0001
1
2 BEFORE THE BUREAU OF REAL ESTATE
3 DEPARTMENT OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS
4 STATE OF CALIFORNIA
5 JOHN DECURE, ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE
6
7
8 In the Matter of the Accusation )
Against: ) Case No. H-03010 FR
9 ) OAH No. 2016051017
STACEY ANN HAVENER, ) Volume I
10 )
Respondent. )
11 ________________________________)
12
13
14
15
16 TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS
17 Los Angeles, California
18 Thursday, November 17, 2016
19
20
21
22 Reported by:
23 JENNIFER DACUS
Hearing Reporter
24
Job No.:
25 12908OAH
0002
1 BEFORE THE BUREAU OF REAL ESTATE
2 DEPARTMENT OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS
3 STATE OF CALIFORNIA
4 JOHN DECURE, ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE
5
6
7 In the Matter of the Accusation )
Against: ) Case No. H-03010 FR
8 ) OAH No. 2016051017
STACEY ANN HAVENER, ) Volume I
9 )
Respondent. )
10 ________________________________)
11
12
13
14
15
16 TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS, taken at
17 320 West Fourth Street, Suite 630, Los Angeles,
18 California, commencing at 9:00 a.m.
19 on Thursday, November 17, 2016, heard before
20 JOHN DECURE, Administrative Law Judge,
21 reported by JENNIFER DACUS, Hearing Reporter.
22
23
24
25
0003
1 APPEARANCES:
2 For the COMPLAINANT: BUREAU OF REAL ESTATE
By: DIANE LEE
3 -and-
JUDITH VASAN
4 320 West Fourth Street
Suite 350
5 Los Angeles, California
90013
6
7 For the RESPONDENT: CENTURY LAW GROUP, LLP
By: EDWARD O. LEAR
8 5200 West Century Boulevard
West Tower
9 Suite 345
Los Angeles, California
10 90045
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
0004
1 I N D E X
2 COMPLAINANT’S
Witnesses: Direct Cross Redirect Recross
3
Karrie De Mascio 21 93 116 120
4 122
5 Ray Scott 141 171 177
6
7
8
9
10
11
12 E X H I B I T S
13 Marked for Received
COMPLAINANT’S: Identification in Evidence
14
1 – Jurisdictional Documents 16 16
15
2 – History Certification and 16 16
16 Online Printout from BRE
17 3 – History Certification of 17 17
Milton Hudson and Online
18 Printout from BRE
19 4 – Accusation of Milton 17 17
Hudson
20
5 – Audit Report Transmittal 18 134
21 and Audit Report
22 6 – Auditor’s Worksheet 135 135
23 7 – Auditor’s Worksheet 135 135
24 8 – Auditor’s Worksheet 137 137
25 9 – Auditor’s Worksheet 137 137
0005
1 E X H I B I T S (Continued)
2 Marked for Received
COMPLAINANT’S: Identification in Evidence
3
10 – Auditor’s Worksheet 137 137
4
11 – Auditor’s Worksheet 140 140
5
14 – Complaint to BRE 61 84
6
15 – Welcome Packet 84 87
7
16 – Property Management 28 41
8 Agreement
9 17 – Rental Agreement 33
10 18 – 1099 Form 43 43
11 19 – Receipts from All 44 46
Seasons Realty
12
20 – Receipt for 48 48
13 Swamp Cooler
14 21 – Bank Statements 50 50
15 22 – Receipt and Documents 53 53
from Credit Union
16
23 – E-mails 28 59
17
24 – Series of Documents 68 83
18
27 – Summary of Charges 166
19
28 – Property Management 142 142
20 Agreement, Business card
and Business Search
21
29 – Package of Documents 144 190
22
62 – Copy of E-mails 127
23
24
25
0006
1 Los Angeles, California, Thursday, November 17, 2016
2 9:00 a.m.
3
4
5 THE COURT: I’m opening the record in the Matter of the
6 Bureau of Real Estate, Department of Consumer Affairs,
7 Accusation, which was filed against Stacey Ann Havener.
8 Today is Thursday, November 17th, 2016. We’re in the Office
9 of Administrative Hearings in Los Angeles. It’s
10 approximately 9:00 a.m. The Agency case number is H-03010.
11 The OAH case number is 2016051017. I’m Administrative Law
12 Judge, John DeCure. May I have appearances, please,
13 beginning with Agency Counsel.
14 MS. LEE: Diane Lee on behalf of the Bureau of Real
15 Estate, along with Judith Vasan.
16 THE COURT: Before we get to Defense Counsel, is one of
17 you going to be Lead Counsel? Because typically, the way I
18 like to proceed with a hearing is one of you should be the
19 one who is making objections and offering evidence, and so
20 on. The other attorney, if you want to have that attorney
21 handle certain witnesses altogether, do assignments like
22 that, that’s fine. That’s totally up to you how you want to
23 put your case on. What I don’t want to hear is two
24 attorneys basically acting as an intermittent Lead Counsel
25 at the same time. It’s not an orderly way to do a hearing.
0007
1 MS. LEE: If I do my job correctly, I’ll be the only
2 one talking, your Honor.
3 THE COURT: All right. Defense Counsel, good morning.
4 MR. LEAR: Good morning, your Honor. Edward Lear on
5 behalf of Stacey Havener who is seated here to my left.
6 THE COURT: All right. Ms. Lee, I need you to hear me
7 on this perfectly clearly. I am a former colleague of
8 Mr. Lear. We were both prosecutors of the State Bar of
9 California in the 1990s, and so I know him professionally
10 and I also know him personally. I have not in — at least
11 15 years I haven’t seen him in any social setting. I think
12 the last time I saw Mr. Lear was earlier this year or late
13 last year. I saw him in the hallway, and we exchanged
14 friendly hellos. But beyond that, we haven’t had any
15 contact as far as my job here, my duties as an
16 Administrative Law Judge. We don’t call each other on the
17 phone at night and talk about cases. I’ve had no contact
18 with him today or recently regarding this case at all. If I
19 did, I wouldn’t be sitting here right now.
20 I would have had the case reassigned. But I want
21 to make a full disclosure to you that in my judgment right
22 now I believe that I could hear the case in an unbias
23 fashion, but I want to let you know that we do know each
24 other more deeply than I would know a typical attorney that
25 I look out to see sitting at Counsel table. I had known
0008
1 Mr. Lear since — I think it was about 1993, and we worked
2 together until probably 1997 at the State Bar. As I said,
3 we were colleagues. We talked about cases, and I know him
4 in terms of his personality and I know about his reputation
5 as an attorney, a defense attorney and I believe I referred
6 a client to him many years ago. Not a client, but a
7 potential client. I have no idea what happened to that
8 case, but I thought well enough of Mr. Lear as an attorney
9 that I was always willing to refer someone to him in State
10 Bar defense matters because I considered him an excellent
11 prosecutor. That’s my full disclosure to you, and it’s
12 really up to you as to whether you would want to allow me to
13 hear the case or if you want to ask to have another judge
14 hear the case.
15 MS. LEE: If I may ask a question, your Honor?
16 THE COURT: Yes.
17 MS. LEE: You state you haven’t talked to him about
18 this case recently. Have you ever talked to him about this
19 case?
20 THE COURT: No. I’ve never spoken to Mr. Lear about
21 any matter that’s been before me. I’ve been with OAH for a
22 little over two years now. And I would have been shocked or
23 surprised to ever receive a phone call or a message from
24 Mr. Lear. If you are a prosecutor at State Bar, you learn
25 the rules of professional conduct and Business and
0009
1 Professions Code as it applies to lawyer ethics and duties
2 really, really well. And so, my expectation of him is that
3 he has very high ethics as a lawyer, and I know he knows the
4 rules very, very well. I would have been shocked and
5 stunned if he ever talked to me personally about any case
6 here. Even a case that he might be trying involving another
7 Administrative Law Judge. We’ve never had any discussions
8 like that.
9 MS. LEE: Fair enough.
10 THE COURT: Do you want to take a minute and talk to
11 Counsel? It’s totally up to you as to how you want to
12 proceed.
13 MS. LEE: We’re okay with it, your Honor.
14 THE COURT: All right. Have the parties — before we
15 get started, I like to talk about what you have planned for
16 scheduling-wise for the day. How do you intend to proceed
17 today?
18 MS. LEE: I’m supposed to have a witness come in at
19 9:00 or 9:15. She did tell me she was running late today.
20 If she does not come in time, I’ll be putting my auditor on
21 and then putting on that witness. I have four witnesses
22 total, including the auditor that I’d like to get through
23 today.
24 THE COURT: All right. Mr. Lear?
25 MR. LEAR: Thank you, your Honor. Ms. Lee and I have
0010
1 communicated a bit about scheduling. And we from the
2 Respondent’s side have approximately 7 to 9 witnesses, the
3 bulk of those are character witnesses, so we — I originally
4 had some on them on standby for today. We called that off.
5 The reason we called that off is because they are coming
6 generally from Frazier Park, which is about a two-hour
7 commute. So rather than having them inconvenienced and
8 drive down here and not testify until tomorrow, we chose to
9 put the character witnesses on for tomorrow. Dr. LaRue, our
10 expert psychologist, is also going to be available for
11 tomorrow. So today should Ms. Lee afford us some time, then
12 we could put on Ms. Havener in our case in Chief.
13 THE COURT: All right. How many character witnesses do
14 you think you will have testify?
15 MR. LEAR: I think we counted 7 to 8.
16 THE COURT: Do you think there’s any possibility you
17 could narrow that list down? We only have two days for
18 hearing. And if you got an expert, I would hope that we’d
19 hear from your expert first because that might be your most
20 important witness, and I would want to make sure — I think
21 it’s more effective to have your more important witnesses
22 testify as close to the Agency’s case having been put on
23 because we may end up needing a third day. This sounds like
24 we’ve got a lot of territory to cover in two days.
25 MR. LEAR: We will keep that in mind. At this point
0011
1 the plan would be to have Dr. LaRue first thing tomorrow
2 morning.
3 THE COURT: I think usually say 3 to 5 character
4 witnesses. If they come from different backgrounds and
5 different walks of life, usually it’s very effective.
6 Beyond that — it’s up to you. I will let you call your
7 witnesses, but once you get beyond about 5 witnesses, often
8 there tends to be a lot of overlap in their testimony and it
9 may not be substantial. It may not really be all that
10 significant at that point. At some point in time, it comes
11 cumulative.
12 MR. LEAR: I understand. We’ll take that into
13 consideration.
14 THE COURT: Thank you. Will the parties be making
15 opening statements? And Mr. Lear, you have the option of
16 making an opening statement when you put on your defense.
17 MS. LEE: Briefly. Basically, the facts are Respondent
18 and her husband, Milton Hudson, are in the Real Estate
19 business. The key date to remember is December 18, 2013,
20 that is when Milton Hudson surrendered his broker license in
21 connection with a BRE case involving multiple allegations,
22 including trust fund shortages amongst others. Respondent
23 is alleging that — Respondent took over the files. She did
24 not inform her clients that she did so. Respondent may try
25 to cast blame on her husband and that she was basically a
0012
1 good guy trying to make everyone whole. However, her own
2 expert witness is going to testify that although she claims
3 to be naive, her psych evaluation states that she does not
4 show signs of being naive generally and is a student
5 competent when she puts her mind to it.
6 Also, the problem with her allegation that she was
7 just a good guy trying to make people whole is that the
8 facts and the evidence do not substantiate her words and
9 allegations. And a few of those facts, which I won’t get
10 into too much detail because the witnesses will talk about
11 it, but some of the pertinent facts are the fact that even
12 though her husband’s license was revoked — surrendered in
13 December of 2013, when her auditor went out more than a year
14 later, March 2nd, 2015, she still didn’t even open up a
15 trust fund. How can you even — she just didn’t open a
16 trust fund. More than a year later despite the fact that
17 she is asserting she was just trying to make people whole.
18 In fact, her bank account was named after her cafe who
19 serves the community center called Base Camp where she holds
20 and participates in acting in theater groups. She’s really
21 involved in that kind of stuff in her community.
22 Also, when the BRE auditor investigator
23 interviewed Respondent, she can’t produce anything but bank
24 statements. She can’t even produce where the files of
25 properties are. And this is more than a year later that
0013
1 supposedly she’s trying to make people whole, but yet she
2 doesn’t even know where the files are. The auditor has to
3 go back a couple weeks later to talk to her husband because
4 her husband knows stuff, but Respondent doesn’t know
5 anything. Then the husband is able to help our auditor with
6 some of the documents. She writes a declaration that day,
7 March 2nd, 2015, and states, “From now on, I’ll be on the up
8 and up” essentially.
9 That’s March 2nd, 2015, she’s saying this more
10 than a year after her husband’s license is taken away. But
11 our evidence will show as recent as March of 2016, she was
12 still allowing her husband to take rent money and negotiate
13 contracts and doing other unlicensed activities, which is a
14 year after she wrote a declaration to the Bureau of Real
15 Estate saying she’s going to be on the up and up at that
16 point. Our witnesses will show that her demeanor is not of
17 a person who is trying to help people, but rather is part of
18 the conspiracy to hurt people in her community, that’s
19 important too. Let me go over the community a little bit.
20 The community is the community of Frazier Park, slash, Pine
21 Mountain Club. I had to learn about this as well. It’s in
22 the rural mountain areas.
23 Population of each of these towns is approximately
24 2500 people. Everyone knows everyone, essentially. If you
25 say one name, “Tom,” they will know which realtor that is
0014
1 because that’s how small the community is. It’s an
2 unincorporated area of Kern County but sort of in between
3 the borders of Kern County, Ventura and LA. It’s about
4 90 miles from LA, 60 miles from Bakersfield and those are
5 the closest cities that they have. So I want to set up the
6 setting to let you know that this is not Los Angeles, that
7 this is a small community. The mountain community is a
8 rural area and they suffer from their own issues as far as
9 everyone knows everyone, and obviously, with the economy and
10 the recession as well. That’s my opening statement.
11 THE COURT: Thank you. Mr. Lear?
12 MR. LEAR: Reserve.
13 THE COURT: Okay. Please, if I am exuberant later and
14 say, “Go ahead and present your defense,” you can remind me
15 about an opening statement. Occasionally, I forget that.
16 Counsel, go ahead.
17 MS. LEE: If I may I approach, your Honor?
18 THE COURT: Yes. Do you want to start with
19 jurisdictional documents before your witness gets here?
20 MS. LEE: I think it would be best to probably mark all
21 of the evidence so we can refer to them when the witnesses
22 testify.
23 THE COURT: All right. Go ahead.
24 MS. LEE: Respondent would like to mark and introduce
25 into evidence for jurisdictional purposes the hearing file,
0015
1 which contains the pleadings and notices pertaining to the
2 Matter to establish jurisdiction and become a container of
3 the record for these proceedings.
4 THE COURT: Okay. That’s this manila folder you handed
5 to me?
6 MS. LEE: Yes.
7 THE COURT: Mr. Lear has got a copy of it?
8 MS. LEE: No.
9 THE COURT: Okay. Can you give him a copy physically?
10 I don’t know how he can make objections or not if he doesn’t
11 have a copy of your Exhibit 1.
12 MS. LEE: May I show it to him?
13 THE COURT: Sure. You can show it to him.
14 MR. LEAR: I have no objections for jurisdictional
15 purposes.
16 THE COURT: All right. Did you describe what was in
17 it?
18 MS. LEE: The documents that were already mailed to
19 Respondent or her Counsel, they are pertaining to the
20 Accusation, Proof of Service, Request of Set, Notice of
21 Hearing, et cetera. Other jurisdictional documents.
22 THE COURT: All right. Those are marked as Exhibit 1.
23 With there being no objection, Exhibit 1 is received in
24 evidence.
25 ///
0016
1 (Complainant’s Exhibit 1 was marked for
2 identification by the Court and received in evidence.)
3 MS. LEE: Complainant would like to mark and introduce
4 into evidence a history certification of Stacey Ann Havener
5 dated May 5th, 2016, along with an online Internet printout
6 from the Bureau of Real Estate website.
7 THE COURT: That’s marked as Exhibit 2. Any objection
8 to Exhibit 2 being received?
9 MR. LEAR: No objection.
10 THE COURT: With there being no objection, Exhibit 2 is
11 received.
12 (Complainant’s Exhibit 2 was marked for
13 identification by the Court and received in evidence.)
14 MS. LEE: Complainant would like marked and introduced
15 into evidence a history certification of Milton Lance Hudson
16 and an online BRE license information printout of his
17 license.
18 THE COURT: That history is marked as your Exhibit 3.
19 Any objection to Exhibit 3 being received?
20 MR. LEAR: Objection. Relevance.
21 THE COURT: Go ahead and make an offer of proof,
22 Counsel.
23 MS. LEE: It shows the timeline as far as when his
24 license — he no longer had license rights, and that’s very
25 pertinent to the fact that he no longer has a license, but
0017
1 he was working under Stacey Havener’s license.
2 THE COURT: All right. The objection is overruled.
3 Exhibit 3 is received.
4 (Complainant’s Exhibit 3 was marked for
5 identification by the Court and received in evidence.)
6 MS. LEE: Complainant offers Bureau of Real Estate’s
7 documents regarding the case of — the Accusation of Milton
8 Lance Hudson, case number H-02790FR.
9 THE COURT: That’s marked as Exhibit 4. Is there any
10 objection to Exhibit 4 being received?
11 MR. LEAR: Objection. Relevance and Evidence Code
12 section 352, more prejudicial than probative.
13 THE COURT: Are there allegations against your client
14 contained in it as far as the prejudicial aspect of it?
15 MR. LEAR: No.
16 THE COURT: Okay. The objection is overruled. Exhibit
17 4 is received. I’m receiving it really for historical
18 background. I read the Accusation. Go ahead.
19 (Complainant’s Exhibit 4 was marked for
20 identification by the Court and received in evidence.)
21 MS. LEE: Complainant would like marked as Exhibit 5 as
22 the audit report transmittal and audit report.
23 THE COURT: This is going to be your witness’s report?
24 MS. LEE: Correct.
25 THE COURT: All right. I’m going to mark it for now as
0018
1 your Exhibit 5.
2 (Complainant’s Exhibit 5 was marked for
3 identification by the Court.)
4 MS. LEE: Yes. Complainant request that Exhibit 6 be
5 marked. It is the working papers B-1 for the audit.
6 THE COURT: Okay. How many of these are your auditor’s
7 documents that we’re getting into now?
8 MS. LEE: Exhibits 6 through 11 are directly related to
9 the audit report itself.
10 THE COURT: So she’s going to be testifying to those?
11 MS. LEE: Yes.
12 THE COURT: All right. I don’t think it’s really that
13 useful for us to be marking them. It’s better for me to
14 hear from the witness what they are and have it addressed
15 right there in the context of the hearing. I know you are
16 trying to save time, and I appreciate that. Why don’t we do
17 this: Let’s go off the record, and I want you to contact
18 your witness and see where he is. Off the record.
19 (Recess)
20 THE COURT: Back on the record. Ms. Lee, you are
21 putting your case on. You want to call a witness?
22 MS. LEE: Yes. I’d like to call Karrie De Mascio to
23 the stand.
24 THE COURT: All right. Please raise your right hand.
25 ///
0019
1 KARRIE DE MASCIO,
2 called as a witness, and having been first duly sworn by the
3 Court, was examined and testified as follows:
4 THE WITNESS: I do.
5 THE COURT: Thank you. Please state and spell your
6 full name for the record.
7 THE WITNESS: Karrie, K-A-R-R-I-E, Jo, J-O, De Mascio,
8 D-E, space, M-A-S-C-I-O.
9 THE COURT: Have you ever testified before?
10 THE WITNESS: This case, no. But I have, yes, your
11 Honor.
12 THE COURT: How many times? Several.
13 THE WITNESS: Yes, I’m a peace officer.
14 THE COURT: Okay. So you are an experienced witness?
15 THE WITNESS: Correct.
16 THE COURT: A couple of things I want to make sure you
17 are clear on: First, this is an adversarial proceeding.
18 You have defense attorney and an Agency lawyer, and they
19 have two sides of the case they are presenting really. So
20 it’s really important that when you are asked a question by
21 either lawyer, you listen to the question and not be in too
22 much of a hurry to give your answer right away because often
23 the attorneys are composing their questions as they speak,
24 and they may not really be at the end of the question when
25 you start answering. The other issue is, attorneys have a
0020
1 right to object to the form of a question or the question
2 itself. And if you are in a real hurry to give that answer,
3 we’re going to have crossfire.
4 We will have two different voices, the attorney
5 objecting and you answering the question. So the easiest
6 way to avoid that problem and for us to get one voice at a
7 time so the court reporter makes a really good record of
8 what’s being said in here is for you to just wait a few
9 seconds until you are sure that the attorney’s question is
10 done. If you wait that few extra seconds, that will give
11 Opposing Counsel the opportunity to make an objection
12 because it may turn out that if I sustain the objection,
13 there is no answer to that question, and they will have to
14 ask another one. Take your time answering. Keep your voice
15 level up as well as you can. I’m not going to judge you to
16 be overly aggressive or asserted. If you do, it’s just
17 going to be easier for me. And this is sort of a good sized
18 room, I think the biggest one on the floor.
19 So you want to make sure your voice carries so the
20 attorneys can hear you. If you are asked a question and you
21 have really no idea what that question means, say, “I don’t
22 understand the question,” and I’ll have the attorney ask
23 another question. If you are asked a question and you
24 really don’t know what your answer would be, you don’t have
25 an answer for it, I don’t want to you try to provide an
0021
1 answer anyway by guessing or surmising your way through an
2 answer, that’s called speculation and speculation is not
3 something I can consider as evidence. So if you don’t know
4 the answer, say, “I don’t know.”
5 THE WITNESS: Will do.
6 THE COURT: Any questions?
7 THE WITNESS: No, sir.
8 THE COURT: Thank you. Go ahead, Counsel.
9
10 DIRECT EXAMINATION
11 BY MS. LEE:
12 Q Good morning. You sort of went into it a little
13 bit, but what do you do for a living?
14 A I am an Animal Control Officer for the City of Los
15 Angeles.
16 Q How long have you done that?
17 A Twenty years.
18 Q Are you familiar with Pine Mountain Club, slash,
19 Frazier Park area?
20 A I am.
21 Q How are you familiar with that area?
22 A I resided there for 12 years.
23 Q Can you tell us what years?
24 A It was — I believe — I moved in 2013, so I was
25 there — I moved there in 2001.
0022
1 Q And are you married?
2 A I am.
3 Q Who is your husband?
4 A Eugene De Mascio.
5 Q How long have you been married?
6 A We got married up there, so I believe it’s going
7 to be 13 years in December.
8 Q Do you own a home in Lebec, California?
9 A I do.
10 Q How far is Lebec from Frazier Park, approximately?
11 A Maybe 5 miles.
12 Q Would that be considered part of the mountain
13 communities up there?
14 A Correct.
15 Q And can you describe the mountain communities up
16 there?
17 A They are small. There’s a bunch of them. There’s
18 a bunch of communities. They are very close-knit. It’s a
19 very small town. People communicate, you hear things, you
20 run into people, everybody knows everybody’s business for
21 the most part.
22 Q Can you turn to — in the binder before you, can
23 you turn to Exhibit 53.
24 THE COURT: Counsel, just so I know for sure what you
25 are focusing on right now, what part of the Accusation
0023
1 should I be looking at? You have 7 causes.
2 MS. LEE: Correct. This is going to go to basically
3 rebut Respondent’s foreseeable testimony that is from her
4 mentality and her motives for the allegations in the
5 Accusation.
6 THE COURT: Okay.
7 MR. LEAR: Assumes facts not in evidence.
8 THE COURT: Are there any allegations that the
9 testimony — I’ve been looking through the Accusation as the
10 witness has been just answering a few questions, and I’m
11 trying to figure out which part of the Accusation that this
12 testimony would go to.
13 MS. LEE: Well, Ms. De Mascio’s testimony is the second
14 cause of action on page 5.
15 THE COURT: Okay. Thank you.
16 MR. LEAR: Your Honor, I’m concerned with the proffer
17 based upon your question about Ms. Lee anticipating evidence
18 that has not yet been offered in evidence and calling Ms. De
19 Mascio as a rebuttal witness when in fact there’s nothing to
20 rebut.
21 THE COURT: Counsel?
22 MS. LEE: Your Honor, I think it’s important to
23 understand the community that we’re talking about. We can’t
24 be talking a vacuum [sic].
25 THE COURT: Understanding the community is fine, and I
0024
1 didn’t hear Mr. Lear make any objections to that. I heard
2 in your opening remarks you were describing that as part of
3 your case. That’s fine. As far as rebuttal goes, I don’t
4 know what it would be rebutting yet either. My main concern
5 is that I know which part of the allegations you are
6 referring to. Don’t assume that I’m going to find the right
7 place in your pleadings. You do have 7 causes, so just —
8 if you could point the way for me when you offer the
9 witness, that’s fine. I’ll follow along the testimony and
10 if Mr. Lear has objections to the questions, he can
11 certainly make them. Go ahead.
12 BY MS. LEE:
13 Q Are you at Exhibit 53?
14 A Yes.
15 Q It describes Frazier Park and Pine Mountain Club
16 as having a population of approximately 2300 to 2600 people.
17 Does that sound about right to you?
18 A It does.
19 Q And you said you own a home in Lebec, California?
20 A I do.
21 Q Which is part of the mountain communities here?
22 A Correct.
23 Q At some point, did you move out of that home?
24 A I did.
25 Q And when did you move out of that home?
0025
1 A When? In August of 2013.
2 Q At one point did you and your husband decide to
3 rent it out?
4 A We did.
5 Q And was that — was that decision easily made
6 between you two or did you sort of struggle with that?
7 MR. LEAR: Objection. Relevance.
8 THE COURT: Offer the proof?
9 MS. LEE: Basically, we’re going to describe damage to
10 her home and want to know what kind of condition her home is
11 in.
