HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA REPORT 1992 1007 CC REG ITEM 08EMOORPARK
799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark, California 93021
MEMORANDUM
TO: The Honorable City Council
ITEM $• E•
,�80Rd 529 -6864
R ARK, CALIFC,` :'A
GIy Cou it mcei:nj
of le 199�`Z
ACTION:
FROM: Paul Porter, Senior PlanneQi?, gy
DATE: September 24, 1992 (CC meeting of October 70 1992)
SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE NO. 92 -1 ON THE
APPLICATION OF MARK MCQUEEN
Background
On March 2, 1992, the City of Moorpark received an application for
a Conditional Certificate of Compliance from Mr. McQueen. The
property for which the application is requested is zoned RE- 5 acre
and is a portion of Assessor's parcel Nos. 512- 0 -05 -15 and 512 -0-
04-15 and is located north of Wicks Road and west of 181 Wicks Road
(Mr. McQueen's property). The subject property was awarded to Mr.
Mcqueen by the Superior Court as a result of a settlement to a law
suit. As a result of the court action, the City will give Mr.
McQueen a Certificate of Compliance verifying that the new parcel
is in compliance with the City's Subdivision Ordinance and Section
66499.35 of the Subdivision Map Act regarding Certificate of
Compliance and Conditional Certificate of Compliance. The parcel
being created by approving a Conditional Certificate of Compliance
will be considered a non - conforming parcel in that the parcel
contains approximately 12,818 square feet, which is less than the
five acre minimum as required by the RE- 5 ac. zoning designation
on the property.
Discus ion:
Mr. McQueen will be granted a deed to the property in question from
the current property owner, Moorpark Partnership, after receiving
payment of $1.14 per square foot of actual area as determined by a
survey for that portion of the property which is being disputed
(see attached map). Although the property is to be granted to Mr.
McQueen pursuant to a court settlement, the property was not
subdivided in accordance the provisions of the State Subdivision
Map Act and the City's Subdivision Ordinance. The granting of a
Conditional, Certificate of Compliance by the City will certify that
the division of land is in compliance with the Map Act.
Section 66499.35 of the Map Act states that any person owning real
property or a vendee of that person pursuant to a contract of sale
may request, and the local agency shall determine, whether the real
property complies with the provisions of the division and of local
PP09:24:92/9:310sA: \CC1.X0I 1
PAUL W. LAWRASON JR. JOHN E. WOZNIAK SCOTT MONTGOMERY BERNARDO M. PEREZ ROY E. TALLEY JR
Mayor Mayor Pro Tem Councilmember Councilmember Councilmember
Printed On Recycled Pane
ordinances enacted pursuant thereto. Upon making the
determination, the City shall cause a Certificate of Compliance to
be filed for record with the county recorder if the proposed
division complies with provisions of local ordinances.
In the case of this subdivision, the lot split was not accomplished
in accordance with the provisions of the Subdivision Map Act, nor
the City's Subdivision Ordinance. Section 66499.35 of the
Subdivision Map Act states that the local jurisdiction shall issue
a Certificate of Compliance or a Conditional Certificate of
Compliance. The City may, as a condition to granting a Certificate
of Compliance, impose conditions that would have been applicable to
the division of property at the time the applicant acquired the
interest in the property. Issuance of the certificate serves as
the notice to the property owner who has applied for the
certificate, a grantee of the property owner, or any subsequent
transferee or assignee of the property that the fulfillment and
implementation of the conditions shall be required prior to
subsequent issuance of a permit or other grant of approval of
development of the property. Compliance with any conditions of
approval shall not be required until the time a permit or other
grant of approval for development of the property is issued by the
local agency.
At the present time, a residence is located both on the McQueen
property and the disputed property for which the applicant is
requesting a Conditional Certificate of Compliance (There are two
dwellings involved). According to Mr. McQueen, the utilities to
the residence on the property receiving a Conditional Certificate
of Compliance were connected to the utilities on the McQueen
property at the time of the application submittal for the
Conditional Certificate of Compliance, but that they have since
been separated so that the residence on the disputed property has
it's own utilities and has been connected to the sewer system.
