KASOWITZ, BENSON, TORRES & FRIEDMAN LLP

101 CALIFORNIA STREET, SUITE 2300
SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 94111

Case 2:

—

Nn NN BB WW WN

-cv-09198-JVS-RNB Document 395 Filed 02/15/13 Page1of3 Page ID #:17700

KASOWITZ, BENSON, TORRES & FRIEDMAN LLP

CHARLES N. FREIBERG (SBN 70890)
BRIAN P. BROSNAHAN (SBN 112894)

JACOB N. FOSTER (SBN 250785)
101 California Street, Suite 2300
San Francisco, California 94111
Telephone: (415) 421-6140
Facsimile: (415) 398-5030

LEVINE & MILLER

HARVEY R. LEVINE (SBN 61879)
CRAIG A. MILLER (SBN 116030)
LEVINE & MILLER

550 West C Street, Suite 1810

San Diego, CA 92101-8596
Telephone: (619) 231-9449
Facsimile: (619) 231-8638

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

JOYCE WALKER, KIM BRUCE HOWLETT,
and MURIEL SPOONER, on behalf of themselves

and all others similarly situated

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JOYCE WALKER, KIM BRUCE
HOWLETT, and MURIEL SPOONER,
on behalf of themselves and all others
similarly situated,

Plaintiffs,
V.
LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY OF
THE SOUTHWEST, a Texas
corporation,

Defendant.

CLASS ACTION
CASE NO.: CV 10-9198 JVS (RNBx)

Formerly Case No.: 3:10-cv -04852 JSW
from Northern District of California

PLAINTIFFS’ EVIDENTIARY
OBJECTIONS TO THE
DECLARATION OF STEPHANIE
BURMESTER IN OPPOSITION TO
PLAINTIFFS’ MOTION FOR LEAVE
TO FILE THIRD AMENDED
COMPLAINT

Judge James V. Selna
Date: March 4, 2012

Time: 1:30 p.m
Courtroom: 10C

OBJECTIONS TO BURMESTER DECLARATION IN OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE TAC

Case No. CV 10-9198 JVS (RNBx)

1

KASOWITZ, BENSON, TORRES & FRIEDMAN LLP

101 CALIFORNIA STREET, SUITE 2300
SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 94111

Case 2:

Nn Nn BP W WN

-cv-09198-JVS-RNB Document 395 Filed 02/15/13 Page2of3 PageID#:17701

Plaintiffs Joyce Walker, Kim Bruce Howlett, and Muriel Spooner
(“Plaintiffs”) hereby object to portions of the Declaration of Stephanie Burmester,
submitted by Defendant Life Insurance Company of the Southwest (“LSW’’) in
opposition to Plaintiffs’ motion for class certification (Dkt. 261), on which LSW
relies in opposition to Plaintiffs’ motion for leave to file a Third Amended

Complaint:

Evidence Grounds for Objection(s)

1. | Page 7, 120: 1. Lacks foundation. Ms. Burmester
provides no basis for how she knows about
“National Life Group has, in | these “other insurance products,” the “non-
the past, offered other guaranteed elements” they included, whether
insurance products that have | those elements were provided to

included non-guaranteed policyholders, and what kinds of policies they
elements which became are. She implicitly acknowledges her lack of
available after the policy had | foundation regarding the pricing practices of
been in force over a period _| the National Life Group by limiting her

of years. In every such comments to “every such instance I am aware
instance I am aware of, of.” FRE 602.

when the relevant period of

years elapsed, the National 2. Violation of Rules 26(e) and 37(c). Ms.
Life Group did in fact Burmester’s testimony about non-guaranteed
provide those non- elements for these policies, and LSW’s
guaranteed elements to its reliance thereon, violates Rules 26(e) and
policyholders.” 37(c) because LSW has refused to produce

this kind of information in response to
discovery timely and properly propounded by
Plaintiffs or in response to informal requests
by Plaintiffs during the Rule 7-3 meet and
confer in connection with this motion.

3. Vague, ambiguous, conclusory. Fails to
specify what the “other insurance products”
are, whether they were LSW policies, what the
“non-guaranteed elements” are that they
included, when “in the past” these products
were offered, and how many and which
“{nstances” of which she is aware. FRE 403

OBJECTIONS TO BURMESTER DECLARATION IN OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE TAC
Case No. CV 10-9198 JVS (RNBx)
2

KASOWITZ, BENSON, TORRES & FRIEDMAN LLP

101 CALIFORNIA STREET, SUITE 2300
SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 94111

Case 2:

Nn Nn BB W WN

-cv-09198-JVS-RNB Document 395 Filed 02/15/13 Page3of3 Page ID #:17702

Evidence

Grounds for Objection(s)

and 61 1(a).

4. Irrelevant. Whether National Life
provided non-guaranteed elements associated
with “other insurance products” is irrelevant to
LSW’s intent to provide the non-guaranteed
elements illustrated for Paragon and Provider.
That National Life provided certain future
non-guaranteed benefits on “other insurance
products” also is irrelevant to LSW’s false
certifications to the DOI concerning the “same
or similar forms,” and to the materiality and
unfairness of LSW’s nondisclosure of the fact
that no holder of a Paragon or Provider policy,
or any similar policy, had ever received the
non-guaranteed benefits illustrated. FRE 401
and 402.

DATED: February 15, 2013

KASOWITZ BENSON TORRES & FRIEDMAN
LLP

s/Brian P. Brosnahan
Brian P. Brosnahan

OBJECTIONS TO BURMESTER DECLARATION IN OPPOSITION TO MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE TAC

Case No. CV 10-9198 JVS (RNBx)

3