Title documents

Title documents
Title documents
Title documents
Title documents
9/22/2019 Case Info

Contact Us

Case Number: CGC19579067

Title: SHR ST. FRANCIS, L.L.C. VS. SHR GROUP LLC
Cause of Action: QUIET TITLE - REAL PROPERTY
Generated: 2019-09-22 4:39 pm

Register of Actions Parties Attorneys Calendar Payments Documents

Please Note: The "View" document links on this web page are valid until 4:49:35 pm
After that, please refresh your web browser. (by pressing Command +R for Mac, pressing F5 for Windows or clicking the refresh button on your web
browser)

Register of Actions

Show All entries Search:

Date Proceedings Document Fee

2019-09-12 PROOF OF SERVICE OF EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER AND ORDER TO View
SHOW CAUSE FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION; MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTORITIES; DECLARATIONS
(TRANSACTION ID # 100050742) FILED BY PLAINTIFF SHR ST. FRANCIS, L.L.C. , A DELAWARE LIMITED LIABILITY
COMPANY

2019-09-12 DECLARATION OF NATHAN POWELL IN SUPPORT OF EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING View
ORDER AND ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION (TRANSACTION ID # 100050742) FILED
BY PLAINTIFF SHR ST. FRANCIS, L.L.C. , A DELAWARE LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY

2019-09-12 DECLARATION OF PATRICIA A. NEEDHAM IN SUPPORT OF EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR TEMPORARY View
RESTRAINING ORDER AND ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION (TRANSACTION ID #
100050742) FILED BY PLAINTIFF SHR ST. FRANCIS, L.L.C. , A DELAWARE LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY

2019-09-12 MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR TEMPORARY View
RESTRAINING ORDER AND ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION (TRANSACTION ID #
100050742) FILED BY PLAINTIFF SHR ST. FRANCIS, L.L.C. , A DELAWARE LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY

2019-09-12 EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR ORDER FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER AND ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE View $60.00
FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION (TRANSACTION ID # 100050742) FILED BY PLAINTIFF SHR ST. FRANCIS, L.L.C. ,
A DELAWARE LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY

2019-09-06 NOTICE TO PLAINTIFF View

2019-09-06 QUIET TITLE - REAL PROPERTY, COMPLAINT FILED BY PLAINTIFF SHR ST. FRANCIS, L.L.C. , A DELAWARE View $450.00
LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY AS TO DEFENDANT SHR GROUP LLC , A DELAWARE LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY
SUMMONS ISSUED, JUDICIAL COUNCIL CIVIL CASE COVER SHEET FILED CASE MANAGEMENT CONFERENCE
SCHEDULED FOR FEB-05-2020 PROOF OF SERVICE DUE ON NOV-05-2019 CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT
DUE ON JAN-13-2020

Showing 1 to 7 of 7 entries Previous 1 Next

https://webapps.sftc.org/ci/CaseInfo.dll?CaseNum=CGC19579067&SessionID=D17480DCB812CCD850780B31A4F00B035E89E54E 1/1
CASE NUMBER: CGC-19-579067 SHR ST. FRANCIS, L.L.C. VS. SHR GROUP LLC

NOTICE TO PLAINTIFF
A Case Management Conference is set for:

DATE: FEB-05-2020
TIME: 10:30AM

PLACE: Department 610

400 McAllister Street
San Francisco, CA 94102-3680
All parties must appear and comply with Local Rule 3.

CRC 3.725 requires the filing and service of a case management statement form CM-110
no later than 15 days before the case management conference. However, it would facilitate
the issuance of a case management order without an appearance at the case
management conference if the case management statement is filed, served and lodged in
Department 610 twenty-five (25) days before the case management conference.

Plaintiff must serve a copy of this notice upon each party to this action with the summons and
complaint. Proof of service subsequently filed with this court shall so state. This case is
eligible for electronic filing and service per Local Rule 2.11. For more information,
please visit the Court's website at www.sfsuperiorcourt.org under Online Services.
[DEFENDANTS: Attending the Case Management Conference does not take the place
of filing a written response to the complaint. You must file a written response with the
court within the time limit required by law. See Summons.]

ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION REQUIREMENTS

IT IS THE POLICY OF THE SUPERIOR COURT THAT EVERY CIVIL CASE SHOULD PARTICIPATE IN
MEDIATION, ARBITRATION, NEUTRAL EVALUATION, AN EARLY SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE, OR
OTHER APPROPRIATE FORM OF ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION PRIOR TO A TRIAL.

(SEE LOCAL RULE 4)

Plaintiff must serve a copy of the Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) Information Package
on each defendant along with the complaint. (CRC 3.221.) The ADR package may be
accessed at www.sfsuperiorcourt.org/divisions/civil/dispute-resolution or you may request a
paper copy from the filing clerk. All counsel must discuss ADR with clients and opposing
counsel and provide clients with a copy of the ADR Information Package prior to filing
the Case Management Statement.
Superior Court Alternative Dispute Resolution Administrator
400 McAllister Street, Room 103-A
San Francisco, CA 94102
(415) 551-3869

See Local Rules 3.3, 6.0 C and 10 B re stipulation to judge pro tem.
 GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP
BENJAMIN WAGNER, SBN 163581
bwagner@gibsondunn.corn
ANDREW PAULSON, SBN 267095 ELECTRONICALLY
apaulson@gibsondunn.corn
NATHAN L. POWELL, SBN 318066 FILED
Superior Court of California,
npowell@gibsondunn.corn County of San Francisco
1881 Page Mill Road
Palo Alto, CA 94304-1211 09/12/2019
Clerk of the Court
Telephone: 650.849,5300 BY: BOWMAN LIU
Facsimile; 650.849.5333 Deputy Clerk

GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP

JAMES P. FOGELMAN, SBN 161584
j fogelman@gibsondunn.corn
LAUREN TRAINA, SBN 300218
Itraina@gibsondunn.corn
333 South Grand Avenue
10 Los Angeles, CA 90071-3197
Telephone: 213.229.7000
Facsimile: 213.229.7520

12 Attorneys for Plaintiff SHR St. Francis, L.L.C.

13

14 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

15 FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO

16

17 SHR ST, FRANCIS, L.L.C,, a Delaware limited CASE NO. CGC-19-579067

liability company,
PLAINTIFF'S EXPARTE APPLICATION
Plaintiff, FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER
19 AND ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE FOR
PRELIMINARY IN JUNCTION
20
SHR GROUP LLC, a Delaware limited liability [Memorandum of Points and Authorities;
21 company, Declarations of Patricia Needham and Nathan
Powell; and (Proposedj Order filed concurrently
22 Defendant. herewith]

23 HEARING:
Date: September 19, 2019
24 Time: 9:00 a,m.
Dept.: 501

Action Filed: September 6, 2019

Trial Date: None Set

27

28

Gibson, Dunn &

PLAINTIFF'S EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER AND ORDER TO SHOW
Crutcher LLP CAUSE FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION — CASE NO. CGC-19-579067
 TO ALL PARTIES AND THEIR ATTORNEYS OF RECORD:
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that on September 19, 2019 at 9:00 a,m., or as soon thereafter as

the matter may be heard, in Department 501 of the San Francisco County Superior Court, located at

400 McAllister Street, San Francisco, California 94102, Plaintiff SHR St. Francis, L.L.C. will and

does apply ex parte for (1) an Order to Show Cause why a Preliminary Injunction Should Not Issue

against Defendant SHR Group LLC; and (2) a temporary restraining order against Defendant SHR

Group LLC and its officers, directors, successors, agents, servants, employees, representatives,

affiliates, and all persons acting in concert with them enjoining them from transferring, selling, or

otherwise encumbering title to the real property known as the Westin St, Francis, located at 335

10 Powell Street, City of San Francisco, County of San Francisco, State of California (the "Subject

Property" ).