According to the applicant, Moorpark Partnership will not deed the
property to Mr. McQueen until a Record of Survey is recorded with
the County, the applicant has not paid the current property owner
for the property, and a Conditional Certificate of Compliance is
issued for the new parcel. The current owner of the disputed
property has not signed the application for the Conditional
Certificate of Compliance. In order to prevent a recordable
document from being recorded without the applicant first showing
proof of ownership, staff intends to send a letter to the applicant
indicating that a Certificate of Compliance will been approved if
the applicant shows proof of ownership to the disputed property no
later than November 25, 1992. The applicant will not be given
recordable documents until he produces evidence of ownership to the
property on or before November 25, 1992 (see Condition No. 1).
This matter is being presented to the City Council as a courtesy.
Should the City Council, or any other authority, desire to appeal
PP09:2 4:92 /9:33anA: \CCI.KM 2
the Director's decision, a public hearing should be scheduled. The
next available hearing date is November 4, 1992. If the City
Council takes no action, then the Director's decision stands.
Staff Recommendation
Receive and file the report
Exhibits: I. Conditions of Approval
2. Conditional Certificate of Compliance approval
letter
PP09:2 4:92 /9:31amA: %CC1 -MEM
NDITIONS FOR CONDITIONAL CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE NO. 92 -1
DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CONDITIONS
PRIOR TO RECEIVING RECORDABLE DOCUMENTS FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT'
1. The applicant for the Conditional Certificate of Compliance
shall demonstrate legal ownership of the parcel on or before
November 25, 1992.
2. The applicant demonstrate to the satisfaction of the
Department of Community Development that separate utility
services are available to the parcel.
3. The applicant shall pay to the City all outstanding case
processing costs related to Conditional Certificate of
Compliance No. 92 -1.
CITY ENGINEER'S CONDITIONS:
PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A ZONING CLEARANCE:
4. Prior to the first zoning clearance occurring after
recordation of this certificate of compliance for the conveyed
property, the applicant for zone clearance shall improve Wicks
Road on the southerly border of the Conveyed and the McQueen
properties (as described per Ventura County Plate B -5A for a
60 foot right -of -way. In conjunction with this requirement,
the applicant for zone clearance shall submit to the City for
review and approval, street improvement plans prepared by a
registered civil engineer and shall post sufficient surety to
guarantee construction of these improvements.
5. Prior to the first zone clearance occurring after recordation
of this certificate for the conveyed property, the applicant
shall make a payment to the City for the Los Angeles Avenue
Area of contribution and /or other traffic related fees in
effect at the time of approval of the Certificate of
Compliance. The actual deposit shall be the then current
rates at the time of recordation of the Conditional
Certificate of Compliance.
PP09:24:92 /9:31aUA: \CC1 -P= 4
Date:
Name and Address
C
SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE NO.
Dear:
You are hereby informed that the above referenced Conditional
Certificate of Compliance has been APPROVED as of ,
subject to the attached conditions.
The Department of City of Moorpark finds that:
a. The proposed subdivision is consistent for the type of
development proposed;
b. The design and improvements of the proposed subdivision
are consistent with applicable general and specific
r- plans;
C. The site is physically suitable for the type of
development proposed;
d. The site is physically suitable for the proposed density
of development;
e. The design of the subdivision and the proposed
improvements are not likely to cause substantial
environmental damage or substantially and avoidably
injure fish or wildlife or their habitat;
f. The design of the subdivision and the type of
improvements are not likely to cause serious public
health problems;
g. The design of the subdivision and the type of
improvements will not conflict with easements acquired by
the public at large, for access through or use of,
property within the proposed subdivision;
h. There will be no discharge of waste from the proposed
subdivision into an existing community sewer system in
violation of existing water quality control requirements
under Water Code Sections 13000 et seq.; and
F�
f
i. The proposed subdivision does not contain or front upon any
public waterway, river, stream, coastline, shoreline, lake, or
reservoir.
An appropriate environmental document has been prepared pursuant to
the California Environmental Quality Act.
Pursuant to the City of Moorpark Subdivision Ordinance, any
aggrieved party may appeal this decision by filing an approved
appeal form and submitting the required fee to the Department of
Community Development within calendar days after this action.
The appeal form may be obtained at the Department of Community
Development. If an appeal is filed in a timely manner, the
Department of Community Development will schedule a hearing date
before the to review the matter at the earliest
convenient date. The appeal deadline of this decision is
If you have any questions about this action, please contact
at (805) 529 -6864. Thank you.
