate, by telephone, or other means, with anyone outside the home until the next morning. The initial entry into the home was unwarranted, and without legal authority of any kind. As stated, the officers' were there to locate and apprehend Scott Dyleski, a suspect in a homicide. However, within five minutes after entry, the officers knew he was not at the residence and were told by the occupants where he could be found. He was soon thereafter located and arrested at the location provided to the sheriffs by the claimants. ATTACHMENT TO CLAIM FORM RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS 3 AND 4 A warrant for the search of the premises, and an arrest warrant for Scott Dyleski, were subsequently delivered to the officers. These warrants weren't signed by a judicial officer until 10:55 that evening, and specifically limited service of the warrant to daytime hours. At approximately 2:00 am, another search warrant, authorizing night service, was finally obtained, and a search of Dyleski's property was commenced. At the time of the original entry, the police had no information that any of the occupants present in the home presented any danger to the officers to justify holding them at gunpoint. No weapons were found in the home. The police had no information that any of the occupants intended to hide or destroy evidence pertinent to the investigation into Scott Dyleski, and none of the occupants had any history of criminal activity. The conduct'of the sheriffs' deputies described above was unlawful and violated claimants' state and federal constitutional rights and also amounted to trespass, false imprisonment, and assault and battery, all under color of state law. ` CLAIM BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY ' BOARD ACTION: MAY 16, 2006 Claim Against the County,or Dist the Board of Supervisors,Routing NOTICE TO CLAIMANT and Board Action. All Section ref cGselo2 206 HH 11 The copy of this document mailed to California Government Codes. you is your notice of the action taken COUNTY COUNSEL on your claim by the Board of MARTINEZ CALIF. Supervisors. (Paragraph IV below), given Pursuant to Government Code DAMAGES WITHIN THE JURISDICTION Section 913 and 915.4.Please note all AMOUNT: OF THE SUPERIOR COURT' "Warnings CLAIMANT: KIMBERLY MARIE CURIEL ATTORNEY: MICHAEL D. MEADOWS DATE RECEIVED: APRIL 12, 2006 ANDREW C. SCHWARTZ ADDRESS: CCOPER, MEADOWS, SCHWARTZ BY DELIVERY TO CLERK ON:APRIL 12, 2006 2121 N. CALIFORNIA BLVD., #1020 HAND DELIVERED WALNUT CREEK, CA 94596 BY MAIL POSTMARKED: FROM: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors TO: County Counsel Attached is a copy of the above-noted claim. APRIL 12, 2006 JOHN CULLEN, k Dated: By: Deputy II. FROM: County Counsel TO: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors (vYThis claim complies substantially with Sections 910 and 910.2. ( ) This Claim FAILS to comply substantially with Sections 910 and 910.2, and we are so notifying claimant.The Board cannot act for 15 days(Section 910.8). ( ) Claim is not timely filed. The Clerk should return claim on ground that it was filed late and send warning of claimant's right to apply for leave to present a late claim(Section 911.3). O Other: Dated: 4- (3-o(P By: Deputy County Counsel L11. FROM: Clerk of the Board TO: County Counsel(1) County Administrator(2) ( } Claim was returned as untimely with notice to claimant(Section 911.3). 1V.BOARD ORDER: By unanimous vote of the Supervisors present: (� This Claim is rejected in full. O Other: I certify that this is a true and correct copy of the Board's Order entered in its minutes for this date. Dated: _ JOHN CULLEN,CLERK,ByDeputy Clerk WARM (Gov. code section 913) Subject to certain exceptions,you have only six(6)months from the date this notice was personally served or deposited in the mail to file a court action on this claim.See Government Code Section 945.6.You may seek the advice of an attorney of your choice in connection with this matter.If you want to consult an attorney,you should do so unmediately. *For Additional Warning See Reverse Side of Tlris Notice. -A FIDAVIT OF MAILING I dedare Under peUalty of pel jury that I am now,and at all times herein mentioned, have been a citizen of the United States, over age 18; and that today I deposited in the United States Postal Service in Martinez, California, postage fully prepaid a certified copy or this Dom d Order and Notice to Claimant,addressed to the claimant as shown above. DatedL � ��1 JOHN CULLEN,CLERK By Deputy Clerk `f — BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA WhIA c;UUtr a I INSTRUCTIONS TO CLAIMANT A. A.claim relating to a cause of action for death or for injury to person or to personal property or growing crops shall be presented not later than six months after the accrual of the cause of action. A claim relating to any other cause of action shall be presented not later than one year after the accrual of the cause of action. (Gov. Code § 911.2.) B. Claims must be filed with the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors at its office in Room 106, County Administration Building, 651 Pine Street, Martinez, CA 94553. C. If claim is against a district governed by the Board of Supervisors, rather than the County, the name,of the District should be filled in. D. If the claim is against.more than one public entity, separate claims must be filed against each public entity. E. Fraud. See penalty for fraudulent claims,Penal Code Sec. 72 at the end of this form. Nana woman ■■nom songs■I RE: Claim By: Reserved for Clerk's filing stamp .. KIMBERLY MARIE CDRIEL j RECEI VE® ) I Against the County of Contra CostaW ) APR2 2006 CLERK BOARD OF SUPFRyjSORS District) CONTRA COSTA CO, (Fill in the name) ) The undersigned claimant hereby makes claim against the County of Contra Costa or the above-named district in the sum of S* and in support of this claim represents as follows: .*Damages-within the jurisdiction of the Superior Court 1. When did the damage or injury occur? (Give exact date and hour) 10/19/05 at approximately 800 pm to 10/20/05 at approximately 10:00 am 2. Where did the damage or injury occur? (Include city and county) 1050 Hunsaker Road, Lafayette, Contra Costa County, California 3. How did the damage or injury occur? (Give full details;use extra paper if required) See attached statement for details of the incident and the acts which caused injuries to the claimant. 4. What particular act or omission on the part of county or district officers, servants, or employees caused the injury or damage? See attached statement for details of the incident and the acts which caused injuries to the claimant. 5 What are the names of county or district officers, servants, or employees causing the damage or injury? Law enforcement personnel from the Contra Costa County Sheriff's office who entered the premises identified in item number 2, on the dates and times identified in item number 1, including, but not limited to, sergeant J. Mahoney, Detective J. Barnes, Sergeant K* ,Daly, Detective Sean Pate, Detectives Clark, Moore, Uyeda, and van-Zelf, and other sheriff's deputies who were on the scene but whose names have not yet been ascertained. i0 'd Wti Sb: ZS 9002-90-adt9 6., What damage or injuries do your claim resulted? (Give full extent of injuries or damages claimed, Attach two estimates for auto damage.) Extreme psychological and emotional trauma resulting in nightmares, flashbacks,_ sleep disturbances, inability to concentrate, pervasive anxiety, and other psychological and emotional manifestations. 7. How was the amount claimed above computed? (Include the estimated amount of any prospective injury or damage.) Based on the life-threatening nature of the incident and the apparent threat to family members, and the claimant, and the degree of future medical treatment which will be required. 8. Names and addresses of witnesses,doctors, and hospitals: Witnesses include all claimants at the residence at the .time of the incident, medical personnel at Kaiser, Walnut Creek; the Oasis Center, Walnut Creek, and St-: �Perpetira:Church;__l:afayette, CA. 9. List the expenditures you made on account of this accident or injury: DATE TIME AMOUNT October, 2005 and continuing Various amounts to the Oasis Center for psychotherapy amamam:eaaaaaaooaa00aaoaaa■■aaaaasoaaoo■sosaaa■■aso■■■■■■a0aaa■asoo9aa0aa00aaaaaaaaa■1 Gov. Code Sec. 910.2 provides"The claim shall be signed by the claimant or by some person on his behalf." SEND NOTICES_TO (Attorney) ) Name and address of Attorney ) MICHAEL D. MEADOWS ) V� ANDREW C. SCHWARTZ ) (Claimant's Signature) CASPER,..MEAWWS, SCHWARTZ & COOK) MICHAEL D. MEADOWS 2121 N. California Blvd., #1020 ) Walnut Creek, CA 94596 ) (Address) ) Telephone No. 925-947-1147 ) Telephone No. ■■■o■a■a a s as Dano as o one gam m e a mono Ban■■■Dole Bob.Mae on as a an mum a■6a Dungannon"sae aaDonna■o PUBLIC RECORDS NOTICE: Please be advised that this claim form,or any claim filed with the County under the 'Tort Claims Act, is subject to public disclosure under the California Public Records Act. (Gov. Code, §§ 6500 et seq.) Furthermore, any attachments,addendums,or supplements attached to the claim form, including medical records,are also subject to public disclosure. ■■■o■boom one gone mesonoon awl some pop.■....■a■song menoon spas Noon 00 mono an Duma■■a a■.o■■a.. NOTICE: Section 72 of the Penal Code provides: Every person who, with intent to defraud, presents for allowance or for payment to any state board or officer, or to any county, city, or district board or officer, authorized to allow or pay the same if genuine, any false or fraudulent claim, bill, account voucher, or writing, is punishable either by imprisonment in the County jail for a period of not more than one year, by a fine of not exceeding one thousand dollars ($1,000.00), or by both such imprisonment and fine, or by imprisonment in the state prison, by a fine of not exceeding.ten thousand dollars ($10,000),or by both such imprisonment and fine. Z0 •d Wti 9b= Zi 9eeZ-90—Lida ATTACHMENT TO CLAIM FORM RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS 3 AND 4 At the time of the incident which is the subject of this claim, claimants, Frederick and Kimberly Curiel, owned the residence located at 1050 Hunsaker Canyon Road in Lafayette,.California. Residing with them were their children, Maria, Tina, and Julia Curiel, ages 16, 14 and 11, respectively. Also occupying the residence were Hazel McClure and Michael Jason Sikkema, a married couple, who were graduate students at St. Mary's College, and their children, Dagan McClure-Sikkema, age 3, and Celia McClure-Sikkema, age 2. All were present in the home on October 19, 2005 at approximately 8:35 pm, when more than ten Contra Costa County Sheriffs officers, wearing black windbreakers, burst into the residence, unannounced, with guns drawn, without seeking permission, beforehand, to enter from any of the occupants. Their apparent purpose was to locate and apprehend Scott Dyleski, who was not in the home when entry was made. Warrants had not been issued authorizing the entry into, or search of, the residence, and an arrest warrant had not been issued for Dyleski. Nevertheless, the officers fanned out through the house, and as they encountered the occupants, ordered them, at gunpoint, to "get the fuck down" and threatening claimants with comments such as "get the fuck down or we'll blow your head off'. While lying face down, as demanded, Fred Curiel had his face pushed against the floor by one of the officers, breaking his eyeglasses. He and claimant, Michael Sikkema, were then hand-cuffed by the officers in front of their children. 11 year old Julia Curiel had an officer press her shoe against her back to keep her on the floor. . When the claimants were finally allowed up from their prone positions on the floor, they were ordered to sit and remain stationary in the living room. Any movement, including going to the bathroom, had to be with permission of the officers. The claimants were not allowed to communicate, by telephone, or other means, with anyone outside the home until the next morning. The initial entry into the home was unwarranted, and without legal authority of any kind. As stated, the officers' were there to locate and apprehend Scott Dyleski, a suspect in a homicide. However, within five minutes after entry, the officers knew he was not at the residence and were told by the occupants where he could be found. He was soon thereafter located and arrested at the location provided to the sheriffs by the claimants. ATTACHMENT TO CLAIM FORM RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS 3 AND 4 A warrant for the search of the premises, and an arrest warrant for Scott Dyleski, were subsequently delivered to the officers. These warrants weren't signed by a judicial officer until 10:55 that evening, and specifically limited service of the warrant to daytime hours. At approximately 2:00 am, another search warrant, authorizing night service, was finally obtained, and a search of Dyleski's property was commenced: At the time of the original entry, the police had no information that any of the occupants present in the home presented any danger to the officers to justify holding them at gunpoint. No weapons were found in the home. The police had no information that any of the occupants intended to hide or destroy evidence pertinent to the investigation into Scott Dyleski, and none of the occupants had any history of criminal activity. The conduct of the sheriffs' deputies described above was unlawful and violated claimants' state and federal constitutional rights and also amounted to trespass, false imprisonment, and assault and battery, all under color of state law. CLAIM BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY BOARD ACTION: MAY 16, 2006 Claim Against the County,or District Governed b ) the Board of Supervisors,Rout �Wok NOTICE TO CLAIMANT and Board Action. All Section aces D The copy of this document mailed to California Government Codes. APR 12 2006 you is your notice of the action taken COUNTY COUNSEL on your claim by the Board of MARTINEZ CALIF. Supervisors.(Paragraph IV below), given Pursuant to Government Code DAMAGES WITHIN THE JURISDICTION Section 913 and 915.4.Please note all AMOUNT: OF THE SUPERIOR COURT, "Warnings". CLAIMANT: CELIA ROSE MtCLURE4SIKKEMA ATTORNEY: MICHAEL D. MEADOWS DATE RECEIVED: APRIL 12, 2006 ANDREW C. SCHWARTZ ADDRESS: &SSER, MEADOWS, SCHWARTZ BY DELIVERY TO CLERK ON:APRIL 12, 2006 2121 N. CALIFORNIA BLVD., #1020 HAND DELIVERED WALNUT CREEK, CA 94596 BY MAIL POSTMARKED: FROM: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors TO: County Counsel Attached is a copy of the above-noted claim. APRIL 12, 2006 JOHN CULLE Dated: By: Deputy It. FROM: County Counsel TO:Clerk of the Board of Supervisors ( his claim complies substantially with Sections 910 and 910.2. ( ) This Claim FAILS to comply substantially with Sections 910 and 9I0.2, and we are so notifying claimant.The Board cannot act for 15 days(Section 910.8). ( ) Claim is not timely filed. The Clerk should return claim on ground that it was filed late and send warning of claimant's right to apply for leave to present a late claim(Section 911.3). O Other: Dated: By: 1_nQDDeputy County Counsel III. FROM: Clerk of the Board TO: County Counsel(1) County Administrator(2) O Claim was returned as untimely with notice to claimant(Section 911.3). 1V.ABOARD ORDER: By unanimous vote of the Supervisors present: (� This Claim is rejected in full. O Other: I certify that this is a true and correct copy of the Board's Order entered in its minutes for this date. Dated:A�/e., 4W JOHN CULLEN,CLERK,By Deputy Clerk WARNI (Gov. code section 913) r Subject to certain exceptions,you have only six(6)months from the date this notice was personally served or deposited in the mail to file a court action on this claim.See Government Code Section 945.6.You may seek the advice of an attorney of your choice in connection with this matter.If you want to consult an attorney,you should do so immediately. *For Additional Warning See Reverse Side of This Notice. AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING I declare under penalty of pet jury that I ani now,and at all tinnes herein mentioned,have been a citizen of the United States, over age 18; and that today I deposited in the United Slates Postal Ser-vice in Martinez, California, postage fully prepaid a certified copy of this Board O��yr///der and Notice to Claimant,addressed to the claimant as shown above. Dated JOHN CULLGN, CLERIC By Deputy Clerk BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY INSTRUCTIONS TOCLAIMANT A. A claim relating to a cause of action for death or for injury to person or to personal property or growing crops shall be presented not later than six months after the accrual of the cause of action. A claim relating to any other cause of action shall be presented not later than one year after the accrual of the cause of action. (Gov. Code § 911.2.) B. Claims must be filed with the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors at its office in Room 106, County Administration Building, 651 Pine Street, Martinez, CA 94553. C. If claim is against a district governed by the Board of Supervisors, rather than the County, the name of the District should be filled in. D. If the claim is against more than one public entity, separate claims must be filed against each public entity. E.. Fraud. See penalty for fraudulent claims,Penal Code Sec. 72 at the end of this form. Ross 100"m 0 RE: Claim By; Reserved for Clerk's filing stamp CELIA ROSE McCLURE-SIKKEHA ) RECEIVE® Against the County of Contra Costa or 1) APR 1 2 2006 District) CLERK BOARD OF SUFERVi ORS CONTRA COSTA CO. (Fill in the name) ) The undersigned claimant hereby makes claim_ against the County of Contra Costa or the above-named district in the sum of S* and in support of this claim represents as follows: *Damages within the jurisdiction of the Superior Court 1. When did the damage or injury occur? (Give exact date and hour) 10/19/05 at approximately 8:30 pm to 10/20/05 at approximately 10:00 am 2. Where did the damage or injury occur? (Include city and county) .1050 Hunsaker Road, Lafayette, Contra Costa County, California 3. How did the damage or injury occur? (Give full details; use extra paper if required) See attached statement for details of the incident and the acts which caused injuries to the claimant. 4. What particular act or omission on the part of county or district officers,servants, or employees caused the injury or damage? See attached statement for details of the incident and the acts which caused injuries to the claimant. 5 What are the names of county or district officers, servants, or employees causing'the damage or injury? Law enforcement personnel from the Contra Costa County Sheriff's office who entered the premises identified in item number 2, on the dates and times identified in item number 1, including, but not limited to, Sergeant J. Mahoney, Detective J. Barnes, Sergeant K:..Daly,.Detective Sean Pate, Detectives Clark, Moore, Uyeda, and Van Zelf, and other sheriff's deputies who were on the scene but whose names have not yet been ascertained. Wr, sb: zr 9eeZ-9e-8dd 6. 