12 THE COURT: I’m going to sustain the objection. You
13 could always ask her that. The questions are borderline
14 leading also, so go ahead and ask another question.
15 BY MS. LEE:
16 Q So the home you were renting out, was that the
17 home you lived in?
18 A Yes.
19 Q And did you — what kind of condition was it in?
20 A It was in excellent condition.
21 Q It was your home?
22 A Correct.
23 Q Okay. And at one point you decided to rent it
24 out?
25 A Correct.
0026
1 Q At one point, did you and your husband look for a
2 property manager?
3 A My husband did, yes.
4 Q Okay. And who did you find?
5 A He found Milton Hudson, the employee of All
6 Seasons Realty.
7 Q Okay. Did you guys discuss whether to go with
8 Milton or not?
9 A We did.
10 Q What did you discuss?
11 A So he had Googled him and made an appointment to
12 go speak with Milton, and I wasn’t sure about it because I
13 had read some reviews on Yelp and the neighbors had stated
14 that it would be a mistake to go with him. because —
15 MR. LEAR: Objection. Move to strike. Hearsay.
16 THE COURT: Sustained. The testimony about what the
17 neighbors said is stricken. Go ahead, ask another question.
18 BY MS. LEE:
19 Q You had some hesitance, basically, to hire him;
20 correct?
21 A I did, yes.
22 Q And did you still hire him at one point?
23 A We did. My husband had a conversation with him.
24 Q Can you turn to Exhibit 23? Do you recognize the
25 E-mails in Exhibit 23?
0027
1 A I do.
2 Q Can you describe these E-mails?
3 A These were the E-mails that my husband and I were
4 corresponding with Milton pertaining to our issues that we
5 were afraid would happen.
6 Q You said you had trepidations. Why did you still
7 go with Milton?
8 A My husband considers himself a good judge of
9 character, and of course I trust my husband. And he had a
10 conversation with Milton that I overheard and it was that
11 there was a misunderstanding, that Milton had accidentally
12 withdrew funds to pay one of his clients from a trust fund
13 that he was supposed to keep locked away in lieu of touching
14 when they instate a contract with somebody, and it was a
15 completely misunderstanding and that it wouldn’t happen
16 again, and he’s got it now. And so, my husband said, “Okay.
17 But I have to tell you, we have to tell you, that if
18 anything goes south, my wife files for a living and she will
19 go after you criminally if anything happens.” And he said
20 he understood and it wouldn’t happen, and we could trust
21 him.
22 Q About when was this conversation?
23 A This was in August of 2013.
24 Q Can you turn to Exhibit —
25 THE COURT: I’m going to mark that as Exhibit 23 before
0028
1 you move on, which is E-mails from the witness. That’s the
2 best description I can give it right now. Go ahead.
3 (Complainant’s Exhibit 23 was marked for
4 identification by the Court.)
5 BY MS. LEE:
6 Q Can you turn to Exhibit 16.
7 MS. LEE: I’ll have marked for identification the
8 property management agreement between the De Mascios and All
9 Seasons Realty marked as Exhibit 16.
10 THE COURT: Marked as Exhibit 16. Go ahead.
11 (Complainant’s Exhibit 16 was marked for
12 identification by the Court.)
13 THE WITNESS: May I ask a question? There are —
14 THE COURT: Do you not have the document in front of
15 you?
16 THE WITNESS: I do but —
17 THE COURT: Just a second. Are you asking about what’s
18 in front of you?
19 THE WITNESS: Yes, it’s not complete.
20 THE COURT: Off the record.
21 (Recess)
22 THE COURT: Back on the record. Counsel, it looks as
23 if you got more documents that the witness brought with her.
24 I can’t tell you how to put your case on whether you think
25 they are relevant or significant or whether if Mr. Lear has
0029
1 seen them. We can deal with them, but I can’t tell you what
2 to do. It’s really up to you as to whether you want to try
3 to include them in your case or not. I don’t even know what
4 they are. I’m leaving that to you.
5 MS. LEE: My question isn’t whether to admit them or
6 not. My question is, I need to make copies and whether you
7 would like me to make copies now or later.
8 THE COURT: It all depends on whether you intend to
9 submit them.
10 MS. LEE: I do.
11 THE COURT: Okay. Why don’t we start by having you
12 show them to Mr. Lear. You never know, he may have seen
13 these. He may have a copy of them already. If he doesn’t,
14 we’ll have to copy them so that everybody has got them.
15 Ms. Lee?
16 MS. LEE: I showed them to Respondent’s Counsel.
17 There’s two pages, an addendum II and addendum III to the
18 property management agreement that is not currently in the
19 binder that I’d like to submit into evidence.
20 THE COURT: So you want to add these to your Exhibit
21 16?
22 MS. LEE: Yes.
23 THE COURT: Mr. Lear?
24 MR. LEAR: No objection.
25 THE WITNESS: May I say something? There’s addendum
0030
1 XVIII. They are in there. In Exhibit 17. They are in
2 there.
3 THE COURT: Thank you. I don’t know. I haven’t even
4 looked at them. I haven’t even seen what Counsel has.
5 MS. LEE: They are a part of Exhibit 17. If I could
6 move the two pages to the proper tab —
7 THE COURT: It’s up to you. Mr. Lear, your client is
8 the Real Estate person. Do you have any objection to them
9 staying put? Is that a clear presentation? Do you suggest
10 to move them as part of Exhibit 16?
11 MR. LEAR: Your Honor, it appears that what happened is
12 that the addendum number I, which is part of Exhibit 16,
13 should instead be the addendum number I preceding addendum
14 number II as part of Exhibit 17. Does that make sense?
15 THE COURT: I agree. Okay. Why don’t we do this: I’d
16 rather have less confusion later when I’m sitting alone
17 trying to determine what the evidence is. Let me make sure
18 I’ve got this correct. The last page, which is marked your
19 page 5 of Exhibit 16 is going to come out of Exhibit 16, and
20 the final two pages — the last two pages of Exhibit 17 are
21 going to be removed from Exhibit 17; is that right?
22 MS. LEE: No.
23 MR. LEAR: No.
24 THE COURT: Which ones need to come out of Exhibit 17?
25 MS. LEE: None.
0031
1 THE COURT: Okay. So Exhibit 17 can remain intact.
2 MR. LEAR: So the page you took out should be Exhibit
3 17, Bates stamped 6A.
4 THE COURT: Okay. It’s going to come after page 6, and
5 I’ll mark it as page 6A and put it into the binder for
6 Exhibit 17. Now, Ms. Lee, could you help the witness with
7 that? Off the record.
8 (Recess)
9 THE COURT: Back on the record. Exhibit 16 has had a
10 page removed, and that was added to Exhibit 17. I’m marking
11 Exhibit 16 as the property management agreement involving
12 the De Mascios, which is — the last date on it is
13 August 5th, 2013. Go ahead.
14 BY MS. LEE:
15 Q Exhibit 16, the property management agreement,
16 does it look familiar to you?
17 A Yes.
18 Q How does it look familiar to you?
19 A This is what I signed. This is an agreement that
20 I signed and initialed.
21 Q Who did you meet with at All Seasons Realty to get
22 this done?
23 A Milton Hudson.
24 Q This is on or about August 2nd, 2013?
25 A Correct.
0032
1 Q And as part of your agreement, how did things go
2 with that arrangement?
3 A Everything was fine. He advised us to not — that
4 he would be the go-between between the tenants and that they
5 were eager to move in. So we needed to hurry up, basically,
6 and get out so they could come in. And we had a lot of
7 stuff, so we told him we would hurry and everything was
8 satisfactory at that point.
9 Q Before you signed this property management, did
10 you know the Bureau of Real Estate had an Accusation filed
11 against him?
12 A I did.
13 Q And did you know what happened to that case?
14 A I followed it online. I had contacted the Real
15 Estate Bureau prior to signing this lease with the intent of
16 trying to figure out whether or not to go forward. And the
17 lady that I spoke with at the Real Estate Bureau said that
18 she couldn’t give me any legal advice, but I should use
19 caution, which I then had the conversation with my husband
20 pertaining to the same. And then we still decided to go
21 with Milton because my husband felt that it would be a
22 strong and solid choice. He had also advised us that
23 immediately when we put this up, that he already had
24 somebody that was interested and a perfect tenant for us.
25 Q In December of 2013, he surrendered his license.
0033
1 Did he tell you that he no longer had license rights?
2 A No.
3 Q How did you find that out?
4 A I followed up online again and there were articles
5 that — the small-town paper, the Mountain Enterprise was
6 following along, and I had read it because I was still
7 having that paper sent to me at my new location.
8 Q Let’s go to Exhibit 17. It’s a residential lease.
9 MS. LEE: Can I have that marked into evidence as
10 Exhibit 17, please?
11 THE COURT: All right. August 20th, 2013, All Seasons
12 Realty month-to-month rental agreement. And the names at
13 the top are Robert N. and Margaret N. That’s marked as
14 Exhibit 17.
15 (Complainant’s Exhibit 17 was marked for
16 identification by the Court.)
17 BY MS. LEE:
18 Q Does this document look familiar to you?
19 A It does.
20 Q Can you describe this document?
21 A This is the rental agreement mirror that the
22 tenants had signed. The difference is their signatures are
23 on this one where is ours are on the other one.
24 Q If you go to page 6A, the addendum I, I noticed
25 these aren’t signed. Were these part of the agreement?
0034
1 A These were the ones that we were faxed but, no,
2 these are not the ones that are signed by them. But they
3 did sign papers exactly like this.
4 Q So there’s a copy that’s signed by them, but these
5 are not it, obviously?
6 A Correct.
7 Q This is part of your residential lease agreement?
8 A Yes.
9 Q And addendum II, was that also part of the
10 agreement and signed?
11 A Correct.
12 Q And is this an accurate depiction of what the
13 addendum said of what it is?
14 A Yes.
15 Q Which includes winterizing the home?
16 A Correct.
17 Q And then also addendum III, there’s also a copy of
18 this that was signed?
19 A Yes.
20 Q And as a part of the residential lease agreement?
21 A Yes.
22 Q And it states that the tenant is to pay the $50 a
23 month to All Seasons?
24 A Yes, it states that.
25 Q That was the agreement?
0035
1 A For the water and utility bills, yes.
2 Q So it would be the responsibility of All Seasons
3 to pay the utility for the water bill?
4 A Yes.
5 Q Did you ever find out whether that was actually
6 done?
7 A I did.
8 Q Was the $50 paid by All Seasons to the utility?
9 A When I spoke to Crystal Water Company, they stated
10 to me that the water bill had not been paid to date and that
11 there was an outstanding bill of $300.
12 Q Okay. When was that?
13 A I believe it’s in the E-mail.
14 Q We can get to that.
15 MS. LEE: Withdrawing. Can we enter into evidence
16 Exhibit 17?
17 THE COURT: Any objection?
18 MR. LEAR: Yes. This is an incomplete document that is
19 not signed, best evidence rule.
20 THE COURT: Counsel?
21 MS. LEE: The witness has already testified to the
22 authenticity of this document. If signatures are required,
23 we can get signatures. But at the same time, the witness
24 already testified that this is a part of the agreement.
25 THE COURT: Why don’t you make me an offer of proof as
0036
1 to where the Agency got the document from. Was this part of
2 the investigation?
3 MS. LEE: Correct. It was in the investigation file
4 and that was received — that Legal received. The
5 investigator gets their documents from both the Complainants
6 and the Respondent.
7 THE COURT: Is your investigator going to testify?
8 MS. LEE: No.
9 THE COURT: Okay. It’s a valid objection. It’s a
10 legal contract and it’s not signed. I’m going to sustain
11 the objection, but I’m going to — certainly the record is
12 nowhere near from being closed. That’s something that
13 perhaps you could take up in terms of authentication.
14 MS. LEE: Okay.
15 BY MS. LEE:
16 Q Did you send the residential lease, including the
17 addendums, to the Bureau of Real Estate?
18 A I did.
19 Q And are these a copy of some of the ones that you
20 sent in?
21 A Yes.
22 Q And are they accurate depictions of the agreement
23 that you had or that was made between the resident and —
24 All Seasons Realty and the tenants?
25 A Yes.
0037
1 THE COURT: I have a question for you: Where did you
2 get — this is the document that you submitted to the Agency
3 before this hearing?
4 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.
5 THE COURT: Where did it come from? Where did your
6 copy come from?
7 THE WITNESS: It came from All Seasons Realty. We were
8 planning on only renting the house for a bit, for the year
9 lease, but we wanted the grounds to be maintained throughout
10 that time, which is why we had Milton do the property and
11 the grounds and the watering, and he did the one for the
12 pipes because it snows up there, and then the water, which
13 was agreed upon, which wasn’t in the general. So these were
14 the addendums that everybody came up together and they did
15 have a signed copy.
16 THE COURT: Where did you get the document from that
17 you received, which is what we’re looking at? Who gave it
18 to you?
19 THE WITNESS: Milton Hudson.
20 THE COURT: When did he give it to you?
21 THE WITNESS: The same time that we signed this. It
22 came along with the contract on or around August 2nd.
23 THE COURT: Did you received a signed copy or just this
24 unsigned copy that we’re looking at?
25 THE WITNESS: The unsigned copy. He, to the best of my
0038
1 knowledge, reported to us that they had signed it, but we
2 signed our part and then he forwarded it to the other party
3 for them to sign. But I don’t believe we were ever
4 forwarded back the contract with their signatures on it.
5 THE COURT: All right. I’m going to overrule the
6 objection. I may not give it as much weight as I would if
7 it were a signed document. But based on that testimony, I’m
8 going to overrule the objection and receive Exhibit 17.
9 MR. LEAR: Your Honor, I also want to interpose a
10 statute of frauds objection. This is a contract that deals
11 with residential Real Estate, and the statute of frauds
12 would require there be signed documents. There is no
13 evidence of a signed document before this Court, so that
14 means that there is no agreement that’s in place and there
15 would be no duties that flow therefrom. So if this is the
16 best of the evidence, we’re going to move to dismiss this
17 Count.
18 THE COURT: Let me ask Counsel. I haven’t looked at
19 your documents, and I’m not going to until you present them
20 and you make them relevant, and you have witnesses
21 sponsoring them. Are there any other contracts that are
22 part of your case like this that are unsigned where we might
23 run into the same set of objections?
24 MS. LEE: I don’t believe so, your Honor. But if I may
25 take a moment to look? I believe all of them are signed.
0039
1 THE COURT: So this is the one that is an issue?
2 MS. LEE: Correct. There’s another one that’s not
3 signed, but we’re okay with it not being signed.
4 THE COURT: Well, you might be okay with it, but this
5 is for issue — the issue of my receiving it into evidence.
6 What I want you to do is talk to your investigator today, if
7 you can. Is that investigator available?
8 MS. LEE: No.
9 THE COURT: Why not?
10 MS. LEE: No longer with the Bureau.
11 THE COURT: Okay.
12 MS. LEE: Your Honor, may I clarify?
13 THE COURT: Here’s the other thing you can do: We can
14 certainly question the Respondent with regard to that. I
15 don’t know if Mr. Lear intends to call her as part of his
16 case, but I know under the Government Code she can be
17 cross-examined. And what I want to do is, first of all,
18 find out whether there is a signed copy. And secondly, see
19 if we can get a copy that was signed. According to the
20 witness, one wasn’t provided to her. What I have right now
21 is a legal document that’s unsigned. If one that is signed
22 exists, and if the Agency could get it, certainly they would
23 have wanted to get it.
24 MS. LEE: There was no one, your Honor. All of our
25 documents were obtained from Complainant and Respondent.
0040
1 THE COURT: Okay. Do you have someone who could
2 testify to that effect as far as what your investigator did?
3 Because you attesting to it, I’m not saying — I don’t want
4 to suggest that you are in any way trying to mislead me, I
5 know you are not. On the other hand, you did not
6 investigate this case. The Agency did.
7 MS. LEE: Correct. I believe the witness testified
8 that she did send in these documents, and she’s testified to
9 the authenticity of them.
10 THE COURT: That’s true, but they are unsigned and I
11 know state law requires for basic contracts, certainly
12 involving Real Estate tenancy to be signed. So there should
13 be a signed copy of this somewhere. I want to know what
14 efforts the Agency made to get it. This is a two-day
15 hearing. What I want you to do is inquire with the Agency,
16 and it may turn out that you may need to call a supervisor
17 or somebody who would have access to this investigative file
18 to determine what the Agency did to obtain a copy, a signed
19 copy of the contract. That’s something I’d like to know.
20 The witness has gone as far as she can. She didn’t receive
21 a signed copy. She recalls signing something, but she
22 didn’t receive a signed copy. She got an unsigned copy.
23 Defense Counsel has raised an issue as to authenticity. I
24 think that’s the only way to get to the bottom of it.
25 MS. LEE: Okay.
0041
1 THE COURT: So for right now, I’m going to table
2 Exhibit 17. It’s marked, but hadn’t been received yet. We
3 will definitely come back to it before the hearing is
4 concluded. Thank you.
5 MS. LEE: Can we enter into evidence Exhibit 16, the
6 property management agreement?
7 THE COURT: Is there any objection to Exhibit 16?
8 MR. LEAR: No objection.
9 THE COURT: All right. With there being no objection,
10 Exhibit 16 is received.
11 (Complainant’s Exhibit 16 was received in evidence
12 by the Court.)
13 BY MS. LEE:
14 Q Did you start having problems receiving your rent
15 monies from All Seasons?
16 A I did.
17 Q Can you describe those difficulties?
18 MR. LEAR: Objection. Vague and ambiguous as to time.
19 Your Honor, also relevance in so far as the case that’s
20 being made out here is a case against Milton Hudson. Milton
21 Hudson has already been disciplined. And unless the
22 questions are limited to Ms. Havener, there is no relevance.
23 THE COURT: I’ll sustain the objection as to vagueness.
24 BY MS. LEE:
25 Q Did you have any difficulties with money after
0042
1 December 18th, 2013?
2 A I did.
3 Q Can you describe those difficulties?
4 A That’s when I discovered that the water wasn’t
5 being paid and that we had numerous checks that were
6 returned from the bank that were issued by All Seasons that
7 were non-sufficient funds. We were sent quite a few repairs
8 without receipts, so they collected out of the fund that was
9 set aside for repairs for the property.
10 THE COURT: What was that problem?
11 THE WITNESS: There was a fund set aside out of the
12 original money collected to cover repairs. It was $525, and
13 any repairs that arose at the property, that was deducted
14 out of that, but it would be replenished out of the next
15 month’s rent.
16 THE COURT: Okay. Continue.
17 THE WITNESS: I’m done.
18 BY MS. LEE:
19 Q Could you turn to Exhibit 16, please. I’m sorry,
20 Exhibit 18. Have you seen this document before?
21 A I have.
22 Q Can you describe this document?
23 A This is the W4, I believe, that was issued from
24 All Seasons Realty pertaining to the monies collected from
25 the tenants that we would claim on our taxes.
0043
1 Q And it states on the amount $3,814 and 6 cents?
2 A Correct.
3 Q Is that the correct amount?
4 A I believe so.
5 THE COURT: That’s marked. The W4 form is marked as
6 Exhibit 18.
7 (Complainant’s Exhibit 18 was marked for
8 identification by the Court.)
9 MS. LEE: Admit into evidence, your Honor?
10 THE COURT: Any objections?
11 MR. LEAR: No objection other than it’s a 1099 form as
12 indicated on the bottom left-hand corner.
13 THE COURT: That’s right. It is. It’s a 1099. Okay.
14 If there’s no objection, aside to clarifying it that it’s a
15 1099 form, it’s received.
16 (Complainant’s Exhibit 18 was received in evidence
17 by the Court.)
18 BY MS. LEE:
19 Q Turn to the next exhibit, Exhibit 19. They look
20 like they are from All Seasons Property Management for
21 October 2013, November 2013, December 2013 and January 2014;
22 is that correct?
23 THE COURT: How did you describe these? I’m asking the
24 witness. What are these?
25 THE WITNESS: These are the receipts that we received,
0044
1 the accounting for the months of the rents collected and
2 where the funds were dispersed.
3 THE COURT: These are receipts you received from who?
4 THE WITNESS: All Seasons Realty.
5 THE COURT: All right. Those are marked as Exhibit 19.
6 Go ahead, Counsel.
7 (Complainant’s Exhibit 19 was marked for
8 identification by the Court.)
9 BY MS. LEE:
10 Q What was the money that they collected in rent
11 from the tenants?
12 A Well, apparently in September the money was
13 prorated for the move-in, so the full month’s rent, which
14 was $1050, wasn’t collected. It was just prorated to $875.
15 And then the management fee, they took 10 percent of that,
16 which was the $87.50, and then there was a 100-dollar set-up
17 fee that they took, which they then remitted the check for
18 $87.50 for September. And in October, they collected the
19 full amount, and then the deductions that come along with
20 that.
21 Q When you break down the $1050, was $50 supposed to
22 be for the water bill?
23 A No. The rent was $1100, and that $50 — that
24 extra $50 that All Seasons retains, that was to go pay the
25 water bill.
0045
1 Q So the tenants paid $1100 to them and they took
2 $50 for the water bill?
3 A Correct.
4 Q And then the rest was broken down and you were
5 given, obviously, a portion for that?
6 A Correct.
7 Q If you could briefly look through this,
8 specifically with respect to the last couple of pages, the
9 December 2013 and January 2014 documents. Are these
10 accurate?
11 MR. LEAR: What page are you on?
12 MS. LEE: The last two pages of Exhibit 19.
13 THE WITNESS: I never noticed that before. We had
14 employed them through March. March is when we terminated,
15 so February is not reported. It’s reported only as vacant,
16 that’s unusual.
17 THE COURT: Okay. These are not paginated. We’re
18 going to paginate them. Anything over three pages, you want
19 to always paginate, Counsel. Let’s see. I’m going through
20 them one-by-one just starting with 1 and hopefully not
21 missing any pages. I think there are five pages?
22 MS. LEE: Yes.
23 THE COURT: Are you on page 4, Ms. De Mascio?
24 THE WITNESS: I was on the last page.
25 THE COURT: Okay. So you want us so go to page 5?
0046
1 THE WITNESS: Hold on.
2 BY MS. LEE:
3 Q This is dated on the bottom, December 10th, 2013?
4 A Correct.
5 Q So this goes to that date; correct?
6 A Right.
7 Q Okay. And then the next page, page 5, that’s
8 dated January 15th, 2014?
9 A Right.
10 Q So that goes to that date; correct?
11 A Correct.
12 Q Okay. The question to you: Were these amounts
13 correct on this last page, page 5, up to that date?
14 A It appears so. It appears that the correct monies
15 that were distributed to us were the corrections issues.
16 MS. LEE: May we have admitted into evidence Exhibit
17 19, your Honor?
18 THE COURT: Any objection?
19 MR. LEAR: No objection.
20 THE COURT: Exhibit 19 is received.
21 (Complainant’s Exhibit 19 was received in evidence
22 by the Court.)
23 BY MS. LEE:
24 Q Go to Exhibit 20, please. Have you seen this
25 one-page document?
0047
1 A Yes.
2 Q And what is this document?
3 A This was the receipt that we received reflecting a
4 winterizing of the swamp cooler of the property.
5 Q They were charging you 55 dollars?
6 A Yes.
7 Q Were they supposed to?
8 A No.
9 Q Why not?
10 A Because according to the original contract, the
11 winterizing was the responsibility of the tenants, not the
12 landlord. That was one of the agreements off of the
13 addendum that we don’t have signed.
14 Q Would it be Exhibit 17, page 7?
15 A Yes.
16 Q Addendum number II?
17 A Correct.
18 Q Let’s go to the next exhibit, Exhibit 21.
19 MS. LEE: Can we have Exhibit 20 admitted into
20 evidence, your Honor?
21 THE COURT: Any objection to Exhibit 20 being received?
22 MR. LEAR: Objection to the extent that it relies on
23 Exhibit 17, which is not into evidence.
24 THE COURT: All right. That objection is overruled.
25 Exhibit 20 is received.
0048
1 (Complainant’s Exhibit 20 was marked for
2 identification by the Court and received in evidence.)
3 BY MS. LEE:
4 Q Turn to Exhibit 21. They look very similar to
5 Exhibit 19. Did you get these — did you get this first
6 document from All Seasons?
7 A I did.
8 Q And it looks like it was — this is dated March
9 2nd, 2014?
10 A Correct.
11 Q So this is basically the couple of months before
12 that; correct?
13 A Correct.
14 Q Is this an accurate reflection of what you were
15 paid?
16 A Yes.
17 Q Okay. Can you go to the second page? Can you
18 describe this document?
19 A This is a statement from my credit union advising
20 me that the check issued by All Seasons Realty was returned
21 for non-sufficient funds. So I was being charged a
22 15-dollar bank fee.
23 Q So you were not paid basically for the February —
24 which rent was this reflecting? Which month?
25 A February.
0049
1 Q So you were not paid that at that time?
2 A Correct.
3 Q Can you go to page 3? Did you also receive this
4 from your credit union?
5 A I did.
6 Q Can you tell us what this document states?
7 A This document reflects the amount of the check
8 that I deposited that didn’t cover — that didn’t go
9 through.
10 Q Is this a second check?
11 A No. This is a reflection of that deposit. And
12 the first page that we pointed out was just the fee that I
13 was charged, the 15 dollars. And the second one is the
14 supplemental to that same transaction, just denoting to me
15 what check didn’t clear.
16 Q Go to the next page, page 4. Could you describe
17 this document?
18 A This is a copy of the check that the bank sent me
19 back letting me know that it didn’t clear.
20 Q As dated February 17th, 2014?
21 A The check?
22 Q Yes.
23 A Yes.
24 Q Is that about when you received this check?
25 A No. I received the check on the 24th.
0050
1 Q Of February?
2 A Correct. That’s when I deposited it.
3 Q About February 24th, 2014?
4 A Yes.
5 Q And it’s for the rent for which month?
6 A February.
7 Q Of 2014?
8 A I believe so, yes.
9 Q And the last page, did you get this from your
10 credit union as well?