Plaintiff is the longtime rightful owner of the Subject Property, which is a luxury hotel.
13 Defendant is a shell Delaware limited liability company with a name similar to Plaintiff and its

14 affiliates, but with no actual relation to Plaintiff or its affiliates, Without Plaintiff's knowledge or

15 authority, Defendant has illicitly purported to transfer title to the Subject Property to itself via a false

16 Grant Deed recorded in San Francisco County. This false Grant Deed has obstructed a major real

17 estate transaction worth over one billion dollars involving one of the most well-known luxury hotel

18 properties in San Francisco County, A temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction are

19 necessary and appropriate to prevent Defendant from further encumbering or transferring title in the

20 Subject Property until the cloud on title to the Subject Property can be cleared.

21 This Ex Parte Application is made under Sections 525-527 of the Code of Civil Procedure

and Rules 3,1150 and 3.1200, et seq,, of the California Rules of Court. Plaintiff has not previously

23 filed any ex parte applications in this case. The Application is based on the accompanying

24 Memorandum of Points and Authorities, the attached Declarations of Patricia Needham and Nathan

Powell (the "Powell Decl."), the [Proposed] Order submitted with this application, all matters on file

26 in this case, argument and submissions through the disposition by the Court, and any other matters of

27 which the Court may choose to take notice,

28

Gibson, Dunn &

Crutcher LLP PLAINTIFF'S EXPARTE APPLICATION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER AND ORDER TO SHOW
CAUSE FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION — CASE NO. CGC-19-579067
 California Rule of Court 3.1202(a), Identification: Attorneys for Plaintiff
SHR St. Francis, L.L.C, are James P. Fogelman and Lauren Traina of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP,

333 South Grand Avenue, Los Angeles, California, 90071, (213) 229-7000, and Benjamin B,

4 Wagner, Andrew Paulson, and Nathan L. Powell, also of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP, 1881 Page

Mill Rd., Palo Alto, California, 94304, (650) 849-5300. Plaintiff's counsel knows of no attorney

representing Defendant. Defendant is a Delaware limited liability company with no known address
or telephone number.

California Rule of Court 3.1150(a) Notice: Notice of this Ex Parte Application was
provided to Defendant SHR Group LLC on September 12, 2019, via personal service on their
10 registered agents for service of process. See Powell Decl. $ 3.

12 DATED; September 12, 2019

GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP
13 BENJAMIN B. WAGNER
JAMES P. FOGELMAN
ANDREW PAULSON
LAUREN TRAINA
15 NATHAN POWELL
16

17
P -
~1
By:
18
Benjamin B, Wagner
19 Attorneys for Plaintiff SHR St, Francis, L.L.C.
20

21

25

26

27

Gibson, Dunn tt
Crutcher LLP PLAINTIFF'S EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER AND ORDER TO SHOW
CAUSE FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION — CASE NO. CGC-19-579067
 GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP
BENJAMIN WAGNER, SBN 163581
bwagner@gibsondunn.corn
ANDREW PAULSON, SBN 267095 ELECTRONICALLY
apaulson@gibsondunn.corn
NATHAN L. POWELL, SBN 318066 FILED
Superior Court of California,
npowell@gibsondunn.corn County of San Francisco
1881 Page Mill Road
Palo Alto, CA 94304-1211 09/12/2019
Clerk of the Court
Telephone: 650,849.5300 BY: BOWMAN LIU
Facsimile: 650.849.5333 Deputy Clerk

GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP

JAMES P, FOGELMAN, SBN 161584
j fogelman@gibsondunn.corn
LAUREN TRAINA, SBN 300218
Itraina@gibsondunn.corn
333 South Grand Avenue
10 Los Angeles, CA 90071-3197
Telephone: 213.229.7000
Facsimile: 213.229.7520

12 Attorneys for Plaintiff SHR St. Francis, I..I.. C,

13

14 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

15 FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO

16

17 SHR ST. FRANCIS, L.L.C,, a Delaware limited CASE NO. CGC-19-579067

liability company,
18 MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND
Plaintiff, AUTHORITIKS IN SUPPORT OF
19 PLAINTIFF'S EX PARTE APPLICATION
FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER
20 AND ORDER SHOW CAUSE FOR
SHR GROUP LLC, a Delaware limited liability PRELIMINARY IN JUNCTION
21 company,
[Ex Parte Application for Temporary Restraining
Defendant. Order and Order to Show Cause for Preliminary
Injunction; Declarations of Patricia Needham
23 and Nathan Powell; and [Proposedj Order filed
concurrently herewith]
HEARING:
25 Date: 19, 2019
Dept„'eptember
Time: 9:00 a.m,
501