Sincerely,
Attachment: Conditions of Approval
CC. Steve Kueny, City Manager
Paul Porter, Senior Planner
Case Planner
City Engineer
Case File (Application Section)
Chroni File
2
e
MOORPARK
799 Moorpark Avenue Moorpark, California 93021 (805) 529 -6864
WK5,19,01 _ Dili,
TO: The Honorable City Council
FROM: Paul Porter, Senior PlanneQ8.
DATE: October 2, 19922
SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE NO. 92 -1 ON THE
APPLICATION OF MARK MCQUEEN
This item has been placed on the October 7, 1992 City Council
Consent Calendar. For your information regarding this matter, I
have attached the legal description, sketch and aerial photograph
of the property, as well as the court transcript related to this
subject for your information and review.
Attachments: 1. Legal description of property
2. Sketch
3. Court transcript
4. Aerial photograph of property
cc. Steve Kueny, City Manager
rvio:oa:ss/s:ssa.a:\xi.�
PAUL W. LAWRASON JR. JOHN E. WOZNIAK SCOTT MONTGOMERY BERNARDO M. PEREZ ROY E. TALLEY JR.
Mayor Mayor Pro Tem Councilmember Councilmember Councilmember
Printed On Recycled Pane,
A PORTION OF M.L. WICKS
STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS
MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF
DESCRIBED AS.FOLLOWS:
C
SUBDIVISION, IN THE COUNTY OF VENTURA,
PER MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 5, PAGE 37 OF
THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY,
BEGINNING AT THE 20TH COURSE OF LAND CONVEYED TO MARK AND SONIA
KORNWASSER, JACOB AND MILA KORNWASSER, AND MINNIE LEE HEROLD,
AND ARTHUR L. WILLIAMSON BY DEED RECORDED AUGUST 27, 1964, AS
DOCUMENT NO. 60388 IN BOOK 2614, PAGE 17 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF
THE COUNTY OF VENTURA; THENCE ALONG SAID COURSE BEING A CURVE
HAVING A RADIUS OF 800 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 14'
21'42" A DISTANCE OF 200.53 FEET; THENCE PERPENDICULAR TO SAID
CURVE, NORTH 14 °20142" WEST 30 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTHERLY
EDGE OF WICKS ROAD, BEING THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. SAID
TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING BEING COMMON TO THE TERMINUS OF THE 5TH
COURSE OF THAT PORTION EXCEPTED FROM THE HEREINBEFORE REFERRED
DEED AND DESCRIBED THEREIN; THENCE,
1ST: NORTH 29'58'50" EAST 88.95 FEET; THENCE,
2ND: NORTH 01 °06110" WEST 118.61 FEET; THENCE,
3RD: SOUTH 78'50150" WEST 206.86 FEET; THENCE,
4TH: NORTH 14'19150" WEST 1.47 FEET; THENCE,
5TH: NORTH 78450150" EAST 254.60 FEET; THENCE,
6TH: SOUTH 11°26'37" EAST 152.92 FEET; THENCE,
7TH: SOUTH 59 0010" WEST 67.45 FEET; THENCE,
8TH: SOUTH 65 05810" WEST 22.61 FEET TO A POINT
LYING ON THE NORTHERLY EDGE OF THE ABOVE MENTIONED
WICKS ROAD; THENCE
9TH: SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG THE NORTHERLY EDGE OF WICKS ROAD
42.58 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNINC.
. Page 1 of 2
ATTAr.wmr:FjT
!v Z• t9' SD' l..l � ti 8.93►
�' N toe tq
Mc QUEEN PROPERTY
A.M.B. 512, P9. 05 Pa. 13
N, -r
v
N
4L REGIS N u;
COU V EY E4 PROPERTY —
A
0
lit \- 1
V
ti
N
O
N
s�
J
w
1
1
1
f
C
r C ORIGINAL
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CA- LIFORNIA
COURTROOM 22
FOR THE COUNTY OF VENTURA
HON. EDWIN M. OSBORNE, JUDGE
MARK G. McQUEEN and BARBARA B. )
McQUEEN, )
Plaintiffs, )
VS. ) No. 111338
MOORPARK PARTNERSHIP, a California )
general partnership, et al., )
)
Defendants.