'What damage or injuries do .your claim resulted? (Give full extent of injuries or damages claimed...Attach two estimates for auto damage:) Extreme psychological and emotional trauma resulting in nightmares, flashbacks, sleep disturbances, inability. to concentrate, pervasive anxiety, and other psychological and emotional manifestations. 7. How was the amount claimed above computed? (Include the estimated amount of any prospective injury or damage.) Based on the life-threatening nature of the incident and the apparent threat to family members, and the claimant, and the degree of future medical treatment which will be required. 8. Names and addresses of witnesses,doctors, and hospitals: Witnesses include all claimants at the residence at the time of the incident, medical personnel at Raiser, Walnut Creek, the Oasis Center, Walnut Creek, and St -3!PerpetirarC.hurch;-I:afayette, CA. 9. List the expenditures you made on account of this accident or injury: DATE TIME AMOUNT ■■doaaea®aeeaaoeama■a■■o■■■■■■■a■aa■sa■aasaao■■ooa■■■■■■■■-boom a■■aaaoaoo■aaao■■o■■■. Gov. Code Sec. 910.2 provides"The claim shall be signed by the claimant or by some person on his behalf." SEND MICES To : (Attorney) 1 Name and address of Attorney ) MICHAEL D. MEADOWS ) ANDREW C. SC 1WARTZ ) D. amt's Signature) MICUELCASPER, MEADOWS, SCHWARTZ & COOK) 2121 N. California Blvd., #1020 ) Walnut Creek, CA 94596 ) (Address) ) Telephone No. 925-947-1147 )Telephone No. ■■■■■■■■naoa00000saoaaeaaao�aasaoa■■■■■■■■a■■■■rooaaaaaaaaaeaeaoaa■■■ooaw■■■■moo■■■■, PUBLIC RECORDS NOTICE: Please be advised that this claim form, or any claim filed with the County under the'fort Claims Act, is subject to public disclosure under the California Public Records Act. (Gov. Code, §§ 6500 et seq.) Furthermore, any attachments,addendums, or supplements attached to the claim form, including medical records, are also subject to public disclosure. ■■■■■■■araaaaaoamaeaaaaaaaaoaaaa�■■■■■■■■■■■■■a■■a■aaa■aa■■asasaa■ao■o■c■■■■a■■o■■o■, NOTICE: Section 72 of the Penal Code pruvides: Every person who, with intent to defraud, presents for allowance or for payment to any state board or officer, or to any county, city, or district board or officer, authorized to allow or pay the same if genuine, any false or fraudulent claim, bill, account voucher, or writing, is punishable either by imprisonment in the County jail for a period of not more than one year, by a fine of not exceeding one thousand dollars (S1,000.00), or by both such imprisonment and fine, or by imprisonment in the state prison, by a fine of not exceeding ten thousand dollars ($10,000), or by both such imprisonment and fine. Z0 'd W!7 9b: ZT 900Z-S0-214J" ATTACHMENT TO CLAIM FORM RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS 3 AND 4 At the time of the incident which is the subject of this claim, claimants, Frederick and Kimberly Curiel, owned the residence located at 1050 Hunsaker Canyon Road in Lafayette, California. Residing with them were their children, Maria, Tina, and Julia Curiel, ages 16, 14 and 11, respectively. Also occupying the residence were Hazel McClure and Michael Jason Sikkema, a married couple, who were graduate students at St. Mary's College, and their children, Dagan McClure-Sikkema, age 3, and Celia McClure-Sikkema, age 2. All were present in the home on October 19, 2005 at approximately 8:35 pm, when more than ten Contra Costa County Sheriffs officers, wearing black windbreakers, burst into the residence, unannounced, with guns drawn, without seeking permission, beforehand, to enter from any of the occupants. Their apparent purpose was to locate and apprehend Scott Dyleski, who was not in the home when entry was made. Warrants had not been issued authorizing the entry into, or search of, the residence, and an arrest warrant had not been issued for Dyleski. Nevertheless, the officers fanned out through the house, and as they encountered the occupants, ordered them, at gunpoint, to "get the fuck down" and threatening claimants with comments such as "get the fuck down or we'll blow your head off'. While lying face down, as demanded, Fred Curiel had his face pushed against the floor by one of the officers, breaking his eyeglasses. He and claimant, Michael Sikkema, were then hand-cuffed by the officers in front of their children. 11 year old Julia Curiel had an officer press her shoe against her back to keep her on the floor. When the claimants were finally allowed up from their prone positions on the floor, they were ordered to sit and remain stationary in the,living room. Any movement, including going to the bathroom, had to be with permission of the officers. The claimants were not allowed to communicate, by telephone, or other means, with anyone outsHe the home until the next morning. The initial entry into the home was unwarranted, and without legal authority of any kind. As stated, the officers' were there to locate and apprehend Scott Dyleski, a suspect in a homicide. However, within five minutes after entry, the officers knew he was not at the residence and were told by the occupants where he could be found. He was soon thereafter located and arrested at the location provided to the sheriffs by the claimants. . ATTACHMENT TO CLAIM FORM RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS 3 AND 4 A warrant for the search of the premises, and an arrest warrant for Scott Dyleski, were subsequently delivered to the officers. These warrants weren't signed by a judicial officer until 10:55 that evening, and specifically limited service of the warrant to daytime hours. At approximately 2:00 am, another search warrant, authorizing night service, was finally obtained, and a search of Dyleski's property was commenced. At the time of the original entry, the police had no information that any of the occupants present in the home presented any danger to the officers to justify holding them at gunpoint. No weapons were found in the home. The police had no information that any of the occupants intended to hide or destroy evidence pertinent to the investigation into Scott Dyleski, and none of the occupants had any history of criminal activity. The conduct of the sheriffs' deputies described above was unlawful and violated claimants' state and federal constitutional rights and also amounted to trespass, false imprisonment, and assault and battery, all under color of state law. CLAIM BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY r BOARD ACTION: MAY 16, 2006 Claim Againsi the County,or District Governed b the Board of Supervisors,Routing n NOTICE TO CLAIMANT and Board Action. All Section refeF", fe to )� UThe copy of this document mailed to California Government Codes. PR 12 2066 you is your notice of the action taken COUNTY COUNSEL on your claim by the Board of MARTINEZ CALIF. Supervisors.(Paragraph IV below), given Pursuant to Government Code DAMAGES WITHIN THE JURISDICTION Section 913 and 915.4.Please note all AMOUNT: OF THE SUPERIOR COURT` "Warnings". CLAIMANT: DAGAN ALEXANDER McCLURE-SIKKEMA ATTORNEY: MICHAEL D. MEADOWS DATE RECEIVED: APRIL 12, 2006 ANDREW C. SCHWARTZ ADDRESS: COOK, MEADOWS, SCHWARTZ BY DELIVERY TO CLERK ON:APRIL 12, 2006 2121 N. CALIFORNIA BLVD., #1020 HAND DELIVERED WALNUT CREEK, CA 94596 BY MAIL POSTMARKED: FROM: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors TO: County Counsel Attached is a copy of the above-noted claim. APRIL 12, 2006 JOHN CULLEN, k Dated: By: Deputy II. FROM: County Counsel TO:Clerk of the Board of Supervisors (\,)�his claim complies.substantially with Sections 910 and 910.2. ( ) This Claim FAILS to comply substantially with Sections 910 and 910.2, and we are so notifying claimant.The Board cannot act for 15 days(Section 910.8). ( ) Claim is not timely filed. The Clerk should return claim on ground that it was filed late and send warning of claimant's right to apply for leave to present a late claim(Section 911.3). O Other: Dated: '13-0 By: Deputy County Counsel 111. FROM: Clerk of the Board TO: County Counsel(l) County Administrator(2) O Claim was returned as untimely with notice to claimant(Section 911.3). 1V: BOARD ORDER: By unanimous vote of the Supervisors present: (y}� This Claim is rejected in full. O Other:_ I certify that this is a true and correct copy of the Board's Order entered in its minutes for this date. Dated:��G►y�w„9'�Qdk JOHN CULLEN,CLERK,By Deputy Clerk WARNIN' Gov�code section 913) Subject to certain exceptions,you have only six(6)months firom the date this notice was personally served or deposited in the mail to file a tout actiou on this claim.See Government Code Section 945.6.You may seek the advice of an attorney of your choice u1 connection with this matter.If you want to consult an attorney,you should do so immediately. *For Additional Warning See Reverse Side of This Notice. AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING I declare under penalty of pet juiy that I am now, and at all times herein mentioned,have been a citizen of the United States, over age 18; and that today 1 deposited in the United Stakes Postal Service in Martinez, California, postage fully prepaid a certified copy of this 130,11-d 01-der incl Notice to Claimant,addressed to tine claimant as shown above. Dated: __ JOAN CULLEN,CLERK ByDeputy Clerk BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA C US l A L:U UN a I INSTRUCTIONS TOC AIMANT A. A claim relating to a cause of action for death or for injury to person or to personal property or growing crops shall be presented not later than six months after the accrual of the cause of action. A claim relating to any other cause of action shall be presented not later than one year after the accrual of the cause of action. (Gov. Code §.911.2.) B. Claims must be filed with the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors at its office in Room 106, County Administration Building, 651 Pine Street, Martinez,CA 94553, C. If claim is against a district governed by the Board of Supervisors, rather than the County, the name of the District should be filled in. D. If.the claim is against more than one public entity, separate claims must be filed against each public entity. E. Fraud. See penalty for fraudulent claims,Penal Code Sec. 72 at the end of this form. eNos Rollo rrreoreeeeee■■r■■■rrineeeeeee■■■■■tressSusan sure■■r■■■■■■r■■■r■rNames 91 RE: Claim By: Reserved for Clerk's filing stamp DAGAN ALEXANDER MCCLIIRE-STKKMA ) RECEIVED Against the County of Contra Costa im ) APR 1 2 2006 District) CLERK BOARD OF SUPERVISORS (Fill in the name) ) CONTRA COSTA CO. The undersigned claimant hereby makes claim against the County of Contra Costa or the above-named district in the sum of$* and in support of this claim represents as follows: . .*Damageswithin the jurisdiction of the Superior Court 1. When did the damage or injury occur? (Give exact date and hour) 10/19/05 at approximately 8:30 pm to 10/20/05 at approximately 10:00 am 2. Where did the damage or injury occur? (Include city and county) 1050 Hunsaker Road, Lafayette, Contra Costa County, California 3. How did the damage or injury occur? (Give full details; use extra paper if required) See attached statement for details of the incident and the acts which caused injuries to the claimant. 4. What particular act or omission on the part of county or district officers, servants, or employees caused the injury or damage? See attached statement for details of the incident and the acts which caused injuries to the -claimant. 5 What are the names of county or district'officers, servants, or employees causing the damage or injury? Law enforcement personnel from the Contra Costa County Sheriff's office who entered the premises identified in item number 2, on the dates and times identified in item number 1, including, but not limited to, Sergeant J. Mahoney, Detective J. Barnes, Sergeant K' Daly, Detective Sean Pate, Detectives Clark, Moore, Uyeda, and Van zelf, and other sheriff's deputies who.were on the scene but whose names have not yet been ascertained. ie •d wd GV: ZT 9eez-9e-ads 6: What damage or injuries do your claim resulted? (Give full extent'of injuries or damages claimed. Attach two estimates for auto damage.) Extreme psychological and emotional trauma resulting in nightmares, flashbacks, sleep disturbances, inability. to concentrate, pervasive anxiety, and other psychological and emotional manifestations. 7. How was the amount claimed above computed? (Include the estimated amount of any rospecbve injury or damage.) Based on the. life=threatening.nature of the incident and he apparent threat -to family members, and the claimant, and the degree of future medical treatment which will be required. 8. Names and addresses of witnesses,doctors, and hospitals: Witnesses include all claimants at the residence at the time ot ,the incident, medical personnel at Kaiser, Walnut Creek; the Oasis Center, Walnut Creek, and St-._?Perpetiiar:Church, Lafayette, CA. 9. List the expenditures you made on account of this accident or injury: DATE TIME AMOUNT aaaaao.eaaaeaeooasaa■agar■■orassume aaaaaaaoaaaaaoa■■.■■■■■■■rraaaaoaaaaaaaamaaaoa■■■■ Gov. Code Sec. 910.2 provides"The claim shall be signed by the claimant or by some person on his )behalf" SM NOTICES TO: (Attorney) Name and address of Attorney ) MICHAEL D. MEADOWS ) AAIDREW. C. SCHWARTZ ) (Claimant's Signature) CASPER. MEADOWS, SCHWARTZ & COOK) MICHAEL D. MEADOWS 2121.N. California Blvd_, #1020 ) Walnut Creek, CA 94596 ) (Address) ) ) Telephone No. 925-947-1147 } Telephone No. . ama■■■■a as to oaaoa6a 6aa6aoa among Boom■■son■■soon ada as Ca aaaa9aa a6o aaa1aa0aaPa■a■a■■■.■.4 PUBLIC RECORDS NOTICE: Please be advised that this claim form,or any claim filed with the County under the Tort Claims Act, is subject to public disclosure.under the California Public Records Act. (Gov. Code, H 6500 et seq.) Furthermore, any attachments,addendums,or supplements attached to the claim form, including medical records,are also subject to public disclosure. ■■■■■NON■n a a 9 Now memo Noma ME a awns*on■Samoa.".ago among Now a a e Mona a a Suwon mom a■■■.■■■a■■■■ NOTICE: Section 72 of the Penal Code provides: Every person who, with intent to defraud, presents for allowance or for payment to any state board or officer, or to any county, city, or district board or officer, authorized to allow or pay the same if genuine, any false or fraudulent claim, bill, account voucher, or writing, is punishable either by imprisonment in the County jail for a period of not more than one year, by a fine of not exceeding one thousand dollars ($1,000.00), or by both such imprisonment and fine, or by imprisonment in the state prison, by a fine of not exceeding ten thousand dollars ($10,000),or by both such imprisonment and fine. Ze 'd W1:1 9t-: Zi 9002-S0-21d1y ATTACHMENT TO CLAIM FORM RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS 3 AND 4 At the time of the incident which is the subject of this claim, claimants, Frederick and Kimberly Curiel, owned the residence located at 1050 Hunsaker Canyon Road in Lafayette, California. Residing with them were their children, Maria, Tina, and Julia Curiel, ages 16, 14 and 11, respectively. Also occupying the residence were Hazel McClure and Michael Jason Sikkema, a married couple, who were graduate students at St. Mary's College, and their children, Dagan McClure-Sikkema, age 3, and Celia McClure-Sikkema, age 2. All were present in the home on October 19, 2005 at approximately 8:35 pm, when more than ten Contra Costa County Sheriffs officers, wearing black windbreakers, burst into the residence, unannounced, with guns drawn, without seeking permission, beforehand, to enter from any of the occupants. Their apparent purpose was to locate and apprehend Scott Dyleski, who was not in the home when entry was made. Warrants had not been issued authorizing the entry into, or search of, the residence, and an arrest warrant had not been issued for Dyleski. Nevertheless, the officers fanned out through the house, and as they encountered the occupants, ordered them, at gunpoint, to "get the fuck down" and threatening claimants with comments such as "get the fuck down or we'll blow your head off'. While lying face down, as demanded, Fred Curiel had his face pushed against the floor by one of the officers, breaking his eyeglasses. He and claimant, Michael Sikkema, were then hand-cuffed by the officers in front of their children. 