11 A I did.
12 MS. LEE: Can we mark and move into evidence as Exhibit
13 21, please?
14 THE COURT: All right. Exhibit 21 was already marked.
15 Any objection?
16 MR. LEAR: No objection.
17 THE COURT: With there being no objection, Exhibit 21
18 is received.
19 (Complainant’s Exhibit 21 was marked for
20 identification by the Court and received in evidence.)
21 BY MS. LEE:
22 Q Go to Exhibit 22. This looks largely the same as
23 the last exhibit, but can you describe these documents?
24 A This is the invoice from All Seasons pertaining to
25 March’s proceeds.
0051
1 Q Did you receive pages 2, 3 and 4 from your credit
2 union?
3 A I did.
4 Q Where did you get page 5 from?
5 A Page 5 was the result of me contacting All Seasons
6 to let them know that I needed reimbursement for my check
7 that did not clear again.
8 Q When you say All Seasons, who exactly did you
9 contact?
10 A Milton Hudson.
11 Q Okay. Is this — these documents state a check
12 bounced. Is that an accurate description?
13 A Yes.
14 Q And you incurred a non-sufficient funds from your
15 credit union?
16 A Correct.
17 Q At any point, did you try to contact Stacey
18 Havener regarding these issues?
19 A I did.
20 Q Can you describe when and how that interaction
21 went about?
22 A So about the end of March, I was kind of at my
23 wit’s end and had enough. So my husband and I had a
24 conversation that we would look for a new property manager
25 to get out from underneath of All Seasons, because there
0052
1 were so many breaches of contract between the tenants and
2 the property manager, and we were done. So I made an
3 appointment with a realtor for the Pine Valley Realty, and
4 then I went and spoke with her. And she suggested that I go
5 speak with Ms. Havener because she might be able to help us
6 out and then resolve some of the situations or the issues
7 that I was having with her husband, and I did. I went over
8 to her office and we had a conversation, and I advised her
9 of all of the misappropriations of the funds and the lack of
10 receipts and that we were having a hard time getting a hold
11 of Milton now, and then my intent is to move forward with a
12 different property management.
13 Q How did she respond?
14 A She did say that she had warned her husband in the
15 past that he shouldn’t deal with utilities, and that she
16 said she would try to resolve it. She was sorry, but what
17 flagged me was that she didn’t seem surprised or appalled.
18 In my estimation, she was aware of it and that it didn’t
19 bother her that she was — I asked her, did she not know
20 what her husband’s dealings were and that he was doing this
21 and he had been accused of this and lost his license. And
22 she just really didn’t answer. She wasn’t really
23 forthcoming to try and resolve it. It was a very awkward
24 conversation, I felt. I was angry, and she wasn’t excited
25 at all. I don’t know.
0053
1 Q Would you be confident or not confident at that
2 time of whether she would help you resolve it?
3 A I had hopes, but then we started E-mailing back
4 and forth and it just didn’t go anywhere. It kind of
5 actually went south some more, so it didn’t surprise me.
6 MS. LEE: Can we admit into evidence Exhibit 22?
7 THE COURT: Exhibit 22 is the — it was marked. It was
8 another set of All Seasons — actually, it’s one receipt and
9 then several more documents from the witness’s credit union
10 regarding the check that bounced. Any objection to Exhibit
11 22 being received?
12 MR. LEAR: No objection.
13 THE COURT: With there being no objection, Exhibit 22
14 is received.
15 (Complainant’s Exhibit 22 was marked for
16 identification by the Court and received in evidence.)
17 BY MS. LEE:
18 Q Turn to Exhibit 23. Exhibit 23 and 24 are sort of
19 together. Are you there?
20 A Yes.
21 Q You said that you were frustrated and at wit’s
22 end. Were the tenants part of that frustration?
23 A Absolutely. They were misrepresented from the
24 get-go. I understand now why Milton said that he wanted to
25 be the go-between and didn’t want us to contact the tenants,
0054
1 but the tenants completely blew out of the water and were
2 pushing us out of the house and they were really bad people.
3 They burned us so bad. I know that they also had problems
4 with Milton because we communicated with them. Sadly, I
5 didn’t want to, but I did. And we couldn’t get Milton to
6 give a firm answer as to issues that we had at the property,
7 and it was just completely frustrating.
8 There were threats from the tenants to us, so much
9 so that we had to call the Sheriff’s Department and make a
10 report to our safety and wellbeing. There was damage to the
11 property. And if something like that happened, Milton just
12 said, “When they move out then their security deposit will
13 cover that.” But that wasn’t even close because when we
14 terminated All Seasons, Milton refused to give us the
15 deposit back, the tenants were threatening him on their end
16 because they wanted their money because I guess the monies
17 had been — what they told me was their monies had been
18 transferred from property to property to property, so they
19 never actually saw the dollar amount, but it was reserved
20 for them for a new deposit. So I don’t know if the money
21 was there or not.
22 Then Milton wasn’t cooperating with us pertaining
23 to that or the new property manager, and I’m not sure what
24 all transpired after that. It was completely — it was
25 traumatic. It was disheartening. It was disgusting. And I
0055
1 feel like Stacey, she had to know what her husband was doing
2 and for it to allow to escalate to that resolve, I don’t
3 understand how you could allow that to happen.
4 THE COURT: Okay. You need to testify. I don’t want
5 you to be speaking to the Respondent. Just give us your
6 testimony, but it’s inappropriate for you to be addressing
7 her directly. Continue.
8 THE WITNESS: I’m sorry. I wish I had never, ever
9 employed All Seasons Realty, and I’m sorry for anybody else
10 who ever has. But this was a complete and total nightmare.
11 And we still haven’t recovered from damage to our credit, to
12 our credibility with our neighbors, to the neighborhood, to
13 everything that transpired out of this. This was a huge
14 issue. I’d say criminal. It was ridiculous.
15 BY MS. LEE:
16 Q You said you talked to Stacey Havener. Did you
17 tell her this stuff?
18 A I did. I let her know that the tenants were
19 horrible and that the neighbors were fighting and the
20 Sheriffs were called out constantly. They made the paper.
21 Another neighbor had tried to burn down the house on New
22 Years’ Eve with a pipe bomb that he threw at the house due
23 to my neighbor’s behavior — to the tenants’ behavior.
24 Q And Milton Hudson was the one that found these
25 tenants supposedly and found these tenants for you?
0056
1 A Correct. He had told us that they were a nice
2 older couple and that they live with their mother, and that
3 the property that they had been renting in Pinon Pines,
4 which is another community up there, they had an elderly
5 mother and this property had stairs and it was hard for her
6 to get up and down, so our property was a dream. And then
7 the nonsense started.
8 Q Can you describe the nonsense?
9 A Yes. They had — the first day they called us, we
10 had just got settled in from driving down to the mountain.
11 And the tenant called my husband and we had him on speaker
12 phone, and he asked if he could get permission to cut the
13 cupboards on top of the refrigerator because his
14 refrigerator did not fit. And of course, we told him no
15 that we had just remodeled the kitchen. He argue with my
16 husband and there was some yelling. And my husband is like,
17 “Look, if you don’t like it, get out. It’s not a problem.
18 We already knew you guys were being problems pushing us
19 out.” So he calmed down, the tenant calmed down and said,
20 “I’m sorry. We’ll make it work. Not a problem. I’m sorry
21 to bother you,” and that was the first night.
22 Well, come to find out, they cut the cupboards
23 anyways and moved the refrigerator into the hole. Then they
24 were only supposed to have four dogs, a little one in the
25 house and then three shepherds, and they were breeding these
0057
1 shepherds. The shepherds were getting out. They were
2 aggressive, noisy, they were filthy. They tracked in all
3 sorts of nonsense in the house. We were being told that
4 there was all sorts of vehicle traffic up and down, and the
5 neighbors suspected that there might have been some elicit
6 activity and maybe some drug sales.
7 THE COURT: Let me interject. Counsel, I’m going to
8 ask you: Is there an allegation in the Accusation that’s
9 relevant to the current testimony about bad tenants? I’m
10 trying to locate it.
11 MS. LEE: It doesn’t pertain to a paragraph, your
12 Honor.
13 THE COURT: Okay.
14 MS. LEE: It goes to the amount of knowledge that
15 Respondent had of the situation.
16 THE COURT: Well, Respondent is not testifying. Here
17 is what we’re going to do: I did give the witness some
18 leeway in this, but right now what you have to focus on is
19 due process in moments like this. This was not alleged, and
20 I’ve heard some testimony. I don’t want to hear additional
21 testimony on issues that really were not alleged. It’s not
22 fair to the Respondent.
23 MS. LEE: Fair enough.
24 THE COURT: Go ahead.
25 ///
0058
1 BY MS. LEE:
2 Q Go to Exhibit 23. Can you describe these
3 documents?
4 A These are E-mails that I forwarded to you that
5 were corresponding between my husband, Milton and myself.
6 Q These particular E-mails in this exhibit, these
7 six pages, were before December 18th, 2013; correct?
8 A Yes.
9 Q So it was before Stacey Havener took over the
10 company?
11 A I’m sorry?
12 Q I’m sorry. It was before Milton Hudson’s license
13 got — he lost his license rights basically?
14 A I believe so.
15 Q Are these accurate E-mails and communications
16 between Mr. Hudson and you and your husband?
17 A Yes. Nothing has been omitted on my end or
18 deleted.
19 MS. LEE: Can we move Exhibit 23 into evidence?
20 THE COURT: Any objection?
21 MR. LEAR: Yes. Hearsay, lacks foundation, relevance.
22 Certainly hearsay as to any E-mail between Milton Hudson
23 Eugene De Mascio. And that would be pages 1 through 4 on
24 page 5 of Exhibit 23. The objection is relevant in so far
25 as these were E-mails between Ms. De Mascio and Mr. Hudson
0059
1 dated in September of 2013 before Ms. Havener took over the
2 company. That’s also true as to the E-mail indicated on
3 page 6.
4 THE COURT: All right. I’m going to overrule the
5 foundation and relevance objections. The hearsay objection
6 is a good one. I’m only going to receive this — I am going
7 to overrule it and receive Exhibit 23 as administrative
8 hearsay only, that would explain or supplement the testimony
9 of the witness.
10 (Complainant’s Exhibit 23 was received in evidence
11 by the Court.)
12 THE COURT: Go ahead, Counsel. How much more direct do
13 you have in terms of timeframe? I just want to know so I
14 can schedule a morning recess. Why don’t we do this: I
15 think we should take a morning recess until 11:00 a.m. and
16 that way, Ms. Lee, you can figure out what further questions
17 you have. I do want to draw your attention to an exhibit
18 and have you think about how you’re going to use it. It’s
19 Exhibit 24, which might be coming next with this witness.
20 Were you going to offer that?
21 MS. LEE: Yes.
22 THE COURT: Okay. It’s 65 pages and it’s a lot of
23 different documents. I’ve been looking through it during
24 the quieter moments in the testimony, and I just want to you
25 know you are going to have to be prepared to really explain
0060
1 to me what you want to use because I don’t typically receive
2 piles of documents and do book reports later when I’m
3 writing the decision. You are going to have to go through
4 that and show me what documents you really are relying on.
5 And because there’s copies of contracts in there, there are
6 all sorts of various E-mails.
7 I’m just not going to go through this and read
8 through it to try to understand the context or relevance
9 somehow at a later date, that I don’t think that’s what an
10 Administrative Law Judge should do. So you are going to
11 have to figure out how you want to sponsor this document.
12 It just looks like a whole lot of pages of disparate
13 information. Some of it might be very important to your
14 case, but I want you to consider that during the break. So
15 hopefully we don’t get too bogged down on that subject later
16 when we’re back on the record. Mr. Lear, I don’t know if
17 you looked through that as well, but you might take a look
18 at it before we start up again.
19 MR. LEAR: Thank you.
20 THE COURT: Off the record.
21 (Recess)
22 THE COURT: We’re back on the record. We were still
23 doing direct examination. Counsel, you can continue.
24 BY MS. LEE:
25 Q Go back to Exhibit 14. At the bottom, there is a
0061
1 complaint, page 1 and top of page 2. Was that complaint
2 made by you?
3 A Yes.
4 THE COURT: I don’t know if we had touched on Exhibit
5 14 before, had we?
6 MS. LEE: No.
7 THE COURT: Okay. You want to describe what Exhibit 14
8 is, please, so I can mark it? Go ahead, ma’am.
9 (Complainant’s Exhibit 14 was marked for
10 identification by the Court.)
11 THE WITNESS: This is the complaint that I had to
12 complete when I generated a complaint with the Real Estate
13 Board to report the shenanigans. So this is a printed copy
14 of my complaint.
15 BY MS. LEE:
16 Q The bulk of is it the bottom of page 1 and top of
17 page 2. Are the facts there true and correct?
18 A Yes.
19 Q And we were talking about receiving money from All
20 Seasons Property Management and taking money. Who did you
21 receive and take money from?
22 A I’m sorry?
23 Q Who did you deal with?
24 THE COURT: Counsel, you want to refer to a certain
25 part of it because I can’t speed read. I haven’t seen this
0062
1 document. I just marked it, and you are talking about
2 something specific. Do you want to point that out in
3 Exhibit 14 so I could follow where you are going? Just so
4 you know, I can’t assimilate information that quickly. I’m
5 looking at this for the very first time. There’s about 18
6 lines of information. You just asked if they are true and
7 correct. I can’t sit and read them while you are asking
8 questions. If you are going to be specific, and you want to
9 point it out to me so I could follow your line of
10 questioning. Thank you.
11 BY MS. LEE:
12 Q You mentioned in here that the rent was collected.
13 Who collected the rent?
14 A All Seasons Realty.
15 Q And who in All Seasons Realty collected the rent?
16 A I believe an employee, possibly Milton Hudson.
17 MR. LEAR: Objection. Calls for speculation. Move to
18 strike.
19 THE COURT: Sustained. If you don’t know, I don’t want
20 to you guess. Do you know the answer as to who collected
21 rent?
22 THE WITNESS: No.
23 THE COURT: Thank you. Go ahead, Counsel.
24 BY MS. LEE:
25 Q Did you receive money from All Seasons Property
0063
1 Management?
2 A I did.
3 Q And who did you receive it from, if you know?
4 A I don’t know.
5 Q How did you get the money?
6 A A check was mailed to me to my address or when the
7 funds didn’t clear, I made arrangements and met with Milton
8 at Kaiser on Tourney Road in Santa Clarita so he could hand
9 me cash.
10 THE REPORTER: Can you spell that street name?
11 THE WITNESS: T-O-U-R-N-E-Y.
12 BY MS. LEE:
13 Q When was this?
14 A I believe it was — that handwritten receipt that
15 we were just on in Exhibit 22 or something, that was the day
16 that I met him down there.
17 Q Do you have an approximate date?
18 A I can tell you exactly. It’s on the receipt. It
19 was 3/23/14.
20 Q That was cash you said?
21 A Yes.
22 Q Not going into details, but you said you had
23 issues with the tenants; correct?
24 A Yes.
25 Q And did you tell Milton about this?
0064
1 A Yes.
2 Q And was the complaints after December 18th, 2013?
3 A Yes.
4 Q Okay. And did he address those issues with you?
5 MR. LEAR: Objection. Relevance. Goes beyond the
6 scope of the Accusation.
7 THE COURT: Sustained. Ask another question.
8 BY MS. LEE:
9 Q Did he negotiate with you regarding any of the
10 monies to be paid, the deposits to be paid or anything to be
11 dealing with money?
12 A Yes.
13 Q How so?
14 A The tenants had accumulated more dogs, and Milton
15 tried to collect extra money to cover a pet deposit but we
16 weren’t satisfied. We didn’t want the dogs there because
17 driving by the property it was clear to us that the whole
18 entire yard as decimated as it was, it wasn’t about money at
19 that point.
20 MR. LEAR: Objection. Move to strike. Relevance.
21 THE COURT: Overruled. Just barely. There’s nothing
22 alleged, with all due respect to the witness’s experience,
23 which sounded very negative, there is nothing alleged
24 regarding the bad renters as far as I can tell.
25 MS. LEE: It’s not dealing with bad renters, your
0065
1 Honor, it’s dealing with the fact that Stacey Havener
2 allowed an unlicensed person negotiate and accept money
3 regarding a rental property.
4 THE COURT: Okay. As far as the accepting money goes,
5 are we talking about the additional money regarding the
6 dogs, the pet deposit? Was that renegotiated? Because page
7 6, line 12, you got a pet deposit of $600. That’s why I’m
8 giving you some leeway, but I’m not hearing specifics about
9 that just yet.
10 MS. LEE: It goes to the previous question regarding
11 the receipts where he accepted cash on that street from
12 Complainant after he no longer had a license.
13 THE COURT: Ask another question.
14 MR. LEAR: I heard testimony that Ms. De Mascio didn’t
15 know who collected the money.
16 MS. LEE: No. Particular that one day she handed him
17 cash on a street that the court reporter asked the name of.
18 THE COURT: I want you to ask the witness a follow-up
19 question about that. That’s not what I understood. I was
20 not perfectly clear on that transaction. So go ahead and
21 ask a question. If you don’t, I’m going to.
22 BY MS. LEE:
23 Q Can you describe the transaction you described
24 that you handed cash to Milton that day in, I believe,
25 March 2015?
0066
1 THE COURT: Why don’t we do this: Now you are talking
2 about a date of March of 2015. I thought the witness went
3 and looked for a receipt which was March 23rd, 2014.
4 MS. LEE: Sorry, March 2014.
5 THE COURT: Can you show us in the record so we know
6 what you were referring to, because it’s plain that right
7 now the attorneys and I are not fully following your
8 testimony. Go ahead.
9 THE WITNESS: Okay. Let me find it again. So because
10 March’s proceeds had bounced, I had called Milton and I made
11 arrangements with him to get cash in lieu of another check
12 or cashier’s check. So he met me in Santa Clarita, which
13 was the halfway point for both parties and handed me this
14 receipt and the cash.
15 THE COURT: Okay. This receipt, you want to show us
16 where it is?
17 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir. It’s Exhibit 22, page 5.
18 THE COURT: Okay. You were just testifying about a pet
19 deposit. Is it fair to say that that’s a separate monetary
20 issue between you and Milton?
21 THE WITNESS: Correct.
22 THE COURT: Okay. Go ahead, Counsel. Ask another
23 question.
24 BY MS. LEE:
25 Q You said there was an initial agreement as to the
0067
1 dogs; correct?
2 A Correct.
3 Q What was the agreement?
4 A They would maintain four dogs on the property by
5 paying the pet deposit, and that was agreed upon in the
6 signed lease by both parties.
7 Q Okay. And was that met?
8 A No. The parties — the tenants kept adding dogs.
9 And from what I understand — from what I recall from our
10 conversations with Milton in the E-mail that I was
11 responding to is that he had negotiated with them to collect
12 more of a pet deposit to cover the amount of dogs at which
13 time I told him, “I don’t need any dogs. I don’t want the
14 dogs there, and I don’t want extra money to cover the cost
15 of the extra dogs, tell them no.”
16 Q What was the result of the negotiation with him?
17 A It didn’t go over well, and then it turned into a
18 big problem with the next rental company pertaining to the
19 deposit of the dogs and monies collected and owed.
20 Q When were these discussions about the possible
21 extra money for these dogs and deposits made?
22 A The E-mails I guess. I don’t know if we got that
23 far yet.
24 Q Can you turn to Exhibit 24. Turning to
25 specifically page 12 and 13 of Exhibit 24 —
0068
1 THE COURT: Okay. I haven’t gotten to Exhibit 24 yet,
2 so I’m just going to mark it. It’s a whole series of
3 documents and I’m going to just mark the first page, and I’m
4 going to just keep track of whatever pages for right now you
5 are going to be referring to. And so, we’ll get back to the
6 admissibility. What I would suggest is any time you have an
7 exhibit of this size, which for the record is 65 pages,
8 includes copies of — at least partial copies of contracts.
9 It includes other documents that look like maybe they are
10 receipts perhaps, E-mails, it is all interspersed. What
11 I’ll do is before I consider receiving it in evidence, I’m
12 going to want you — Ms. Lee, I’m going to want you to
13 narrow it down to whatever documents you are relying upon.
14 Go ahead. Which pages do you want to focus on?
15 (Complainant’s Exhibit 24 was marked for
16 identification by the Court.)
17 MS. LEE: Pages 12 and 13.
18 THE COURT: All right.
19 BY MS. LEE:
20 Q Are you there?
21 A Yes.
22 Q Do these two pages look familiar to you?
23 A Yes.
24 Q Can you describe them?
25 A They are E-mail correspondence between Milton, my
0069
1 husband and myself.
2 Q I know sometimes it goes to Eugene, I assume
3 that’s your husband; correct?
4 A Yes.
5 Q So how do you know that this is exactly what
6 Milton wrote to him or that he wrote to Milton?
7 THE COURT: All right. Let me ask a quick question so
8 we don’t spend an undue amount of time. Mr. Lear, is that
9 an issue with you?
10 MR. LEAR: Yes.
11 THE COURT: Okay. Go ahead and answer the question.
12 THE WITNESS: It’s in the signature of the E-mail of
13 the three correspondents and some of them and some of them
14 not. I’m having a conversation on the side with my husband,
15 and I’m also having a conversation with Milton.
16 BY MS. LEE:
17 Q So you can verify, for example, the first E-mail
18 on page 12 you are CC’d on this E-mail?
19 A Correct.
20 Q You discuss this issue with the deposits of these
21 dogs with your husband in person as well?
22 A Yes.
23 Q And the second E-mail from Milton, is that an
24 accurate — actually, page 12 and 13, are these accurate
25 E-mails to the best of your knowledge sent to and from
0070
1 Milton?
2 A Yes. The reason there’s so many E-mails is
3 because my husband and I wanted a record of the transactions
4 and the conversations. That’s why — we always contacted
5 the company together and included the other spouse so that
6 we would have a record of this because things didn’t seem —
7 we wanted a written record that we were able to refer to.
8 Q And these dates on these E-mails are correct as
9 well?
10 A Correct.
11 Q Is it accurate, for example, the second paragraph
12 when Milton writes on page number 12 that, quote, “We
13 increased the deposit by another hundred dollars?”
14 THE COURT: Okay. The document speaks for itself,
15 Counsel. I’m going to sustain my own 352 objection. Go
16 ahead and ask another question. You don’t need to read
17 portions of E-mails into the record.
18 MS. LEE: Okay.
19 BY MS. LEE:
20 Q Go to page number 17. Did you and your husband
21 write this E-mail to Milton?
22 A Yes.
23 Q Did you get any proceeds after this?
24 MR. LEAR: Objection. Relevance, your Honor. I may
25 just be the stupid one. Where does this connect to anything
0071
1 alleged in the Accusation?
2 THE COURT: Counsel, as far as the how broad the
3 question is, did you get any proceeds? This is the owner of
4 a property that was engaged for as far as I could tell many
5 months with the Respondent’s property management company.
6 Did you want to narrow the focus of that and ask another
7 question?
8 MS. LEE: Sure.
9 BY MS. LEE:
10 Q Did you receive any proceeds as a result of this
11 E-mail that you and your husband sent to Milton?
12 A Yes.
13 MR. LEAR: Objection. Relevance.
14 THE COURT: Overruled. The answer was yes?
15 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.
16 BY MS. LEE:
17 Q On page 19, it’s an E-mail from Milton saying, “I
18 will get a cashier’s check out to you today.” Did you
19 receive that cashier’s check?
20 A I believe so. I’d have to look at my receipts.
21 Q Do you have receipts handy?
22 A What exhibit did you have? Was it Exhibit 14?
23 Oh, got it. Those proceeds would have been the check that
24 bounced, and that’s why I had that handwritten receipt for
25 the transaction that happened in Santa Clarita.
0072
1 THE COURT: Ask another question, Counsel. The witness
2 already testified to that effect a little while ago.
3 BY MS. LEE:
4 Q On page number 20, did you send these E-mails —
5 did you send the E-mail to terminate your relationship with
6 All Seasons?
7 A Yes.
8 Q You sent that to Milton Hudson?
9 A I did.
10 Q Actually, page 20 and 21. Can you go to page 27?
11 Was this an E-mail you and your husband received in response
12 to your termination with the contract with them?
13 A Yes.
14 Q And noticed on the bottom, at least to my
15 knowledge, that you see the name Stacey Havener Hudson on
16 these E-mails?
17 A Correct.
18 Q And it looks like her name is on the bottom of
19 page 27 it goes on to page 28?
20 A Correct.
21 Q And that this E-mail, it also looks like it has an
22 attachment on the top. It says,
23 “DeMascioManagementAgreement.PDF?”
24 A Yes.
25 Q And was attachment page 29, 30, 31, 32 and 33?
0073
1 A Yes.
2 Q Can you describe this attachment?
3 A So I showed you the copies that we received to
4 you, the original addendums. This addendum, which is page
5 29, states that it’s addendum number I and I had never seen
6 this before until that day that it was E-mailed to me.
7 Q What does this addendum say?
8 A It says that, “Owner further agrees that this
9 agreement is valid 12 months after securing the tent. The
10 owner may opt out of the management agreement by remaining
11 tenant locate fee half a month rent from month-to-month
12 tenant or one-month rent for lease. Some exceptions apply.
13 Owners enter escrow to transfer ownership. B property is
14 foreclosed upon resulting the change of ownership and both
15 parties approve an alternate written agreement. Any
16 outstanding funds for services rendered, maintenance or
17 repairs may be subject to finance charge for 60 days.”
18 Q We can read it, but what does this mean to you?
19 A This means that this addendum was a direct result
20 of terminating All Seasons as my property manager and a way
21 to get back at me to obtain more funds.
22 Q How so?
23 A In my mind, this is blackmail. Like, shut up or
24 put up.
25 Q Why?
0074
1 A Because now they are asking for money for finder’s
2 fee for these tenants that I would need to forfeit for this
3 agreement, which I never signed. This is something else to
4 garner more money out of us that we never agreed upon. That
5 was never expressed. This is illegal. I don’t know where
6 this document even came from as far as in the natural
7 transaction of everything that happened, and I perceive this
8 as a threat.