Action Filed: September 6, 2019

Trial Date: None Set
28

Gibson, Dunn tr
MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF'S EX PARTE APPLICATION
Crutcher LLP FOR TRO AND ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION — CASE NO. CCrC-19-579067
 INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff brings this application for a temporary restraining order and order to show cause why
a preliminary injunction should not issue, to prevent fraudsters from obstructing a major real estate

transaction involving one of the most well-known luxury hotel properties in San Francisco, A real

estate transaction worth over one billion dollars hangs in the balance as a handful of patently false

deeds filed by an ex-felon cloud title to six luxury hotel properties throughout California, including

one in this county,

Plaintiff is a subsidiary of Strategic Hotels 2 Resorts LLC (" Strategic" ), a Chicago-based

company that owns luxury hotels across the country. It is currently in the process of selling several
10 hotels, including the Westin St. Francis (the "Subject Property" ). Strategic recently learned that a 26-

year-old ex-felon named Daniil Belitskiy ("Belitskiy") recorded a series of false Grant Deeds

purporting to transfer title in six luxury hotel properties in California owned by subsidiaries of
13 Strategic to Delaware limited liability companies that serve merely as shell companies for these false

14 transfers and criminal schemes. In each instance, to avoid detection, these Delaware companies were

15 deliberately given names similar to those of Strategic's subsidiaries or affiliates. Defendant

16 SHR Group LLC is a shell entity, apparently created by Belitskiy or his confederates, which has a

17 name similar to Strategic affiliates. Strategic has no affiliation with this shell company, and no

affiliation with the ex-felon who executed the false deed.

19 Though simple in its execution, this criminal scheme has had sweeping impacts. These
20 patently false deeds—and the cloud on title they have produced—threaten the consummation of a
more than one billion dollar sale transaction involving 12 Strategic luxury hotel properties, including

22 the Subject Property located in San Francisco. On September 6, 2019, Plaintiff, rightful owner of the

23 Subject Property, filed an action in this County to quiet title and to cancel the false Grant Deed

currently clouding title to the property. Time is of the essence for Plaintiff and for Strategic, which

25 stand to lose many millions of dollars if the sale of this and other hotels in California is derailed or

26 delayed by the obviously false Grant Deeds. Such losses could never be repaid by Belitskiy or the

27 assetless shell companies that filed the false deeds, A temporary restraining order ("TRO") is

28 therefore necessary.

Gibson, Dunn &

Crutcher LLP MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF'S EX PARTE APPLICATION
FOR TRO AND ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION — CASE NO. CCJC-19-579067
 This is not a close call,

Ei'rst, absent a temporary restraining order, nothing in the chain of title will prevent

Defendant from further encumbering the Subject Property by, for example, using it as collateral for a

loan or illegally transferring the property to yet another of Defendant's affiliated shell companies. In

the case of two Strategic hotels in Orange County, affiliates of this Defendant have already filed

second deeds purporting to transfer title a second time. More encumbrances or transfers would

magnify and perpetuate the irreparable harm Plaintiff has already suffered, as additional false deeds
would serve only to further complicate and obstruct the sale of the properties, not to mention force

Plaintiff into additional time-consuming and costly litigation. Meanwhile, Defendant cannot possibly
10 suffer any harm, for it has no lawful claim to any ownership interest in the Subject Property in the

first place.

12 Second, Plaintiff will win on the merits. Plaintiff is the longtime, rightful owner of the
/

13 Subject Property, the deed is patently false, and the shell entities that appear on the false deed have

14 no connection to Strategic and no authority to take title to the Subject Property.