11 year old Julia Curiel had an officer press her shoe against her back to keep her on the floor. When the claimants were finally allowed up from their prone positions on the floor, they were ordered to sit and remain stationary in the living room. Any movement, including going to the bathroom, had to be with permission of the officers. The claimants were not allowed to communicate, by telephone, or other means, with anyone outside the home until the next morning. The initial entry into the home was unwarranted, and without legal authority of any kind. As stated, the officers' were there to locate and apprehend Scott Dyleski, a suspect in a homicide. However, within five minutes after entry, the officers knew he was not at the residence and were told by the occupants where he could be found. He was soon thereafter located and arrested at the location provided to the sheriffs by the claimants. ATTACHMENT TO CLAIM FORM RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS 3 AND 4 A warrant for the search of the premises, and an arrest warrant for Scott Dyleski, were subsequently delivered to the officers. These warrants weren't signed by a judicial officer until 10:55 that evening, and specifically limited service of the warrant to daytime hours. At approximately 2:00 am, another search warrant, authorizing night service, was finally obtained, and a search of Dyleski's property was commenced. At the time of the original entry, the police had no information that any of the occupants present in the home presented any danger to the officers to justify holding them at gunpoint. No weapons were found in the home. The police had no information that any of the occupants intended to hide or destroy evidence pertinent to the investigation into Scott Dyleski, and none of the occupants had any history of criminal activity. The conduct of the sheriffs' deputies described above was unlawful and violated claimants' state and federal constitutional rights and also amounted to trespass, false imprisonment, and assault and battery, all under color of state law. CLAIM BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY BOARD ACTION: MAY 16, 2006 Claim Against Elie County,or District Governed by ) the Bca9rd of 5uj ervisors,Routin � (` NOTICE TO CLAIMANT and Board Action. All Section re te�altsT V The copy of this document mailed to California Government Codes. APR 12 2000 you is your notice of the action taken on your claim by the Board of COUNTY COUNSEL MARTINEZ CALIF. Supervisors. (Paragraph IV below), given Pursuant to Government Code DAMAGES WITHIN THE JURISDICTION Section 913 and 915.4.Please note all AMOUNT: OF THE SUPERIOR COURT` "Warnings". CLAIMANT: MICHAEL JASON SIKKEMA ATTORNEY: MICHAEL D. MEADOWS DATE RECEIVED: APRIL 12, 2006 ANDREW C. SCHWARTZ ADDRESS: &SCK, MEADOWS, SCHWARTZ BY DELIVERY TO CLERK ON:APRIL 12, 2006 2121 N. CALIFORNIA BLVD., #1020 HAND DELIVERED WALNUT CREEK, CA 94596 BY MAIL POSTMARKED: FROM: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors TO: County Counsel Attached is a copy of the above-noted claim. APRIL 12, 2006 JOHN CULLEN Dated: By: Deputy H. FROM: County Counsel TO: Clerk of the Board of upervisors ( this claim complies substantially with Sections 910 and 910.2. ( This Claim FAILS to comply substantially with Sections 910 and 910.2, and we are so notifying claimant.The Board cannot act for 15 days(Section 910.8). ( )� Claim is not timely filed. The Clerk should return claim on ground that it was filed late and send warning of claimant's right to apply for leave to present a late Claim(Section 911.3). O Other: Dated: Lf—)a-Ix, By: Deputy County Counsel Ill. FROM: Clerk of the Board TO: County Counsel(1) County Administrator(2) O Claim was returned as untimely with notice to claimant(Section 911.3). IV, ARD ORDER: By unanimous vote of the Supervisors present: (WI/ This Claim is rejected in full. O Other: I certify that this is a true and correct copy of the Board's Order entered in its minutes for this date. Dated:/ . /fie o?BkHN CULLEN, CLERK,By Or, ir Deputy Clerk WARNIN Gov. code section 913) Subject to certain exceptious,you have only six(6)months from the date this notice was personalty served or deposited ui the mail to file a court action on this claim,See Government Code Section 945.6.You may seek the advice of an attorney of your choice in connection with this matter.If you wtuit to consult an attorney,you should do so unmediately. *For Additional Warning See Reverse Side of Tbis Notice. AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING I declare under penalty of pelju'ry that I ant now,and at all times herein mentioned, have been a citizen of the United States, over age 18; and that today I deposited in the United Slates Postal Service ill Martinez, California, postage fully prepaid a certified copy of this Board Oar/der aid2Notice to Claimant,addressed to the claimant as shown above. Da(ed:J% �/ o��B_ JOHN CULLEN,CLERK By Deputy Clerk HOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA CON t;uur,a x. INSTRUCTIONS TOC CLAIMANT A. A claim relating to a cause of action for death or for injury to person or to personal property or growing crops shall be presented not later than six months after the accrual of the cause of action. A claim relating to any other cause of action shall be presented not later than one year after the accrual of the cause of action. (Gov. Code § 911.2.) B. Claims must be filed with the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors at its office in Room 106, County Administration Building, 651 Pine Street, Martinez,CA 94553. C. If claim is against a district governed by the Board of Supervisors, rather than the County, the name of the District should be filled in. D. If the claim is against more than one public entity, separate claims must be filed against each public entity. E. Fraud. See penalty for fraudulent.claims,Penal Code Sec. 72 at the end of this form. ■eaaa.eMacau sosaga&arae.■ago Rona■o memo..■..usageseegesan Damon.■■u■■■sees ONES@aI RE: Claim By: Reserved for Clerk's filing stamp MICHAEL JASON S1CKEMA j RECEIVED ) APR 1 2 2006 Against the County of Contra Costa U ) CLERK BOARD OF SUPERVISORS District) CONTRA COSTA CO. (Fill in the name) The undersigned claimant hereby makes claim against the County of Contra Costa or the above-named district in the sum of S* and in support of this claim represents as follows: *Damages:within the jurisdiction of the Superior Court 1. When did the damage or injury occur? (Give exact date and hour) 10/19/05 at approximately 8:30 pm to 10/20/05 at approximately 10:00 am 2. Where did the damage or injury occur? (Include city and county) 1050 Runsaker Road, Lafayette, Contra Costa County, California 3. How did the damage or injury occur? (Give full details; use extra paper if required) See attached statement for details of the incident and the acts which caused injuries to the claimant. 4. What particular act or omission on the part of county or district officers, servants, or employees caused the injury or damage? See attached statement for details of the incident and the acts which caused injuries to the claimant. 5 What are the names of county or district officers, servants, or employees causing the damage or injury? Law enforcement personnel from the Contra Costa County Sheriff's office who entered the premises identified in item number 2, on the dates and times Identified in item number 1, including, but not limited to, Sergeant J. Mahoney, Detective J. Barnes, Sergeant K-: ,Daly, Detective Sean Pate, Detectives Clark, Moore, Uyeda, and Van-Zelf, and other sheriff's deputies who were on the scene but whose names have not yet been ascertained. T0 'd WH Sb: ZT 9002-se-21JO 6. What damage or injuries do .your claim resulted? (Give full extent of injuries or damages claimed..Attach two estimates for auto damage.) Extreme psychological and'-emotional trauma resulting in nightmares, flashbacks, sleep disturbances, inability. to concentrate, pervasive anxiety, and other psychological and emotional manifestations. 7. How was the amount claimed above computed? (Include the estimated amount of any prospective injury or damage.) Based on the life-threatening nature of the incident and the apparent threat to family members, and the claimant, and the degree of future medical treatment which will be required. 8. Names and addresses of witnesses,doctors, and hospitals: Witnesses include all claimants at . the residence at the time o) the incident, medical personnel at Kaiser, Walnut Creek, the Oasis Center, Walnut Creek., and St-:�Perpetua.,:Church;-Lafayette, CA. 9. List the expenditures you made on account of this accident or injury: DATE TIME AMOUNT Wes "am must.BID maoaamo an 0 an 0 a Damon-.6 Gov. Code Sec. 910.2 provides"The claim shall be signed by the claimant or by some person on his behalf," SRM NOTICES TO: (Attorney) I Name and address of Attorney ) MICHAEL D. MEADOWS ) ANDREW C. SCawARTz ) (Claimant's Signature) CASPER. MEADOWS, SCHWARTz & COOK) MICHAEL D. MEADOWS 2121.N. California Blvd., #1020 ) Walnut Creek, CA 94596 ) (Address) ) Telephone No. 925-947-1147 )Telephone No. .aa NON an s aasasoassm a*some a•o s sass a a■a■on a a Mo.am a as a a sa s a as a a 6a 0oun a sap a Oma as s D a■.-.a PUBLIC RECORDS NOTICE: Please be advised that this claim form,or any claim filed with the County under the'Tort Claims Act, is subject to public disclosure under the California Public Records Act. (Gov. Code, H 6500 et seq.) Furthermore, any attachments,addendums,or supplements attached to the claim form, including medical records,are also subject to public disclosure. ■■■mama■■aaaaesasasammasasaaasammm■.P..■■.asboa noaaa asago ago asNOON Goa aPupgo. Poon■.■■1 NOTICE: Section 72 of the Penal Code provides: Every person who, with intent to defraud, presents for allowance or for payment to any state board or officer, or to ,any county, city, or district board or officer, authorized to allow or pay the same if genuine, any false or fraudulent claim, bill, account voucher, or writing, is punishable either by imprisonment in the County jail for a period of not more than one year, by a fine of not exceeding one thousand dollars ($1,000.00), or by both such imprisonment and fine, or by imprisonment in the state prison, by a fine of not exceeding ten thousand dollars ($10,000),or by both such imprisonment and fine. Z0 'd 140 9b: ZL 9002—S0-2idk:� ATTACHMENT TO CLAIM FORM RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS 3 AND 4 At the time of the incident which is the subject of this claim, claimants, Frederick and Kimberly Curiel, owned the residence located at 1050 Hunsaker Canyon Road in Lafayette, California. Residing with them were their children, Maria, Tina, and Julia Curiel, ages 16, 14 and 11, respectively. Also occupying the residence were Hazel McClure and Michael Jason Sikkema, a married couple, who were graduate students at St. Mary's College, and their children, Dagan McClure-Sikkema, age 3, and Celia McClure-Sikkema, age 2. All were present in the home on October 19, 2005 at approximately 8:35 pm, when more than ten Contra Costa County Sheriffs officers, wearing black windbreakers, burst into the residence, unannounced, with guns drawn, without seeking permission, beforehand, to enter from any of the occupants. Their apparent purpose was;to locate and apprehend Scott Dyleski, who was not in the home when entry was made. Warrants had not been issued authorizing the entry into, or search of, the residence, and an arrest warrant had not been issued for Dyleski. Nevertheless, the officers fanned out through the house, and as they encountered the occupants, ordered them, at gunpoint, to "get the fuck down" and threatening claimants with comments such as "get the fuck down or we'll blow your head of'. While lying face down, as demanded, Fred Curiel had his face pushed against the floor by one of the officers, breaking his eyeglasses. He and claimant, Michael Sikkema, were then hand-cuffed by the officers in front of their children. 11 year old Julia Curiel had an officer press her shoe against her back to keep her on the floor. When the claimants were finally allowed up from their prone positions on the floor, they were ordered to sit and remain stationary in the living room. Any movement, including going to the bathroom, had to be with permission of the officers. The claimants were not allowed to communicate, by telephone, or other means, with anyone outside the home until the next morning. The initial entry into the home was unwarranted, and without legal authority of any kind. As stated, the officers' were there to locate and apprehend Scott Dyleski, a suspect in a homicide. However, within five minutes after entry, the officers knew he was not at the residence and were told by the occupants where he could be found. He was soon thereafter located and arrested at the location provided to the sheriffs by the claimants. ATTACHMENT TO CLAIM FORM RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS 3 AND 4 A warrant for the search of the premises, and an arrest warrant for Scott Dyleski, were subsequently delivered to the officers. These warrants weren't signed by a judicial officer until 10:55 that evening, and specifically limited service of the warrant to daytime hours. At approximately 2:00 am, another search warrant, authorizing night service, was finally obtained, and a search of Dyleski's property was commenced. At the time of the original entry, the police had no information that any of the occupants present in the home presented any danger to the officers to justify holding them at gunpoint. No weapons were found in the home. The police had no information that any of the occupants intended to hide or destroy evidence pertinent to the investigation into Scott Dyleski, and none of the occupants had any history of criminal activity. The conduct of the sheriffs' deputies described above was unlawful and violated claimants' state and federal constitutional rights and also amounted to trespass, false imprisonment, and assault and battery, all under color of state law. CLAIM BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY C,/ 1 BOARD ACTION: MAY 16, 2006 Claim Against the county,or District Governed by ) the Board of Supervisors,Routin NOTICE TO CLAIMANT and Board Action. All Section re yy��i ��''// The copy of this document mailed to California Government Codes. APR 12 2004 you is your notice of the action taken on your claim by the Board of COUNTY COUNSEL Supervisors. (Paragraph IV below), MARTINEZ CALIF. given Pursuant to Government Code DAMAGES WITHIN THE JURISDICTION Section 913 and 915.4.Please note all AMOUNT: OF THE SUPERIOR COURT` "Warnings". CLAIMANT: HAZEL ANNE McCLURE ATTORNEY MICHAEL D. MEADOWS DATE RECEIVED: APRIL 12, 2006 ANDREW C. SCHWARTZ ADDRESS: CASPER, MEADOWS, SCHWARTZ BY DELIVERY TO CLERK ON:APRIL 12, 2006 & COOK 2121 N. CALIFORNIA BLVD., #1020 HAND DELIVERED WALNUT CREEK, CA 94596 BY MAIL POSTMARKED: FROM: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors TO: County Counsel Attached is a copy of the above-noted claim. APRIL 12, 2006 JOHN CULLEN, e Dated: By: Deputy H. FROM: County Counsel TO: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors (4This claim complies substantially with Sections 910 and 910.2. ( ) This Claim FAILS to comply substantially with Sections 910 and 910.2, and we are so notifying claimant.The Board cannot act for 15 days(Section 910.8). ( ) Claim is not timely filed. The Clerk should return claim on ground that it was filed late and send warning of claimant's right to apply for leave to present a late claim(Section 911.3). O Other: Dated: �J By: mC.B0it— Deputy County Counsel 11I. FROM: Clerk of the Board TO: County Counsel(1) County Administrator(2) O Claim was returned as untimely with notice to claimant(Section 911.3). (1V. ARD ORDER: By unanimous vote of the Supervisors present: This Claim is rejected in full. O Other: I certify that this is a true and correct copy of the Board's Order entered in its minutes for this date. Dated: 4 OHN CULLEN,CLERK,By ._ Deputy Clerk WARNI Gov. code section 913) Subject to certain exceptions,you have only six(6)months front the date this notice was personally served or deposited in the mail to file a court action on this claim.See Government Code Section 945.6.You may seek the advice of an attorney of your choice in connection with this matter.Uyou want to consult an attorney,you should do so i nmediately. *For Additional Warning See Reverse Side of This Notice. AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING I declare under penalty of pet jury that I ant now,and at all times herein mentioned, have been a citizen of the United States, over age 18; and that today I deposited in the United Stages Postal Service ilk Martinez,California, postage fully prepaid a certified copy of this Board Order nod Notice to Claimant,addressed to the claimant as shown above. Dated. JOHN CULLEN, CLERK By eput}'Clerk = BOARD OF SUPEKV 11uitb tea+ INSTRUCTIONS TO CLAIMANT A. A claim relating to a cause of action for death or for injury to person or to personal property or growing crops shall be presented not later than six months after the accrual of the cause of action. A claim relating to any other cause of action shall be presented not later than one year after the accrual of the cause of action. (Gov. Code § 911.2.) B. Claims must be filed with the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors at its office in Room 106, County Administration Building, 651 Pine Street, Martinez, CA 94553. C. If claim is against a district governed by the Board of Supervisors, rather than the County, the name of the District should be filled in,. D. If the claim is against more than one public entity, separate claims must be filed against each public entity. E. Fraud. See penalty for fraudulent claims,Penal Code Sec. 72 at the end of this form. ■so ano mssoamong Dow onspa.a■msson■■■■■ssssssssoss one so Dow se s■•■■ss■■..0osmomomm1 RE: Claim By: Reserved for Clerk's filing stamp HAZEL AWNE McCLURE ) RECEIVED Against the County of Contra Costa M } I I APR 1 2 2006 } CLERK BOARD OF SUPERViSORS District) I CONTRA COSTA CO. (Fill in the name) ) 1 The undersigned claimant hereby makes claim against the County of Contra Costa or the above-named district in the sum of$* and in support of this claim represents as follows: ,*Damages within the jurisdiction of the Superior Court 1. When did the damage or injury occur? (Give exact date and hour) 10/19/05 at approximately 8:30 pm to 10/20/05 at approximately 10:00 am 2. Where did the damage or injury occur? (Include city and county) 1050 Hunsaker Road, Lafayette, Contra Costa County, California 3. How did the damage or injury occur? (Give full details; use extra paper if required) See attached statement for details of the incident and the acts which caused injuries to the clamant. 4. What particular act or omission on the part of county or district officers, servants, or employees caused the injury or damage? See attached statement for details of the incident and the acts which caused injuries to the claimant. 5 What are the names of county or district officers,servants, or employees causing the damage or injury? Law enforcement personnel from the Contra Costa County Sheriffs office who entered the premises identified in item number 2, on the dates and times identified in item number 1, including, but not limited to, Sergeant J. Mahoney, Detective J. Barnes, Sergeant K.