9 Q Going back to the E-mail that this was attached
10 to, like I said, Stacey Havener, the first time you see her
11 name here. It looks like — correct me if I’m wrong. Does
12 it look like it’s forwarded from Stacey to Milton and then
13 to you?
14 A Yes. And this is a direct result of my meeting
15 with Stacey Havener because I went and saw her on the 28th
16 of March. This is dated April 1st. So this was her
17 response to my plea for assistance in my mind.
18 Q How did you feel about whether she would actually
19 help you or not?
20 A It’s apparent that she wasn’t going to, that she
21 was going to come after me for more money or try to finagle
22 more money out of me for terminating the lease for the
23 wrongdoing during the whole time, by breaking the contract.
24 Q Since you terminated your property management
25 agreement with All Seasons, did you try to find another
0075
1 property management company?
2 A I did.
3 Q And did you inform them of what was transpiring
4 with All Seasons?
5 A I did.
6 Q And your testimony here today, was it in
7 accordance with what they had advised you?
8 THE COURT: I’m going to sustain my own objection as to
9 vagueness. The witness has been testifying for some time
10 now for that being in accordance with what somebody else
11 advised her of, I have no idea that what that question
12 really gets to. It’s too broad.
13 MS. LEE: Okay.
14 BY MS. LEE:
15 Q Please turn to page 34. Did you tell your new
16 property manager that you had —
17 THE COURT: Let’s talk about Exhibit 34 since we
18 haven’t.
19 MS. LEE: No, page 34.
20 THE COURT: I’m sorry. I thought you said Exhibit 34.
21 MS. LEE: If I did, I apologize, your Honor. Page 34.
22 THE COURT: Go ahead.
23 BY MS. LEE:
24 Q Did you disclose your dealings with All Seasons to
25 your new property manager?
0076
1 A I did.
2 MR. LEAR: Objection. Relevance.
3 THE COURT: You want to make an offer of proof?
4 MS. LEE: The relevance is she’s testifying that she
5 felt like she got cheated, and whether that feeling is
6 justified or not based upon her dealings with another agent.
7 MR. LEAR: Objection. Hearsay.
8 THE COURT: I’m going to sustain the objection. The
9 witness — as far as I can tell, the witness has testified
10 sincerely since she took the stand. So further
11 justification of her feelings, I don’t believe is really
12 relevant or useful at this point.
13 MS. LEE: Okay.
14 BY MS. LEE:
15 Q Could we turn to page 38? Do you recognize this
16 E-mail?
17 A I do.
18 Q Can you tell us — not reading it, but can you
19 tell us what this is regarding?
20 A This is regarding the utilities for the property
21 that All Seasons was managing. This was her response to my
22 report to Stacey Havener that there was an agreement of All
23 Seasons to pay the water bill, and not me. That’s why the
24 extra $50 was collected in the money every month because All
25 Seasons was supposed to pay the water bill.
0077
1 Q Okay.
2 A So this is her rebuttal to my conversation with
3 her pertaining to that.
4 Q So she did not agree that they were wrong in not
5 paying the $50 per month for the water bill?
6 A Right, because she didn’t get the bill allegedly.
7 Q And both Stacey and Milton is on this E-mail?
8 A Yes.
9 Q Go to the next page, page 39. This is an E-mail
10 from Stacey to you. Is this an accurate E-mail that you
11 first gave and received from Stacey?
12 A Yes.
13 Q Going to page 40 and 41, one E-mail string. Are
14 these accurate E-mails sent between you and Milton?
15 A Yes.
16 Q And in this, I noticed that you mentioned, and he
17 mentioned some later amounts for various things, and that
18 you finally state — strike that. There’s a number of
19 amounts that both you and he states at the end. He states
20 at the end, “I will get the $840 right out to you.” Did he
21 give you $840?
22 A He did give me $840.
23 Q Was that the amount that you guys — that was
24 actually owed to you?
25 A No. We were always owed the deposit as well to
0078
1 transfer to the next company, but he didn’t pay that to us.
2 Q Why did you state that you were owed $968 and 44
3 cents but you settled for $840?
4 A At that point, I was so frustrated that I wanted
5 to make it as easy on them as possible and be done.
6 Q And did you go to Stacey to this or did she know
7 about this?
8 A I don’t recall.
9 Q Did she reach out in anyway to help you or resolve
10 any of your issues with the tenant, the water or any of
11 that?
12 A No. I believe the last E-mail was that she was
13 checking into it with her husband.
14 Q If you would turn to page 47, this is about the
15 security deposit. Can you tell us about the security
16 deposit?
17 A This was for the final accounting with All Seasons
18 Realty, and it advises me that he’s — the tenants are not
19 comfortable with us getting the security deposit for our
20 property, so he’s going to give it to them.
21 Q Did you feel that was right?
22 A From what I understand, it was illegal.
23 Q Why?
24 A Because I was consulting with — this was our
25 first time, and I was probably very ignorant through the
0079
1 process, but that’s why I enlisted the help of Pine Valley
2 Management Company, Wendy, to help me, so she was included
3 in these E-mails to advise me what was going on. So she
4 advised me that that would be illegal.
5 MR. LEAR: Objection. Hearsay. Move to strike.
6 THE COURT: Sustained. The portion regarding the
7 advice from Pine Valley is stricken.
8 BY MS. LEE:
9 Q What is your understanding of why you didn’t
10 receive the security deposit?
11 A It’s my house and the tenants hadn’t vacated the
12 premises yet. So if there were any damages, which there
13 were, that the security deposit was supposed to cover those
14 damages. And in fact, they only paid a fraction of that
15 because we had to negotiate with them to get them to sign
16 the new contract, and they were bad people. So when they
17 moved out, the things they stole and took, it didn’t even
18 cover. If I had had that original security deposit and it
19 had come to me and been reserved with Pine Valley, then we
20 would have been okay.
21 Q Did All Seasons ever give you back the deposit or
22 give you the deposit?
23 A No.
24 Q And were your damages in excess of the security
25 deposit?
0080
1 A Yes.
2 Q Do you know what they did with that security
3 deposit, if you know?
4 A The tenants told me that they got it from Milton.
5 Q But you did not receive it for sure?
6 A No.
7 Q Correct you did not receive it?
8 A I did not.
9 Q If you could go to page 57, is this an accurate
10 E-mail that you received from Milton stating that he will
11 get the money order and send it out today?
12 A Yes.
13 Q And did you eventually get that money order or no?
14 A I know I did, I just don’t remember what form it
15 was in, if it was a cashier’s check or cash. I don’t
16 recall. I’d have to check bank statements, which I don’t
17 have on me.
18 Q Can you turn to page 62. It’s an E-mail that you
19 wrote, it looks like. Did you draft this E-mail?
20 THE COURT: Take a minute and let us know whether
21 you’re ready. The question is whether you drafted it.
22 THE WITNESS: Yes. I did write this E-mail, yes.
23 BY MS. LEE:
24 Q The people receiving it and the date is correct?
25 A Yes.
0081
1 Q And that includes Stacey Havener?
2 A Yes.
3 Q In here you demand the security deposit, I assume
4 that’s what you meant?
5 A Yes.
6 Q Did you ever receive receipts from any or all
7 repairs of the property?
8 A No.
9 Q Did you receive $300 owed to you from the utility?
10 A Yes.
11 Q Okay. Was that part of the settlement that you
12 agreed to?
13 A Yes.
14 Q The NSF fee, was that part of the settlement they
15 paid off.
16 A Yes.
17 Q How did you get that settlement?
18 A That was an accumulation of the $300 for the
19 water, the 15-dollar non-sufficient return fee, the repairs
20 that we were charged for that we didn’t have receipts for,
21 so that was $128 and 44 cents. And then the deposit that
22 was set aside for the repair fund. So I waived, at that
23 point, just to settle the repair fees that we were charged
24 not taken out of the repair fund.
25 Q Did Stacey reach out to you after you sent this
0082
1 E-mail to her?
2 A I don’t think so.
3 Q Did she reach out to you in a positive way as far
4 as that she will take care of these things for you?
5 A Nope.
6 Q You state that you accepted less than what was
7 owed to you; correct?
8 A Yes.
9 Q And did Stacey ever state that she wants to make
10 you whole completely?
11 A No.
12 Q Did she ever indicate that she wanted to do that?
13 A No.
14 MS. LEE: Complainant moves those particular pages into
15 evidence, your Honor.
16 THE COURT: You mean the pages from Exhibit 24?
17 MS. LEE: Correct.
18 THE COURT: Let me see if I got it right. Pages 12,
19 13, 17, 19, 20, 21, 27, 28, 29 through 33, page 34, 38, 39,
20 40, 41, 47, page 57 and page 62. Is that your
21 understanding, Ms. Lee and Mr. Lear?
22 MR. LEAR: Yes, your Honor.
23 MS. LEE: I would like page 48 admitted as well,
24 because it’s a continuation of page 47 — pages 48 and 49
25 actually.
0083
1 THE COURT: Okay. Page 47, 48 —
2 MS. LEE: And page 49. I believe page 47 was one of
3 the pages — they are an E-mail string.
4 THE COURT: All right. Pages 47, 48, 49 as well. Any
5 objection to these pages of Exhibit 24 being received?
6 MR. LEAR: Yes. Objection based on relevance to pages
7 12 through 13 and page 17.
8 THE COURT: Okay. Let me take a look at those. Pages
9 12 and 13, I’m going to overrule the relevance objection
10 only because there’s an allegation regarding a pet deposit.
11 That doesn’t mean I’m going to give it a lot of weight, so
12 that’s overruled. Page 17 is regarding much of the
13 testimony we heard from the witness about March 2014 and the
14 problem of non-payment, so that’s overruled as well.
15 (Complainant’s Exhibit 24 was received in evidence
16 by the Court.)
17 MR. LEAR: No other objections.
18 THE COURT: Thank you. Then those pages I indicated of
19 Exhibit 24 will be received. Everything else, I’m going to
20 return to you, Counsel, probably today. I’m going to have
21 to go off the record later and take them out. Unless you
22 intend to use them with other witnesses, you want me to keep
23 it together?
24 MS. LEE: No.
25 THE COURT: All right. How much more direct have you
0084
1 got for this witness?
2 MS. LEE: I need to admit two more documents, your
3 Honor. Exhibit 14, which is her complaint. I’d like to
4 admit Exhibit 14 into evidence.
5 THE COURT: Right. Exhibit 14 we’ve already marked and
6 her testimony. Is there any objection to Exhibit 14, the
7 electronic copy of the complaint?
8 MR. LEAR: Yes. Objection. Relevance. This is a
9 complaint against Milton Hudson.
10 THE COURT: Overruled. Exhibit 14 is received.
11 (Complainant’s Exhibit 14 was received in evidence
12 by the Court.)
13 BY MS. LEE:
14 Q Exhibit 15, please. Can you describe these
15 documents?
16 A This is the welcome packet that we received from
17 All Seasons Property Management when we enlisted them as our
18 property manager.
19 THE COURT: All right. I’m going to mark these
20 documents as Exhibit 15. Go ahead, Counsel.
21 (Complainant’s Exhibit 15 was marked for
22 identification by the Court.)
23 BY MS. LEE:
24 Q Milton Hudson sent these to you?
25 A We were handed this when we signed our lease and
0085
1 went down there to hand it to him and give him the keys.
2 Q It mentions on page 4 they offer locating a tenant
3 services. Did you receive such services?
4 THE REPORTER: What was that?
5 MS. LEE: Locating a tenant.
6 BY MS. LEE:
7 Q And screening a tenant?
8 A I don’t know if they did or they didn’t. I just
9 know that they located a tenant, and clearly didn’t fall
10 under this criteria. But I am not sure what vetting they
11 actually did with the tenants.
12 MR. LEAR: Objection. Move to strike. Goes beyond the
13 scope of the Accusation.
14 THE COURT: It goes beyond the scope of the Accusation?
15 MR. LEAR: There’s an insinuation that vetting was part
16 of the requirement of Mr. Hudson with respect to the
17 tenants. There’s no allegation in the Accusation that there
18 was a failure to vet or there was a duty by Mr. Hudson to
19 vet. And by the way, Mr. Hudson is not the Respondent here.
20 THE COURT: It sounds like a relevance objection.
21 Counsel, is there a relevant issue as far as whatever
22 vetting Mr. Hudson did with regard to those renters?
23 MS. LEE: I think it goes to the result of what
24 happened that was on Stacey Havener’s watch because the
25 tenants —
0086
1 THE COURT: Here’s the thing: Ms. De Mascio, correct
2 me if I’m wrong, but I heard you testify that you really
3 didn’t know what kind of vetting they did.
4 THE WITNESS: That’s correct.
5 THE COURT: Okay. I’m going to sustain the objection.
6 I’m not going to strike the testimony because that’s
7 important testimony for this ruling. She doesn’t know what
8 the vetting process involved. Go ahead and ask another
9 question.
10 BY MS. LEE:
11 Q Were they supposed to find a proper tenant for
12 you?
13 MR. LEAR: Objection. Relevance, and vague and
14 ambiguous as to “they.” All of the testimony has been that
15 the initial dealings were with Milton Hudson. As page two
16 of this document itself indicates, Mr. Hudson was the broker
17 and Ms. Havener was broker sales manager and on the sales
18 staff, not on the management staff.
19 THE COURT: I’m going to sustain the objection on my
20 own grounds of that this is cumulative. The witness has
21 testified at length about the many negative experiences that
22 she perceived based on who the renters were and her
23 testimony earlier that Mr. Hudson had located the renters
24 for her at the beginning of the agreement. We really
25 covered this.
0087
1 MS. LEE: Fair enough. Can we move Exhibit 15 into
2 evidence?
3 THE COURT: Any objection to Exhibit 15 being received?
4 MR. LEAR: No objection.
5 THE COURT: All right. No objection, Exhibit 15 is
6 received.
7 (Complainant’s Exhibit 15 was received in evidence
8 by the Court.)
9 BY MS. LEE:
10 Q As a result of this experience, did you report
11 this to anyone?
12 A I did.
13 Q Who did you report to?
14 A The Real Estate Board.
15 Q Anyone else?
16 MR. LEAR: Objection. Relevance.
17 THE WITNESS: Yes.
18 THE COURT: Okay. The relevance?
19 MS. LEE: The consequences of what this has done to
20 her. Why would you report something if you didn’t feel like
21 it was important to you or you agreed?
22 THE COURT: All right. I’m going to sustain the
23 objection. I don’t know that that’s relevant. The witness
24 has testified very confidently about her experiences up
25 until now. Go ahead. Ask another question. We know that
0088
1 she made a complaint to the Bureau because we saw her
2 complaint form and she testified about its contents and much
3 further. Unless the case involves another matter, and it
4 certainly isn’t alleged, I think you should just really ask
5 another question.
6 MS. LEE: Okay.
7 BY MS. LEE:
8 Q Going back to the addendums I, II and III that
9 were not signed, they were a part of Exhibit 17, the
10 residential lease, did you receive that from All Seasons
11 Realty, those forms?
12 A They were part of the original lease that we had
13 signed and submitted to All Seasons Realty, the first three
14 addendums.
15 Q So they were together with the original
16 residential lease that was signed?
17 A Yes. On our side. I’m not sure why I don’t have
18 a signed copy from the other parties. But that was part of
19 the original lease, that’s what we bruised while we were
20 negotiating the contract.
21 Q Did you receive this — the entirety of Exhibit
22 17, which is the residential lease and the addendum I, II
23 and III, did you receive this from All Seasons Realty?
24 A Yes.
25 Q All right. So to the best of your knowledge, they
0089
1 are the ones that typed this up; correct?
2 A Yes.
3 Q And in fact, the bottom of addendum I, II and III
4 states it’s by Milton Hudson of All Seasons Realty?
5 A Yes.
6 Q And again, you stated that you had signed —
7 strike that. Have you ever seen a signed copy of addendum
8 I, II and III?
9 A Maybe.
10 Q When you brought up — for example, you brought up
11 addendum I and the obligations therein. Did you bring up
12 the issues in addendum I to Milton Hudson ever, such as
13 illegal activity should not be on the premises?
14 A When we’re referring to addendum I, we’re talking
15 about the one that was issued originally, not the
16 supplemental addendum I that I was sent after I complained?
17 THE COURT: Here’s the thing: We got two versions of
18 the addendum, so, Counsel, you got to clarify for the record
19 what you are referring to because right now I can’t keep up.
20 And there’s no way someone later reading this transcript is
21 going to know what the witness is referring to. You got to
22 be more specific, please.
23 BY MS. LEE:
24 Q Let’s refer to Exhibit 17, page 6A. This one was
25 indicated August 20th of 2013, and the second to last
0090
1 paragraph states, quote, “Tenants acknowledge that this
2 property has zero tolerance for illegal activity?”
3 A Correct.
4 Q This was part of the original contract?
5 A Yes.
6 Q And did you ever bring up this term regarding zero
7 tolerance of lewd activity to Milton Hudson?
8 A Yes.
9 Q Did he deny that was a part of the contract?
10 A No.
11 Q Did he acknowledge that was part of the contract?
12 A Yes.
13 Q Let’s go to addendum II, which is Exhibit 17, page
14 7. And this refers to winterizing the house; correct?
15 A Yes.
16 Q And you had discussed winterizing the house with
17 Milton Hudson before?
18 A Yes.
19 Q And did he acknowledge the terms here in that the
20 responsibility is of the tenants?
21 A Yes.
22 Q Did he ever say anything that would deny that
23 these were the terms of your contract?
24 A There was a receipt that he sent us for allegedly
25 winterizing our cooler, which maybe he forgot.
0091
1 Q Did he take that back?
2 A Yes, when we called him out on it.
3 Q And then addendum III, which is Exhibit 17, page
4 8. This refers to the tenant agreeing to pay $50 a month
5 for the water bill?
6 A Right.
7 Q Then Milton Hudson denied that it was the tenants’
8 responsibility to pay the $50 — strike that. The tenants
9 — as part of what the tenants paid to All Seasons, was that
10 part of it the $50 that was supposed to be for the water
11 bill?
12 A Correct. They paid $1100 a month, and that first
13 $50 off the top of that was to go to the water company.
14 THE COURT: Counsel, this is cumulative. I recall
15 specifically writing notes as to this testimony a couple
16 hours ago.
17 MS. LEE: No further questions.
18 THE COURT: All right. It’s noon time, so we’re going
19 to take a recess and come back at 1:30. Beforehand, I want
20 to ask you, Counsel, what other witnesses do you have
21 planned for this afternoon?
22 MS. LEE: According to the Accusation, I have a person
23 for the third cause of action and a person for the fifth
24 cause of action.
25 THE COURT: Okay. And they’re both going to be here
0092
1 this afternoon?
2 MS. LEE: Yes.
3 THE COURT: How long do you think your direct is going
4 to be on the witnesses? Your time estimate.
5 MS. LEE: An hour and a half.
6 THE COURT: Per witness?
7 MS. LEE: Probably.
8 THE COURT: I would imagine — first of all, this
9 witness has been on the stand for two and a half hours,
10 including breaks and Mr. Lear hadn’t even done cross. You
11 can have them both come here, but what I would suggest you
12 do is — we’ll talk — if we get through the first witness
13 you call this afternoon, and we see how much time is left
14 over we can talk about excusing the second witness because I
15 think that based on the length of time for testimony of this
16 first witness, if the others are similar, you figure they
17 would be 90 minutes each. I can’t imagine us getting
18 through both of them this afternoon. Just keep that in
19 mind. You might have one of them on call if they are close
20 by. Whoever your second witness you would call in the
21 afternoon would be, maybe you can have that person on call
22 so they don’t have to sit here all afternoon because I’m not
23 really confident that we’re going to get through two more
24 witnesses at the rate we’re going. You can take your time
25 to put your case on. I’m not telling you how to do it, but
0093
1 we’re going to break at 5:00 o’clock, and we’re not going
2 any later than that. Just keep that in mind. Off the
3 record.
4 (Recess)
5 THE COURT: Back on the record.
6 MR. LEAR: We stipulated to some allegations. Do you
7 want me to put the stipulation on the record?
8 THE COURT: You can do that when we come back. We’ll
9 start with your cross-examination at 1:30. Off the record.
10 (Lunch Recess)
11 THE COURT: We’re back on the record.
12 Cross-examination of Ms. De Mascio. You can proceed. Go
13 ahead.
14 MR. LEAR: Thank you.
15
16 CROSS-EXAMINATION
17 BY MR. LEAR:
18 Q Ms. De Mascio, they were bad people; right?
19 A Not bad people, but bad tenants.
20 Q You said, quote, unquote, “Bad people;” right?
21 A Yes.
22 Q You never sued them, did you?
23 A No.
24 Q Now, in fact, you allowed them to stay in your
25 home for beyond the one-year term of the lease?
0094
1 A Correct.
2 Q All right. Why didn’t you sue them?
3 A A couple of reasons: One, we didn’t have any
4 address or way to get a hold of them, and two, my funds were
5 completely depleted in order to retain an attorney.
6 Q Why didn’t you evict them?
7 A Because I couldn’t retain the attorney to do that
8 either.
9 Q How about the really simple solution. Why not —
10 why did you extend their lease?
11 A Something you have to understand with the tenants
12 was the fact they were very threatening, they had threatened
13 my husband and myself a couple of times. We have police
14 reports the San Dimas Sheriff’s Department came out and took
15 reports for us. We would tell them they have to go, and
16 they would beg. We were just at our wit’s end dealing with
17 these people. Everything was a battle. Everything was
18 drama. Finally, we would not extend the lease anymore and
19 told them, “You have to get out,” when in fact they had
20 offered to purchase the property, and we said no. And then
21 they actually vacated the premises a month early stating
22 that they were victims from what had transpired with the
23 neighbor behind them.
24 Q Let’s go back to the residential lease, which is
25 Exhibit 17, page 1, paragraph 2. You agree that the lease
0095
1 terminated on August 31, 2014?
2 A Correct.
3 Q You agree that you didn’t have to hire an attorney
4 to simply say, “Your lease is up. Bye-bye;” right?
5 A Right.
6 Q That doesn’t cost you money to do that; right?
7 A No.
8 Q You didn’t do that?
9 A Did not.
10 Q But you are here today blaming Milton Hudson for
11 having put in bad tenants; right?
12 A Yes.
13 Q And yet, when you had a chance to get the bad
14 tenants out of there, you didn’t do that. Why?
15 A We were told that because they paid their rent on
16 time and that we couldn’t prove any of the legal activity
17 allegedly that was happening there, with all of that stuff
18 that was going on, that we really couldn’t do that based on
19 them just having extra dogs or whatever the case may be. So
20 they kept saying they paid the rent, we’re trying to catch
21 up, they were paying but we had no idea what was really
22 going on in the house. So that being said, that’s why we
23 then terminated them.
24 Q Are you blaming Milton Hudson for the fact the
25 tenants stayed in your home beyond August 31, 2014?
0096
1 MS. LEE: Objection. Vague.
2 THE COURT: Did you understand the question?
3 THE WITNESS: I did.
4 THE COURT: You said you did?
5 THE WITNESS: Yes.
6 THE COURT: Overruled. Go ahead. You may answer.
7 THE WITNESS: I was trying to think of the answer.
8 What was the question?
9 BY MR. LEAR:
10 Q Are you blaming Milton Hudson for the fact that
11 the tenants stayed in your home beyond August 31, 2014?
12 A No, not that part of it, no.
13 Q Are you blaming Milton Hudson for the fact that
14 the tenants made threats against you?
15 A That would be subjective only because they were
16 difficult with him. They were difficult with us. We were
17 young and inexperienced.
18 Q Yes or no?
19 A I honestly can’t answer that.
20 Q Are you blaming Milton Hudson for the damage to
21 the property that the tenants caused?
22 A Yes.
23 Q Was Milton Hudson over at the home with a
24 sledgehammer?
25 A No.
0097
1 Q What did Milton Hudson do that caused damage to
2 your property?
3 A Per the lease agreement, he was supposed to do
4 inspections. That was part of the lease agreement and keep
5 an eye on the property for us and report back to us if
6 things weren’t being managed properly and he never did.
7 Q Let’s talk about Milton Hudson. He didn’t abandon
8 you, did he?
9 A Yeah, there were a couple of times where I
10 couldn’t reach him for whatever reason and it got pretty
11 terse [sic] between us and the tenants because he was not
12 mitigating what was going on, so yes.
13 Q Wouldn’t you agree that Milton Hudson was
14 responsive to your E-mails?
15 A Occasionally, not always. If I couldn’t reach him
16 then I would have Eugene try because he wasn’t responsive.
17 And then we would try to get a hold of him and he said he
18 would call us, but my number wasn’t working or whatever the
19 case may be. I’ve had the same number for the last 15
20 years.
21 Q Wouldn’t you agree that in the 65 pages or so of
22 E-mails that are part of Exhibit 24 that each time you or
23 your husband E-mailed Milton Hudson he responded?
24 A Like I said, it wasn’t always. We would have to
25 chase him down or try to call him and the office.
0098
1 Q Do you want to go through every E-mail?
2 A We can. You can see there’s days that elapsed
3 between the responses.
4 Q But he did respond?
5 A Maybe eventually, yes, but that’s why I went to
6 Stacey because there was a point in time where he wasn’t
7 responding at all, and I couldn’t reach him.
8 Q Show me one E-mail in Exhibit 24 in which he did
9 not respond to you.
10 MS. LEE: Objection. It presumes all of the E-mails
11 ever sent are in this exhibit.
12 THE WITNESS: That is true.
13 THE COURT: That’s not a legal objection. Think about
14 it. You got to make legal objections, Counsel.
15 MS. LEE: Argumentative and assumes facts not in
16 evidence.
17 THE COURT: It’s not argumentative. It’s overruled.
18 MS. LEE: And assumes facts not in evidence.
19 THE COURT: I don’t know if those facts are in
20 evidence. I thought Exhibit 24 came from the witness; isn’t
21 that right?
