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