-Daly, Detective Sean Pate, Detectives Clark, Moore, Uyeda, and Van zelf, and other sheriff's deputies who were on the scene but whose names have not yet been ascertained. TO -d we 9t-:Zi 90OZ—S0—Z1dt9 6. What damage or injuries do your claim resulted? (Give full extent of injuries or damages claimed..Attach two estimates for auto damage:) Extreme psychological and emotional trauma resulting in nightmares, flashbacks, sleep disturbances, inability to concentrate, pervasive anxiety, and other psychological and emotional -manifestations- 7. motionalmanifestations_7. How was the amount claimed above computed? (Include the estimated amount of any prospective injury or damage.) Based on the life-threatening nature of the incident and the apparent threat to family members; and the claimant, and the degree of future medical treatment,which will be required. S. Names and addresses of witnesses, doctors, and hospitals: Witnesses include all claimants at the residence at the time of the incident, medical personnel at Kaiser, Walnut Creek, the Oasis Center, Walnut Creek, and St-:_.,Perpetiva:_Church .,:L-afayette, CA. 9. List the expenditures you made on account of this accident or injury: DATE, TIME AMOUNT ■amaaa./aa0aaa/aaaaasaao/■■a■■aa■■asaaa■aooasaaaoaa■■■■■■■0a■■■aa5a/aaaaaaaa0aaa/oa■■ Gov. Code Sec. 910.2 provides"The claim shall be signed by the claimant or by some person on his behalf SENA NOTICES TO: (Attorney) l Name and address of Attorney _ ) MICHAEL D. MEADOWS ) ANDREW C. SCHWARTZ ) D. 1Clajm-Sant's Signature) MICHAELCASPER. MEADOWS, SCHWMZ b COOK) 1�ADOW 2121 N. California Blvd., #1020 ) , Walnut Creels, CA 94596 ) (Address) Telephone No. 925-947-1147 ) Telephone No. ■■a■m■■■/aa/asaasaaaaaeaa/aaa/aa/s■■■■■■■■■■a■araaaaaaaaaaaaaa■o//aaaa/aa/■aaa■■■■a■ PUBLIC RECORDS NOTICE: Please be advised that this claim form,or.any claim filed with the County under the"Cort Claims Act,is subject to. public disclosure .under the California Public Records Act. (Gov. Code, §§ 6500 et seq.) Furthermore, any attachments,addendums, or supplements attached to the claim form, including medical records, are also subject to public disclosure. ■■■ev■■r■eaaaamamaeaaaaaaat■/■•a■a■■■■■■■■ar■a■■aaaaao••■aaa•ea/a/a■aaaaaaa■a■■■aaa■ NOTICE: Section 72 of the Penal Code provides: Every person who, with intent to defraud, presents for allowance or for payment to any state board or officer, or to any county, city, or district board or officer, authorized to allow or.pay the same if genuine, any false or fraudulent claim, bill, account voucher, or writing, is punishable either by imprisonment in the County jail for a period of not more than one year, by a fine of not exceeding one thousand dollars ($1,000.00), or by both such imprisonment and fine, or by imprisonment in the state prison, by a fine of not exceeding ten thousand dollars ($10,000),or by both such imprisonment and fine. WC 9b- Zr 9002-90-6d" ATTACHMENT TO CLAIM FORM RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS 3 AND 4 At the time of the incident which is the subject of this claim, claimants, Frederick and Kimberly Curiel, owned the residence located at 1050 Hunsaker Canyon Road in Lafayette_California. Residing with them were their children, Maria, Tina, and Julia Curiel, ages 16, 14 and 11, respectively. Also occupying the residence were Hazel McClure and Michael Jason Sikkema, a married couple, who were graduate students at St. Mary's College, and their children, Dagan McClure-Sikkema, age 3, and Celia McClure-Sikkema, age 2. All were present in the home on October 19, 2005 at approximately 8:35 pm, when more than ten Contra Costa County Sheriffs officers, wearing black windbreakers, burst into the residence, unannounced, with guns drawn, without seeking permission; beforehand, to enter from any of the occupants. Their apparent purpose was,to locate and apprehend Scott Dyleski, who was not in the home when entry was made. Warrants had not been issued authorizing the entry into, or search of, the residence, and an arrest warrant had not been issued for Dyleski. Nevertheless, the officers fanned out through the house, and as they encountered the occupants, ordered them, at gunpoint, to "get the fuck down" and threatening claimants with comments such as "get the fuck down or we'll blow your head off'. While lying face down, as demanded, Fred Curiel had his face pushed against the floor by one of the officers, breaking his eyeglasses. He and claimant, Michael Sikkema, were then hand-cuffed by the officers in front of their children. 11 year old Julia Curiel had an officer press her shoe against her back to keep her on the floor. When the claimants were finally allowed up from their prone positions on the floor, they were ordered to sit and remain stationary in the living room. Any movement, including going to the bathroom, had to be with permission of the officers. The claimants were not allowed to communicate, by telephone, or other means, with anyone outside the home until the next morning. The initial entry into the home was unwarranted, and without legal authority of any kind. As stated, the officers' were there to locate and apprehend Scott Dyleski, a suspect in a homicide. However, within five minutes after entry, the officers knew he was not at the residence and were told by the occupants where he could be found. He was soon thereafter located and arrested at the location provided to the sheriffs by the claimants. ATTACHMENT TO CLAIM FORM RESPONSES TO QUESTIONS 3 AND 4 A warrant for the search of the premises, and an arrest warrant for Scott Dyleski, were subsequently delivered to the officers. These warrants weren't signed by a judicial officer until 10:55 that evening, and specifically limited service of the warrant to daytime hours. At approximately 2:00 am, another search warrant, authorizing night service, was finally obtained, and a search of Dyleski's property was commenced. At the time of the original entry, the police had no information that any of the occupants pesent in the home presented any danger to the officers to justify holding then!at gunpoint. No weapons were found in the home. The police had no information that any of the occupants intended to hide or destroy evidence pertinent to the investigation into Scott Dyleski, and none of the occupants had any history of criminal activity. The conduct of the sheriffs' deputies described above was unlawful and violated claimants' state and federal constitutional rights and also amounted to trespass, false imprisonment, and assault and battery, all under color of state law. CLAIM BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY BOARD ACTION:MAY 16, 2006 Claim Against the County,or District Governed by ) the Board of Supervisors,Routing Endorsements, ) NOTICE TO CLAIMANT and Board Action. All Section references are to } The copy of this document mailed to California Government Codes. you is your notice of the action taken Egli�g � on your claim by the Board of Supervisors. (Paragraph IV below), APR 1 3 2006 given Pursuant to Government Code AMOUNT: $200,000.00 COUNTY COUNSEL Section 913 and 915.4.Please note all MARTINEZ CALIF. "Warnings". CLAIMANT:REYNALDO.G. BENJAMIN ATTORNEY:RANDAL M. BARNUM DATE RECEIVED: APRIL 13, 2006 LAW OFFICES OF RANDAL M. BARNUM APRIL 13 2006 ADDRESS: 279 EAST H STREET, BY DELIVERY TO CLERK ON: BENECIA, CA 94510 BY MAIL POSTMARKED: APRIL 12, 2006 FROM: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors TO: County Counsel Attached is a copy of the above-noted claim. JOHN CULLEN, le 1 Dated: APRIL 13, 2006 By:.Deputy Y f II. FROM: County Counsel TO: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors (v�This claim complies substantially with Sections 910 and 910.2. ( ) This Claim FAILS to comply substantially with Sections 910 and 910.2, and we are so notifying claimant.The Board cannot act for 15 days(Section 910.8). mayno{1►e (O'Claim - tint timely filed. Thp�^uld r ++ham+i+was fit d I rP an l send� arninof claimant's r (r,YOther: See le+kr -R-o— Coote{.�&,6cr rein drr►a s fv7ty>Zr/wkclai� .rte �u✓SULh I tri �iov.Lode 9//.3 The ec LL_y �loNs reSGrve riAit< r � cog.7+r1dig5 Vra/qT1� Lfa�m. Dated: 7.. —O(a By: m�`c Deputy County Counsel 1I1. FROM: Clerk of the Board TO: County Counsel(1) County Administrator(2) O Claim was returned as untimely with notice to claimant(Section 911.3)., IV. BOARD ORDER: By unanimous vote of the Supervisors present: This Claim is rejected in full. O Other: I certify that this is a true and correct copy of the Board's Order entered in its minutes for this date. Dated r e*4QOHN CULLEN,CLERK,By Deputy Clerk WARNI (Gov. code section 913) Subject to certain exceptions,you have only six(6)months front the date this notice was personally served or deposited in the mail to file a court action on this claim.See Government Code Section 945.6.You may seek die advice of an attorney of your choice in connection with this matter.If you want to consult an attorney,you shouid do so unmediately. *For Additional Warning See Reverse Side of This Notice. AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING I declare under penalty of perjury that I am now, and at all times herein mentioned, have been a citizen of the United States, over age 18; and that today I deposited in the United States Postal Service in Martinez, California, postage fully prepaid a certified copy of this Board Order and Notice to Claimant,addressed to the claimant as shown above. Dated: . AV 7 12",6 JOHN CULLEN, CLERK By Deputy Clerk OFFICE dF THE COUNTY COUNSEL S� L SILVANO B.MARCHESI COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA' __Off, COUNTY COUNSEL Administration Building ,�: �'•¢ 651 Pine Street, 91h Floor _ SHARON L.ANDERSON CHIEF ASSISTANT Martinez, California 94553-1229 i GREGORY C.HARVEY (925) 335-1800 �;` al r�11fl�11 ©� i`G' VALERIE J. RANCHE (925) 646-1078 (fax) ASsIsTANTs STATUTORY WARNING PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 911.3 TO: Randal M. Barnum Law Offices of Randal M. Barnum 279 East H Street Benicia, CA 94510 RE: Claim of Reynaldo G. Benjamin Please Take Notice as Follows: The claim you presented to the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors on April 12, 2006 was reviewed by County Counsel. The portion of the claim prior to October 12, 2005 was not presented within six months after the event or occurrence as required by law. Because you allege a continuing violation,the claim is "timely on its face" and will be reviewed and acted upon by the Board of Supervisors within the statutory time period. To preserve the rights of the County, its departments and employees to challenge the validity of the continuing violation,you are warned pursuant to statute that if your continuing violation argument is improper, your claim is late, and is being returned because it was not presented within six months after the event or occurrence as required by law. (See Gov. Code, §§ 901, 911.2.) Because the claim may not have been presented within the time allowed by law, we warn you that to preserve your right in the event your claim is determined to be late, your only recourse at this time is to apply without delay to the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors for leave to present a late claim. ,(See Gov. Code, §§ 911.4 to 912.2, inclusive, and 946.6.) Under some circumstances, leave to present a late claim will be granted. (See Gov. Code, § 911.6.) SILVANO B. MARCHESI COUNTY COUNSEL By: Monika L. Cooper Deputy County Counsel Page 1 Randal A Barnum Re: Claim of Reynaldo G. Benjamin Page Two CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE BY MAIL (Code Civ.Proc., §§ 1012, 1013a,2015.5;Evid. Code, §§ 641, 664) I am a resident of the State of California,over the age of eighteen years, and not a party to the within action. My b siness address is Office of the County Counsel, 651 Pine Street, 9th Floor, Martinez, CA 94553-1229. On / 2-00 ,I served a true copy of this Statutory Warning Pursuant to Government Code Secti 911.3 by placing the document in a sealed envelope with postage thereon fully prepaid, in the United States mail at Martinez,California addressed to Randal M.Barnum, Law Offices of Randal M. Barnum, 279 East H Street,Benicia, CA 94510 asset forth above. I am readily familiar with Office of County Counsel's practice of collection and processing of correspondence for mailing. Under that practice, it would be deposited with the U.S. Postal Service on that same day with postage thereon fully prepaid in the ordinary course of business. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of-the State of California and the United States of America that the above is true and correct. Executed on 6.,eArwY/ 9 2oa6 at Martinez, California. ij Kathleen O'Conne 1 cc: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors(original) Risk Management Page 2 RECEIVED ccup APR 13 2006 Law Offices of v or CLERK BOARD OF SUPERVISORS W13 COUTRA COSTA CO. Randal M. Barnum ® _ Board Certified Civil Trial Specialist 279 East H Street • Benicia, CA 94,510 n Telephone(707)745-3747 • Fax(707)745-4580 e T."n April 12, 2006 VIA CERTIFIED MAIL (RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED) Janet L. Holmes Deputy County Counsel Contra Costa County 651 Pine Street, 9th Floor Martinez, CA 94588 RE:. Reynaldo G. Benjamin, current employee of Contra Costa County DFEH E200506M1134-00-ae EEOC 37AA608278 NOTICE OF CLAIM Dear Ms. Holmes: Our firm represents Reynaldo "Ronnie"Benjamin,a long time employee and current Accounting Clerk in the Department of Child Support of Contra Costa County("County"). Please direct all communications regarding this matter to my attention at my Benicia office address noted above. The purpose of this letter is to enter into meaningful discussions with the County to resolve Mr.Benjamin's claims regarding age and race discrimination. The facts,applicable law and our suggestion'for resolution follow. FACTUAL BACKGROUND Mr. Benjamin started his employment with the County in 1999. During his first six (6) years of employment with the County, Mr. Benjamin worked in the Fiscal Department of Child Support. Mr. Benjamin was never criticized about his work with the County. Mr. Benjamin is 59 years old and is Filipino. April 12,2006 RE: Ronnie Benjamin Page: 2 Approximately one year ago,Mr.Benjamin and a co-worker,Michael Shaw,received lateral transfers to the Audit department of Child Support. Mr. Shaw is 25 years old and Caucasian. Other than Mr. Benjamin, all members of the Audit department are Caucasian. Mr. Benjamin is the oldest in the department by quite a few years. Immediately after Mr. Benjamin transferred departments he was treated differently. Specifically,Mr.Benjamin's trainer,Cheryl McDaniel(who is Caucasian)told Mr.Benjamin not to ask anyone else, specifically Pat Alexander and Steve Schilling, in the department questions.Mr.Benjamin was also instructed by Ms.McDaniel to submit all of his draft work to her,both by e-mail and hard copy, for her to review. Mr. Shaw,who was less senior than Mr.Benjamin,was not instructed by Ms.McDaniel to only ask her questions nor did he have to submit an e-mail draft of his work to Ms. McDaniel for her review. Mr. Benjamin repeatedly requested that his supervisor,Marianne Farina,have Ms.McDaniel sit down with him and go through the process of an audit step by step.However,Ms. Farina refused to do so. Mr.Benjamin's first post-transfer performance evaluation was positive and rated him as meeting all expectations. However, in May, 2005, Mr. Benjamin asked a co-worker a work-related question and was verbally reprimanded.However,when that same co-worker assisted Mr. Shaw, Mr. Shaw was not reprimanded. Prior to Mr. Benjamin's transfer, his entire employment with the County devoid of criticism or discipline. In August, 2005 Mr. Benjamin received a verbal warning from Ms. McDaniel. The verbal warning referenced Mr.Benjamin's statistics being low and not meeting his quota.It should be noted that the audit department uses a different audit system which is why Mr. Benjamin is in"training."Also,Mr.Benjamin was denied his right to union representation for this meeting. At that time Mr. Benjamin requested that he be transferred to a different department.Ms.Farina responded by stating there was"no way you will ever be transferred." In October,2005,Mr.Benjamin received another letter of reprimand regarding similar issues.Around this time Ms.Farina also began repeatedly asking Mr.Benjamin,"When are you going to retire and move to Arizona?"Despite Mr.Benjamin informing Ms.Farina that he did not have immediate plans to retire, Ms. Farina continued to question Mr. Benjamin about his prospective retirement. Also in the Fall of 2005, following Mr. Benjamin taking a bathroom break, he returned to his desk find Ms.Farina waiting for him.Ms.Farina informed Mr.Benjamin that he needed to inform her every time he went to the bathroom. April 12,2006 RE: Ronnie Benjamin Page: 3 The constant scrutiny to which Mr. Benjamin was subjected to began to cause him nervousness at work. In December, 2005 Mr. Benjamin received another letter of criticism regarding the accuracy of his work.Specifically,a set of numbers on a report was transposed. Prior to its submission, Ms. McDaniel reviewed and approved Mr. Benjamin's report. The transposed number error was not noticed by Ms.McDaniel.Nevertheless,Mr.Benjamin was reprimanded. Ms. McDaniel was not. In February, 2006, Mr. Benjamin was suspended for five (5) working days for purported "incompetence, inefficiency and neglect of duty" stemming from an incident where the County claimed that a cash envelope and a number of checks were left on Mr. Benjamin's desk unattended.Following an investigation,a different employee informed the County of its responsibility for the envelope and that it was left on Mr. Benjamin's desk without his knowledge. Despite the County being made aware that Mr. Benjamin was not responsible for this issue,the County did not remove the suspension from Mr. Benjamin's file nor reimburse him for the five (5) day suspension. Following this incident, Mr. Benjamin filed a complaint for hostile work environment with the personnel supervisor, Susan Tarvin, and the County's human resource department. On February 6, 2005, Mr. Benjamin filed a complaint for discrimination with the Department of Fair Employment and Housing(DFEH) based on race and age discrimination. On March 14, 2006 Ms.-McDaniel called Mr. Benjamin into her office after she witnessed Mr.Benjamin having a discussion with Pat Alexander and Mr. Shaw regarding an audit case he was working on.Ms.McDaniel told Mr.Benjamin never to ask Mr.Alexander or Mr. Shaw questions because Mr. Benjamin was "bothering"them. When Mr. Benjamin asked Ms.McDaniel to confirm this criticism in writing,Ms.McDaniel appeared upset and left Mr. Benjamin in her office and went to speak to the manager, Kelley Sweeney. Mr. Benjamin was then called to Ms. Sweeney's office together with-Ms. Tarvin and Heidi Carter,a union representative.Ms. Sweeney re-iterated Ms.McDaniel's instruction that Mr. Benjamin should never ask other employees questions.Mr. Benjamin was also questioned about going to the bathroom and criticized about allegedly staying in the hallway too long and talking to other employees. However, the employees who engaged in these alleged conversations were not reprimanded. Mr. Benjamin's repeated requests for transfer were denied, despite other employees' requests for transfers being accommodated.It should also be noted that a female Caucasian employee,Dorothy Ortiz,who is on the same team as Mr.Benjamin,has been the subject of complaints from her lead accounting clerk and other employees because of errors,yet she has April 12,2006 RE: Ronnie Benjamin Pager 4 not been disciplined. Another employee, Roseanne Ortland, has been with the audit department for only three years, she was never required to meet the same requirements .imposed on Mr.Benjamin,including the number of audits Mr.Benjamin was required to do. Ms. Ortland was also granted her transfer request and was still in training when she was transferred. On March 15, 2006 Mr. Benjamin's physician placed him on medical leave due to chest and back pain relating to the stress of his working environment.Mr.Benjamin also had to seek counseling for the emotional distress he was suffering due to the hostile and harassing work environment and is currently on anti-depressants.Mr.Benjamin remains unable to work and is on medical leave. LEGAL AUTHORITIES AND LIABILITY A. Racial Discrimination Several statutes have been violated by the County which provide Mr.Benjamin with substantive legal remedies. The Civil Rights Acts of 1866 (42 USC §1981) provides a federal remedy to plaintiffs for racial discrimination in employment. See, Johnson v. Railway Express Agency (1975) 421 US 454. This law.insures that all persons have the same right to make and enforce contracts,enjoy all benefits of the employment relationship and enjoy the full and equal benefit of all laws and proceedings for the security of persons and property. 42 USC § 1981, the amendments of which codify the Civil Rights Act of 1991,prohibits all forms of racial bias in employment. 