- 1
RM;M40 mmy L:_ q ..K ;fib
Thursday, July 18, 1991
APPEARANCES:
For the Plaintiffs: ANDERSON, KREHBIEL,
McCREARY & BRYAN
BY: JOEL BRYAN
31351 Via Colinas
Suite 204
Westlak Village, California 91362
For the Defendants: ADELMAN & SCHWARTZ
Moorpark Partnership
BY: MILTON M. ADELMAN
and Mark Kornwasser
9595 Wilshire Boulevard
Ninth Floor
Pro
Beverly Hills, California 90212
For the Defendant:
FERGUSON, CASE, ORR,
Thomas Schleve
PATERSON & CUNNINGHAM
BY: WILLIAM E. PATERSON
1050 South Kimball Road
Ventura, California 93004
ATTACHMENT3
STEPHANIE HADDEN,
CSR
8489
Official Reporter
Pro
Tempore
ATTACHMENT3
1
1
VENTURA, CALIFORNIA; THURSDAY, JULY 18, 1991
2
A.M. SESSION
3
-- Co0Ooo --
4
MR. BRYAN: Good morning, your Honor.
5
THE COURT: -- -We're on the record in open court, 111338,
6
Mcqueen versus Moorpark Partnership.
7
Would you state your appearances for the record and
a
identify those parties or representatives present in court with
9
you.
10
MR. BRYAN: Joel Bryan for the plaintiffs, the McQueens,
11
and my client is Mark G. McQueen.
12
MR. ADELMAN: Milton Adelman for the -- A- d- e- l -m -a -n --
13
for the Moorpark Partnership.
14
MR. PATERSON: William Paterson on behalf of defendant
15
Thomas Schleve.
16
THE COURT: Mr. Adelman_, you also represent Mark
17
Kornwasser.
18
MR. ADELMAN: Yes. Mr. Kornwasser is a partner of
19
Moorpark Partnership.
20
THE COURT: I've been informed that there is a settlement
21
of the case. Who is prepared to recite the terms of that for
22
the record?
23
MR. BRYAN: Your Honor, I would dare to undertake that.
24
Mr. Paterson has also made some notes that I think he'd like to
25
add on which we're in agreement, but if I might, we are -- we've
26
prepared prior to today a written stipulation, and I'll read
27
that in the record.
28
THE COURT: All right.
1 MR. BRYAN: The plaintiffs have agreed to settle the case
2 with defendants along the lines of a purchase by plaintiffs of
3 what is referred to as the disputed area and has been previously
4 approximately described in Exhibit D of the complaint. The
5 exact legal description of the disputed area shall be determined
6 in accordance with a monument survey to be obtained by and paid
7 for by plaintiffs.
8 The survey shall be completed and submitted to the
9 County of Ventura for approval on or before September 20, 1991.
10 If not so completed and submitted by that date, then defendants
11 and I believe Kornwasser -- well, the defendants can speak for
12 themselves on this, your Honor, but the defendants will be free
13 at that juncture to obtain at their own expense and complete the
14 survey and add it to the purchase price, which will be described
15 later, for payment by the plaintiffs.
16 The purchase price for the disputed area will be
17 the per square foot amount of $1.14. Is that correct?
18 MR. PATERSON: Correct.
19 MR. BRYAN: $1.14 per square foot of the actual area as
20 determined by the survey for the disputed area. That amount
21 will be paid by plaintiffs to defendants Kornwasser and Moorpark
22 Partnership.
23 MR. ADELMAN: Just Moorpark Partnership.
24 MR. BRYAN: All right. To Moorpark Partnership on or
25 before December 10, 1992. If not so paid, then this action will
26 be dismissed with prejudice.
27 As I indicated earlier, in the event of a default
28 in our client's ability or for whatever reason, they have not
21 THE COURT: Does that release as to the subject matter of
22 all causes of action, is that both known.and unknown?
23 MR. BRYAN: There are perhaps issues unknown which my
24 client'iaould prefer not to release, your Honor. The 1542
25 language I don't think would be appropriate, but all matters
26 pertaining -- the known matters of this lawsuit would be
27 released and relinquished.
28 And in the event it became necessary, for whatever
..