22 MS. LEE: Yes.
23 THE COURT: Okay. She’s being asked to look through an
24 exhibit that she provided. I don’t see there’s anything
25 improper about that. She doesn’t have to assume anything.
0099
1 She just has to look through it, and she’s being asked to
2 show a specific example. I don’t know. We’ll see. As you
3 can see, I’m not pouring over it because it’s not my
4 exhibit. Ms. De Mascio, you go ahead and take your time. I
5 know there’s a lot of documents there. Only a handful are
6 used.
7 THE WITNESS: I can tell you too that these aren’t all
8 of the E-mails.
9 THE COURT: Right. I understand. This is what we have
10 to work with.
11 THE WITNESS: That’s fine.
12 THE COURT: Off the record.
13 (Recess)
14 THE COURT: Back on the record. The witness was
15 looking through Exhibit 24, which is many pages long, and so
16 far only a handful of those pages have been received in
17 evidence. I believe the question from Mr. Lear was, can you
18 look through these to determine whether there are any
19 E-mails that you sent, which Milton, the Respondent’s
20 husband, did not Respondent to or return? Did you have a
21 chance to look at those E-mails.
22 THE WITNESS: I did.
23 THE COURT: Did you locate any?
24 THE WITNESS: I did not in here, no, but I know I have
25 some.
0100
1 THE COURT: Go ahead, Mr. Lear.
2 BY MR. LEAR:
3 Q What threats did the tenants make?
4 A They threatened to take us to court. They
5 threatened to sue us. They threatened to sue All Seasons
6 Realty, and said that they had friends in places and that
7 they were untouchable.
8 Q Were any of those threats the fault of Milton
9 Hudson?
10 A Indirectly, yes.
11 Q He didn’t threaten you, did he?
12 A Milton, no.
13 Q In fact, during the course of the relationship you
14 had with Milton Hudson, he was trying to resolve the
15 problems between landlord and tenant, wasn’t he?
16 A On some accounts, yes.
17 Q And the E-mails that are part of Exhibit 24 were
18 in part communications about his attempts to resolve issues;
19 right?
20 A Yeah.
21 Q Okay. On or around April 28th of 2014, you were
22 frustrated beyond belief with the situation with the
23 tenants, would you agree?
24 A Yes.
25 Q And on that day you believed that both the tenants
0101
1 and All Seasons owed you money; right?
2 A Yes.
3 Q And you decided that the BRE, Bureau of Real
4 Estate, would be a good collection agency on your behalf?
5 A No. I wasn’t looking for the refunded money or
6 the outstanding cost, I just wanted them to be aware of what
7 was going on.
8 Q On that date, it was at the forefront of your mind
9 to get back the money that Milton Hudson owed you; right?
10 A Yes.
11 Q And taking a look at Exhibit 14, you submitted the
12 complaint to the BRE at 6:43 p.m.; right?
13 A Correct.
14 Q You thought about it a little bit and then you
15 engaged that same day with Milton Hudson via E-mail, didn’t
16 you?
17 A Maybe. I don’t recall.
18 Q In fact, you testified earlier that you were at
19 the limits of your frustration and wanted to resolve this
20 matter with Milton Hudson; correct?
21 A Correct.
22 Q And that was April 28th, even after 6:43 p.m. You
23 know what I’m referring to because you’re going to look for
24 that E-mail right now; right?
25 A I want to verify that what you are saying is true.
0102
1 Q That E-mail was right around 10:00 p.m., page 40
2 of Exhibit 24.
3 THE COURT: Okay. So Exhibit 24, page 40. Thank you.
4 BY MR. LEAR:
5 Q So at the height of your frustration you submitted
6 a complaint to the BRE to get your money, and then later
7 that night you wrote an E-mail to Milton Hudson proposing a
8 settlement, and that E-mail is page 40 of Exhibit 24;
9 correct?
10 A Yes.
11 Q Milton Hudson is not the one that initiated the
12 settlement discussion; correct?
13 A There were — and I can’t go back in time to tell
14 you, but there were also phone conversations as well. Those
15 aren’t recorded, so we were trying to get a hold of him.
16 Unfortunately, as repulsive as it was, between the tenants
17 and myself with trying to get resolution because they were
18 done with Milton and we were done with Milton. And for a
19 little bit there, we tried to work together, but that was no
20 good and then it just got worse. I was trying to get a
21 resolution with my tenants to get them to sign a new
22 contract because they were such a headache. Every month it
23 was something.
24 Q I’m focusing on your relationship with Milton
25 Hudson now, and my question generally is that it was your
0103
1 idea to settle for $840, not Milton’s?
2 A Correct, but he lowballed it in his original quote
3 anyways.
4 Q That’s in the E-mail on page 41; correct? And to
5 clarify, that’s the E-mail on page 41?
6 A Yes.
7 Q And your response was, “No, Milton, you’re wrong.
8 You actually owe $968.44, but I’ll settle for $840?
9 A Right.
10 Q And then immediately or shortly thereafter he
11 agreed; correct?
12 A Yes.
13 Q And as you testified earlier today, he paid?
14 A Yes.
15 Q Okay. He owes you no money as we sit here today;
16 correct?
17 A If I made agreements with him to pay the tenants
18 their deposit, then I would say no because we settled, and I
19 wasn’t going to keep going after it.
20 Q So you agree that on or about April 28th, 2014,
21 you and Milton Hudson entered into a full settlement?
22 A Yes.
23 Q Okay. So you didn’t need the BRE’s involvement
24 anymore, did you, because you got your money?
25 A It had nothing to do with that at all.
0104
1 Q You seem really mad at Stacey Havener because she
2 wasn’t empathetic enough in the meeting you had with her;
3 was that accurate?
4 A Not mad, no.
5 Q Frustrated?
6 A Yes.
7 Q And you only ever had one meeting with her;
8 correct?
9 A One meeting, yes, and a couple corresponding via
10 E-mail, yes.
11 Q You are here today to try to have her license
12 revoked because that meeting didn’t go so well; is that
13 right?
14 A I’m not here to have her license revoked, I’m here
15 to tell the truth and that is not my decision.
16 Q You know that this hearing is about the revocation
17 or not of Ms. Havener’s license?
18 A Okay.
19 Q And the only evidence that you have to suggest
20 that she should be revoked is you had a meeting where she
21 wasn’t emotional enough for your needs?
22 MS. LEE: Objection. Misstates the evidence.
23 THE COURT: It misstates the testimony. She said she’s
24 not here to have the Respondent’s license revoked, she’s got
25 nothing to do with that decision.
0105
1 MR. LEAR: I’ll rephrase.
2 THE COURT: Thank you.
3 BY MR. LEAR:
4 Q Your only complaint with her is that she wasn’t
5 emotional enough in that meeting; correct?
6 A No, that’s not my only complaint.
7 Q She wasn’t sympathetic to your needs?
8 A That’s not what it’s about.
9 Q This is really about Milton Hudson, isn’t it?
10 A This is about All Seasons Realty and the injustice
11 and shenanigans and the — this is criminal. This is what I
12 do. And I won’t be ripped off like this. This is
13 ridiculous. This never had to happen this way. This was
14 supposed to be a respectable company that had a job to do
15 that failed to do that. In the interim, I had to chase and
16 do and go through a bunch of nonsense to even try to get
17 things a little right.
18 Q You said, “This is what I do.” I thought you
19 worked for the Animal Control Department?
20 A Correct.
21 Q Is what you do going out and enforcing alleged
22 crimes against individuals?
23 A I investigate allegations of crimes that may or
24 may not have been committed, and I do file criminally
25 against when people do violate the law, yes, it’s my job.
0106
1 Q Only with regard to animals; right?
2 A No, not necessarily.
3 Q Are you doing any fraud investigations?
4 MS. LEE: Objection. Relevance.
5 THE COURT: Offer the proof.
6 MR. LEAR: She brought it up. This is what she does,
7 quote, unquote.
8 THE COURT: All right. Overruled.
9 THE WITNESS: You don’t know me.
10 THE COURT: The question — here is what I want to make
11 sure you are focused on, is the questions. And this one had
12 to do with whether or not you do fraud investigations. Just
13 answer that question, please.
14 THE WITNESS: In regards to my personal life or my
15 professional life?
16 BY MR. LEAR:
17 Q Professional. This is what you do.
18 A Okay, yes.
19 Q You investigate criminal charges with respect to
20 Real Estate transactions; is that right?
21 A Not Real Estate, no.
22 Q This is not what you do at all, is it?
23 A Not Real Estate, but fraud is part of any kind of
24 counterfeit, certificates or medical proof or something
25 along those lines. But no, I’m not savvy with Real Estate,
0107
1 no.
2 Q Okay. And you are with Animal Control?
3 A Correct.
4 Q So is it accurate to say that what you do has to
5 do with investigating issues concerning animals?
6 MS. LEE: Objection. Asked and answered.
7 THE COURT: I’m sorry, investigating?
8 MR. LEAR: Issues having to do with animals.
9 THE COURT: Overruled.
10 THE WITNESS: Yes.
11 BY MR. LEAR:
12 Q You don’t really have any background to make an
13 assertion under the penalty of perjury against my client
14 that she is engaged in criminal activity?
15 MS. LEE: Objection. She’s not here as a legal
16 analyst. She’s here as a witness of what happened to her in
17 her transactions.
18 THE COURT: Overruled. Her testimony was that in her
19 opinion it was criminal conduct. You can answer.
20 THE WITNESS: I’m sorry, but scheming off the top of
21 proceeds would be criminal, don’t you think? If I hadn’t
22 had develop into Crystal Mutual Water Company, I would have
23 never discovered that, in fact, they weren’t being paid and
24 I have this outrageous bill to pay.
25 ///
0108
1 BY MR. LEAR:
2 Q Since you are such a criminal expert —
3 MS. LEE: Objection. Argumentative.
4 THE COURT: I’m going to sustain it. So far, the tone
5 has been very professional but let’s try to leave out that
6 commentary.
7 MR. LEAR: Withdraw. Thank you, your Honor. I
8 apologize.
9 BY MR. LEAR:
10 Q Do you agree that for someone to commit a crime
11 there needs to be mens rea?
12 MS. LEE: Objection. Again, she’s not a legal analyst.
13 MR. LEAR: This is what she does, your Honor.
14 THE COURT: I’m going to overrule the objection because
15 I didn’t hear the whole question. I want you — this is the
16 moment where I was talking about four hours ago, and I said
17 this is an adversary proceeding. I want you to be really
18 patient and make sure the question is done and a few seconds
19 had gone by, because Counsel may very well object to this
20 question or the next one or the next. Go ahead and ask the
21 full question, Mr. Lear.
22 MR. LEAR: Thank you.
23 BY MR. LEAR:
24 Q In order for a crime to be committed, there needs
25 to be mens rea; correct?
0109
1 MS. LEE: Objection. That’s not true. What crime?
2 There’s various crimes.
3 THE COURT: I’m going to sustain the objection.
4 MR. LEAR: Thank you. I’ll clarify.
5 BY MR. LEAR:
6 Q In order to be guilty of a crime of
7 misappropriation, there needs to be mens rea; correct?
8 MS. LEE: Objection. Misappropriation is a criminal
9 art. I need a code to look up what that means, quite
10 frankly.
11 THE COURT: Overruled. Do you understand the question?
12 THE WITNESS: No.
13 BY MR. LEAR:
14 Q Let me restate it. You used the term “scheming
15 off the top” and you implied — not even implied, you
16 explicitly stated that in your professional background,
17 scheming money off the top is a crime?
18 A Correct.
19 Q Is mens rea an element that you would consider in
20 your conclusion of the fact that scheming off the top is a
21 crime?
22 A Can you define “mens rea” please?
23 Q I will after I probe you about your criminal
24 background?
25 A My criminal background?
0110
1 Q I’m sorry, your criminal education background.
2 Please describe your criminal education background.
3 A I’ve worked for 20 years — 20 plus years doing
4 animal control. I do — file cases regarding animal laws
5 pertaining to animals in the City of Los Angeles and
6 ownership thereof. I go after hoarders. I file against
7 people who neglect their animals, for lack of medical care,
8 starvation or any number of those things, too many animals,
9 illegal harboring of animals, yes, it all has to do with
10 animals, but it doesn’t take the professional or somebody
11 who maybe had not have enough experience in Real Estate to
12 understand that there was fraud in this case.
13 THE COURT: Okay. I want you to focus on the question.
14 The question had to do with your background and experience.
15 MS. LEE: Your Honor, I’m going to object to this line
16 of questioning. The witness is here not as an expert
17 witness. We have not presented her as an expert witness.
18 We’ve only offered her as a witness to what’s happened,
19 factually speaking, that’s up to your Honor to actually
20 determine the legal ramifications of what these facts mean.
21 THE COURT: Well, here’s my thinking. I really try
22 hard not to cut off entire lines of questioning, and as for
23 both the Agency and Defense Attorney, because I don’t
24 necessarily always know where you are going when I’m hearing
25 your case. It’s going to take me time to digest both sides
0111
1 of the case and that’s why I have 30 days to write a
2 decision. With that being said, the reason I’m allowing for
3 some questioning right now on this topic is, as I indicated
4 before when I ruled on one of the objections a few minutes
5 ago, the witness did testify about her background as an
6 Animal Control Official, basically, for many years and she
7 did offer an opinion on direct that this was criminal
8 misconduct. I know that wasn’t alleged, but this is part of
9 her testimony and you would probably agree that to call this
10 criminal, that’s a fairly strong statement.
11 And I think that the Defense should have the right
12 to at least ask some questions as to what the basis of that
13 opinion is. I can tell you I’m not going to let Mr. Lear
14 linger with it too long because there’s only so much to be
15 gained from this line of questioning. It really comes from
16 only a couple of remarks, but the remarks were very strong.
17 And in the witness’s opinion, it was criminal misconduct.
18 Go ahead, ask another question. Was there a question
19 pending? I think there was.
20 MR. LEAR: I don’t recall.
21 THE COURT: I’m certain there was a question pending.
22 Go ahead and read back the question.
23 (Record read)
24 THE COURT: Right. What I’d like you to do, if you
25 can, cross-examination is different from direct. Direct
0112
1 examination allows typically for a more of a narrative.
2 Mr. Lear, if he asks you a question on cross, I want you to
3 really listen to the question and answer the question to the
4 best of your ability, and then stop and wait for another
5 question.
6 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.
7 THE COURT: Counsel for the Agency is going to have an
8 opportunity to do redirect examination so she can ask you
9 further questions on some of the same topics if she chooses.
10 I just really want you to focus on the question and giving
11 your best answer to each question then wait for the next
12 one.
13 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.
14 THE COURT: Go ahead, Mr. Lear.
15 MR. LEAR: I’ll cut to the chase, your Honor.
16 BY MR. LEAR:
17 Q You’ve accused my client, Ms. Havener, of being a
18 criminal; do you agree?
19 A Yes.
20 Q I want you to assume that in order for it to be a
21 crime, Ms. Havener needed to have the intent to steal from
22 you. Do you have any evidence of that?
23 A My addendum that I received.
24 Q Could you point that out for the record, please?
25 Is it Exhibit 24, page 29?
0113
1 A Yes.
2 Q So this is your evidence in support of the fact
3 that Ms. Havener is a criminal in your eyes?
4 A This was a bargaining chip, and yes.
5 Q In connection with your comment that you were
6 being blackmailed?
7 A Correct.
8 Q Okay. And that was because she sent you an E-mail
9 with this attachment, you construed that as blackmail,
10 therefore, she’s a criminal; right?
11 A Yes.
12 Q Okay. Do you have any other evidence that
13 Ms. Havener is a criminal?
14 A Besides the fact that her husband was working
15 under her license when his was revoked?
16 Q Are you a Real Estate expert now?
17 A No.
18 MS. LEE: Objection. Argumentative. That was a
19 factual statement that she made.
20 THE COURT: Sustained.
21 BY MR. LEAR:
22 Q Do you have any basis to link your statement about
23 the fact that Milton Hudson was working under Ms. Havener’s
24 license as being a criminal act?
25 MS. LEE: Objection. Again, this calls for a legal
0114
1 conclusion.
2 THE COURT: Overruled.
3 THE WITNESS: I do. I have the printout from the Real
4 Estate Board reflecting his surrendering of his license. It
5 might be in here. I’m not sure.
6 BY MR. LEAR:
7 Q That makes Ms. Havener a criminal; correct?
8 A From what I understand — look, again, I’m not a
9 Real Estate expert, but what I was told was that he wouldn’t
10 be allowed to keep doing what he was doing by surrendering
11 his license, and he was doing it under hers.
12 Q And you heard that from a lawyer?
13 A No. I heard that from a lot of people.
14 Q A lot of non-lawyers?
15 A Maybe they are lawyers.
16 MS. LEE: Objection. Probative value and relevance as
17 far as what her belief is as far as whether an unlicensed
18 person can conduct unlicensed activities under another
19 person’s license.
20 THE COURT: What was the last question? Could you read
21 it back?
22 (Record read)
23 THE COURT: Overruled. Can you answer that?
24 MS. LEE: I believe she answered that, your Honor.
25 THE WITNESS: I can’t tell you. I don’t know if they
0115
1 are a lawyer.
2 BY MR. LEAR:
3 Q Your testimony generally is you heard from a lot
4 of people that the fact Milton Hudson was working under
5 Stacey Havener’s license makes her a criminal?
6 A Maybe not her, but from what I understand, that is
7 illegal.
8 Q Okay. We’re here because of Ms. Havener who is on
9 trial today; right? And you are calling her a criminal.
10 And so, I’m entitled to figure out all of your basis for
11 making the statement that my client is a criminal.
12 A All I know is what I have, which is my experience
13 with it, which was that money was being skimmed off the top,
14 that money was being misappropriated somehow because my
15 checks weren’t clearing, that I went to her expecting some
16 kind of resolution or answers or assistance, and I didn’t
17 get that. Instead, I got an addendum that was what I
18 interpreted as hostile because I’m asking for help but I’m
19 getting more nonsense. I’m not sure.
20 Q Okay. Fair enough. With respect to what you just
21 testified to, that’s everything that you have as evidence to
22 show that my client is a criminal; correct?
23 A That there were probably criminal — yes.
24 Q Okay. Stacey Havener doesn’t owe you any money,
25 does she?
0116
1 A No, because we settled.
2 THE COURT: You have to keep your voice level up. Say
3 that again.
4 THE WITNESS: No, because it’s done. We’re done.
5 THE COURT: Thank you.
6 MR. LEAR: I have nothing further, your Honor.
7 THE COURT: All right. Redirect?
8
9 REDIRECT EXAMINATION
10 BY MS. LEE:
11 Q Going to Exhibit 23 and 24. Are these all of the
12 E-mails and correspondence between you and Milton Hudson?
13 A No.
14 Q These are the only ones you sent me, though;
15 correct?
16 A Correct.
17 Q Is there a reason you picked these particular
18 E-mails and didn’t send me everything that you had from
19 Milton Hudson?
20 A These are the E-mails that I had. My husband has
21 others, but I didn’t forward you his because he wasn’t
22 coming to testify.
23 Q And did Milton Hudson respond to every one of
24 these E-mails?
25 A Probably eventually, but there would be a big
0117
1 lapse in time, but yes.
2 Q Even when he did respond, technically as typing in
3 some words to a computer, was his answer satisfactory to you
4 all the time?
5 A No.
6 Q Was his answer regarding the dogs satisfactory as
7 far as going back and forth about perhaps a deposit can be
8 made or anything like that?
9 A No.
10 Q Okay. As far as when you asked regarding the
11 water not being paid and actually Stacey Havener was the one
12 that responded, were you satisfied with that response that
13 she gave?
14 A No.
15 Q Why not?
16 A Because I wish I had known. That was a big chunk
17 of money that I had to forward to the water company when I
18 was pretty sure, according to our lease, that they were
19 taking care of that. I don’t know why it wasn’t shut off.
20 Q And you mentioned during cross a lot of complaints
21 that you had with the tenants. Did you inform Stacey that
22 you weren’t happy with tenants?
23 A Yes.
24 Q She was well aware?
25 A Yes.
0118
1 Q And the reasons why you weren’t happy with them?
2 A Yes.
3 Q What was her response?
4 A I don’t remember.
5 Q Was it positive that you felt like you were going
6 to get some help from her?
7 A It was more of nonchalant response, I guess. It
8 was — I didn’t really — she said that she would speak with
9 Milton about it and that was it.
10 Q So you are not aware of whether she actually did
11 anything to help you?
12 A I don’t know.
13 Q Okay. Regarding Exhibit 17, the residential
14 lease, is this the complete set of Exhibit 17, pages 1
15 through 8, which includes the three addendums. I want you
16 to take your time to look at this. Is this what you
17 received from Milton Hudson without the signatures?
18 A Yes.
19 Q Exactly like this?
20 A Yes.
21 Q Okay. Have you ever seen a copy signed by the
22 tenants or by All State?
23 THE COURT: You mean All Seasons?
24 BY MS. LEE:
25 Q All Seasons.
0119
1 A No, I don’t believe so. During the break, I tried
2 to search for E-mails reflecting that. Also, my husband and
3 I wasn’t able to find anything like that, and I know we
4 would have kept that.
5 Q Is this what you submitted to the Bureau of Real
6 Estate?
7 A Yes.
8 Q Okay. When you discussed — strike that. Did you
9 ever refer to the terms of the contract when talking to
10 Milton Hudson?
11 A Yes.
12 Q And did you ever refer to the contract when you
13 talked to Stacey?
14 A No. I didn’t have the contract with me when I
15 went to talk to her.
16 Q But she understood that it was regarding this
17 rental agreement?
18 A Correct.
19 Q You mentioned that the purpose of you reporting
20 Stacey Havener, Mr. Hudson and All Seasons wasn’t for money.
21 So what was the purpose?
22 A The purpose was, was that this whole situation was
23 unprofessional, and I needed to follow through with this.
24 This could have totally been avoided. It could have been a
25 copasetic relationship with All Seasons, but I felt the need
0120
1 to report it. I didn’t want anybody else to go through what
2 I was going through.
3 Q And has Ms. Havener ever reached out to you since
4 you terminated the contract with her company?
5 A No.
6 MS. LEE: No further questions.
7 THE COURT: Recross?
8 MR. LEAR: Briefly.
9
10 RECROSS-EXAMINATION
11 BY MR. LEAR:
12 Q You appreciated the services that All Seasons
13 provided to you; correct?
14 A Appreciated?
15 Q Yes.
16 A Could you clarify what you mean by that? Oh, I
17 know where you are going with that. To keep it cordial, I
18 did say that, yes.
19 Q Let’s look at the E-mail. Page 21 of Exhibit 24
20 where your E-mail ends — your E-mail to Milton Hudson
21 starts with, “We have decided to terminate your services,”
22 and ends with, “We appreciated all you have done and thank
23 you for your business”?
24 A Right.
25 Q That’s not something you say to a criminal, is it?
0121
1 A When I was trying to be polite and make it go
2 away, yeah.
3 Q It says what it says; right?
4 A It says what it says.
5 Q Got it. Just to kind of finalize the criminal
6 allegation: You don’t have any proof that All Seasons
7 received the bills from Crystal Mutual Water, did you?
8 A Yeah. I spoke with her and they never forwarded
9 any and there’s an E-mail that reflects that.
10 Q Let’s take a look at the E-mail. Exhibit 24, page
11 38. I will direct your attention to the E-mail from All
12 Seasons Realty to amongst other people, you and that is —
13 there’s an indication there that bills were never received
14 by All Seasons to trigger any payment. And I’ll reference
15 to you the E-mail that you wrote below that talking about
16 Crystal Mutual Water. Do you have any proof that in fact
17 All Seasons Realty was lying when they said that bills were
18 never received by All Seasons to trigger any payment?
19 A Do you want me to answer?
20 Q Yes, please.
21 A No.
22 MR. LEAR: Nothing further.
23 THE COURT: Redirect?
24 ///
25 ///
0122
1 FURTHER REDIRECT EXAMINATION
2 BY MS. LEE:
3 Q Can we go to — actually, I want to ask a general
4 question. Defense Counsel insinuated that you were happy
5 with their services. Did you report that you were unhappy,
6 besides the Bureau’s sake, to any other people or entity
7 besides the Bureau Real Estate basically. You were unhappy
8 with All Seasons Stacey Havener and Milton?
9 A Right.
10 MR. LEAR: Same objection as before, relevance.
11 MS. LEE: He opened the door, your Honor.
12 THE COURT: He might have insinuated that, but I never
13 heard any testimony from the witness that she was happy with
14 their services, far from it. She’s been here since a little
15 after 9:00 o’clock in the morning, and the tenure of her
16 testimony has never crossed over in her happiness with the
17 services she received from All Seasons, the Respondent’s
18 husband or the Respondent. I’m going to sustain the
19 objection. I don’t think at this point this is probative.
20 The witness is articulate and has really let it be known in
21 her testimony how she felt about the service that she got or
22 didn’t get. That’s really been covered.
23 MS. LEE: Okay.
24 BY MS. LEE:
25 Q Why did you say you were appreciative in that
0123
1 E-mail?
2 A I was trying to keep it cordial and professional.
3 Q Did you appreciate it in fact?
4 A No. I was grateful it was coming towards the end,
5 though, because I was done.
6 MS. LEE: No further questions, your Honor.
7 THE COURT: Recross?
8 MR. LEAR: Nothing further.
9 THE COURT: Okay. I just got a couple of questions for
10 you about the residential lease for which is Exhibit 17.
11 You said this was the copy that you got from the
12 Respondent’s husband. It’s the one that’s unsigned;
13 correct?
14 THE WITNESS: Right. We got two.
15 THE COURT: What was the second one you got?
16 THE WITNESS: The first one was the one — this one
17 here and in Exhibit 16.
18 THE COURT: Okay. My understanding is that’s a
19 different contract that involves your agreement with All
20 Seasons; correct?
21 THE WITNESS: Correct. I’m sorry, I misunderstood
22 then.