42 USC §1981,as amended by Civil Rights Act of 1991. Furthermore,Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964(42 USC §§2000e-2000e-17 prohibits employment discrimination by employers on the basis of race, color and other protected bases. Specifically prohibited is discrimination pertaining to classifications and "other acts that tends to limit,segregate,or classify employees or applicants for employment in a way that would tend to deprive them of employment opportunities or adversely affect their status." 42 USC §§2000e-2(a) - (c). Under California state law,the California Fair Employment and Housing Act(FEHA) (Govt. Code §§12900-12996) prohibits employment discrimination by employers on the basis of race, color and other protected bases. Specifically prohibited are discriminatory refusals to hire,.promote, discrimination in compensation or other terms and conditions of employment. Govt. Code §12940(a). April 12, 2006 RE: Ronnie Benjamin Page: 5 The circumstances of this case clearly indicate that Mr.Benjamin has been the victim of illegal discrimination as it pertains to his differential and disparate treatment, the reprimands and suspensions he has been subjected to, and the comparative preferential treatment provided to the departments Caucasian employees. B. Age Discrimination Under California state law,the California Fair Employment and Housing Act(FEHA) (Govt.Code§§12900-12996)prohibits employment discrimination by employers on the basis of age and other protected bases. Specifically prohibited are discriminatory refusals to hire, promote, discrimination in compensation or other terms and conditions of employment. Govt. Code §12940(a). Mr. Benjamin has been scrutinized and treated differently than his younger counterparts. L Burden of Proof Applicable to Employment Discrimination Cases Mr.Benjamin's claim for discrimination under the Fair Employment and Housing Act is based on a theory of disparate treatment. This is discrimination based on treating similarly situated individuals differently in their employments because of a protected characteristic. International Brotherhood of Teamsters v.United States(1977)431 U.S.324,335-336; Guz v. Bechtel (2000) 24 CalAth 317, 355. As you are aware, in employment discrimination cases, the burden of production generally shifts back and forth between employer and employee. See, Ritter v. Hughes Aircraft Co. (9th Cir. 1995) 58 F.3d 454, 457; Harris v. Itzhaki(9th Cir. 1999) 183-F.3d 1043, 1051. The analytical framework for these shifting burdens is drawn from St.Mary's Honor Center v. Hicks (1993)509 U.S. 502, 113 S.Ct. 2742. It is recognized that the employee bears the initial burden of proving a prima facie case of discrimination. However,not much evidence is required; Mr. Benjamin need only offer evidence which "gives rise to an inference of unlawful discrimination." Wallis v. J.R. Simplot Co. (9th Cir. 1994)26 F.3d 885, 889. A prima facie case can be established either(a)by evidence creating an inference of discriminatory motives (e.g. comments about a protected group to which Mr. Benjamin belongs, relating to employment action taken), or (b) simply by showing others not in Mr. Benjamin's protected class were treated more favorably. Actual proof of discrimination is April 12, 2006 RE: Ronnie Benjamin Page: 6 not required for a prima facie case; all Mr. Benjamin must do is raise an inference that such misconduct occurred. Warren v. City of Carlsbad (9th Cir. 1995) 58 F.3d 439, 442; Sutera v. Schering Corp. (2"d Cir. 1995)73 F.3d 13, 16(`de minimus' showing sufficient for prima facie case). Once a prima facie case has been made,the burden of production shifts to employer to show that its employment decision was taken for some legitimate, non-discriminatory reason. Wallis v.J.R. Simplot Co.,supra,26 F.3d at 889; See, also,Anderson v.Baxter Health Corn. (7" Cir. 1994) 132 F.3d 1120, 1124. The burden then shifts back to the employee to demonstrate that employer's alleged reason for its employment action was pretextual. McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green (1973) 411 U.S. 792, 804; Wallis v. J.R. Simplot Co., supra 26 F.3d at 889, 892. It should also be noted that where the plaintiff has presented proof of discriminatory intent as part of a prima facie case, no additional evidence may be necessary to satisfy the employee's burden: "When a plaintiff has established a prima facie inference of disparate treatment through direct or circumstantial evidence of discriminatory intent, he will necessarily have raised a genuine issue of fact with respect to the legitimacy and bona fides of the employer's articulated reasons for its employment decision," precluding summary judgment. Schnidrig v.Columbia Machine,Inc.(9`b Cir. 1996)80 F.3d 1406, 1410; See, also, Payne v. Norwest Corp. (9`h Cir. 1997) 113 F.3d 1079, 1080. Even where Mr. Benjamin relied entirely on a presumption (inference) of discriminatory motive arising from disparate treatment within a protected class to prove a prima facie case,the defense is defeated by proof that the employer's reasons are pretextual. Most Circuits,and now the United States Supreme Court,hold the case gets to the jury by either: 1. Presenting evidence, circumstantial or direct, that discrimination was more likely than not a motivating cause of the employer's actions (which in some cases may already be shown in Mr. Benjamin's prima facie case); or 2. Attacking the credibility of the employer's reasons by evidence showing weaknesses, inconsistencies, or impossibilities in the employer's proffered reasons/i.e.,showing the employer's reasons were April 12, 2006 RE: Ronnie Benjamin Page: 7 a"pretext for discrimination." Sheraton v. E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Co. (Y' Cir. 1996) 100 F.3d 1061, 1066-1067; Collier v. The Budd Co. (7" Cir. 1995) 66 F.3d 886, 891-893; Nidds v. Schindler Elevator Corp.(9"Cir. 1996)113 F.3d 912,918. These courts rely on St.Mary's Honor Center v.Hicks(1993)509 U.S.503,511 which states that where unlawful discrimination is charged it is up to the jury to decide the credibility of the employer's reasons for its discriminatory conduct. This legal standard was upheld by the U.S. Supreme Court in Reeves v. Sanderson Plumbing Products,Inc. (2000) 530 U.S. 133, 148. The employee may meet its third stage burden "through the elimination of other plausible non-discriminatory reasons(for disparate treatment)until the most plausible reason remaining is discrimination." Thomas Y.Eastman Kodak(V Cir. 1999) 183 F.3d 38,61. Under this view,very little evidence of discriminatory motive is necessary to raise a genuine issue of fact as to pretext. The employee need simply point to fact showing the employer's explanation for his or her rejection is not credible, from which a fact finder could infer a retaliatory or discriminatory motive despite the employer's denial thereof. Warren v. City of Carlsbad(9"Cir. 1995)58 F.3d 430,443; Clements v.Air_portAuthority of Washoe Coun (9" Cir. 1995) 69 F.3d 321, 334-335. An employer's arguably false reasons for its actions may create an inference of discriminatory motive,sufficient to raise a genuine issue of fact. Lindahl v.Air France(9" Cir. 1991) 930 F.2d 1434, 1439 (employer claimed it promoted a younger man over the plaintiff (a 40 year old woman) because he had better "leadership abilities"; evidence challenging credibility of this explanation raised inference that promotion was based on age and gender discrimination). The employer's stating fundamentally different reasons at different times ("shifting reasons") for terminating the employee creates an inference of pretext. That is, a rational trier of fact could find the stated reason was pretextual "for one who tells the truth need not recite different versions of the supposedly same event."Payne v.Norwest Corp.(9t"Cir. 1997) 113 F.3d 1079, 1080. See, also,Washington v. Garrett (9" Cir. 1993) 10 F.3d 1421, 1433-1434. The Washington court reversed a motion for summary judgment in favor of the employer under the post St. Mary's standards based on the Plaintiff establishing a prima facie case and raising a genuine issue as to whether the employer's explanation for its case was true. Washington v. Garrett, supra at 1433. The court held: If a Plaintiff succeeds in raising a genuine factual issue April 12,2006 RE: Ronnie Benjamin Page: 8 regarding the authenticity of the employer's stated motive, summary judgment is inappropriate,because it is for the trier of fact to decide which story is to be believed. This approach is in accord with the Supreme Court's recent decision in. St. Mary's Honor Center. The St. Mary's majority held that, even when the Plaintiff is successful in demonstrating,pursuant to the McDonnell Douglas framework, that the employer's proffered reason is pretextual,the factfinder is not compelled to render a finding of unlawful discrimination. The opinion makes clear,however,that the factfinder may infer discrimination from the showing of pretext: The factfinder's disbelief of the reasons put forward by the Defendant(particularly if disbelief is accompanied by suspicion ofinendacity)may,together with the elements ofthe prima facie case,suffice to show intentional discrimination. Thus,rejection of the employer's proffered reasons will permit the trier of fact to infer the ultimate fact of intentional discrimination, and...upon such rejection,"no additional proof of discrimination is required." (citing St. Mary's Honor Center, supra 113 Supreme Court at 2749). Because, as St.Mary's recognizes, the factfinder in a Title VII case is entitled to infer discrimination from Plaintiff's proof of a prima facie case and showing of pretext without anything more, there will always be a question for the factfinder once a Plaintiff establishes a prima facie case and raises a genuine issue as to whether the employer's explanation for its action is true. Such a question cannot be resolved on summary judgment. Washington v. Garrett, supra at 1433. (emphasis added) The United States Supreme Court has upheld the proposition set forth in St. Mary's Honor Center v. Hicks, supra at 511 that a fact finder's disbelief of the reasons put forward by the Defendant,together with the elements of a prima facie case, may suffice to show intentional discrimination based on the rejection of Defendant's proffered reasons permitting the trier of fact to infer the ultimate fact of intentional discrimination. Reeves v. Sanderson Plumbing Products (2000) 530 U.S. 133. April 12, 2006 RE: Ronnie Benjamin Page: 9 The Reeves case involved the complaint of age discrimination by Roger Reeves, age 57. At trial,the respondent employer claimed that Reeves(and a younger employee in his mid-thirties) had been fired due to their failure to maintain accurate attendance records for their department. Reeves attempted to demonstrate that this explanation was a pretext for age discrimination, introducing evidence that he had accurately recorded the attendance and hours of the employees he supervised and that the individual who fired him had demonstrated age-based animus in his dealings with him. The district court denied respondent's motion for judgment as a matter of law under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 50,and the case went to the jury,which returned a verdict for Reeves. However, the Fifth Circuit reversed. Although recognizing that Reeves may have offered sufficient evidence for the jury to have found that respondent's explanation was pretextual,the Circuit Court explained that this did not mean that Reese had presented sufficient evidence to show he had been fired because of his age. In finding the evidence insufficient, the Circuit Court weighed the additional evidence of discrimination introduced by Reeves against other circumstances surrounding his discharge, including that Chestnuts' age-based comments were not made in the direct context of Reeves' termination;there was no allegations that the other individuals who recommended his firing were motivated by age;two of these individuals were over 50; all three supervisors were accused of inaccurate record keeping; and several of respondents managers were over 50 when Reeves was fired. Reeves v. Sanderson, supra. However,the United States Supreme Court found the Plaintiff's evidence to be sufficient to support the jury's verdict and reversed the judgment of the Court of Appeals. The Supreme Court upheld the McDonald Douglas Corp. v. Green, supra at 802 standard that a Plaintiff's prima facie case of discrimination combined with evidence for a reasonable fact finder to reject the employer's non-discriminatory explanation for its decision, would be adequate to sustain a finding of liability for intentional discrimination under the ADEA. Reeves v. Sanderson, supra. The court noted: In this case, Reeves established a prima facie case and made a substantial showing that respondent's legitimate, non- discriminatory explanation,i.e.,his shoddy record keeping,was false. He offered evidence showing that he had properly maintained the attendance records in question and that cast doubt on whether he was responsible for any failure to discipline late and absent employees. April 12, 2006 RE: Ronnie Benjamin Page: 10 In holding that the evidence was insufficient to sustain the jury's verdict, the Fifth Circuit ignored this evidence, as well as the evidence supporting Reeves' prima facie case, and instead confined its review of the evidence favoring Reeves to that showing that Chestnut had directed derogatory, age-based comments at Reeves, and that Chestnut had singled him out for harsher treatment than younger employees. It is therefore apparent that the court believed that only this additional evidence of discrimination was relevant to whether the jury's verdict should stand. In so reasoning, the court misconceived the evidentiary burden borne by plaintiffs who attempt to prove intentional discrimination through indirect evidence. In St. Marx's Honor Center v. Hicks, 509 U.S. 511, 125 L. Ed. 2d 407, 113 S. Ct. 2742, the court stated that, because the factfnder's disbelief of the reasons put forward by the Defendant, together with the elements of the prima facie case, may be sufficient to show intentional discrimination, rejection of the Defendant's proffered reasons will permit the trier of fact to infer the ultimate fact of intentional discrimination. Proof that the Defendant's explanation is unworthy of credence is simply one form of circumstantial evidence that is probative of intentional discrimination, and it can be quite persuasive. See, Id. at 517. In appropriate circumstances, the trier of fact can reasonably infer from the falsity of the explanation that the employer is dissembling to cover up a discriminatory purpose. See, e.g., Wright v. West, 505 U.S. 277, 296, 120 L. Ed. 2d 225, 112 S.Ct. 2482. Moreover, when one of the employer's justification has been eliminated,discrimination may well be the most likely alternative explanation, especially since the employer is in the best position to put forth the actual reason for its decision. Cf. lFurnco Constr. Corp. v. Waters, 438 U.S. 567,577,57 L.Ed.2d 957,98 S.Ct.2942. Such a showing by the Plaintiff will not always be adequate to sustain a jury's liability finding. Certainly there will be instances where, although the Plaintiff has established a prima facie case and introduced sufficient evidence to reject the employer's explanation, no rational factfmder could conclude that discrimination had occurred. This court need not and could not April 12, 2006 RE: Ronnie Benjamin Page: 11 resolve all such circumstances here. In this case, it suffices to say that a Plaintiff's prima facie case, combined with sufficient evidence to find that the employer's asserted justification is false,may permit the trier of fact to conclude that the employer unlawfully discriminated. Pp. 5-14. Reeves v. Sanderson, supra. Applying the above legal standards, the court noted that the Fifth Circuit disregarded evidence favorable to Reeves,the evidence supporting his prima facie case, and undermining respondent's non-discriminatory explanation and failed to draw all reasonable inferences in his favor. The court noted, for instance, that while acknowledging the potentially damaging nature of the employer's age related comments, the Circuit Court discounted them on the ground that they were not made in direct context of Reeves termination. The court also improperly discredited Reeves' evidence that Chestnut was the actual decision maker by giving weight to the fact that there was no evidence suggesting the other decision makers were motivated by age. Moreover,the other evidence on which the court relied, that other employees, not in the protected group,were cited for poor record keeping,and that respondent employed many managers over 50, although relevant, was not dispositive. The court concluded: Given that Reeves established a prima facie case, introduced enough evidence for the jury to reject respondent's explanation, and produced additional evidence that Chestnut was motivated by age-based animus and was principally responsible for Reeves' firing, there was sufficient evidence for the jury to conclude that respondent had intentionally discriminated. Reeves v. Sanderson, supra at p. 4. Here,Mr.Benjamin will certainly be able to establish a prima facie case and set forth evidence of age based discrimination.There was no reasonable explanation for Mr. Benjamin being treated so differently than his younger co-workers and being repeatedly questioned about his retirement. This permits the,trier of fact to conclude that the County discriminated against Mr.Benjamin. It should be noted circumstantial evidence is important in discrimination cases. The case of Visser v. Packer Engineering Assoc.. Inc. (7" Cir. 1990) 909 F.2d 959 is instructive. The Visser court, in reversing the trial court's granting of summary April 12, 2006 RE: Ronnie Benjamin Page: ]2 judgment, stated as follows: The district court, in granting summary judgment, found there was no direct evidence of age discrimination. Seldom,however, are we provided with a smoking gun in such cases. In this case, we believe that there is sufficient direct evidence to create a material issue of fact as to whether Visser's evidence demonstrated that age played a part in the employment decision and thus presented a mixed motives case. See, Price Waterhouse,109 S.Ct.at 1789 n. 12. The evidence asserted by Visser to demonstrate the illegitimate motive includes Visser's age of 64 and his replacement by a 29 year old, Dr. Packer's allegedly vengeful character,his knowledge of Visser's pension status, Dr. Packer's dislike for Visser, and affidavits of three officers that they believed from their personal knowledge that Visser's age was a factor. Although dismissal of an employee to eliminate a pension liability, without more, may not be enough for an age discrimination action,the combination of all the factors in this case,we conclude,creates a material issue of fact as to whether age "played a motivating part in an adverse employment decision,"n.2. See,Price Waterhouse,109 S.Ct. at 1790, and provides a premise from which a reasonable jury could infer that Visser was fired because of his age. See, Palucki v. Sears, Roebuck & Co. (7th Cir. 1989) 879 F.2d 1568, 1571. Visser v. Packer, supra 961. Based on the above,the court stated, "We conclude that the law is better served by having such cases examined in the crucible of a contested hearing. A trial becomes appropriate to evaluate whether the employer is attempting to avoid liability based on an illegitimate motive by simply supplying a legitimate one at the summary judgment phase. ...Thus, the final outcome, under these circumstances, should not rest solely on a legitimate motive proffered for summary judgment but should instead be resolved through trial." Visser,supra at 961-962. C. Harassment The FEHA also prohibits harassment on the basis of race and age. Govt. Code §12940(h). Under California law, an employer is strictly liable for harassment April 12, 2006 RE: Ronnie Benjamin Page: 13 perpetrated by an agent or supervisor. Govt. Code §12940(h)(1); 2 Ca1.Code Regs. §7287.6(b). See, Kelly-Zurian v. Wohl Shoe Co. (1994) 22 Cal.App.4th 397. The County and its' employees have harassed Mr. Benjamin by subjecting him to different standard, taking disciplinary action against him, and suspending him without pay. The FEHA also requires employers to take "All reasonable steps necessary to prevent discrimination and harassment from occurring." Govt. Code §12940(k). This provision creates a statutory tort action. Trujillo v.North Co.Transit dist.