C
3
1
completed the survey and submitted the same to the county by
2
September 20, 1991, then the amount of the purchase would be
3
increased by the amount that defendants have to pay for
4
completing and submitting the survey.
5
Upon payment on or before December 10, 1992 from
6
plaintiffs to Moorpark Partnership, then the defendants will
7
convey the disputed area to plaintiffs outright, free and clear
8
of any encumbrance and fee simple, absolute.
9
Upon the receipt of that deed, the plaintiffs will
10
simultaneously cause to be recorded a release of lis pendens of
11
that certain notice of pending action recorded June 19, 1990, in
12
connection with this action.
13
THE COURT: What date again, please?
14
MR. BRYAN: June 19, 1990. The parties agree that'this
/
15
stipulation settlement will release and relinquish any and all
16
rights or actions or causes of action which they may have
17
against one another in connection with the subject matter of
18
this suit.
19
Each party will bear and sustain its own legal fees
20
and costs.
21 THE COURT: Does that release as to the subject matter of
22 all causes of action, is that both known.and unknown?
23 MR. BRYAN: There are perhaps issues unknown which my
24 client'iaould prefer not to release, your Honor. The 1542
25 language I don't think would be appropriate, but all matters
26 pertaining -- the known matters of this lawsuit would be
27 released and relinquished.
28 And in the event it became necessary, for whatever
C
C
C
4
1 reason, to enforce the terms of this stipulation, the costs in
2 attorney's fees incurred in enforcing it would be collectible by
3 the prevailing party.
4 THE COURT: Mr. Bryan, are there any other terms that you
5 want to recite?
6 MR. BRYAN: Those are the terms of which I'm aware.
7 THE COURT: Mr. Paterson, there are some additional
8 matters?
9 MR. PATERSON: Mr. Bryan covered them all. There's only
10 one additional matter, that the Court would retain jurisdiction -
11 to enforce the terms and conditions of the settlement agreement.
12 THE COURT: I believe that it would be under CCP 664.6
13 anyway, which I like to recite for the record anyway, both to
14 supervise and, if necessary, to enforce.
15 MR. PATERSON: Beyond that, the recitation is my
16 understanding of the agreement, and I'm authorized to bind my
17 client to it.
18 THE COURT: Mr. Adelman, are there any corrections,
19 clarifications or additions?
20 MR. ADELMAN: The only thing I would add to what
21 Mr. Paterson said is that the enforcement of the settlement
22 agreement would be for the dismissal of the lawsuit with
23 prejudice.
24 THE COURT: Well, enforcement might be any of several
25 things. It might be dismissal with prejudice. It might be
26 payment. It might be signing deeds.
27 MR. ADELMAN: Yes. Attorney's fees perhaps.
28 THE COURT: Yes.
1
MR. ADELMAN: But the principle matter to enforce the
2
settlement would be the dismissal of the lawsuit, together with
3
whatever attorney's fees that would be awarded by the Court and
4
costs, if any.
5
THE COURT: Your name is Mark G. McQueen?
6
MR. McQUEEN: Yes.
7
THE COURT: Mr. McQueen, you're the plaintiff in the
8
case?
9
MR. McQUEEN: Yes.
10
THE COURT: You, of course, discussed the case before
11
today with your attorney. Did you discuss this case and-the
12
settlement with your attorney as the negotiations have proceeded
13
this morning?
14
MR. McQUEEN: Yes.
15
THE COURT: And did
you hear all of the terms of the
16
proposed settlement as they have been recited here on the record
17
in open court?
18
MR. McQUEEN: Yes.
19
THE COURT: Do you have any questions about those terms?
20
MR. McQUEEN: Just one. I was going to ask Joel just
21
what he was talking about right now as far as the lawyer fees.
22
What was he talking about without prejudice?
23
MR. BRYAN: You're talking about Mr. Adelman's comments?
24
MR. McQUEEN: The costs, what was he talking about?
25
THE COURT: I think he was referring to that provision
26
which Mr. Bryan cited, that is, that while each party is to bear
27
their own attorney's fees and costs for this lawsuit up to now,
28
if later on somebody doesn't follow through and do their part as
C
C
� C
G
1 they're supposed to in the settlement and if some enfor cement
2 action is required on that, that the prevailing party would be
3 entitled to recover their costs in attorney's fees fro= the
4 losing party, in effect, on that enforcement action to enforce
5 the settlement.