23 THE COURT: I’m sorry if I didn’t make that clear.
24 Now, did — what was your understanding when you received
25 this unsigned copy? Were you aware whether it had any force
0124
1 or value or did you expect that it was going to be altered
2 in some way or changed? What was your understanding in your
3 dealings with All Seasons when they gave you this blank copy
4 that was filled in? I’m sorry, it’s not blank, but it’s
5 been filled in and it’s got terms and conditions, it’s got
6 names, dates, dollar amounts, balances due, but it doesn’t
7 have signatures on the last page. What was your
8 understanding as to why you were getting a copy of this?
9 THE WITNESS: There is a signed copy, there is. This
10 one was the one that Milton sent us to look at it to approve
11 it to give to the tenants. There is one with signatures on
12 it.
13 THE COURT: Do you remember signing it?
14 THE WITNESS: I believe all of our signatures are on
15 it. I’m pretty sure.
16 THE COURT: Do you remember signing? That’s my
17 question.
18 MS. LEE: Wait, your Honor, let’s be clear —
19 THE COURT: You don’t get to say, “Your Honor, let’s be
20 clear” and start arguing. If you want to make an objection,
21 it’s got to be a legal objection.
22 MS. LEE: Objection. I want to make sure we’re talking
23 about the — there’s been a confusion already regarding what
24 contract we’re talking about.
25 THE COURT: No. We’re talking about Exhibit 17. They
0125
1 are two different documents. I’m paying full attention to
2 your case, and you’ve laid it out very thoroughly, and I’m
3 complementing you on that. Exhibit 17 is not Exhibit 16.
4 There’s no confusion over that. Exhibit 17 is the one
5 that’s unsigned, and my question was simple. Do you recall
6 yourself signing this agreement at all?
7 THE WITNESS: No.
8 THE COURT: Right. It didn’t call for your signature?
9 THE WITNESS: Correct.
10 THE COURT: Were you advised as to what was going to
11 happen to this contract once you were given a copy of it?
12 Do you remember? Were you told whether it had been executed
13 already or whether it was going to be? Were you asked to
14 comment on whatever contents there were in this?
15 THE WITNESS: No. We were sent this one without
16 signatures, approved it, went to All Seasons, and then the
17 tenants went into All Seasons on the 23rd of August and
18 possibly signed this. He said they signed it, so I don’t
19 know.
20 THE COURT: All right. So you were given a copy of
21 this. Is it fair to say so that you would understand that
22 this was going to be the agreement between All Seasons and
23 the tenants?
24 THE WITNESS: Correct.
25 THE COURT: All right. Thank you. I don’t have any
0126
1 further questions. Any redirect on Exhibit 17?
2 MS. LEE: May I approach with an E-mail, your Honor?
3 THE COURT: Yes.
4 MR. LEAR: Objection. I saw this E-mail about twenty
5 seconds ago and —
6 THE COURT: Does it have to do with my questions?
7 MS. LEE: Yes, it does.
8 MR. LEAR: Yes.
9 THE COURT: Is it part of your documents in your case?
10 MS. LEE: No. It’s like a three-sentence E-mail
11 possibly.
12 MR. LEAR: It’s hearsay, flat out. You can’t lay a
13 foundation for this.
14 MS. LEE: It’s to refresh her recollection.
15 THE COURT: Since — Mr. Lear, you don’t have a copy of
16 it?
17 MR. LEAR: No.
18 THE COURT: All right.
19 MS. LEE: I got it myself during a break, your Honor.
20 THE COURT: Okay. Off the record.
21 (Recess)
22 THE COURT: We’re back on the record. We’re doing
23 redirect. Ms. Lee, you wanted to submit — you wanted to
24 show the witness something to refresh her recollection and
25 you had shown that to Mr. Lear. Mr. Lear, do you have an
0127
1 objection?
2 MR. LEAR: Objection to the document being shown to the
3 witness.
4 THE COURT: Right. I know you hadn’t seen it.
5 MR. LEAR: I have an objection to the document being
6 admitted into evidence.
7 THE COURT: I don’t think — I don’t know what the
8 witness is going to do with it. Do you intend to use it as
9 an exhibit? You want to have it marked and received or not?
10 I have no idea.
11 MS. LEE: I want to see if this refreshes her
12 recollection first.
13 THE COURT: All right. Since I don’t know what it is —
14 MS. LEE: We could have it marked as Exhibit 62, a
15 one-page document.
16 THE COURT: What is your last exhibit?
17 MS. LEE: Exhibit 61.
18 THE COURT: Okay. We’ll mark this as Exhibit 62. It’s
19 a copy of two E-mails. Go ahead.
20 (Complainant’s Exhibit 62 was marked for
21 identification by the Court.)
22 BY MS. LEE:
23 Q Have you seen this E-mail before?
24 A Yes.
25 Q Can you describe how you saw this E-mail?
0128
1 A It was in my husband’s E-mail account because I
2 was searching for a signed copy by the tenants.
3 Q Do you have access to your husband’s E-mail
4 account?
5 A Yes.
6 Q So you signed into his account and forwarded it
7 directly to me?
8 A Yes, with his permission first.
9 Q Is it your understanding that the tenants did sign
10 Exhibit 17?
11 A It’s my understanding that that’s what this E-mail
12 is reflective of, yes.
13 Q But did your eyes ever see a signed copy of the
14 residential lease?
15 THE COURT: I thought the witness had already been
16 questioned on this and answered no. Is that correct? You
17 don’t remember?
18 THE WITNESS: Correct.
19 THE COURT: Move on, Counsel.
20 MS. LEE: Okay. I’ll offer it into evidence.
21 THE COURT: Any objection to Exhibit 62 being received?
22 MR. LEAR: Hearsay. Lacks foundation.
23 THE COURT: The hearsay objection is noted, it’s
24 overruled. I’ll receive this as administrative hearsay.
25 MR. LEAR: Your Honor, if I may be heard. Lake v. Reed
0129
1 provides that administrative hearsay is admissible to the
2 extent that it corroborates other evidence. Here, the other
3 evidence is that she doesn’t know if it was ever signed, so
4 this is not corroboration. This is exactly — it’s not
5 corroboration.
6 THE COURT: The problem I have with Lake v. Reed is in
7 all of these instances is while we’re still going through
8 the proceeding, it’s really hard for me to be able to say
9 definitively that administrative hearsay is going to be tied
10 to other reliable evidence. It does explain or supplement
11 the testimony of the witness, which is only that she
12 believed there was a lease that was signed. I’ve heard a
13 whole lot of testimony already today that there was somebody
14 by the name of these two people that was living there, and
15 that they were apparently causing certain problems as
16 tenants and renters. You asked extensive questions
17 yourself, which presumed that those were the facts that
18 these were the tenants.
19 Your client, as I mentioned, can be cross-examined
20 later as to whether or not this is a valid document or
21 whether there’s something missing from it. And if we have
22 to, we will get into the issue of whether there are terms
23 and conditions here that are contested because that’s really
24 where the best evidence rule is going to come in. And I
25 don’t know yet because I’m giving you the courtesy of being
0130
1 able to put on your defense first. But just for purposes of
2 it supplementing the testimony of the witness, which is that
3 she believed there was a signed agreement, that’s why I’m
4 receiving it as administrative hearsay. Thank you, Counsel.
5 Go ahead.
6 BY MS. LEE:
7 Q Did you act on reliance on your belief that this
8 was a signed agreement?
9 A I did. I assumed, yes.
10 MS. LEE: No further questions.
11 THE COURT: Any recross?
12 MR. LEAR: None.
13 THE COURT: All right. Sadly, your testimony has come
14 to an end. I’m being facetious. Thank you for being
15 patient. You are excused.
16 MS. LEE: Your Honor, I request that Exhibit 17 be
17 moved into evidence.
18 THE COURT: Any objection?
19 MR. LEAR: Yes. Lacks foundation. Hearsay.
20 THE COURT: All right. For the time being, I’m going
21 to sustain the objection. We will be coming back to Exhibit
22 17. The Respondent has yet to testify, and I don’t want to
23 misplace her testimony right now just on Exhibit 17, but
24 she’s going to be questioned about Exhibit 17.
25 MS. LEE: Okay. I would like to put on the record,
0131
1 though, that it’s not the issue as far as the terms of the
2 agreement. It’s not a civil case; it’s a matter that this
3 contract was even given to the Complainant, Ms. De Mascio,
4 and that she acted on reliance thereof. It’s not a civil
5 issue.
6 THE COURT: Thank you for your comments. It’s a rule
7 of evidence issue. I know what the best evidence rule says,
8 and I don’t know just yet how much, if any, of the terms and
9 conditions in this agreement is actually in dispute. We’ll
10 certainly get to that. I promise you that. Your comments
11 are noted on the record and let’s move on. Who is your next
12 witness?
13 MS. LEE: Can I also put another thing on the record as
14 far as Government Code 11513, subsection C, regarding
15 technical evidence are not applied to a hearing such as
16 this.
17 THE COURT: Thank you for the boat of confidence,
18 Counsel. I know that code section is there, and it’s noted
19 now for the record. Thank you.
20 MS. LEE: We call Ray Scott to the stand.
21 MR. LEAR: Before you do that —
22 THE COURT: You know what — go ahead, Mr. Lear.
23 MR. LEAR: We have an extensive stipulation. I think
24 that’s a good time to put that on the record.
25 THE COURT: Let talk about it.
0132
1 MS. LEE: I agree.
2 THE COURT: What is your timeframe, because I don’t
3 want to be adhesive towards the court reporter. I realize
4 we’ve been going close to an hour and fifteen minutes. We
5 had a short break, but not really a recess.
6 MS. LEE: I believe with the stips, we can move things
7 along pretty quickly. There was no stips with the first
8 witness.
9 THE COURT: Let talk about the stipulations. I’ll let
10 you go ahead with that, and then we can get into some direct
11 testimony, and I will call an afternoon recess soon,
12 sometime within our next half hour. Go ahead.
13 MR. LEAR: Taking a look at the Accusation, Respondent
14 stipulates to the following paragraphs: Paragraph 6,
15 paragraph 7, paragraph 8, paragraph 9, paragraph 20,
16 paragraph 21, paragraph 22, paragraph 23, paragraph 27,
17 paragraph 28, paragraph 29. With respect to paragraph 31,
18 Respondent stipulates that check number 1602 bounced a
19 second time due to insufficient funds.
20 THE COURT: Okay. So you stipulate just to that
21 language?
22 MR. LEAR: Correct.
23 THE COURT: That’s the second half of the sentence
24 beginning with, “but check number 1602 bounced,” et cetera?
25 MR. LEAR: Yes.
0133
1 THE COURT: All right. Let me make sure I get this
2 right. I’m not sure. Did you say 23?
3 MR. LEAR: Yes.
4 THE COURT: Then you went to 27 next?
5 MR. LEAR: Correct.
6 THE COURT: All right. I’ve got them all.
7 MR. LEAR: Paragraph 35, paragraph 36, paragraph 37,
8 paragraph 38. With respect to paragraph 39, the stipulation
9 is that Ms. Havener facilitated the rental agreement, but we
10 are not stipulating that Hudson facilitated the rental
11 agreement. The balance of the paragraph we stipulate to.
12 THE COURT: Okay. On that paragraph 39, Ms. Lee, what
13 do you think about whether or not you want — do you still
14 want to contest that paragraph because it refers to Hudson
15 facilitating the rental agreement?
16 MS. LEE: Yes.
17 THE COURT: You do? Okay. That’s not really
18 technically a stipulation then, but hopefully you will spend
19 a little less time on paragraph 39, Counsel.
20 MR. LEAR: The next paragraph is 42, paragraph 43, and
21 that’s it.
22 THE COURT: Ms. Lee, did you want to be heard on this
23 at all?
24 MS. LEE: No. We do want to also offer into evidence
25 Exhibits 5 through 11. They pertain to the audit report and
0134
1 the first cause of action, as well as the working papers
2 that were just stipulated to.
3 THE COURT: Okay. Mr. Lear, as far as Exhibits 5
4 through 11, what I usually do is go through each one, I mark
5 it and I make sure it’s described so we know what we’re
6 talking about, and then ask if you have any objections. We
7 can go through them one by one.
8 MR. LEAR: However you would like. We have no
9 objection to any of them.
10 THE COURT: You don’t? All right. So I’m going to do
11 this quickly then. Exhibit 5 is an audit report.
12 MS. LEE: Correct. The audit report transmittal and
13 audit report.
14 THE COURT: Okay. That’s marked as Exhibit 5. With
15 there being no objection, that’s being received?
16 MR. LEAR: Correct.
17 THE COURT: Received.
18 (Complainant’s Exhibit 5 was received in evidence
19 by the Court.)
20 THE COURT: Exhibit 6 is —
21 MS. LEE: Exhibit 6 are the working papers, V-1. It
22 was created by the Bureau of Real Estate’s auditor Diana
23 Brewster based upon what she could see of Respondent’s
24 papers. This was a creation of the Bureau’s.
25 THE COURT: You said working papers?
0135
1 MS. LEE: Correct.
2 THE COURT: I don’t know what working papers are.
3 MS. LEE: They are the basis for conclusions in the
4 audit.
5 THE COURT: Okay. So this is the Bureau’s auditor’s
6 worksheet or working papers; correct?
7 MS. LEE: Yes.
8 THE COURT: Okay. That’s marked as Exhibit 6. No
9 objection to Exhibit 6?
10 MR. LEAR: No objection.
11 THE COURT: Thank you. Exhibit 6 is received.
12 (Complainant’s Exhibit 6 was marked for
13 identification by the Court and received in evidence.)
14 MS. LEE: Exhibit 7 are further working papers
15 identified by auditor as B-1.1. This was created by the
16 Bureau of Real Estate auditor in attempt to figure out
17 Respondent’s handling of trust funds.
18 THE COURT: Okay. So Exhibit 7 is marked, that’s the
19 auditor’s worksheet regarding various trust funds that were
20 investigated. Is there any objection to Exhibit 7 being
21 received?
22 MR. LEAR: No.
23 THE COURT: Exhibit 7 is received.
24 (Complainant’s Exhibit 7 was marked for
25 identification by the Court and received in evidence.)
0136
1 MS. LEE: Exhibit 8 is a audit working papers B-1.2.
2 Again, this was created by the Bureau of Real Estate, which
3 you can see as shown by the initials on the bottom
4 right-hand corner, DB for Diana Brewster, to try to figure
5 out Respondent’s liabilities and her trust funds.
6 THE COURT: Okay. This is Exhibit 8.
7 MS. LEE: I will note for the record on page number 3,
8 for example, the balance it says, “Bank statement of
9 2/28/2015 was $1,490 and 17 cents.” And based upon her
10 findings, there was only that amount in the bank account and
11 there was a discrepancy of $24,812 and 58 cents, hence a
12 shortage in that bank account as of February 28, 2015,
13 because there’s only $1,490 and 17 cents in the back
14 account.
15 THE COURT: What page are you on?
16 MS. LEE: Page 3. It says, “Balance per bank statement
17 as of 2/28/15.”
18 THE COURT: $1,490.
19 MS. LEE: Correct. That was the balance.
20 THE COURT: The total trust fund discrepancy that was
21 noted is over $24,000?
22 MS. LEE: Correct, $24,812 and 58 cents.
23 THE COURT: You wanted to point that out specifically
24 for me?
25 MS. LEE: Correct. That is part of the first cause of
0137
1 action regarding trust funds in the shortage. That date was
2 February 28th, 2015.
3 THE COURT: Okay. All right. That’s been marked as
4 your Exhibit 8. Is there any objection to Exhibit 8 being
5 received?
6 MR. LEAR: No objection.
7 THE COURT: All right. Exhibit 8 is received.
8 (Complainant’s Exhibit 8 was marked for
9 identification by the Court and received in evidence.)
10 MS. LEE: Exhibit 9 is audit working papers identified
11 as B-1.8.
12 THE COURT: That’s marked as Exhibit 9. Any objection
13 to Exhibit 9 being received?
14 MR. LEAR: No objection.
15 THE COURT: Exhibit 9 is received.
16 (Complainant’s Exhibit 9 was marked for
17 identification by the Court and received in evidence.)
18 MS. LEE: Exhibit 10 is the working papers — strike
19 that. Identified as B-1.9.
20 THE COURT: All right. That’s marked as Exhibit 10.
21 Any objection?
22 MR. LEAR: No objection.
23 THE COURT: Exhibit ten is received.
24 (Complainant’s Exhibit 10 was marked for
25 identification by the Court and received in evidence.)
0138
1 MS. LEE: Exhibit 10 is the audit working papers
2 identified as B-1.9 — sorry. Exhibit 11 is the audit
3 working papers B-1.10. These were received by the auditor
4 from Milton Hudson.
5 THE COURT: All right. That’s marked as your Exhibit
6 11?
7 MS. LEE: Correct. And I would note as stated in the
8 front page of Exhibit 9, 10 and 11 that these supporting
9 documents as noted in the front page was given to the
10 auditor by Milton Hudson, not given by Stacey Havener. And
11 that is the first sheet of Exhibit 9, the first sheet of
12 Exhibit 10 and first sheet of Exhibit 11.
13 THE COURT: Okay. Just word to the wise, I’m not going
14 to take these back and study them copiously. I don’t have
15 an accounting background. I don’t know how much of this
16 is — you’re going to be relying on based on the
17 stipulations to all of those various paragraphs of
18 allegations. If there is something that is still left in
19 question or at issue, I’m expecting you, because you have
20 the burden of proof, Ms. Lee, to point it out for me, to
21 cover it, to make sure I know where it’s coming from.
22 Because I just did — even though there were no objections
23 from Mr. Lear, I just did intake of over 100 pages of
24 documentation that all appears to be accounting and
25 auditing. Just so we’re clear, I hope you understand that.
0139
1 I’m not going to go back and study this and reach
2 any kind of conclusions without you pointing out to me,
3 “This is what’s important. This is what we’re relying on.
4 This is what we alleged, and here you will find the
5 information, your Honor.” Just to be clear, that’s not how
6 it works. I’m not suggesting that you think that’s what I
7 would do, but these are — this is pretty specialized
8 looking — the last Exhibit 11 that I just marked is 77
9 pages long and it’s full of facts and figures. You may want
10 to incorporate that. If you think this doesn’t need to be
11 covered by a witness, then you should cover it yourself in
12 argument at least before we conclude the case. Like I said,
13 I’m not going to go back and somehow try to decipher what’s
14 important and what isn’t from this many documents.
15 I am not equipped to do that, and I don’t think
16 it’s really proper for me to do that as well. I am not
17 supposed to be acting like a detective. I am not suggesting
18 that’s what you are trying to have me do, but I want you to
19 be really clear that that’s not what I’m going to do, so
20 I’ll be relying on you to make offers of proof and make
21 argument, and let me know what I should be looking at if you
22 are relying on anything contained in these.
23 MS. LEE: Yes, your Honor.
24 THE COURT: Thank you. Exhibit 11 has not yet been
25 received. Any objection?
0140
1 MR. LEAR: No objection.
2 THE COURT: Exhibit 11 is received.
3 (Complainant’s Exhibit 11 was marked for
4 identification by the Court and received in evidence.)
5 MS. LEE: The Complainant will call Ray Scott to the
6 stand.
7 THE COURT: What is your time estimate on Ray Scott for
8 direct?
9 MS. LEE: Ray Scott pertains to the third cause of
10 action starting on page 7. At least half has been
11 stipulated to the facts, so I assume when I question him it
12 should move things along quicker.
13 THE COURT: Off the record.
14 (Recess)
15 THE COURT: Back on the record. We’re going to take —
16 since it’s nearly 3:00 o’clock and we only took a very brief
17 recess for me to make copies, we’re going to take our
18 afternoon recess. We’re going to come back at 3:15. Off
19 the record.
20 (Recess)
21 THE COURT: Back on the record. Counsel, you were
22 going to call another witness. Go ahead.
23 MS. LEE: Complainant calls Ray Scott to the stand.
24 THE COURT: Off the record.
25 (Recess)
0141
1 THE COURT: Back on the record. Mr. Scott, thank you
2 for being patient. Please raise your right hand.
3
4 RAY SCOTT,
5 called as a witness, and having been first duly sworn by the
6 Court, was examined and testified as follows:
7 THE WITNESS: I do.
8 THE COURT: Thank you. Please state and spell your
9 full name for the record.
10 THE WITNESS: Ray Scott, R-A-Y, S-C-O-T-T.
11 THE COURT: Thank you. Go ahead, Counsel.
12
13 DIRECT EXAMINATION
14 BY MS. LEE:
15 Q Who do you work for?
16 A Mountainside Disposal.
17 Q Are you authorized to sign on their behalf?
18 A Yes, ma’am.
19 Q Are you in charge of the property at 612 Pomona
20 Trail, Frazier Park, California 93225?
21 A Yes.
22 Q When you entered into an agreement with Jennings
23 Real Estate on April 20th, 2004, was that essentially you?
24 A Yes, ma’am.
25 Q And is that — if you turn to Exhibit 28 in your
0142
1 binder, the first three pages.
2 A Yes, those are my initials and signature.
3 Q And this is the contract that you relied upon?
4 A Yes, ma’am.
5 Q Okay. The fourth page, what is that? A business
6 card of Connie Gross, what is that?
7 A She was the — if you want to say office manager
8 or property manager for Jennings Realty.
9 Q And the fifth page is any detail regarding Ascend
10 Property Management Incorporated. Who are they?
11 A I believe they are Jennings Realty.
12 MS. LEE: Could we admit Exhibit 28 into evidence?
13 THE COURT: I’m marking Exhibit 28. First, it’s a
14 property management agreement between Mountainside Disposal
15 and Jennings, J-E-N-N-I-N-G-S, Realty. There’s an attached
16 copy of a business card and a business search from the
17 California Secretary of State, one page, on Ascend,
18 A-S-C-E-N-D, Property Management Inc. That’s all been
19 marked as Exhibit 28. Is there any objection to Exhibit 28
20 being received?
21 MR. LEAR: No objection.
22 THE COURT: With there being no objection, Exhibit 28
23 is received.
24 (Complainant’s Exhibit 28 was marked for
25 identification by the Court and received in evidence.)
0143
1 BY MS. LEE:
2 Q When this property management agreement was
3 transferred to All Seasons Realty, were you notified of that
4 by either All Seasons Realty or Jennings Real Estate?
5 A No, ma’am.
6 Q How did you find that out?
7 A I discovered that when some checks started
8 bouncing from All Seasons Realty. I believe the first ones
9 were, like, in 2011.
10 Q And at the time, let’s say in 2007, who was a
11 tenant in this property?
12 A I’ll be honest with you, ma’am, I did not look at
13 that information.
14 Q Okay. After 2008 — after All Seasons Realty took
15 over in 2008, was there a change in tenancy.
16 A Once again, I didn’t look at that information so I
17 don’t have that readily available.
18 Q Could we go to Exhibit 29, page — it’s hard to
19 see but the bottom right-hand corner says “Cal. BRE 8.”
20 THE COURT: You want to give me a general description?
21 I have it marked.
22 MS. LEE: It is the packet of documents sent by Ray
23 Scott to the Bureau of Real Estate with his complaints.
24 They include the residential lease I just described with All
25 Seasons Property Management as well as E-mails between
0144
1 Mr. Hudson and Ray Scott.
2 THE COURT: All right. That packet of documents, which
3 is 41 pages is marked as Exhibit 29.
4 (Complainant’s Exhibit 29 was marked for
5 identification by the Court.)
6 BY MS. LEE:
7 Q Go to page number 8 on the bottom right-hand
8 corner. It’s a residential lease between All Seasons
9 Property Management and the window cleaners, slash, Nadine
10 Stears, S-T-E-A-R-S. Do you see that document?
11 A Yes, ma’am.
12 Q When this document was executed on May 30, 2010,
13 on or about then, did you know they were going to rent the
14 property to this person?
15 A No, ma’am.
16 Q Okay. Did they have your authority to rent to
17 this person?
18 MR. LEAR: Objection. Relevance. This is a document
19 dated around 2010 well prior to the date that Ms. Havener
20 took over All Seasons Realty. This also is dealing with —
21 potentially issues that are not charged misconduct.
22 THE COURT: Counsel, I tell you what, why don’t you
23 point me to the portion of the Accusation that has
24 allegations relevant to this, and I’ll take it from there.
25 Because otherwise, I have no way of knowing how to rule on
0145
1 Mr. Lear’s objection.
2 MS. LEE: Actually, I would like to withdraw it. I’m
3 referring to the wrong document.
4 THE COURT: Okay.
5 BY MS. LEE:
6 Q Will you refer to page number 14 of Exhibit 29?
7 This is a residential lease dated April 16th, 2014. On or
8 about that date, were you aware that Prints entered into an
9 agreement with All Seasons Realty to rent the property?
10 A No, ma’am.
11 Q And how did you find out?
12 A To be honest, I found out when another bounced
13 check came about. I went to the property and actually spoke
14 to Prints.
15 Q Did you ever give them authority to rent to Prints
16 prior to or on April 16th, 2014?
17 MR. LEAR: Objection to the extent that it goes beyond
18 the scope of the Accusation.
19 THE COURT: Counsel, once again, can you direct me to
20 which part of the Accusation the witness is referring to?
21 It was a suggestion I made this morning. I just want you to
22 know it’s impossible for me to rule on objections as to
23 relevancy, et cetera. If I don’t know which part of your
24 case the witness is addressing. I don’t have it memorized.
25 MS. LEE: It’s paragraph number 24 that she was acting
0146
1 under the direction.
2 THE COURT: Paragraph 24, and that was not one of the
3 paragraphs stipulated to?
4 MS. LEE: Correct.
5 THE COURT: So that’s in dispute.
6 MS. LEE: Just laying a foundation for other
7 questioning, your Honor.
8 THE COURT: This has to do with security deposit
9 refund, so I don’t follow — I don’t see the connection
10 between that and your line of questioning currently. It
11 states — this is regarding a negotiation over how much of
12 the security deposit should be refunded back to the then
13 tenants. I’m going to sustain the objection.