(1998)63 Cal.App.4th 280, 286. Also, relevant to this case is the fact that the courts have held that the mere existence of a grievance procedure and general policy against discrimination does not shield the employer against liability for harassment. See, e.g.,Meritor Savings Bank v.Vinson (1986) 477 US 57. As to the damages recoverable,the Fair Employment and Housing Act affords full and unlimited tort damages to plaintiffs who establish liability. The California Supreme Court's decision in Commodore Home Systems, Inc. v. Superior Court (1982)32 Cal.3d 211,221 clearly established the availability of such remedies under the FEHA. The court held that courts have authority to award FEHA plaintiffs all noncontractual tort remedies including emotional distress damages and punitive damages. Mr.Benjamin'may receive back pay consisting of lost earnings from the time of the FEHA violation through the entry of judgment. This includes salary and fringe benefits and any other form of compensation which would have been paid. County of Alameda v. FEHC (1984) 153 Cal.App.3d 499, 509. The court may also award front pay consisting of the plaintiffs lost earnings from the date of judgment through the date of employment and a comparable position. Ackerman v. Western Electric (N.D. Cal.1986) 642 F.Supp.836, 856. The courts may award full compensatory damages to plaintiffs under the Fair Employment and Housing Act. Peralta Community College District v.FEHC(1990) 52 Cal.3d 40; Commodore Home Systems, Inc. v. Superior Court, supra at 221. These damages are designed to compensate the plaintiff for emotional injuries that were April 12, 2006 RE: Ronnie Benjamin Page: 14 suffered as a result of the defendant's actions,considering factors such as the plaintiff's physical and emotional well being, ability to work, personal and family relationships, and the duration of the injury. See, Aluminum Precision Products (1988) FERC decision no.88-05; Wilson v.Safeway Stores,Inc.(1997)52 Cal.App.4th 267,273. It should be noted that emotional distress awards from FEHA violations have been significant. See,e.g.,Iwekaogwu v.Citxof Los Angeles(1999)75 Cal.App.4th 803, 821 (upholding $450,000 award on remittitur for emotional distress damages); Bihun v.AT&T Info Systems(1993)13 Cal.AppAth 976,979(upholding$662,000 emotional distress award); and Watson v.Department of Rehabilitation (1989)212 Cal.App.3d 1271 (holding award of$1 million for emotional distress not excessive in discrimination case). The courts may also award punitive damages to the plaintiff under the Fair Employment and Housing Act. Dyna-Med. Inc. v. FERC (1987) 43 Ca1.3d 1379, 1383; Commodore Home Systems, Inc. v. Superior Court,supra at 221. The Fair Employment and Housing Act expressly states that the prevailing party may recover reasonable attorney's fees and costs. Govt. Code §12965(d). Here,based on the above legal authorities as applied to the facts of this case,Mr. Benjamin has been the victim of racial and age discrimination,based on the County's failure to treat him equally with regard to the application of its procedures and policies, and singling him out with respect to discipline. DAMAGES The Fair Employment and Housing Act affords full and unlimited tort damages to plaintiffs who establish liability. The California Supreme Court's decision in Commodore Home Systems,Inc.v.Superior Court(1982)32 Ca1.3d 211,221 clearly established the availability of such remedies under the FEHA.The court held that courts have authority to award FEHA plaintiffs all noncontractual tort remedies including emotional distress damages and punitive damages. See also,Wilson v.Safeway Stores, Inc. (1997) 52 Cal.AppAth 567, 573. Mr.Benjamin may receive back pay consisting of lost earnings from the time of the FEHA violation through the entry of judgment. This includes salary and fringe benefits and any other form of compensation which would have been paid. County of April 12, 2006 RE: Ronnie Benjamin Page: 15 Alameda v. FEHC (1984) 153 Cal.App.3d 499, 509. The court may also award front pay consisting of Mr. Benjamin's lost earnings from the date of judgment through the date of employment and a comparable position. Ackerman v. Western Electric (N.D. Cal.1986) 642 F.Supp.836, 856. The courts may award full compensatory damages to Mr.Benjamin under the Fair Employment and Housing Act. Peralta Community College District v.FEHC(1990) 52 Ca1.3d 40; Commodore Home Systems, Inc. v. Superior Court, supra at 221. These damages are designed to compensate Mr. Benjamin or emotional injuries that were suffered as a result of the County's actions, considering factors such as Mr. Benjamin's physical and emotional well being, ability to work, personal and family relationships, and the duration of the injury. See, Aluminum Precision Products (1988) FEHC decision no. 88-05; Wilson v. Safeway Stores, Inc. (1997) 52 Cal.AppAth 267,273. It should be noted that emotional distress awards from FEHA violations have been significant. See,e.g.,Iwekaogwu v.City of Los Angeles(1999)75 Cal.App.4th 803, 821 (upholding $450,000 award on remittitur for emotional distress damages); Bihun v. AT&T Info Systems (1993) 13 Cal.App.4th 976, 979 (upholding$662,000 emotional distress award); and Watson v. Department of Rehabilitation (1989) 212 Cal.App.3d 1271 (holding award of$1 million for emotional distress not excessive in discrimination case). The Fair Employment and Housing Act expressly states that the prevailing party may recover reasonable attorney's fees and costs. Govt. Code §12965(d). SETTLEMENT DEMAND I am authorized to present you with a suggested settlement request in the total amount of$200,000. This demand, although certainly significant, represents what I believe is a substantial discount of Mr. Benjamin's potential recovery. In light of the allowable recovery of attorney's fees, the County's legal exposure will increase significantly if litigation is commenced. We also demand that discipline be expunged from Mr. Benjamin's personnel file and that he be transferred'to another department within the County. In evaluating this demand,we suggest that you consider not only your exposure April 12, 2006 RE: Ronnie Benjamin Page: 16 under the above theories of liability but also the tangible and intangible costs and attorney's fees you will incur in defending formal litigation of this nature. This demand is less than the County's exposure, particularly when taking into account the total amount of Mr. Benjamin's potential economic recovery. If Mr. Benjamin's claims against the County succeeds, a damages award in her favor (not including a potential award of interest, costs and attorney's fees),would far exceed the above demand. This demand shall remain open for two weeks from the date of this letter. In considering this demand,we again recommend you consider not only the County's legal exposure but also the substantial costs and attorney's fees,which the County will incur in defending itself and have to pay to our client. If a meaningful effort is not made to resolve this matter within this time frame,Mr.Benjamin will continue to pursue all legal avenues available to her. This will involve the commencement of a formal lawsuit against the County based on the above theories of liability. Thank you for your attention to this matter. We look forward to your prompt response. Very Truly Yours, RMB/ejb AL M. CC: (By Certified Mail) Contra Costa County Board of Supervisor OD.0 o o � 'o�-a 1000 �� ao w IIjj��II W a. O u m s e} micas p'�uvn� w d ir y - vo Ln 00 cVrk} 1 I' b 00 O a OC) NL C3 161 ol co <ni f j C3 Q ru C3 s coU tC3 S/ ' �• / CLAIM BOARD OF SUPI!;RVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY BOARD ACTION: MAY 16, 2036 Clair Against the County,or District Governed by ) the Board of Supervisors,Routing Endorsements, ) NOTICE TO CLAIMANT and Board Action, All Section ref � I The copy of this document mailed to California Government Codes. you is your notice of the action taken APR 1 4 2006 on your claim by the Board of Supervisors.(Paragraph IV below), COUNTY COUNSEL given Pursuant to Government Code AMOUNT: UNKNOWN MARTINEZ CALIF. Section 913 and 915.4.Please note all "Warnings". CLAIMANT: JACK BERT SCHMIDT ATTORNEY:THOMAS R. WOELFEL DATE RECEIVED: APRIL 14, 2006 LAW OFFICE OF THOMAS R. WOELFEL APRIL 14, 2006 ADDRESS: 500 YGNACIO VALLEY ROAD, . B:Y DELIVERY TO CLERK ON: SUITE 300 WALNUT CREEK, CA 94596 BY MAIL POSTMARKED: APRIL 13, 2006, FROM: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors TO: County Counsel Attached is a copy of the above-noted claim. APRIL 14, 2006 JOHN CULLEN, r Dated: By: Deputy lL FROM: County Counsel TO: Clerk of the Board of S pervisors (v�/This claim complies substantially with Sections 910 and 910.2. ( ) This Claim FAILS to comply substantially with Sections 910 and 910.2, and we are so notifying claimant_The Board cannot act for 15 days(Section 910.8). O Claim is not timely filed. The Clerk should return claim on ground that it was filed late and send warning of claimant's right to apply for leave to present a late claim(Section 9113). O Other: Dated: "[i'�9�6� By: IYI CQ ?PJAi Deputy County Counsel III. FROM: Clerk of the Board TO: County Counsel(1) County Administrator(2) ( ) Claim was returned as untimely with notice to claimant(Section 911.3). IV. ARD ORDER: By unanimous vote of the Supervisors present: ( This Claim is rejected in full. O Other: I certify that this is a true and correct copy of the Board's Order entered in its minutes for this date. � ,, Dated:/AV&, W,41!6AHN CULLEN,CLERK,By eputy Clerk VARNIN (Gov. code section 913) Subject to certain exceptions,you have only six(6)months from the date this notice was personally served or deposited it the mail to file a court action on this claim.See Government Code Section 945.6.You may seek the advice of an attorney of your choice it connection with this matter.U you want to consult an attorney,you should do so immediately. *For Additional Warning See Reverse Side of This Notice. AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING I declare under penalty of perjury that I am now,and at all times herein mentioned,have been a citizen of the United States, over age 18; and that today I deposited in the United States Postal Ser-vice in Martine%, California, postage fully prepaid a certified copy of this Board Order and Notice to Claimant,addressed to the claimant as shown above. Dated JOHN CULLEN, CLERK By Deputy Clerk This warning does not apply to claims which are not subject to the California Tort Claims . Act such as actions in inverse condemnation, actions for specific relief such as mandamus or injunction,.or Federal Civil Rights claims.The above list is not exhaustive and legal consultation is essential to understand all the separate limitations periods that may apply. The limitations period within which suit must be filed may be shorter or longer depending on the nature of the claim.Consult the specific statutes and cases applicable to your particular claim. The County of Contra Costa does not waive any of its rights under California Tort Claims Act nor does it waive rights under the statutes of `li�i itations applicable to actions not subject to the California Tort Claims Act 1 � 1 Thomas R. Woelfel, SBN 120358 RECEIVED LAW OFFICE OF THOMAS R. WOELFEL 2 500 Ygnacio Valley Road, Suite 300 APR 1.4 2006 Walnut Creek, CA 94596 3 Tel: (925) 977-9600 CLERK BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Fax: (925) 977-9687 CONTRA COSTA CO. 4 5 Attorney for Claimant, JACK BERT SCHMIDT 6 7 8 CLAIM OF Jack Bert Schmidt, 9 Claimant, CLAIM AGAINST CONTRA COSTA COUNTY A14-D ITS EMPLOYEE, 10 MARK ALAN DUCKETT 11 (Government Code, Section 910) 12 13 14 15 TO.: CONTRA. COSTA COUNTY AND ITS EMPLOYEE; MARK .ALAN DUCKETT: 16 Pursuant to'California Government Code, section 910, Jack Bert 17 Schmidt presents a claim to the Contra Costa County and its 18 employee, Mark Alan Duckett, as follows : 19 The claimant is Jack Bert Schmidt whose present post office 20 address is 3421 Hudson Court, No. 63, Antioch, CA 94509. 21 - The circumstances giving rise to this claim are: On November 22 22, 2005, at approximately 11: 55 a.m. , Mr. Schmidt was a pedestrian 23 within the crosswalk eastbound on Main Street, crossing Court 24 Street, in Martinez, California, when a Contra Costa County 25 maintenance vehicle,, being driven by Mark Alan Duckett, an employee 26 of Cont.ra''Ccsta ' County, made a , lef.t-,. -:southbound, turn - from Main 27 Street and struck Mr. Schmidt, thereby causing him bodily injuries, 28 generally to his neck, left shoulder, back, 'and left ankle. -1- R _ ... .._ � _ � � , ... i 1 A 11/22/2005 "Traffic Collision Report" of this accident was 2 prepared by Officer Mike Thompson, #60, of the Martinez Police 3 Department, with NCIC # CA0071400, and Local Report Number 05-5582 . 4 This claimant contends that negligence on the part of Contra 5 Costa County and its employee, Mark Alan Duckett, caused the 6 accident by violating applicable sections of the California Vehicle 7 Code, including section 22106 thereof, and entitles this claimant 8 to monetary damages for the injuries and damages sustained, all in 9 an amount presently unknown but subject to the jurisdiction of the 10 Superior Court, Unlimited Civil Jurisdiction. 11 All notices or other communications regarding this claim are 12 to be sent to the Law Office of Thomas R. Woelfel, 500 Ygnacio 13 Valley Road, Suite 300, Walnut Creek, California 94596, (925) 977- 14 9600. 15 DATED: April 13, 2006 16 LAW OFFICE OF THOMAS R. WOELFEL 17 18 By: TH MAS R. WO 19 Attorn-ey or Claimant, JAC-K'BERT SCHMIDT 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 -2- .. , .. f , .... _ _.. ,... .. _. ... I. i � � � � t 1 Case No. N/A 2 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE BY MAIL 3 [CCP, §§ 1013a, 1015 & 2015. 5] 4 I, Thomas R. Woelfel, the undersigned, hereby certify and 5 declare under penalty of perjury that the following statements are 6 true and correct: 7 1. I am over the age of 18 years and am not a party to the 8 within cause. 9 2 . My business address is 500 Ygnacio, Valley Road, Suite 10 300, Walnut Creek, CA 94596. 11 3. I am familiar with my mail collection and processing 12 practices; I know that the mail is collected and deposited with the 13 United States Postal Service on the same day it is deposited in 14 interoffice mail; and, I know that postage thereon is for first 15 class mail service and is fully prepaid. 16 4 . Following said practice, on April 13, 2006, I served a 17 true copy of the attached document entitled exactly "CLAIM AGAINST 18 CONTRA COSTA COUNTY AND ITS EMPLOYEE, MARK ALAN 'DUCKETT" by placing 19 it in an addressed sealed envelope and depositing it in regularly 20 maintained interoffice mail to: 21 Board of Supervisors County Administration Building 22 651 Pine Street, Room 106 Martinez, CA 94553 23 Att 'n: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors/Claims Filing Department 24 Executed on April 13, 2006, at Walnut Creek, California. 25 26 21 Thomas R. Wo fel 28 PROOF OF SERVICE m lU Y v r eA c11 i a r .rA r 0 ON a ,•� a a � 1� s ' d t0 �r- N man W 0 coo 7 GaOtATA .as P �; - s- ��' .,,..... 1' .:2.�r 999""" ..., C 'e .�..«. f ........ r, . y 1 �� ' � ti, �^�� " 1 �� r' ,� -,`' CLAllC BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY 0✓! BOARD ACTION: MAY 16, -2006 Claim Against the County,or District Governed by ) the Board of Supervisors,Routing Endorsements, ) NOTICE TO CLAIMANT and Board Action. All Section references are to ) The copy of this document mailed to California Government Codes. ) you is your notice of the action taken on your claim by the Board of Supervisors. (Paragraph IV below), APR 1 8 2006 given Pursuant to Government Code AMOUNT: $350.00Section 913 and 915.4.Please note all COUNTY COUNSEL "Warnings". MARTINEZ CALIF. CLAIMANT: DARRYL G. PEREIRA ATTORNEY: UNKNOWN DATE RECEIVED: APRIL 17, 2006 ADDRESS: P.O. BOX 2091 BY DELIVERY TO CLERK ON:APRIL 17, 2006 MARTINEZ, a.:, 94553 BY MAIL POSTMARKED: APRIL 12, 2006 FROM: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors TO: County Counsel Attached is a copy of the above-noted claim. APRIL 18, 2006 JOHN CULLEN, 1 ! Dated: By: Deputy It, FROM: County Counsel TO: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors claim 'complies substantially with Sections 910 and 910.2. ( ) This Claim FAILS to comply substantially with Sections 910 and 910.2, and we are so notifying claimant.The Board cannot act for 15 days(Section 910.8). ( ) Claim is not timely filed. The Clerk should return claim on ground that it was filed late and send warning of claimant's right to apply for leave to present a late claim(Section 911.3). O Other: Dated: r7 By:MC4)16� Deputy County Counsel I11. FROM: Clerk of the Board TO: County Counsel(1) County Administrator(2) O Claim was returned as untimely with notice to claimant(Section 9113).. WBOARD ORDER: By unanimous vote of the Supervisors present: This Claim is rejected in full. O Other: I certify that this is a true and correct copy of the Board's Order entered in its minutes for this date. Dated: -2AdZ JOHN CULLEN,CLERK,By Deputy Clerk WARNI (Gov. code section 913) - Subject to certaut exceptions,you have only six(6)months from the date this notice was personally served or deposited in the mail to Tile a court action on this claim.See Government Code Section 945.6.You may seek(lie advice of an attorney of your choice in connection with this matter.If you want to consult an attorney,you should do so immediately. *For Additional Warning See Reverse Side of This Notice. AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING I declare under penalty of perjury that I am now,and at all times herein mentioned, have been a citizen of the United States, over age 18, and that today I deposited in the United States Postal Service in Martinez, California, postage fully prepaid a certified copy or this Board Order and Notice to Claimant,addressed to the claimant as shown above. Dated:Htlmle JOHN CULLEN,CLERK By Deputy Clerk y K p This warning does not apply to claims which' are not subject to the California Tort Claims Act such as actions in inverse condemnation, actions for specific relief such as mandamus or injunction, or Federal Civil Rights claims.The above list is not exhaustive and legal consultation is essential to-understand all the separate limitations periods that may apply. The limitations period within which suit must be tiled may be shorter or.longer depending on the nature of the claim. Consult the specific . statutes and cases applicable to your particular claim. The County of Contra Costa does not waive any of its rights under California Tort Claims Act nor does it waive rights under the statutes of limitations applicable to actions not subject to the California Tort Claims Act .0 o I ,j ( BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY SHARON HYMES-OFFORD INSTRUCTIONS TO CLAIMANT APR 1 3 2006 A. A claim relating to a cause of action for death or for injury to person or to personal property or growing crops shall be presented not later than six months after the accrual of the cause of action. A claim relating to any other cause of action shall be presented not later than one year . after the accrual of the cause of action. (Gov. Code § 911.2.) B. Claims must be filed with the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors at its office in Room 106, County Administration Building, 651 Pine Street,Martinez, CA 94553., C. If claimis against a district governed by the Board of Supervisors, rather than the County, the naive of the District should be filled in. D. If the claim is against more than one public entity, separate claims must be filed against each. public entity. E. Fraud. See penalty for fraudulent claims,Penal Code Sec. 72 at the end of this form. MEN RE: RE: Claim By: Reserved for Clerk's filing stamp RECEIVED APR 1 2006 Against the County of Contra Costa or ) CLERK BOARD OF SUPERVISORS CONTRA COSTA CO. District) (Fill in the name) ) The undersigned claimant hereby makes claim against the County of Contra Costa or the above-named district in the sum of$ 33V�; and in support of this claim represents as follows: I. When did the damage or injury occur? (Give exact date and hour) Z I Z,71a 6 u- 3 2. Where did the damage or injury occur? (Include city and county) 3. How did the damage or injury occur? (Give full details; use extra paper if required) La//NT y r2vCAC -VA."V L /�iy�.,�/�� J ry ru"r, ®l�.f�st 7'lf� K©9ro 516-V91C. SYSTassvr D9/v1 1/vyy� Tiyi2 CuG!/�.ica� /3!/LkHe�ipO 4. What particular act or omission on the part of county or district officers, servants, or employees caused the injury or damage? w` Ge.i/J,0;%WV7`_'_... 5 What are the names of county or district officers; servants, or employees causing the damage or injury? f�T . •/o v ivG ' , _ 2, �� -.. .'.. ... �. •._ __ _:: .... .. '' :..: .. _ .... .. ..:' .'. L .. ... .. ' . e:. .. .. .,,...� r. _ ..� .r.� - ... .. ,., .. �... .. C .. .. _., ,J .. -. � ti 6. What damage or injuries do your claim resulted? (Give full extent of injuries or damages claimed. Attach two estimates for auto damage:) No dG,C/e/.4-L 1e V-11SJ 495'rs . A-jr 7'y/s 7. How was the amount claimed above computed? (Include the estimated amount of any prospective injury or damage.) t tfibv�rJ /jam wic.cl��c Tv i,�,.�, �- /z,�-j' .it-5 �3.s—o ivr y 7?FDai' Oe -mix 8. Names and addresses of witnesses, doctors, and hospitals: 9. List the expenditures you made on account of this accident or injury: DATE TIME AMOUNT MvivrZ y�r 5aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa¢aaaaaaaaa2aaaeaaaaaaaaa25aaaaaaaaaaaaa15aaaaaaaa2aaaaaaa21 ) .Gov, Code Sec. 910.2 provides"The claim shall be ) signed by the claimant or by some person on his behalf." SEND NOTICES TO: (Attorney) 1 Name and address of Attorney ) } (Claimant's Signature) (Address) ) Telephone No. ) Telephone No. 9 z ■aaaa5aaaaaaaaa5aaaaaaaaaaaa2aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa2aaaaaaaaaasaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa2aaI PUBLIC RECORDS NOTICE: Please be advised that this claim fon-n, or any claim filed with the County under the Tort Claims Act, is subject to public disclosure under the California Public Records Act. (Gov. Code, ss 6500 et seq.) Furthermore, any attaclunents,addendums, or supplements attached to the claim form, including medical records;are also subject to public disclosure. ■■a a a a s a a l a a s assess woman a a a so a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a t a a a a a o a a a a son s t a a a l a a a a a a a a a a a a memo a s a a i NOTICE: Section 72 of the Penal Code provides: Every person who, with intent to defraud, presents for allowance or for payment to any state board or officer, or to any county, city, or district board or officer, authorized to allow or pay the same if genuine, any false or fraudulent claim, bill, account voucher, or writing, is punishable either by imprisonment in the County jail for a period of not more than one year, by a fine of not exceeding one thousand dollars ($1,000.00), or by both such imprisonment and fine, or by imprisonment in the state prison, by a fine of not exceeding ten thousand dollars ($10,000),or by both such imprisonment and fine. i ti . �. .. � �� w� ,1�'^r"'�•.-�^a:. �_ '+�^� .+A � X,r��."� W ..r'r'i''y'N��-�.�C ��.�_' r e �,�,tat,,:- o-w ��,r7r-' .,.T1'��",�r r fi� �:�y.`.�(yA^x' �• � _ i•"�"" i r T..""rF°��'• •o;. �ss�� M 7'°ti�� , sr +' •A \i��-'x ', „_,."-^•"� 4 `� �.t.,,.sc- .. �� .tp .1':yy ',.s�`J`y fp, 'rte' :. ip x m r �-;G�"�n.-s ��: � '•°a' �'�yy T'=Tr�l _ �w { ,ti;s��S�1� 4� � c�e>?''+•�•,�►+�a.+r}- :..'. '4 *fs�' - 4��,y%�►.��w,+.�...�d'-�'p .,�% f1 tt �r. a'y �" p� 2;hF t. a.^a l�f �-' as�z� '}-✓ +�� y r e� .1 ..+ i y'k- .£� a!��„�"• A �' as M li .: . ;Yt a � � �� i.- .. ��ti�d�i '�s �`1M`^•._a'.•J31'' �+.+r"•'"S," «�'M _ � a A e {;:.:"�—'"'�'\.• T� "� � .gym' ^r .,. ��.. M1 M w o ,'4: rn by• SJ ' , yn9m ,y J11171 ,• � y'q r d C :. vtk4 C , 1 M i ry I� CLAIM / BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY C• / BOARD ACTION- !.MAY 16, 2006 Claim Against the County, or District Governed by ) the Board of Supervisors, Routing Endorsements, ). NOTICE TO CLAIMANT and.Board Action. All Section references are to ) The copy of this document mailed to California Government Codes. ) you is your notice of theaction taken on your claim by the Board of Supervisors. (Paragraph IV below), given Pursuant to Government Code AMOUNT: $2,377.71 APR 1 8 2006 Section 913 and 915.4. Please note all COUNTY COUNSEL "Warnings". CLAIMANT: KIM WURCHER MARTINEZ CALIF. ATTORNEY- UNKNOWN DATE RECEIVED.- APRIL 18, 2006 ADDRESS: 3300 CLAREMONT AVENUE BY DELIVERY TO CLERK ON: APRIL, 18, 2006 BERKELEY, CA 94705 APRIL 17, 2006 BY MAIL POSTMARKED: FROM: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors TO: County.Counsel Attached is a copy of the above-noted claim. APRIL 18, 2006 JOHN CULLEN, leik Dated: By: Deputy IL FROM: County Counsel TO: Clerk of the Board of Stfpervisors (►.This claim complies substantially with Sections 910 and 910.2. ( ) This Claim FAILS to comply substantially with Sections 910 and 910.2, and we are so notifying claimant. The Board cannot act for 15 days (Section 910.8). O Claim is not timely filed. The Clerk should return claim on ground that it was filed late and send warning of claimant's right to apply for leave to present a late claim (Section 911.3). O Other: Dated: `� ' By: �1 Deputy County Counsel III. FROM: Clerk of the Board TO:. County Counsel (1) County Administrator(2) O Claim was returned as untimely with notice to claimant (Section 911.3). . IV.,BOARD ORDER: By unanimous vote of the Supervisors present: lam) This Claim is rejected in full. O Other: I certify that this is a true and correct copy of the Board's Order entered in its minutes for this date. DatedOHN CULLEN, CLERK, By Deputy Clerk WARNl (Gov. code section 913) Subject to certain exceptions,you have only six(6)months from the date this notice was personally served or deposited in the mail to file a court action on this claim.See Government Code Section 945.6.You may seek the advice of an attorney of your choice in connection with this matter. If you want to consult an attorney,you should do so immediately. *For Additional Warning See Reverse Side of This Notice. AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING I declare under penalty of perjury that I am now, and at all times herein mentioned, have been a citizen of the United States, over age 18; and that today I deposited in the United States Postal Service iuu Martinez, California, postage fully prepaid a certified copy of this Board Order and Notice to Claimant, addressed to the claimant as shown above. Dated:/,/-A JOHN CULLEN, CLERK By Deputy Clerk This warning does not apply to claims which are not subject to the California Tort Claims Act such as actions in inverse condemnation, actions for specific relief such-as mandamus or injunction, or Federal Civil Rights claims. The above list is not.exhaustive:and legal consultation is essential to understand all the separate limitations periods .that may apply. The limitations period within which suit must. be filed may be shorter or longer depending on the nature of the claim. Consult the specific statutes and cases applicable to your particular claim. The County of Contra Costa does not waive any of its rights under California Tort Claims Act nor,does_.it waive rights tinder the statutes of lim tations.,applieable to actions not subject to the California Tort Claims Act Y a�1 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY INSTRUCTIONS TO CLAIMANT A. A claim relating..to_a cause of action for death or for injury to person or to personal property or gr6wing crops shall be presented not later than six months after the accrual of the cause of action. A claim relating to any other cause of action shall be.presented not later than one year . after the,accrual of the cause of action. (Gov. Code § 911.2:) B. LCIaLimsmust be filed with the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors at its office in Room 106, Administration Building, me ee , artmez, A 9455 . C. If claim is against a district governed by the Boar of Supervisors, rather than the County, the name of the District should be filled in. D. If the claim is against more than one public entity, separate claims must be filed against each. public entity. E. Fraud. See penalty for fraudulent claims, Penal Code Sec. 72 at the end of this form. ■■of morias s smsssas a a as so a a nam mamsma■aaamsaaama nam a m mamma massa among amssmas■aca as RE: Claim By: Reserved for Clerk's filing stamp RECEIVED , Against the County of Contra Costa or ) APR 1 8 2006 District) UVc,Fi I.'`.'. "..:)OF SUPERVISORS (Fill in the name) ) The undersigned claimant hereby makes claim against the County of Contra Costa or the above-named district in the sum of$ al and in support of this claim represents as follows: 1. '�kThen did the damaze or injury occur? (Give exact date and hour) 2. Where did the damage or injury occur? (Include city and county) kKC3AAe. q_1IeMffi � ct�a\ GW,,4 �J a C6� �� -. How did C'e damn e or injury occur? Give full details;use extra paper if require g J Y ( P P q ) V\J� � C'- -��, M� J m 4. ; What.particular act or omission on the part of county or district officers, servants, or employees caused the injury or damage? .��(i_r eqo �b� r 5 What are the names of county or district officers, servants, or employees causing the damage or injury? �.- 4 , 6. What da agLe or jaiuries do y.Qur claim resulted? (Give full extent of injuries or damages claimed-: o e s to dama e. g ) - 7, How was the amount claimed above computed? (Include the estimated amount of any prospective injury or damage.) s�ew>aS 24 S. Names and tvatnes's'es, dnnol ors, os mals: P4�- a- Kd+, ,e, mLw, 9. List the expenditures you made on account of this accident or injury: DATE TIME AMOUNT ■ .■aaaaa.a..■■e..aa..a.aa ■.a.....a....■a.■..mass KNEES■■......aa...a..a.a.man.a.aaa.at ) .Gov. Code Sec. 910.2 provides"The claim shall be ) signed by the claimant or by some person on his behalf." SEND NOTICES TO: (Attorneyl � Name and address of Attorney ) (Claimant's Signature) (Address) ) Telephone No. )Telephone No. � aaaaaaaaaaaaa.aaa................■a......■...■a......■■.............................. PUBLIC RECORDS NOTICE: Please be advised that this claim form, or any claim filed with the County under the Tori Claims Act, is subject to public disclosure under the California Public Records Act. (Gov. Code, §§ 6500 et seq.) Furthermore, 'any attachments, addendums, or supplements attached to the claim form, including medical records, are also subject to public disclosure. ■...■a..■■a..Sam was.was aa.■■■a...■■■■.■■...man...■■■.■■aa.a.aaaaa.....MEN.aa.too..as$ NOTICE: Section 72 of the Penal Code provides: Every person who, with intent to defraud, presents for allowance or for payment to any state board or officer, or to any county, city, or district board or officer, authorized to allow or pay the same if genuine, any false or fraudulent claim, bill, account voucher, or writing, is punishable either by imprisonment in the County jail for a period of not more than one year, by a fine of not exceeding one thousand dollars ($1,000.00), or by both such imprisonment and fine, or by imprisonment in the state prison, by a fine of not exceeding ten thousand dollars ($10,000), or by both such imprisonment and fine. County Administrator Contra Risk Management Division Costa 2530 Arnold Drive,Suite 140 Liability Claims (925) 335-1 Martinez,California 94553 County ount / Fax Number (925) 335-1 ��JJJ r.t �/ January 30, 2006 - sT� co Kim Wurcher 3300 Clairmont Ave Berkeley, CA 94705 Re: Claimant: Kim Wurcher Insured: Contra Costa County D/Accident: 01/18/2006 Claim No.: 59900 Dear Ms. Wurcher: The above captioned matter has been referred to my office for investigation and handling on behalf of the Contra Costa County Department of Health Services. The county driver struck your vehicle while parked on Oregon Street, Berkeley. I have enclosed a claim form that must be completed in order to file a formal claim against the County. Be advised that you have six months from the accident date to file a formaLclatim-as stated in theC` alifomia_Gavernment-Code-begi-nning.with.S.ection.900:. This also notifies you that you must comply with the.claims-presentation and.timely.suit filing requirements of California,law in order to preserve your claim. ..0ur investigation. . of your claim does not affect your duty to comply with time limits set by.law, and by investigating, considering, and-discussing-your claim-with-you-or-your.representative, we- do not waive our right to assert your failure to comply with those time limits as.a.- complete defense to any claim or action you may bring. Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact the undersigned. Sincerely, Penny Bailey Liability Claims Adjuster 925-335-1455 Enclosure r., M & J AUTO BODY 3033 SAN PABLO AVE. BERKELEY, CA 94702 PHONE: (510) 848-1088 FAX: (510) 848-7003 LIC #: HF132844 CD LOG NO 6102-1 DATE 02/28/06 SHOP: M&J AUTO BODY INSP DATE: 02/28/06 ADDRESS : 3033 SAN PABLO AVE PHONE 1 : (510) 848-1088 CITY STATE: BERKELEY, CA FAX: (510) 848-7003 ZIP: 94702- OWNER: WURCHER, KIM HOME PHONE: (510) 601-5327 ADDRESS : 3300 CLAREMONT ST. CITY STATE: BERKELEY, CA ZIP: 94705 LIC#: STATE: VIN: BODY COLOR: MILEAGE: CONDITION: ACCTNG CTL#: *=USER-ENTERED VALUE E=REPLACE OEM NG=REPLACE NAGS EC=REPLACE ECONOMY UE=REPLACE OE SURPLUS UC=RECONDITIONED PRT UM=REMAN/REBUILT PRT EU=REPLACE SALVAGE EP=REPLACE PXN OE=REPLACE PXN OE SRPLS PC=PXN RECONDITIONED PM=PXN REMAN/REBUILT TE=PARTL REPL PRICE ET=PARTL REPL LABOR IT=PARTIAL REPAIR I=REPAIR L=REFINISH BR=BLEND REFINISH TT=TWO-TONE CG=CHIPGUARD SB=SUBLET N=ADDITIONAL LABOR RI=R&I ASSEMBLY P=CHECK AA=APPEAR ALLOWANCE RP=RELATED PRIOR UP=UNRELATED PRIOR 2001 CHRYSLER PT CRUISER STD 4DOOR WAGON 4CYL GASOLINE 2 . 4 CODE: M7203A/A OPTNS B/24J OPTIONS: TWO-STAGE - EXTERIOR SURFACES TWO-STAGE — INTERIOR SURFACES AIR CONDITIONING OP GDE MC DESCRIPTION MFG.PART NO. PRICE AJo B% HOURS R -- --- -- ----------- ------------ ----- --- -- ----- - EP 0074 COVER, FRONT BUMPER ECONOMY PART 326.27 2 . 1 1 L 0074 13 COVER, FRONT BUMPER REFINISH 3 .7 4 E 0041 46 HEADLAMP ASSY,HALOG LT 5288765AH 225. 00 0 . 3 1 N 0973 HEADLAMPS AIM ADDNL LABOR OPERA 0 . 4 1 BR 0083 PANEL,HOOD BLEND REFINISH 1 . 6 4 EP 010.3 FENDER, FRONT LT ECONOMY PART 161 .34 1 . 4 1 L 0103 FENDER, FRONT LT REFINISH 2 . 9 4 BR 0207 DOOR SHELL, FRONT LT BLEND REFINISH 1 .2 4 RI 0229 MIRROR, OUTER R/C LT R&I ASSEMBLY 0 . 3 1 E M03 FLEX ADDITIVE NEW PART 8 . 00* 4* E M14 CORROSION PROTECTION NEW PART 10. 00* 4* L M15 COLOR TINT REFINISH 0. 5*4 E M17 COVER CAR EXTERIOR NEW PART 8 . 00* 4*" PAGE 1 2001- CHRYSLER PT CRUISER STD 4DOOR WAGON CD LOG .NO 6102-1 L M60 HAZARD. WSTE. REM. REFINISH 5. 00* 4* L M66 COLOR, SAND & BUFF REFINISH 2 . 0*4* 15 ITEMS MC MESSAGE (S) 13 INCLUDES 0. 6 HOURS FIRST PANEL TWO-STAGE ALLOWANCE 46 PRINTABLE PXN COMPARE FINAL CALCULATIONS & ENTRIES GROSS PARTS 251 . 00 OTHER PARTS 492 . 61 PAINT MATERIAL 357 . 00 PARTS & MATERIAL TOTAL 1, 100 . 61 TAX ON PARTS & MATERIAL @ 18 .750% 96. 30 LABOR RATE REPLACE HRS REPAIR HRS 1-SHEET METAL 72 . 00 4 . 1 0 . 4 324 . 00 2-MECH/ELEC 72 . 00 3-FRAME . 90 . 00 4-REFINISH . 72 . 00 11 . 9 856. 80 5-PAINT MATERIAL 30. 00 LABOR TOTAL 1, 180 . 80 SUBLET REPAIRS TOWING STORAGE GROSS TOTAL 2, 377 .71 NET TOTAL 2, 377 . 