6 MR. PATERSON: To maybe put that in concrete terms, this
7 agreement provides that if Mr. McQueen does not pay, we get to
8 dismiss the suit, but if Mr. McQueen were both to not pay and to
9 attempt to prevent us from dismissing the suit and that caused
10 us problems and that was in default of the -- of the settlement
11 agreement and we took that to court and we won and you lost, you
12 would have to pay our fees. That's what that's designed to do.
13 THE COURT: Similarly, if you paid and they didn't deed
14 over the property and you had to come in and get an order from
15 the Court compelling them somehow, you would be entitled to
16 recover the fees for you in enforcing that.
17 Any other questions?
18 MR. McQUEEN: No.
19 THE COURT: Do you understand the terms and conditions of
20 the agreement?
21 MR. McQUEEN: Yes.
22 THE COURT: Are you willing to agree to a total
23 disposition of the case on those terms?
24 MR. McQUEEN: Yes.
25 THE COURT: Are you Mrs. McQueen?
26 MRS. McQUEEN: Yes.
27 THE COURT: Barbara B. McQueen?
28 MRS. McQUEEN: Yes.
C
c �
7
1 THE COURT: Can you hear me?
2 MRS. McQUEEN: Yes.
3 THE COURT: Are you the other plaintiff?
4 MRS. McQUEEN: Yes.
5 THE COURT: You obviously have also participated in the
6 negotiations.
7 MRS. McQUEEN: Yes.
8 THE COURT: Did you hear all the terms as they've been
9 recited just now in open court?
10 MRS. McQUEEN: Yes.
11 THE COURT: Do you have any questions about the terms?
12 MRS. McQUEEN: No.
13 THE COURT: Do you understand them?
14 MRS. McQUEEN: Yes.
15 THE COURT: Do you now agree to a total settlement of the
16 case on those terms?
17 MRS. McQUEEN: Yes.
18 THE COURT: Mr. Bryan, do you join in the settlement on
19 their behalf?
20 MR. BRYAN: Yes, sir.
21 THE COURT: Mr. Adelman, you represent Moorpark
22 Partnership and Mr. Wasserman?
23 MR. ADELMAN: Yes.
24 THE COURT: Have you discussed the settlement with the
25 defendants that you represent?
26 MR. ADELMAN: Yes, I have, your Honor.
27 THE COURT: Have they authorized you to agree to this
28 settlement on these terms?
t
C
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
i8
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
MR. ADELMAN: Yes, they have.
THE COURT: And you do join now in the settlement on
their behalf?
MR. ADELMAN: That's right.
THE COURT: Mr. Paterson, you represent Mr. Schleve?
MR. PATERSON: Yes.
THE COURT: He's not present here today.
MR. PATERSON: No.
THE COURT: You have discussed the terms with him?
MR. PATERSON: I discussed them with him this morning.
THE COURT: And he's authorized you to agree to the
settlement on these terms?
MR. PATERSON: Yes.
THE COURT: And you now join?
MR. PATERSON: Yes, I do.
THE COURT: The Court accepts the settlement. I'd like
to congratulate you all in resolving the issues. *It's obviously
a lot cheaper than a trial.
MR. ADELMAN: There is a trial date of July 29.
THE COURT: Thank you. The trial date is vacated._ The
Court does accept this settlement which can be supervised and,
if necessary, enforced by the Court.
(Proceedings adjourned.)
ooOOoo ---
r REPORTER'S CERTIFICATE
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
Ss.
COUNTY OF VENTURA )
I, STEPHANIE HADDEN, CSR No., 8489 Certified
Shorthand Reporter of the State of California, for the
County of ventura, do hereby certify that the foregoing
pages, 1 through 8, inclusive, comprise a full, true and
correct transcript of the testimony given and the
proceedings had in the above - entitled action on July 18,
1991, and that said transcript contains all of the
objections of counsel and the rulings of the Court, and all
matters to which the same relate:
Dated at Ventura, California, this 19th day of
July, 1991.
r
STEPHANIE HA
CSR No.,8489
'AN
r'A
P4
ot
Ao
IL
I A4-
.Vt
9:7
IL
IL .0
'A
pz,.t-2�rg X
'do