14 BY MS. LEE:
15 Q Did you ever talk to Stacey Havener about this
16 property?
17 A No, ma’am.
18 Q Did you ever talk to Milton Hudson about this
19 property?
20 A Yes, ma’am.
21 Q Was Stacey Havener present at one time?
22 A At one meeting on May 13th, 2014, she was present
23 in their office at their Pine Mountain Club address.
24 MR. LEAR: Objection. Nonresponsive. Move to strike.
25 THE COURT: Well, the witness testified that she was
0147
1 present. My understanding of that was that — I’m going to
2 overrule that objection.
3 MR. LEAR: Your Honor, he testified that she was
4 present at the office. The question was, “Was she part of
5 the conversation?” You can be present in an office and be
6 30 yards away.
7 THE COURT: I’m going to sustain the question. Be more
8 specific.
9 BY MS. LEE:
10 Q When you talked to Milton Hudson, was Stacey
11 Havener present and listening to your conversation?
12 MR. LEAR: Objection. Calls for speculation.
13 THE COURT: I don’t know what the answer would be. Do
14 you understand the question?
15 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.
16 THE COURT: Are you able to answer it?
17 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.
18 THE COURT: Go ahead.
19 THE WITNESS: Yes. She was distinctively listening to
20 our conversation.
21 BY MS. LEE:
22 Q How far away was she?
23 A She may have been 8 to 10 feet.
24 Q So did she say anything in this conversation?
25 A No.
0148
1 Q But she was actively listening to this
2 conversation?
3 A Yes.
4 Q And what did you say to Milton in this
5 conversation?
6 A This conversation had to do with getting the files
7 for the past two tenants, Stearns and Prints, because they
8 were never forwarded to me. So I asked for them when I
9 asked for the money for the checks that were bounced at that
10 time.
11 Q Okay. Let’s refer again to Exhibit 29, page 14
12 through 20. Is this part of the documents that Milton gave
13 to you?
14 A Yes, ma’am.
15 Q Okay. And this was after your conversation with
16 him?
17 A Yes, ma’am.
18 Q And that conversation was on — you said —
19 A May 13th, 2014.
20 Q And you mentioned there was a prior tenant, I
21 believe, prior to Ms. Prints?
22 A Correct.
23 THE COURT: How do you spell that?
24 THE WITNESS: S-T-E-A-R-S.
25 ///
0149
1 BY MS. LEE:
2 Q Can you refer to the same exhibit, Exhibit 29,
3 page 8 through 13. Is this a contract that you received?
4 THE COURT: Slow down, Counsel, please. I’ve got to go
5 to those pages. I’m writing notes. I want to keep up, but
6 I can’t keep up at this rate. You got to give me a chance
7 to at least turn to the pages of the document. Give me
8 those pages again.
9 MS. LEE: Pages 8 through 13.
10 THE COURT: Go ahead.
11 BY MS. LEE:
12 Q Did Milton give this to you as well after that
13 conversation on May 13th, 2014?
14 A Yes, he did mail them to me directly.
15 Q Okay. And were you in agreement with this
16 residential lease being made at the time it was made?
17 A No, ma’am.
18 Q Okay. The same question regarding the residential
19 lease dated April 16th, 2014, with C. Prints. Did you agree
20 to authorize All Seasons Realty to enter into this agreement
21 with C. Prints?
22 MR. LEAR: Objection. Relevance. It goes beyond the
23 scope of the Accusation. It deals with allegation against
24 Milton Hudson. Milton Hudson is not a trial today.
25 THE COURT: Counsel, I’m particularly interested in
0150
1 where it’s alleged.
2 MS. LEE: This is not with Milton Hudson because as
3 stipulated, this contract is already under Stacey Havener’s
4 license.
5 THE COURT: Show me where any accusation this is going
6 to be relevant to.
7 MS. LEE: Number 22, “When or soon after Hudson no
8 longer had a Real Estate license and licensing rights. On
9 December 18, 2013, the property management of real property
10 was transferred to Havener.” So anything done after
11 December 18th, 2013, is under Havener’s watch is not under
12 Milton’s watch. And this contract is dated after that date,
13 April 16th, 2014.
14 THE COURT: Okay. Doesn’t the contract speak for
15 itself as far as the date on it? I’m still not
16 understanding why this — what you are having this witness
17 testify to?
18 MS. LEE: I’m laying the foundation that this contract
19 was executed and that it’s authenticity. If I was to offer
20 this without his testimony, I’ll get an objection as to
21 where did I get this document from.
22 THE COURT: All right. I’m going to overrule the
23 objection on that basis that you are laying foundation that
24 this is a valid contract. Go ahead.
25 ///
0151
1 BY MS. LEE:
2 Q When you complained to Milton with Stacey
3 listening to that conversation, did Stacey reply or say
4 anything to you?
5 A No, ma’am.
6 Q Okay. Did she indicate that she would help you or
7 not help you in any way?
8 THE COURT: Counsel, you don’t have to ask questions
9 about a negative. I already heard the witness she didn’t
10 say anything, so you could ask a lot of questions about what
11 she didn’t say. You are not going to get anywhere.
12 BY MS. LEE:
13 Q Thereafter, had she ever contacted you regarding
14 the complaints that she heard?
15 A No, ma’am.
16 Q What are some of your complaints that you told
17 Milton Hudson with Stacey listening?
18 A That the tenant was moved in without my knowledge
19 or consent. That in regards to Nadine Stears, Milton
20 Hudson, if you want to say, waived a security deposit
21 because she painted the house. Once again, I had no
22 knowledge of this going on.
23 Q What do you mean he waived?
24 MR. LEAR: Objection. Relevance. Vague and ambiguous
25 as to time. It appears that the allegation only relates to
0152
1 Mr. Hudson who is not on trial.
2 MS. LEE: Your Honor, these actions were done under
3 Stacey Havener’s watch, which goes to the fact that she was
4 allowing an unlicensed person to do licensed activities and
5 negotiate into contracts.
6 THE COURT: Where is that alleged so I can follow
7 along?
8 MS. LEE: It goes to the 7th cause of action. “Wilful
9 disregard, violation, negligence and failure to supervise
10 her employees as well as —
11 THE COURT: Okay. Here the problem with that: You’re
12 re-alleging paragraphs 3 through 43. I can’t go through
13 paragraphs 3 through 43 right now to determine whether you
14 alleged a violation that’s directly relevant to this
15 testimony. You are going to have to help me. I can’t rule
16 on these relevance objections unless I know where you are
17 going, and that’s got to be alleged in the Accusation.
18 That’s always the touchdown, that’s always what I’m going to
19 take you back to. And I want to give you the opportunity
20 each time, rather than just rule on it not knowing the case
21 nearly as well as you know it. I’d rather give you the
22 opportunity to show me.
23 MS. LEE: It also goes to paragraph 25, which states
24 that she “violated Code Section 10137 employ or compensate
25 an unlicensed person to perform acts which require a Real
0153
1 Estate license.”
2 THE COURT: Okay. That’s a legal violation. That’s
3 conclusory as to a legal violation. What the objection is,
4 is relevance of this particular line of questioning, which
5 has to do with Milton, the husband of the Respondent waiving
6 some sort of fee because the tenant did some painting on the
7 property.
8 MS. LEE: That goes to negotiation. How does he have
9 the power? He’s not licensed to waive or negotiate a
10 contract.
11 THE COURT: I don’t know. You tell me. It’s your
12 case. I’m going to sustain the objection. The problem is,
13 I can’t follow the testimony of witnesses if you haven’t set
14 forth sufficient allegations. Number one, provide a roadmap
15 for the hearing, and number two, that provide notice to the
16 parties that are involved in this, particularly the
17 Respondent. This is a due process issue. So anytime I hear
18 a relevance objection — if you make one, I’m going to do
19 the same thing and ask him what’s the relevance. The reason
20 I’m going back to you right now is because you have the
21 burden of proof. This is your case.
22 I cannot rule on relevance unless you show me,
23 “Your Honor, this is what’s alleged and this is what this
24 goes to.” And so far, I can’t make enough of a connection
25 that, “We’ll, we’re alleging,” as you pointed out. You are
0154
1 alleging there’s a code violation. Okay. That may well be
2 the case, but you got to allege facts that lead to a
3 violation. This is not code pleading land we’re in, this is
4 notice pleading. When you do an administrative licensing
5 cases you got to give sufficient notice to the Respondent as
6 to what it is you believe they did or did not do that
7 violated particular regulations. We can’t leave open the
8 guesswork. I don’t want you to feel as if I’m giving you a
9 hard time, I’m not. I’m just trying to get a grasp on where
10 you are going with the witness. I’m going to sustain the
11 objection.
12 BY MS. LEE:
13 Q Can you go to page 25 of Exhibit 29, please. Can
14 you describe page 25 and 26?
15 A This is a E-mail chain. First portion is a
16 response from Milton Hudson saying that he’s sending the
17 contracts and working on the accounting for the overdue
18 amount. The second part, which is on May 13th, 2014, when I
19 met with Milton Hudson with Stacey present, and this is
20 what — to summarize our meeting.
21 Q Would you consider these negotiations regarding
22 the security deposit?
23 A Yes, ma’am.
24 Q Okay. I notice here you said — you “thank you,”
25 you, as in Milton and Stacey for seeing you?
0155
1 A Correct.
2 Q Does that refer to the meeting that you were
3 talking about where you were talking to Milton and Stacey
4 was intently listening to the conversation?
5 A Correct.
6 Q Okay. I noticed there is also some insufficient
7 funds checks on page 29, 30, 32 — some are insufficient
8 funds checks, some are just plain checks. Did you receive
9 these checks from All Seasons Property Management?
10 A Yes, ma’am.
11 Q And 31, for the envelope, what was that envelope
12 for, if you know?
13 A Ma’am, that could have been — at this time, I
14 don’t know.
15 THE COURT: I’m going to give you a few directions that
16 I should have when you came in. I felt guilty that you were
17 waiting here for so long so I started right in. First, if a
18 question is asked of you, make sure you wait until the end
19 of the question before you answer. Because as you heard,
20 there are objections that are being posed. Secondly, if you
21 are asked a question and you have no idea what the answer
22 is, your answer is, “I don’t know.” I don’t want you to
23 speculate or guess or try to conjure up a good answer for
24 us, that is not really evidence. If you are asked a
25 question and you just don’t understand what the question
0156
1 means, tell us that and the attorney will rephrase it.
2 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.
3 THE COURT: Thank you. Go ahead.
4 BY MS. LEE:
5 Q Let’s briefly go through these checks. Page 29,
6 did you receive this check from All Seasons Property
7 Management?
8 A Yes, ma’am.
9 Q And it was — it bounced due to insufficient
10 funds?
11 A Yes, ma’am.
12 Q The next page, page 30, did you receive this
13 check — the actual check from All Seasons Property
14 Management?
15 A Yes, ma’am.
16 Q And this check bounced?
17 A Yes, ma’am.
18 Q Go to page 32. Did you receive this check from
19 All Seasons Realty Management?
20 A Yes, ma’am.
21 Q It’s the same check as on page 29 when you said
22 that bounced. Page 33, did you receive this check from All
23 Seasons Property Management?
24 A Yes, ma’am.
25 Q It appears to be Stacey Havener’s signature at the
0157
1 bottom on this check?
2 A Yes, ma’am.
3 THE COURT: What page are we on?
4 MS. LEE: Page 33. Just going through the checks.
5 BY MS. LEE:
6 Q Page 34, did you send this to Milton Hudson on
7 September 23, 2013?
8 A Yes, ma’am.
9 Q Page 35, did you receive this check from All
10 Seasons Property Management?
11 A Yes, ma’am.
12 Q That appears to be Stacey Havener’s signature.
13 Page 36, did you receive this check? It says “Base Camp,”
14 but it appears to be signed by Stacey Havener. Did you
15 receive this check from Base Camp essentially to
16 Mountainside Disposal?
17 A Yes, ma’am.
18 Q Next page, page 37, did you receive this check
19 from All Seasons Property Management?
20 A Actually, it’s two checks, ma’am. But yes, these
21 checks were received from All Seasons.
22 Q Did both of them bounce?
23 A Yes, ma’am.
24 Q And doesn’t it say the amount — check 7542, the
25 same amount of $584?
0158
1 A Yes, ma’am. By this document from the bank, they
2 were both $585.
3 Q I see.
4 MR. LEAR: Your Honor, I got a continuing objection as
5 to relevance and motion to strike with respect to page —
6 any testimony regarding page 37, 36, 35. Those, in so far
7 as — those checks are with respect to dates that are prior
8 to Ms. Havener taking control of All Seasons property and
9 furthermore that there is no charge of misconduct with
10 respect to those checks.
11 THE COURT: Ms. Lee?
12 MS. LEE: I think it’s very relevant. In fact, that
13 she signed these checks. It shows that she knows about this
14 property. She’s aware of it even prior to Milton Hudson’s
15 license being taken away.
16 THE COURT: Did you allege that? What I see is on page
17 5 of the Accusation you alleged that from December 18th,
18 2013, through the present. Milton Hudson was not and still
19 is not licensed by the Bureau in any capacity. That seems
20 to be the starting point in your Accusation as far as what’s
21 alleged. It’s still — I’m not clear, and that’s why I keep
22 going back to what portion of the Accusation you got
23 allegations in because I’m looking through it, and I see the
24 dates tend to post date that point in time. That — most of
25 them do at least. There are a few allegations that are from
0159
1 August of 2013, which is a little before, but I’m reading
2 those as historical agreements that were entered into. I
3 don’t know how long the agreements lasted.
4 MS. LEE: Her signature is on these checks, and you
5 characterize these checks the summer before that
6 December 2013, but her signature is on both, which if you
7 know something at 2013, you definitely knew it in 2014.
8 THE COURT: Okay. What you are alleging that she knew,
9 is that somewhere in the Accusation that these checks
10 bounced? Did you allege that these checks bounced and that
11 she was responsible for that?
12 MS. LEE: I’m alleging that she knew the conduct of
13 Milton Hudson and still allowed him to conduct licensed
14 activities her license. And she knew that because she
15 signed these checks.
16 THE COURT: I know, but Mr. Lear is talking about
17 specific dates and you do allege that Mr. Hudson lost his
18 license, basically, December 18th, 2013. These checks
19 predate that event. I’m going to sustain the objection.
20 MR. LEAR: Your Honor, I have an additional objection
21 as to page 29. I’d move to strike on the basis of relevance
22 and beyond the scope of the Accusation. This is purported
23 to be NSF check and I’m counter-referencing with respect to
24 the allegations in the 3rd cause of the Accusation. I don’t
25 see any charge regarding NSF of check 1527.
0160
1 THE COURT: Before we move on to that, I just want to
2 make sure I was clear on which specific pages you objected
3 to the relevancy. I know it was page 35. There were —
4 MR. LEAR: Pages 35, 36 and 37. Now I’m going to page
5 29.
6 THE COURT: All right. So those pages, 35 through
7 37 — none of this has been received into evidence yet, but
8 I sustain your relevance objection as to those pages because
9 of the fact that — I’ve already said enough about it. They
10 predate Mr. Hudson surrendering his license. You went to
11 page 29, and you had an objection about that?
12 MR. LEAR: Right. That’s referring to check 1527
13 accordingly being NSF, and I don’t see reference to that in
14 the 3rd cause of action.
15 THE COURT: Okay. Ms. Lee?
16 MS. LEE: Again, as I stated before, her signature is
17 on it. It shows that she’s aware of the problems with this
18 — the fact that this rental agreement exists, first of all,
19 and that she’s supposedly paying money off of it to
20 Mountainside Disposal as shown by signature, as well as the
21 fact that there was issues with it that they were NSF
22 checks.
23 THE COURT: I don’t understand the offer of proof. I’m
24 sorry. I don’t have a grasp of enough of — there’s so many
25 transactions that you are talking about. What you have to
0161
1 do is point me to the Accusation to what’s alleged in it so
2 I can at least get focused on it in that context. I have to
3 go back to the Accusation when I write my proposed decision.
4 So you are just going to have to guide me through that
5 better than — in the best way you can by showing me
6 specifically what was alleged so that I know whether it’s
7 relevant or not.
8 MS. LEE: It’s relevant because it shows knowledge.
9 THE COURT: Here’s the problem: Saying the relevancy
10 as it shows knowledge, I need you to know me where you are
11 alleging that there was knowledge that she had of regarding
12 this particular check or something that happened surrounding
13 it that would be directly related to an alleged violation.
14 I can’t connect the dots later on my own, not with the
15 specificity that I would need. You got to make it clear.
16 I’m giving you an opportunity to show me.
17 MS. LEE: On paragraph 21, it says that her copy bought
18 out Jennings Real Estate, including this property management
19 agreement. And she’s acting on that property management
20 agreement as shown by this check, by her signature on this
21 check.
22 THE COURT: All right. It’s alleged that in 2008,
23 Hudson doing business as All Seasons Realty bought out
24 Jennings Real Estate.
25 MS. LEE: Correct.
0162
1 THE COURT: So he bought the company, including the
2 property management agreement pertaining to the Pomona Trail
3 Property. And our witness is connected to the Pomona Trail
4 Property; correct?
5 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.
6 THE COURT: Go ahead and continue, because I’m not
7 linking that yet to your document.
8 MS. LEE: And then paragraph 22, which is already
9 stipped states that once Hudson no longer had a license, the
10 contract was transferred to Havener.
11 THE COURT: Right.
12 MS. LEE: So this shows that her signature is on there
13 and she acknowledges that indeed it was transferred to her.
14 THE COURT: I thought we stipped to that. So why would
15 you be using it to acknowledge to something the parties
16 already stipulated to? That’s already been established by
17 both of you agreeing on that; is that right, Mr. Lear?
18 MR. LEAR: Yes, your Honor.
19 BY MS. LEE:
20 Q Page number 30, the check —
21 THE COURT: Just so I’m clear, let’s not go away from
22 page 29 because I’m still giving you an opportunity. I
23 don’t want you to think I’m giving you a hard time, Counsel,
24 I just need to understand what the relevancy is of the
25 testimony and the documents that you are presenting, and I
0163
1 am not quite there yet. Is there an allegation regarding
2 this bounced check?
3 MS. LEE: It’s regarding a bounced check.
4 THE COURT: No. This bounced check is what we’re
5 looking at, page 29.
6 MS. LEE: Not by number, no.
7 THE COURT: Okay. You want to make me an offer of
8 proof as to why we are still on it then? You got a witness
9 who is here ready to go. I don’t want you to bar you from
10 asking him important questions, but I have to know what I’m
11 listening to and why.
12 MS. LEE: She’s not meeting the terms of the contracts
13 as far as paying him according to what needs to be paid.
14 THE COURT: Okay. But this is a bounced check. Okay.
15 Did you allege that there is a violation of Real Estate Code
16 or the Business and Professions Code that would be relevant
17 to the Respondent that has to do with her bouncing this
18 check?
19 MS. LEE: Yes, making substantial misrepresentations.
20 THE COURT: Where?
21 MS. LEE: The fact that —
22 THE COURT: No, show me in the Accusation.
23 MS. LEE: Oh, paragraph 25.
24 THE COURT: Okay. It alleges that her conduct — this
25 is a conclusory allegation, and it may well be something you
0164
1 can prove, but it goes back to described in paragraphs 19
2 through 24. Is the check bouncing described in paragraphs
3 19 through 24?
4 MS. LEE: There’s a check bounced on paragraph 23.
5 THE COURT: Is it this one?
6 MS. LEE: No.
7 THE COURT: Okay. I’ll sustain the relevancy
8 objection. Move on. If you don’t allege it, I’m not going
9 to let you cover it by association prove it against the
10 Respondent. You got to give notice to the Respondent that
11 you are alleging specific facts and that those facts would
12 lead to a violation. Otherwise, they don’t have the ability
13 to defend, and I certainly can’t piece this together later
14 when I’m alone writing a proposed decision. It’s impossible
15 because — just so you know, Counsel, I go back to that
16 Accusation and see what evidence supported the allegation in
17 it. And it’s really a decidedly straightforward process.
18 So again, I don’t want you to think I’m giving you a hard
19 time. That is not my intention, but I really need you to
20 focus on relevancy in terms of what’s alleged in the
21 Accusation. Thank you. Go ahead.
22 BY MS. LEE:
23 Q Go to page 30. I think we already covered it — I
24 believe you testified that this was a check you received and
25 that it was bounced?
0165
1 MR. LEAR: Objection. Evidence Code 352, duplicative.
2 One, it’s already been covered, and two, it’s already been
3 stipulated to.
4 MS. LEE: No, it hasn’t.
5 MR. LEAR: Paragraph 23.
6 MS. LEE: Oh, yes.
7 THE COURT: I know the witness testified that page 30,
8 this check, he received it from All Seasons and then
9 management and the check bounced. He did testify to that
10 effect. Just so you know, you covered this.
11 BY MS. LEE:
12 Q Did you address this bounced check with Milton
13 Hudson in that conversation or bounced checks in general?
14 A Yes, ma’am, bounced checks in general.
15 Q Were your bounced checks issues resolved?
16 A No, ma’am.
17 Q And what do you mean they weren’t resolved?
18 A There is still a pending amount that is owed to us
19 due to these bounced checks.
20 Q Can you go to Exhibit No. 27? Do you recognize
21 this document?
22 A Yes, ma’am.
23 Q Did you generate this document?
24 A Yes, ma’am.
25 THE COURT: Could you just describe it for me so I
0166
1 could mark it before you testify further. Go ahead.
2 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir. It’s a summary of charges for
3 C. Prints, and a summary of charges that we’ve had a loss.
4 THE COURT: Okay. Did you prepare this?
5 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.
6 THE COURT: That’s marked as Exhibit 27. Go ahead,
7 Counsel.
8 (Complainant’s Exhibit 27 was marked for
9 identification by the Court.)
10 BY MS. LEE:
11 Q Can you explain these numbers?
12 A Yes, ma’am. The top portion is what is owed for
13 C. Prints herself while she was in the rental, and then,
14 like I said, the second portion is what is — what our
15 losses are for this property without any cost of repair that
16 have yet to be done.
17 Q What do you mean by losses from the tenant?
18 A When we had to bring this tenant to court because
19 she was homesteading, if you want to say. I had to waive
20 these to get her out of the property.
21 MR. LEAR: Objection. Move to strike. Your Honor, the
22 only allegation still in play here is paragraph 24, which is
23 limited to how much of a security deposit should be refunded
24 back to the then clients. Nothing about this Exhibit No.
25 27. It seems to pertain to that, maybe with the exception
0167
1 of anything limited to security deposit.
2 THE COURT: Okay. Ms. Lee, offer of proof.
3 MS. LEE: If you give him a chance to get to the
4 security deposits.
5 THE COURT: I don’t know what you mean.
6 MS. LEE: Part of the allegations is that security
7 deposits were not refunded, that’s part of the allegation,
8 paragraph 20 and 24, quite frankly. So he’s trying to
9 explain what — there are a lot of numbers here. I don’t
10 know about you, but I didn’t generate this, quite frankly,
11 so I am trying to walk him through it to understand what
12 this document is so we get the security deposits.
13 THE COURT: Okay. We’ve got a stipulation to
14 paragraphs 20, 21, 22, 23, not to 24, and then we don’t have
15 another stipulation until the next allegation. And the
16 allegation this is relevant to is which paragraph?
17 MS. LEE: Paragraphs 20 and 24.
18 THE COURT: All right. Paragraph 20 is that there was
19 a property management agreement with Mountainside Disposal
20 and the witness’s security deposits were to be placed in a
21 trust account. All right. Allegation paragraph 24 is that
22 in May of 2014, Hudson negotiated between Mountainside and
23 the then tenant of the property regarding how much of the
24 security deposit should be refunded back to the then
25 tenants. I heard testimony about that. Hudson also handled
0168
1 the security deposit funds in this transaction. Okay. This
2 document, Exhibit 17, that supports those allegations how?
3 Q Presumably, one of these numbers includes a
4 security deposit.
5 THE COURT: All right. I’m going to overrule the
6 objection narrowly to that effect. Go ahead. You can ask
7 another question.
8 BY MS. LEE:
9 Q I’ll just direct your attention to — are there
10 any numbers here that pertain or relate to the security
11 deposit?
12 A Yes, ma’am.
13 Q Can you direct our attention to that?
14 A Yes. If you look to the right of the page on top,
15 I list out what was to be paid to us, and the security
16 deposit of $975 is part of that.
17 Q That’s part of the $1,470?
18 A Correct.
19 THE COURT: You said that’s supposed to be paid to you?
20 THE WITNESS: Correct.
21 BY MS. LEE:
22 Q Did you receive that?
23 A Not in full.
24 Q Can you explain?
25 A In the — off to the right where I said prorated
0169
1 months, security deposit, pet deposit, credit report, the
2 check that we received was $1,175 still owning $295.
3 Q So you lumped it together basically?
4 A Yes, ma’am.
5 THE COURT: You when you are saying she owed $295 from
6 all of those other payments that were expected to be made?
7 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.
8 THE COURT: Thank you.
9 BY MS. LEE:
10 Q What are these other elements then?
11 MR. LEAR: Your Honor, objection. Relevance. I would
12 move to strike the $295. If the Court looks at allegation
13 24, it talks about how much of a security deposit should be
14 refunded back to the then tenants. The then tenants in May
15 of 2014 pursuant to Exhibit 29, page 14 was Prints. And
16 here, in the Exhibit 27, the security deposit of $975 is
17 attributed to Stears who was the previous tenant and not the
18 then tenant pursuant to the allegation in paragraph 24. So
19 this entire line of questioning, with respect to Exhibit 27,
20 is not relevant or pertinent to the allegations that are
21 alleged in paragraph 24.
22 THE COURT: Mr. Scott, can you help me out with this?
23 Which tenant was this regarding?
24 THE WITNESS: This was regarding C. Prints. Your
25 Honor, as I mentioned before, Milton had waived, whether it
0170
1 be a month’s rent or the security deposit because she
2 painted the house.