71 ADP SHOPLINK UCO29 ES CD LOG 6102-1 DATE 02/28/06 02 : 46:22PM R6.37 CD 02/06 PXN: Y/03/02/00/01/01 CUM 03/02%00/01/01 GEOCODE 94702 HOST LOG (C) 1998 - 2006 ADP CLAIMS SOLUTIONS GROUP, INC. 2 .5 HRS WERE ADDED TO THIS EST. BASED ON ADP. TWO-STAGE REFINISH FORMULA. PAGE 7 Bob Molter Body Shop Inc. Federal Tax ID: 94-3170260 Estimate Oakland, Shattuck Ave. Customer No:4464 Oakland,CA 94609 Report No:4344 2128/2006 Phone M (510)653-7393 Claim#: Fax M (510)653-7394 Assign No: E-Mail: BobMotter@pacbell.net Vehicle Information Owner-KIM WURCHER Accident Location 2002 Chrysler PT Cruiser 3300 CLAREMONT AVE Style:4D WGN TOURING Berkeley,CA 94705 Color: Silver Home Phone: (510)601-5327 Color Code: Work Phone: (510) - Phone#1: - Production Date: 2/02 Fax#: (510) - Phone#2: - License:5CDS260 State: CA Insured- Claimant- VIN:3C4FY58B72T335090 Miles In:29843 Miles Out:0 Home Phone: (510) - Home Phone: (510) - Condition: Work Phone: (510) - Work Phone: (510) - Estimator: Michael Dapper Fax#: (510) - Fax#: (510) - Date Assigned:2/28/2006 Date of Loss:2/28/2006 Date of Inspection:2/28/2006 Options: Hatchback Description of Work Part Number Price Labor Paint Other FRONT BUMPER-BUMPER&COMPONENTS Replace Front Bumper cover, Base 5017861AB $457.00 1.7 body FRONT LAMPS-COMBINATION LAMPS Replace Left Front Headlamp assy 5288765AH $225.00 0.3 body HOOD-HOOD&COMPONENTS Blend Hood 1.4 FENDER-FENDER&COMPONENTS Replace Left Fender 5015485AB $210.00 2.5 body 2.6 -Adjacent(0.4)+Edging(0.5)+Clearcoat(1.1)-Body Overlap(0.5) -0.5 1.2 FRONT DOOR-DOOR&COMPONENTS Blend Left Front Door shell 1.0 R&I Left Front Door Inner w'strip 0.3 body R&I Left Front Door Belt w'strip 0.3 body FRONT DOOR-EXTERIOR TRIM R&I Left Front Door Lower molding,aquamarine 0.3 body R&I Left Front Door Nameplate,"PT CRUISER" 0.2 body FRONT DOOR-OUTSIDE MIRRORS R&I Left Front Door Minor assy, manual 0.5 body FRONT DOOR-LOCK&HARDWARE R&I Left Front Door Handle,outside 0.3 body FRONT DOOR-INTERIOR TRIM R&I Left Front Door trim panel,w/o power locks 0.4 body Other overations Color match 0.5*body* flex additive $5.00*taxed Corrosion protection 0.3*body* $4.00*taxed Refinish Color sand&buff 1.6"body* Hazardous Waste Removal $5.00*nontaxed Cover Car For Overspray $5.00' 0.3*body* R&I windshield washer jets 0.4*body* PREVIOUS DAMAGE THERE IS DAMAGE THROUGHOUT COMPLETE VEHICLE. RIGHT FENDER HAS 3 HOURS OF DAMAGE. RIGHT FRONT DOOR HAS 6 HOURS OF DAMAGE. RIGHT REAR DOOR HAS 4 HOURS OF DAMAGE. RIGHT QUARTER PANEL HAS 1.5 HOURS OF DAMAGE. LEFT QUARTER PANEL HAS 6 HOURS OF DAMAGE AND LEFT TAIL LAMP IS BROKEN.LEFT REAR DOOR HAS SOME MINOR DAMAGE AS WELL. DEFAULT CHARGES Sub Totals $897.00 9.4 6.2 Page 1 of 2 Bob Molter Body Shop Inc. Federal Tax ID: 94-3170260 Estimate 6426 Shattuck Ave. Customer No:4464 Oakland, CA 94609 Report No:4344 2/28/2006 Phone#: (510)653-7393 Claim#: Fax#: (510)653-7394 Assign No: E-Mail: BobMotter@pacbell.net Hours Rate Total ESTABLISHED SINCE 1950 Body Labor 9.4hrs $72.00/hr $676.80 QUALITY TAKES TIME STATE Paint Labor 5.1 hrs $72.00/hr $367.20 LIC#AC171172 Clearcoat Labor 1.1 hrs $72.00/hr $79.20 CAD982014656 OEM Parts $897.00 t Paint Supplies 5.1hrs $32.00/hr $163.20 t Clearcoat 1.1 hrs $32.00/hr $35.20 t Misc Taxed $9.00 t Misc Non-Taxed $5.00 Tax $1104.40 @ 8.7500% $96.64 Grand Total $2,329.24 Estimate based on MOTOR CRASH ESTIMATING GUIDE. Unless otherwise noted all items are derived from the Guide. NAGS Part Numbers and Benchmark Prices are provided by National Auto Glass Specifications. Labor operation times listed on the line with the NAGS information are MOTOR suggested labor operation times. NAGS labor operation times are not included. Guide used is(DR3NP01). 12/05 Indicates Estimator's Judament t Indicates Taxed Item Page 2 of 2 QT b kn j � G d , ,All AMENDED CLAIM ��. BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY BOARD ACTION: MAY 16 2006 i Claim Against the County, or District Governed by ) i the Board of Supervisors, Routing Endorsements, ) NOTICE TO CLAIMANT and Board Action. All Section references are to ). The copy of this document mailed to you is your California Government Codes. �� notice of the action taken on your claim by the i E� �@ Board of Supervisors.(Paragraph IV below), given APR 17 2006 Pursuant to Government Code Section 913 and 915.4. Please note all "Warnings". COUNTY COUNSEL AMOUNT: $1,171.36 MARTINEZ CALIF. DATE.RECEIVED: APRIT 17, 2006 CLAIMANT: KEMPER INDEPENDENCE INSURANCE FOR':' SAM BENNETT BY DELIVERY TO CLERK ON: APRIL 17, 2006 . ATTORNEY: BY: MATHIEU SCHWARTZ UNKNOWN BY MAIL POSTMARKED: APRIL 14, 2006 ADDRESS: P.O. BOX 6660 FOLSOM, CA 95763-6660 FROM: Clerk of the Board of Supervisors TO: County Counsel Attached is a copy of the above-noted claim. APRIL 17 2006 JOHN CULLEN, Cl e k OR: KATHY SINCLAIR , Dated: By: Deputy II. FROM: County Counsel TO: Clerk of the Board of Sup visors ( his claim complies substantially with Sections 910 and 910.2. O This Claim FAILS to comply substantially with Sections 910 and 910.2, and we are so notifying claimant. The Board cannot act for 15 days (Section 910.8). O Claim isnot timely filed. The Clerk should return claim on ground that it was filed late and send warning of claimant's right to apply for leave to present a late claim(Section 911.3). O Other: Dated: y 7—��p By: Deputy County Counsel III. FROM: Clerk of the Board TO: County Counsel (1) County Administrator(2) ( ) Claim was returned as untimely with notice to claimant (Section 911.3). (IV. ARD ORDER: By unanimous vote of the Supervisors present: This Claim is rejected in full. O Other: I certify that this is a true and correct copy of the Board's Order entered in its minutes for this date. Dated: &4V JOHN CULLEN, CLERK, By Deputy Clerk WA Gov. code section 913) Subject to certain exceptions, you have only six (6) months from the date this notice was personally served or deposited in the mail to file a court action on this claim. See Government Code Section 945.6. You may seek the advice of an attorney of your choice in connection with this matter. If you want to consult an attorney, you should do so immediately. *For Additional Warning See Reverse Side of This Notice. AFFIDAVIT OF MAILING I declare under penalty of perjury that I am now, and at all times herein mentioned, have been a citizen of the United States, over age 18; and that today I deposited in the United States Postal Service in Martinez, California, postage fully prepaid a certified copy of this Board Order and Notice to Claimant, addressed to the claimant as shown above. Dated:/% JOHN CULLEN, CLERK By Deputy Clerk 1 This warning does not apply to claims.which are not subject to the California Tort Claims Act such as actions in inverse condemnation, actions for specific relief such as mandamus or injunction, or Federal Civil Rights claims. The above list is not exhaustive and legal consultation is essential to understand all the separate limitations periods that may apply. The limitations period within which suit must be filed may be shorter or longer depending on the nature of the claim. Consult the specific statutes' and cases' Applicable to your particular claim. The County of Contra Costa does not waive any,of its rights under California Tort Claims Act nor does'it waive rights under the statutes of limitations applicable to actions not subject to the California Tort Claims Act I , , a 1 j t i , S �-...Y ,l. P�``^� '11.r"1 {1' n••x51 : 1 i . BOARD ORUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSACOUNTY INSTRUCTIONS TO CLAIMANT A. A claim relating to a cause of action for death or for injury to person,or to personal property or growing crops shall be presented not later than six months after the accrual of the cause of action. A claim relating to any other cause of action shall be presented not later than one year after the accrual of the cause of action. (Gov. Code § 911.2.) B. Claims must be filed with the Clerk of the Board of Supervisors at its office in Room 106, County Administration Building, 651 Pine Street,Martinez, CA 94553. C. If claim is against a district governed by the Board of Supervisors, rather than the County, the name of the District should be filled in. D. If the claim is against more than one public entity, separate claims must be filed against each public entity. E. Fraud. See penalty for fraudulent claims, Penal Code Sec. 72 at the end of this form. RE: Claim By: Reserved for Clerk's filing stamp RECEIVED Against the County.of Cortra-Costa or. ) APR 17 2006 District) (Fill in the name) s, ) CLERKBOARD COSTA 0 OF SUPERVISORS The undersigned claimant hereby makes claim against the County of Contra Costa or the above-named district in the sum of$ . 3tp and in support of this claim represents as follows: . 1. When did the damage or injury occur? (Give exact date and hour) 2. Where did the damage or injury occur? (Include city and county) _ Ak 3. How did the damage or injury occur? (Give full details;use extra paper if required) ullll� dtn, UtKOA /,nk Ptr 4. What particular act or omission on the part of county or district officers, servants, or employees ca sed the injury or damage? 5 W'h`a't�are the names of county or district officers, servants, or employees causing the damage or injury? -r vi610-r- � 6. What damage or injuries do your claim resulted? (Give full extent of injuries or damages claimed. Attach two estimates for auto damage.) Sze- 7. How was the amount claimed above computed? (Include the estimated amount of any prospective injury or damage.) 8. Names and addresses of witnesses, doctors, and hospitals: 9. List the expenditures you made on account of this accident or injury: DATE TEAE AMOUNT Gov. Code Sec. 910.2 provides"The claim shall be signed by the claimant or by some person on his behalf" SEND NOTICES TO: (Attorney) ) Name and address of Attorney (Claimant's Signature) (Address P 6 t$* to lob Telephone No. ) Telephone No. ■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■............................................:...:...................� PUBLIC RECORDS NOTICE: Please be advised that this claim form, or any claim filed with the County under the Tort Claims Act, is subject to public disclosure under the California Public Records Act: (Gov.. Code, §§ '6500,et -seq.) Fu`rther•rnore any attachments; addendums,or supplements attached to the claim form, including medical records, are also subject to public disclosure: w NOTICE: Section 74of the-Penal Code provides:: Every person who, with intent to defraud, presents for allowance or for payment to any state board or officer, or to any county, city, or district board or officer, authorized to allow or pay the same if genuine, any false or fraudulent claim;;bill; account voucher, 'or writing,'is punishable either'by imprisonment in the County jail for a period of not more than one year, by a,fine of not exceeding one thousand dollars ($,1.5.0.00;400); ois'l both such imprisonment and fine, or by imprisonment in the state prison, by a fine of not exceeding�'ten thousand dollars ($10,000),or by both such imprisonment and fine. ' l C f TR ` T`J, UNI icemper AUTO AND HOME February 3,2006 Attn:Penny Baily Contra Costa County Risk Management 2530 Arnold Drive,Suite 140 Martinez,CA 94553 Re: Our Insured: Sam Bennett Our Driver: Jesiryl Bennett Our Claim No: 786 A6 210859 N 786 MPS Date of Loss: August 9,2005 Your Reference: B420 Plate Number: 1062412,California VIN Number: 1FV6HJDA91DH31574 Supervisor: Mike Giles Ms.Baily: Our investigation leads us to conclude that your insured is legally responsible for this accident.Your insured hit our insured's vehicle. As a result of our payment,we are entitled to recover the damages which we have paid to repairs our insured's vehicle. I have enclosed the documents to support the amount of our payment as follows. Total Bill: $671.36 Collision Deductible: 500.00 Total: S1,171.36 171.36 Please forward a draft payable to Kemper Insurance in the amount of$1,171.36. Please mail to: PO Box 6660 Folsom;CA 95763. If you have any question please contact our subrogation department. Sincerely, Mathieu Schwartz Claim Representative III Kemper Independence Insurance Company 800-822-8426 x 2534 (916) 294-2500 (800) 822-8426 (916) 294-2600 Fax P.O. Box 6660 Folsom, CA 95763-6660 9 ---nandhome.com CALH W16/21005 AT 05:31 PM 786A6210859N7860101 31963 KEMPER AUTO AND HOME GROUP SACRAMENTO REGIONAL CLAIM OFFICE P.O.BOX 6660 FOLSOM, CA 95763 (800)822-8426 ESTIMATE OF RECORD WRITTEN BY: DAVID A. GALLAGHER 09/16/2005 05:31 PM ADJUSTER: LINDSEY MATESSINO (800)822-8426 INSURED: SAM BENNETT CLAIM #786A6210859N7860101 OWNER: SAM BENNETT POLICY #RB 828627 ADDRESS: JESIRYL BENNETT DATE OF LOSS: 08/09/2005 AT 01 :50 PM 5052 SN PABLO DAM RD #46 EL SOBRANTE, CA 94803 TYPE OF LOSS: COLLISION DAY: (510)758-7348 POINT OF IMPACT: 12. FRONT INSPECT JESIRYL BENNETT DAY: (510)758-7348 LOCATION: 5052 SN PABLO DAM RD #46 HOME EL SOBRANTE, CA 94803 REPAIR 3 DAYS TO REPAIR FACILITY: LICENSE # 2004 HOND CIVIC VP 4-1 .7L-FI 40 SED BLUE INT:BEIGE VIN: 2HGES16354H576225 LIC: 5KHE339 CA PROD DATE: ODOMETER: 26594 AIR CONDITIONING REAR DEFOGGER TILT WHEEL INTERMITTENT WIPERS TINTED GLASS BODY SIDE MOLDINGS DUAL MIRRORS CLEAR COAT PAINT METALLIC PAINT POWER STEERING POWER BRAKES DRIVER AIR BAG PASSENGER AIR BAG CLOTH SEATS BUCKET SEATS AUTOMATIC TRANSMISSION OVERDRIVE ----------------------------- OP. DESCRIPTION QTY EXT. PRICE LABOR PAINT ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1# INSPECTED CAR ON 9/15/05 1 2 FRONT BUMPER 3 R&I R&I BUMPER COVER 1 .2 4* RPR BUMPER COVER 1 .5* 2.6 5 ADD FOR CLEAR COAT 1 .0 6 GRILLE 7* REPL GRILLE BLUE PEARL 1 90 .27 0 .6 0 .0* 8 HOOD 9* RPR HOOD 1 .5* 2.6 10 ADD FOR CLEAR COAT 1 .0 11# SUBL HAZARDOUS WASTE REMOVAL 1 3.00 X 12# RPR TINT PAINT 0 .5 13# REPL COVER CAR 1 3.00 0 .2 14# REPL FLEX AGENT 1 6.00 15# ESTIMATE COPY LEFT FOR CAR 1 OWNER 9/15/05 1 09%16/2005 AT 05:31 PM 786A6210859N7860101 31963 ESTIMATE OF RECORD 2004 HOND CIVIC VP 4-1 .7L-FI 4D SED BLUE INT:BEIGE ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- NO . OP. DESCRIPTION QTY EXT. PRICE LABOR PAINT ----------------=-------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- SUBTOTALS =_> 102.27 5.5 7 .2 PARTS 99.27 BODY LABOR 5.5 HRS 65.00/HR 357 .50 PAINT LABOR 7 .2 HRS 65.00/HR 468 .00 PAINT SUPPLIES 7 .2 HRS a$ 30 .00/HR 216 .00 SUBLET/MISC. 3.00 ---------------------------------------------------- SUBTOTAL S 1143.77 SALES TAX S 315.27 @ 8.7500% 27 .59 ---------------------------------------------------- TOTAL COST OF REPAIRS. S 1171 .36 ADJUSTMENTS: DEDUCTIBLE 500 .00 ---------------------------------------------------- TOTAL ADJUSTMENTS S 500 .00 NET COST OF REPAIRS S 671 .36 THIS IS NOT AN AUTHORIZATION TO REPAIR. ALL SUPPLEMENTS REQUIRE PRIOR APPROVAL . PLEASE CONTACT D.A.GALLAGHER a 510-677-6440 REGARDING ANY NECESSARY CHANGES. D.A.GALLAGHER STAFF APPRAISER KEMPER AUTO 8 HOME 2 09%16/2005 AT 05:31 PM 786A6210859N7860101 31963 ESTIMATE OF RECORD 2004 HOND CIVIC VP 4-1 .7L-FI 4D SED BLUE INT:BEIGE FOR YOUR PROTECTION CALIFORNIA LAW REQUIRES THE FOLLOWING TO APPEAR ON THIS FORM: ANY PERSON WHO KNOWINGLY PRESENTS FALSE OR FRAUDULENT CLAIM FOR THE PAYMENT OF A LOSS IS GUILTY OF A CRIME AND MAY BE SUBJECT TO FINES AND CONFINEMENT IN STATE PRISON. THE FOLLOWING IS A LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS OR SYMBOLS THAT MAY BE USED TO DESCRIBE WORK TO BE DONE OR PARTS TO BE REPAIRED OR REPLACED: MOTOR ABBREVIATIONS/SYMBOLS: D=DISCONTINUED PART A=APPROXIMATE PRICE LABOR TYPES: B=BODY LABOR D=DIAGNOSTIC E=ELECTRICAL F=FRAME G=GLASS M=MECHANICAL P=PAINT LABOR S=STRUCTURAL T=TAXED MISCELLANEOUS X=NON TAXED MISCELLANEOUS PATHWAYS: ADJ=ADJACENT ALGN=ALIGN A/M=AFTERMARKET BLND=BLEND CAPA=CERTIFIED AUTOMOTIVE PARTS ASSOCIATION D&R=DISCONNECT AND RECONNECT EST=ESTIMATE EXT. PRICE=UNIT PRICE MULTIPLIED BY THE QUANTITY INCL=INCLUDED MISC=MISCELLANEOUS NAGS=NATIONAL AUTO GLASS SPECIFICATIONS NON-ADJ=NON ADJACENT 0/H=OVERHAUL . OP=OPERATION NO=LINE NUMBER QTY=QUANTITY QUAL RECY=QUALITY RECYCLED PART QUAL REPL=QUALITY REPLACEMENT PART COMP REPL PARTS=COMPETITIVE REPLACEMENT PARTS RECOND=RECONDITION REFN=REFINISH REPL=REPLACE R&I=REMOVE AND INSTALL R&R=REMOVE AND REPLACE RPR=REPAIR RT=RIGHT SECT=SECTION SUBL=SUBLET LT=LEFT W/O=WITHOUT W/ =WITH/_ SYMBOLS: #=MANUAL LINE ENTRY *=OTHER [IE. .MOTORS DATABASE INFORMATION WAS CHANGED] **=DATABASE LINE WITH AFTERMARKET N=NOTES ATTACHED TO LINE. MQVP=MANUFACTURER'S QUALIFICATION AND VALIDATION PROGRAM. ESTIMATE BASED ON MOTOR CRASH ESTIMATING GUIDE. UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED ALL ITEMS ARE DERIVED FROM THE GUIDE ARG4440 DATABASE DATE 07/2005, CCC DATA DATE 07/2005, AND THE PARTS SELECTED ARE OEM-PARTS MANUFACTURED BY THE VEHICLES ORIGINAL EQUIPMENT MANUFACTURER. OEM PARTS ARE AVAILABLE AT OE/VEHICLE DEALERSHIPS. ASTERISK (*) OR DOUBLE ASTERISK (**) INDICATES THAT THE PARTS AND/OR LABOR INFORMATION PROVIDED BY MOTOR MAY HAVE BEEN MODIFIED OR MAY HAVE COME FROM AN ALTERNATE DATA SOURCE. TILDE SIGN ( ) ITEMS INDICATE MOTOR NOT-INCLUDED LABOR OPERATIONS. NON-ORIGINAL EQUIPMENT MANUFACTURER AFTERMARKET PARTS ARE DESCRIBED AS AM, QUAL REPL PARTS OR COMP REPL PARTS WHICH STANDS FOR COMPETITIVE REPLACEMENT PARTS. USED PARTS ARE DESCRIBED AS LKQ, QUAL RECY PARTS, RCY, OR USED. RECONDITIONED PARTS ARE DESCRIBED AS RECON. RECORED PARTS ARE DESCRIBED AS RECORE. NAGS PART NUMBERS AND PRICES ARE PROVIDED BY NATIONAL AUTO GLASS SPECIFICATIONS, INC. POUND SIGN (#) ITEMS INDICATE MANUAL ENTRIES. SOME PARTS THAT ARE DESCRIBED AS AM, QUAL REPL PARTS OR COMP REPL PARTS MAY BE OE SURPLUS PARTS OR OTHER OE PARTS OFFERED AT A SPECIAL PRICING DISCOUNT. FOR FURTHER CLARIFICATION PLEASE REVIEW THE SUPPLIERS LIST ATTACHED TO THIS ESTIMATE, OR CONSULT THE APPRAISER OR ESTIMATOR. CCC PATHWAYS - A PRODUCT OF CCC INFORMATION SERVICES INC. 3 09%16/2005 AT 05:31 PM 786A6210859N7860101 31963 ESTIMATE OF RECORD 2004 HOND CIVIC VP 4-1 .7L-FI 4D SED BLUE INT:BEIGE ALTERNATE PARTS USAGE AFTERMARKET PARTS AFTERMARKET SELECTION METHOD: AUTOMATICALLY LIST NO. OF TIMES USER WAS NOTIFIED THAT AN AFTERMARKET PART WAS AVAILABLE: 0 NO. OF AFTERMARKET PARTS THAT APPEAR IN THE FINAL ESTIMATE: 0 4 E" �zv.z�,.�,��,,r�q[�'��2��.:A t�. �-�'tt� 7�. �,.a,tom$ PfF 3'' �. "u`s�r. � Y x, ..^'�.3� C't'•ri r t .-i'��'t�° - •-fi °" 'F a??`�' '+-�£t uk e'er' r''at•;r -E� a.5 'P� i''.. '"- y.ro t�`s-'-�Y ,rJX,...:� r a>Fu"`€E _ 4 ~-,i.�LL '. '° ��fi�ggaF�S��111, �. Y.��„�+�ta•,;,�t#'#^ ��,x:`� ,.��' � {_ s��y {�. _;•t �a� az{"x �`., a��g�w x r.�i.s J `•-�.�S�'$"�-5'r„�`, r`�'.'�.'. �,1��. ! `.1 at T. i�.,'" �r-.�'� " -•,'S �' 3S� ,.c. a Jx^" y " . - ti. t�`ac., a:',�'{y' amu,,, z• ` lis 4 "VON,ba1. Y•�„' -,e��t` ' ,�1� 1�0� �.� G e�'x �s�'�ra.y� '°�,-a �tl i ��a -x �,.� .t.s �. � �:.�a R+g4.F� �� ^e) "'� '�'E �• �)�y' �:p�_4��'- 7- �x-r 2 ��'<F� _„E'�t�t 'S+ sip. _ M- — dt xt'g AroolakT ire '?�`S's��,,,", `.'. ,_-- ' & •`s ,`..- -`S""in,e v - fit, ''`Y � 5 { y`�� k �� ,�f-a 4�.z�x,�„ ,� r `�"�'�'�•-�s�g;_. t' �.�'��'J'2�.` t�r��r: �". •K� � �+"� "�t<,,._ N �Ca--:."3�,.('�.7� t �W W7'�iyl� F r�. ,y+ `fy"ne :r y Y :s�" ,�a't »'a o _ 9 !'t Yr 4. .- Vis-°_ ..g �+*, .,k -•^� -ag< 'qtr _ x � _..re•, a J,...?a ” A "� ""t "� "_rrwr r.., Tx .r ''c .y'" s s, z •,cr-.T= �" .x '..' "L"?- �- i'��;�c" • y SK o.y x Y T ,. 'x •",,'�fip. ilr `` ,'� '� £'xs -• r x;,•' t�. ,t�p'.t- r N•,,r- . .,a`-r:-:-i .K'['f,.a 'G,z.'tr,mat. ' s.lz; aN.- a ,u w�_ ,1 l�{4 �"J5+7�+ `.`"Ff �,. •-� 'i ,�-t' +. "K'K.•.aii..Ri'g c �' _ .... .�'FI:�L.� {A�-T..:_' �t �< � a. W 1 ,t-`- x wl 4 � alt`•� t?' � > - '1 i �j ti k y y^Fp�� 8i Ul r r .. _ ::'�.1,' _ �t- `>£t.,��F y 7t ftp?7• r 5! m'�� l� A I H 1 s x."3 � w'i- x�x�x 7` � �iy - �` r�ity'^e"•1�� r/ .7'c,Fu + � - .i�`'r�_��'�''•�^ri s+ "8 fir. 1. ��k.�r�i=t _�� - �"}'*�-•fes. _ th'w „ 'Ff'f�::'i .t i MLT FOCUS 04/14/06 PAYMENT HISTORY - PAYEE/PAYMENT FOR INFORMATION MPHF01 CLAIM# 786 A6 210859 N 786 NAME BENNETT*SAM D.O. L. 08/09/05 CLAIMANT # 1 CLAIMANT NAME BENNETT*SAM *----------------------- PAYEE/PAYMENT FOR INFORMATION ----------------------* PAYMENT TYPE COVERAGE CODE PAYMENT, ALLOCATION ISSUE PAYMENT PAYMENT CHECK # DATE PAYEE/PAYMENT FOR AMOUNT STATUS 514 916069 09/19/05 SAM BENNETT 671 . 36 ACTIVE Collision with other veh: not hit and run LESS $500 . 00 DEDUCTIBLE NEXT FUNCTION _ F0000011A ALL ITEMS HAVE BEEN DISPLAYED � I LI V cn o Q L 3ovis-bd sn O 0) oii `° L LO ®' IL QiF3i o O 1APSW f o oa 0 0 _ 9 V� V V x d m� v U Cc LL k