3 THE COURT: Right. Okay. So this is the — this was
4 — the security deposit that you link to Ms. Prints?
5 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.
6 THE COURT: Ms. Lee, you want to respond to the
7 objection?
8 MS. LEE: Did this contract start in April of 2014? I
9 don’t see a discrepancy in that. Counsel pointed to
10 paragraph 24 that describes in or about May 2014, and he
11 refers to “then tenant.” And Mr. Scott just testified that
12 this sheet refers to C. Prints. And C. Prints was a then
13 tenant because this started contracts on page 14 of
14 paragraph 29. It says, “May 16, 2014.”
15 THE COURT: Page 14 you said?
16 MS. LEE: Correct.
17 THE COURT: All right. Overruled. I want you to know,
18 you’re going to have to do a lot more to connect the dots so
19 far because this is not coming across particularly clearly
20 based on the allegations in the Accusation. This is why I’m
21 having so much trouble ruling on these basic relevancy
22 objections. I just don’t have a very clear overview, a
23 clear roadmap as to what events the Bureau is alleging are
24 important and significant, and what violations they led to.
25 That’s my suggestion, Counsel. Go ahead.
0171
1 BY MS. LEE:
2 Q When you discussed the contract, the security
3 funds, who did you discuss them with mostly?
4 A Milton.
5 Q And this is post-December 18th, 2013?
6 A Yes, ma’am.
7 Q Okay. And aside from that one conversation
8 described on May 13th, 2014, when you talked to Milton with
9 Stacey listening in on the conversation, have you ever
10 talked directly to Stacey besides that instance?
11 A No, ma’am.
12 MS. LEE: No further questions.
13 THE COURT: Cross-examination?
14 MR. LEAR: Thank you.
15
16 CROSS-EXAMINATION
17 BY MR. LEAR:
18 Q Mr. Scott, can I turn your attention to Exhibit
19 27? Do you see that date in the upper left-hand corner,
20 April 16th, 2014?
21 A Yes.
22 Q Is that the date that you created the document?
23 A No, sir.
24 Q What does that date signify?
25 A That date signifies when she moved into the
0172
1 premises.
2 Q Okay. So she moved in before the lease came into
3 effect?
4 A No. She moved in on either the 15th or the 16th
5 of April. If you look at the contract, it says when she
6 moved in.
7 Q We understand based on the contract, which is at
8 Exhibit 29, page 14, that the term of the lease began on
9 May 1st, 2014?
10 A That may be true, but she was in — because this
11 is signed by her on April 16, 2014.
12 Q I understand. But you agree that the document
13 speaks for itself as to when the lease begins; correct?
14 A Correct. But she moved in on April the 16th,
15 2014.
16 Q I understand you are stating that, but the legal
17 beginning of the lease was indicated as May 1st, 2014, you
18 agree with that; correct?
19 A That’s what it states.
20 Q Thank you. So I want to talk about this
21 conversation on May 13th, 2014. About how far away are you
22 and I right now?
23 A Probably about 8 to 10 feet.
24 Q Okay. So your testimony earlier was that you were
25 having a conversation with Milton Hudson on or about
0173
1 May 13th, 2014?
2 A Correct.
3 Q How close were the two of you? Milton and you?
4 A Between 5 and 6 feet.
5 Q Okay. So if I’m going to represent Stacey Havener
6 and you are going to represent yourself, where would you put
7 Mr. Hudson?
8 A Right about the door.
9 Q Okay. So clarify for the record. If we’re
10 talking your perspective and if I’m 12:00 o’clock from you
11 then that would be approximately 9:00 o’clock?
12 A If I was looking forward, he would be right at
13 6:00 o’clock —
14 Q I’m sorry, 3:00 o’clock.
15 A Right.
16 Q During the time you were making eye contact with
17 him?
18 A Yes.
19 Q And you testified — you were confident that
20 Stacey Havener was listening?
21 A Yes.
22 Q Yet, you testified that she didn’t participate in
23 the conversation?
24 A So she listened intently from 8 feet away. She
25 did not move from the entire time that I walked into the
0174
1 time I walked out. She was still in the same place.
2 Q How long was the conversation?
3 A It was only a few minutes.
4 Q Okay. And during the course of the conversation,
5 were you making eye contact with Mr. Hudson?
6 A Yes.
7 Q And were you making eye contact exclusively with
8 Mr. Hudson?
9 A For the majority, yes.
10 Q So you didn’t really have any way of knowing
11 whether Ms. Havener was in fact listening to your
12 conversation or simply standing 8 to 10 feet away not
13 listening?
14 MS. LEE: Objection. Argumentative.
15 THE COURT: Counsel, next time wait until the question
16 is done. The objection is overruled. You can answer.
17 THE WITNESS: Sir, based on my 35 years of management,
18 dealing with employees, dealing with customers, when someone
19 stands in one place and does not move during an entire
20 conversation looking toward us, yes, they are listening.
21 BY MR. LEAR:
22 Q But you wouldn’t know that she was looking towards
23 you the entirety of the time since you just testified that
24 you were looking at Mr. Hudson at 3:00 o’clock.
25 A As I stated before, sir, from the time I walked in
0175
1 to the time I left, she was in that same place, same stance,
2 watching me as I entered and left.
3 Q So to boil it down, you assumed she was listening?
4 A Based on my experience, yes, she was listening.
5 Q But you are assuming that because you don’t really
6 know that.
7 MS. LEE: Objection. Asked and answered.
8 THE COURT: Sustained. I think you gotten as far as
9 you’re going on this point.
10 MR. LEAR: I agree. Thank you.
11 BY MR. LEAR:
12 Q And with respect to the discussion that you had
13 with Mr. Hudson regarding the security deposit issue, that
14 was a discussion you had with Mr. Hudson regarding the
15 security deposit issue with respect to C. Prints; correct?
16 A Both.
17 Q Okay. I’m including C. Prints.
18 A Correct.
19 Q Who was the then tenant in or around May of 2014?
20 A Correct.
21 Q Okay. Now, in that regard, you would agree — I
22 think it’s your testimony that Ms. Havener knew about that
23 discussion you were having with Mr. Hudson?
24 A Correct.
25 Q So you would agree that the discussion you were
0176
1 having with Mr. Hudson was under the supervision from
2 Ms. Havener?
3 A Correct.
4 Q Did you have an issue with Ms. Havener?
5 A No, sir.
6 Q Did you have an issue with Mr. Hudson?
7 A Just that he didn’t fulfill the contract, and we
8 have a loss due to it.
9 Q Let’s limit the discussion to you. Do you have an
10 issue with the fact Mr. Hudson spoke to you about the
11 security deposit that should be refunded back to Ms. Price?
12 A No, the Price family.
13 Q The Price family. And that that was under the
14 supervision of Ms. Havener?
15 A Yes.
16 Q What is your issue?
17 A I don’t have an issue.
18 Q Let me rephrase the question. Do you have an
19 issue with the fact that Mr. Hudson spoke to you about the
20 — how much the security deposit should be refunded back to
21 the Price family, and he did know under the supervision of
22 Ms. Havener?
23 MS. LEE: Objection as far as issue. What do you mean
24 by issue? Vague and ambiguous.
25 THE COURT: Did you understand the question?
0177
1 THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.
2 THE COURT: Overruled. You may answer.
3 THE WITNESS: No.
4 MR. LEAR: Nothing further.
5 THE COURT: Redirect?
6
7 REDIRECT EXAMINATION
8 BY MS. LEE:
9 Q Can you go to Exhibit 29, page 5. Can you
10 describe this document?
11 A This is the card that I picked up off of Milton’s
12 desk next to his card for Stacey.
13 MS. LEE: Did we mark Exhibit 29 yet, your Honor?
14 THE COURT: Just a minute. What number is it?
15 MS. LEE: Exhibit 29, page 5.
16 THE COURT: Exhibit 29 was marked some time ago. I’m
17 marking each page that you stopped on. I’m marking this
18 page 5. All right. The witness just identified that —
19 what was your testimony about this page? That this is the
20 card?
21 THE WITNESS: This is Stacey’s business card that was a
22 Milton’s desk during our conversation. And because Stacey
23 was standing there listening, I purposely picked up her
24 card.
25 THE COURT: Ask another question.
0178
1 BY MS. LEE:
2 Q Why did you pick up her card?
3 A To identify who was in the room.
4 Q Okay. Do you have peripheral vision?
5 A Yes.
6 Q And in your peripheral vision, could you see
7 Stacey Havener listening to the conversation?
8 A Yes.
9 Q Do you have any doubt in your mind that she was
10 intently listening to that conversation?
11 A There is no doubt in my mind.
12 Q Is that your writing on the left side of this page
13 5?
14 A Yes, ma’am.
15 Q Do you believe these words?
16 A Yes, ma’am.
17 Q You say you don’t have an issue with regarding how
18 much security deposits refunded to Prints, but doesn’t that
19 amount given back to her potentially affect what’s given to
20 you?
21 MR. LEAR: Objection. Mischaracterizes the testimony.
22 THE COURT: Sustained.
23 BY MS. LEE:
24 Q Does a security deposit — how much a security
25 deposit is given to a tenant affect how much is given to you
0179
1 for prepared such things?
2 MR. LEAR: Objection. Relevance.
3 THE COURT: Sustained.
4 BY MS. LEE:
5 Q On page 25 of Exhibit 29, same exhibit. This is
6 the E-mail that you already identified and describe for us.
7 Why did you bother talking about the security deposits with
8 Milton?
9 A Because that was the sum total of part of what was
10 there, so I wanted to make sure that was clarified and he
11 responded accordingly.
12 Q By “accordingly,” what do you mean?
13 A He responded to my E-mail.
14 Q How so? What was your — what did you want?
15 A I had asked for the two contracts and the amount
16 that stated on the E-mail.
17 Q That’s on page 25?
18 A Yes, ma’am.
19 MS. LEE: No further questions.
20 THE COURT: Recross?
21 MR. LEAR: Nothing further.
22 THE COURT: All right. Thank you, very much for
23 coming. You are excused. Okay. It’s 4:28. What do you
24 have in store? Do you want to start tomorrow morning or do
25 you have another witness here?
0180
1 MS. LEE: I do. I have a question, your Honor.
2 THE COURT: Go ahead.
3 MS. LEE: It could be expedited in a sense that there’s
4 exhibits that have CDs, but they have transcripts to the CDs
5 also as part of the exhibits. We could expedite it if we
6 could just go off the transcripts or if you want me to play
7 the CD, that’s a different story. There’s a transcript of
8 the CD as part of the exhibit.
9 THE COURT: I have no idea what that’s going to entail,
10 so I can’t really say do this and don’t do that. I don’t
11 know — I just can’t talk with you as far as efficiency goes
12 because I don’t know if you talked about this with Mr. Lear
13 or if he knows the content of whatever the transcript is
14 you’ve got. This is going to be involving a witness that is
15 going to look at a CD?
16 MS. LEE: This is involving a witness who will testify
17 to dealing with Milton Hudson.
18 THE COURT: Who is the witness?
19 MS. LEE: It pertains to the 5th cause of action
20 starting on page 10, your Honor, involving Terre Ashmore.
21 The 5th cause of action starts on page 10.
22 THE COURT: Okay. We’ve got — paragraph 35 was
23 stipulated to, paragraphs 36, 37, 38, 39, only in part
24 because I don’t believe Mr. Lear thinks that — on line 20
25 he did not agree that Hudson facilitated the rental
0181
1 agreement, so I noted that. Paragraph 40 is not agreed to
2 nor was 41. Who is the witness?
3 MS. LEE: Terre Ashmore.
4 THE COURT: Okay. That was agreed that they entered
5 into a holding deposit agreement. They paid $800 in cash to
6 Respondent and she gave them a receipt from All Seasons
7 Realty with a particular address. She gave them a business
8 card on the same day. That was agreed to. Three days
9 later, April 30, 2015, there was a rental agreement
10 facilitated between Respondent and/or her husband, that’s in
11 dispute, involving someone named Henrick D. and Terre A.
12 The rent is $800 a month.
13 MR. LEAR: I know a good way to spend a half an hour.
14 THE COURT: How is that?
15 MR. LEAR: Talking about the hearsay rule. I note,
16 your Honor, that the transcription, which is Exhibit 50 and
17 51 that I’m looking at for the first time right now is in a
18 form that I’ve never seen before, namely a handwritten
19 transcription that is not certified by any reporter.
20 MS. LEE: What exhibit is this again?
21 MR. LEAR: Exhibits 50 and 51.
22 THE COURT: Is that the transcription you were talking
23 about?
24 MS. LEE: Correct. And this was provided during
25 discovery.
0182
1 THE COURT: Okay. And so, the witness that you intend
2 to call Terre A., she’s going to testify about voice mail
3 messages; is that correct?
4 MS. LEE: Correct. She can authenticate these
5 transcripts.
6 MR. LEAR: I’m also going to indicate the hearsay rule,
7 which is that these are clearly out of court statements
8 offered for the truth of the matter asserted, and basically
9 defined hearsay.
10 MS. LEE: They are not asserted for the truth of the
11 matter but for the fact that they are even made — that they
12 are even making these calls to her regarding the property.
13 Whether it’s true, whether he did certain things, does not
14 matter.
15 THE COURT: Okay. What’s the exception to hearsay that
16 you would be relying on?
17 MS. LEE: It’s not asserted.
18 THE COURT: As far as I can tell, Milton is not going
19 to be here. He’s the person that made the statements that
20 are on the voice mails.
21 MS. LEE: Correct.
22 THE COURT: How is it not hearsay?
23 MS. LEE: It’s not asserted for the truth of the truth
24 essentially. It’s asserted for the fact that he’s making
25 the voice mail at all on behalf of All Seasons.
0183
1 THE COURT: Well, isn’t that still hearsay that his
2 voice would be identified as being — as making a call?
3 That’s, like, hearsay being a handclap or some other
4 gesture. That could be hearsay too. The fact that he’s
5 making calls and that she would identify that, “Yes, this is
6 him and he’s calling.” And by the way, what would the
7 relevance be if I didn’t know what he was calling about? As
8 far as I know, I’m not an expert in Real Estate law, but I
9 don’t think that a non-realtor who works for a realtor is
10 prohibited by law from calling various clients or people
11 that the realtor comes in contact within their business.
12 MS. LEE: Correct.
13 THE COURT: So if there’s no absolute prohibition from
14 a non-realtor who works for a realtor, calling somebody on
15 the telephone who does business with that realtor, I don’t
16 see how this is going to prove anything unless we know what
17 the context is of those calls. For all I know — I’ve got a
18 realtor right now who is giving away pies for Thanksgiving,
19 and she contacted me a few days ago to ask me which day I’d
20 like to pick up my free pie. So unless I know what Milton
21 Hudson is calling about, the fact that he’s calling alone I
22 don’t believe under the Accusation, I don’t think that that
23 would lead to any violations that you’ve alleged.
24 MS. LEE: Well, the fact that he negotiated on the
25 telephone on these voice mails itself.
0184
1 THE COURT: Right. You are correct. That’s the
2 content of his call. So those statements are actually
3 something you are relying on. What it is he’s talking about
4 in those calls. So how is it not hearsay?
5 MS. LEE: Because he’s actually negotiating. It’s not
6 whether — it’s not him describing something, it’s that he’s
7 actually negotiating. It’s an act essentially. It’s a
8 verbal act.
9 THE COURT: I know, but still you have to tie it to the
10 actual verbal act. And I’m sure you know that, that I don’t
11 have a context for it. It’s words coming out of his mouth
12 that somebody else is going to identify that’s being from
13 here.
14 MS. LEE: Correct. Unless she acted in reliance
15 thereof.
16 THE COURT: Right. That’s a relevance issue. The
17 objection is hearsay. I’m giving you your opportunity to
18 tell me why it’s not hearsay or why it meets an exception.
19 I believe it is hearsay based on what you are telling me
20 because you are definitely relying on the content of what
21 that declarant was saying. That’s why I brought up the
22 issue of somebody calling who works at a real estate office
23 for a realtor. There’s no prohibition for staff, unlicensed
24 staff, to call various people that are dealing with that
25 Realty.
0185
1 MS. LEE: There is prohibition of calling someone and
2 negotiating things.
3 THE COURT: Right. That goes to the content of his
4 words. And so, what I’m trying to ask you is if you got a
5 hearsay exception in mind, that would overcome the
6 objection.
7 MS. LEE: Again, not for the truth of the matter
8 asserted. He’s actually negotiating on these voice mails.
9 He’s not saying, “I negotiated with someone yesterday
10 describing an event.” He’s actually doing the negotiations
11 on the voice mails itself. It’s like videotaping something.
12 THE COURT: So you are offering it just to show that he
13 is calling to negotiate, but you don’t want me to consider
14 the truth of the matter asserted, which is that he’s talking
15 about Real Estate and doing a Real Estate transaction; is
16 that right?
17 MS. LEE: No. He’s negotiating with Real Estate. He’s
18 not negotiating about a car. He’s negotiating about rent,
19 about dealing with Real Estate, but he’s doing so on the
20 voice mail.
21 THE COURT: Can I ask you, did you subpoena him to
22 testify?
23 MS. LEE: No.
24 THE COURT: Any particular reason?
25 MS. LEE: Couldn’t find him.
0186
1 THE COURT: You can’t locate him?
2 MS. LEE: Correct.
3 MR. LEAR: Who is “him?”
4 THE COURT: Milton Hudson, the declarant. I don’t
5 think that is something I can use to skirt my way around a
6 hearsay objection, that you are expecting me to consider the
7 words, the content of the words, and not consider them for
8 the truth of the matter asserted but to consider them in the
9 context of this being an act. I just think that that kind
10 of exception to hearsay could be applied to great many
11 hearsay statements, and I don’t really believe that’s how
12 the — I don’t think that’s a valid exception to hearsay,
13 Counsel. I just don’t. If there was a specific exception
14 to hearsay under the law, I’d listen to it, but you are
15 saying it’s non-hearsay and it’s an out of court statement.
16 And you are offering it to show that that out of
17 state declarant was making specific declarations, which are
18 tantamount to Real Estate negotiations. I can’t separate
19 that from the statements themselves. These are out of court
20 statements. It’s 4:40, perhaps the best thing we can do is
21 — I’m going to let you think about this for right now. I’m
22 sustaining the objection. You can bring this witness back
23 tomorrow to testify. We’re not going to get very far at
24 this hour. I’d really rather have the witness testify
25 completely. Based on what we had so far, we had two
0187
1 witnesses and it’s nearly 5:00. I want to give you enough
2 time, Counsel, to be able to do your direct and allow
3 Mr. Lear to do his cross-examination as close to the direct
4 exam as possible. It’s most useful for me no matter which
5 side is calling a witness if we take the witness not in a
6 chopped up fashion. So since we don’t have that much time
7 and this is a major stumbling block, I think we should
8 reconvene tomorrow at 9:00.
9 And for right now I’m sustaining the objection.
10 If you want to make an offer of proof tomorrow when the
11 witness is back and you want to be more specific, you may.
12 But right now, I’d have to say this appears to be hearsay
13 and there doesn’t seem to be any exception. Do you want to
14 have the witness come in and would you like me to order them
15 to come back tomorrow at 9:00? Is your witness available
16 tomorrow at 9:00?
17 MS. LEE: I’ll have to talk to her.
18 THE COURT: You want to bring her in?
19 MS. LEE: Sure. Also, may we admit some documents to
20 pertain to the last witness as well before we convene so
21 it’s fresh in our minds?
22 THE COURT: You want to do that right now?
23 MS. LEE: Sure.
24 THE COURT: Okay. Your Exhibit 27 is not received yet.
25 Exhibit 28 was received. Exhibit 29 was marked but not
0188
1 received.
2 MS. LEE: Exhibit 28 was received?
3 THE COURT: Yes.
4 MS. LEE: Exhibit 29, specifically page 5?
5 THE COURT: Okay. Exhibit 29, page 5.
6 MS. LEE: Pages 8 through 20.
7 THE COURT: Okay.
8 MS. LEE: And pages 25 and 26, those are the E-mails.
9 THE COURT: Mr. Lear had made an objection that I
10 sustained about some of those documents. So we’ve got page
11 5, page 8 through 20, page 25 and 29 marked and page 30 as
12 well. You are moving to have —
13 MS. LEE: Say that again, your Honor, please.
14 THE COURT: I have Exhibits 25, 29 and 30, and actually
15 Exhibit 31 was testified to but the witness didn’t really
16 know exactly what that was. He also testified to Exhibit
17 32. Exhibits 35 through 37, I sustained a relevancy
18 objection.
19 MR. LEAR: I think you also sustained a relevancy
20 objection to Exhibit 29.
21 THE COURT: That’s right. Based on the date on the
22 check.
23 MS. LEE: Can we go over what we are submitting, not
24 what we aren’t?
25 THE COURT: Okay. Page 5, page 8 through 20. What
0189
1 other pages?
2 MS. LEE: Pages 25 and 26.
3 THE COURT: All right. Those are the two E-mail pages.
4 MS. LEE: Page 30.
5 THE COURT: Page 30.
6 MS. LEE: And page 34.
7 THE COURT: Okay, and page 34, a fax transmittal page.
8 I remember the witness did testify about that. Is there any
9 objection to any of those pages being received in evidence?
10 MR. LEAR: Let’s start with 34. I don’t recall the
11 witness testifying to lay foundation for 34.
12 THE COURT: He identified it.
13 MR. LEAR: Then I have no objection.
14 THE COURT: All right.
15 MR. LEAR: And page 34, I am going to revisit that
16 because the content with respect to the comments deal with
17 checks in the period of 2013, which were prior to
18 Ms. Havener taking over the All Seasons Realty, so we would
19 object to 34 on the basis of relevancy.
20 THE COURT: All right. I’m going to overrule your
21 objection just in terms of receiving it. We’ve covered this
22 a lot, and I understand exactly what your objection goes to,
23 so I’m receiving the document but noting your relevance
24 objection. As both of you know at this point, if it’s not
25 alleged in the Accusation with enough specificity, I’m not
0190
1 going to make leaps of logic to make findings in my proposed
2 decision. That’s received. The other pages 5, and 8 to 20,
3 and 25 and 26, do you have any objection to those pages
4 being received?
5 MR. LEAR: I have an objection on page 25 with respect
6 to the May 13th, 2014, E-mail to the extent that it
7 discusses anything other than the security deposits. I’ll
8 withdraw my objection.
9 THE COURT: All right. Then pages 5, 8 through 20 and
10 25 and 26 are received as part of Exhibit 29.
11 (Complainant’s Exhibit 29 was received in evidence
12 by the Court.)
13 MS. LEE: And page 30, your Honor.
14 THE COURT: I already covered 30 and 34, those pages
15 are both in. What I’d like to do is make sure, Counsel,
16 when you are done, Ms. Lee, with the hearing that you take
17 back the other pages that you have not used with any
18 subsequent witnesses. All right.
19 MS. LEE: Your Honor, may we leave those intact for
20 now?
21 THE COURT: Right. I’m going to leave them intact for
22 now, but at the end of the hearing I’m going to come back to
23 you and ask you to pull from the exhibits any pages that
24 were not received so that I don’t make a terrible mistake
25 and rely on something was not received in evidence. I don’t
0191
1 want to do that.
2 MS. LEE: Fair enough.
3 THE COURT: Do you want to get your witness quickly?
4 MS. LEE: Yes.
5 THE COURT: Off the record.
6 (Recess)
7 THE COURT: Back on the record. We’re back on the
8 record, and Ms. Lee is still putting on her case. You had
9 one other witness that was waiting this afternoon; is that
10 right?
11 MS. LEE: Correct.
12 THE COURT: Your name?
13 THE WITNESS: Terre Ashmore.
14 THE COURT: Hi, Terre. I am really sorry to tell you
15 that it’s really the end of the day, and we’ve had really
16 extensive and lengthy proceedings all day only dealing with
17 two witnesses. Can you come back tomorrow morning and be
18 our first witness at 9:00 o’clock?
19 THE WITNESS: Okay. I can do that.
20 THE COURT: Thank you. I apologize that you had to sit
21 here and wait all this time for us. It was really — it’s
22 hard to tell how long it takes to deal with witnesses. Both
23 sides have to have an opportunity to ask their questions,
24 and we got a lot of documents in the case. And so, things
25 went a little more slowly I think than expected, but you are
0192
1 going to be the first witness at 9:00 o’clock. All right.
2 THE WITNESS: Yes.
3 THE COURT: Thank you. See you tomorrow. We’re going
4 to reconvene at 9:00 o’clock tomorrow morning. Hopefully,
5 Ms. Lee, you can talk with Mr. Lear a little bit about your
6 time element on your next witness. She’s the last one;
7 right?
8 MS. LEE: I may have the auditor come up to explain the
9 documents.
10 THE COURT: Okay. You should give Mr. Lear some time
11 estimates so he can try to schedule his witnesses to
12 minimize the amount of waiting they might do.
13 MS. LEE: Fair enough.
14 THE COURT: Thank you. Off the record.
15 (Hearing concluded at 4:52 p.m.)
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
0193
1 REPORTER’S CERTIFICATION
2
3 I, the undersigned, a Certified Shorthand
4 Reporter of the State of California, do hereby certify:
5 That the foregoing proceedings were taken before
6 me at the time and place herein set forth; that any
7 witnesses in the foregoing proceedings, prior to
8 testifying, were duly sworn; that a record of the
9 proceedings was made by me using machine shorthand, which
10 was thereafter transcribed under my direction; that the
11 foregoing transcript is a true record of the testimony
12 given.
13 Further, that if the foregoing pertains to the
14 original transcript of a deposition in a federal case,
15 before completion of the proceedings, review of the
16 transcript [] was [X] was not requested.
17 I further certify I am neither financially
18 interested in the action nor a relative or employee of any
19 attorney or party to this action.
20 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have this date subscribed
21 my name.
22 Dated: November 17, 2016
23
24
25

This is part of the September 29, 2017 online edition of The Mountain Enterprise.

Have an opinion on this matter? We'd like to hear from you.