15 Accordingly, this Court should grant Plaintiff's Application for a Temporary Restraining
Order and Order to Show Cause for Preliminary Injunction (the "Application" ),

17 STATEMENT OF FACTS
18 Strategic is a Chicago-based entity that owns, through subsidiaries, numerous luxury hotel

19 properties throughout the country. A subsidiary of Strategic typically owns the real property and
20 improvements thereon for each hotel, and the hotels are operated by different management companies

21 under different brand names, (Declaration of Patricia Needham ("Needham Decl,") $ 2.) Title to

22 each property is vested in Strategic's subsidiaries—such as SHR St. Francis, L.L.C.—which are

formed as Delaware limited liability companies. (Id.)

In this case, Plaintiff SHR St, Francis, L.L.C. is a subsidiary of Strategic and is, and has been

for years, the rightful owner of the Westin St. Francis. (Id, tt 3,) The property is valued at over one

hundred million dollars, (Id, tt 7.)

Gibson, Dunn &

Crutcher LLP MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF'S EX PARTE APPLICATION
FOR TRO AND ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE FOR PRELIMINARY IN JUNCTION — CASE NO. CGC-19-579067
 A. Belitskiy Executes and Records a False Grant Deed in September 2018 Purporting to
Transfer the Westin St. Francis to a Dela&vare Shell Company

SHR St. Francis, L.L.C. received valid title in the Westin St. Francis on June 1, 2006, via a

Grant Deed executed by BRE/ST. FRANCIS L.L,C, That Grant Deed was recorded with the San

Francisco County Assessor-Recorder the following day on June 2, 2006. (Id., Ex. A.)

10

12

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27
'3
SHR St. Francis, L.L.C. has not transferred to any other entity or person any of its real property

interest in the Westin St. Francis as described in the June 1, 2006 Grant Deed, (Id, $ 3,)

On September 5, 2018, an individual named Daniil Belitskiy executed a false Grant Deed

purporting to transfer SHR St, Francis, L.L.C.'s ownership interest in the Westin St. Francis to
Defendant SHR Group LLC. (Id,, Ex, B.) In the Grant Deed, Belitskiy claims to be the "vice

president" of SHR Group LLC, which is portrayed as both the Grantor and the Grantee thereunder,

The Grantor is described as "SHR GROUP LLC (SHR St Francis 20170515POA)" and the Grantee is

SHR Group LLC. Punambhai Patel, a California Notary Public (Commission 0 2179869) located in

San Francisco, California, notarized the Grant Deed. Simply put, this transaction was a crime.

Neither Belitskiy nor the entity to whom this false Grant Deed purportedly transfers ownership in the
Westin St, Francis have any affiliation with Plaintiff, and Plaintiff has no knowledge of Belitskiy or

the Defendant entity. (Id. $$ 4, 10,) Public records, however, indicate that there is a 26-year-old

resident of San Francisco named Daniil Belitskiy who is a taxi driver with a significant criminal

history, including a felony conviction for robbery and a misdemeanor conviction for receipt of stolen

property. (Declaration of Nathan Powell (the "Powell Decl.") $$ 4-5.) Defendant SHR Group LLC

intentionally recorded this Grant Deed with the San Francisco County Assessor-Recorder on

September 17, 2018, knowing that it was false.

Strategic has for many months been negotiating the sale of 12 of its hotel properties across the

nation, including the Subject Property and five others in California. (Needham Decl. $ 7.) That

transaction is worth over one billion dollars, (Id,) Though Strategic recently secured a buyer for

these properties, the cloud on title caused by Defendant's illicit acts threatens the ability of the parties

to the transaction to obtain complete title insurance and has otherwise obstructed and delayed the sale

Gibson, Dunn &

Crutcher LLP MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF'S EXPARTE APPLICATION
FOR TRO AND ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION — CASE NO, CCIC-19-579067
 of the Subject Property, causing Strategic significant monetary losses, which it will be unable to
recover. from Defendant (a shell entity) or Belitskiy.

In addition to the current suit, five of Strategic's other subsidiaries have simultaneously filed

actions in San Mateo, Los Angeles, and Orange Counties to quiet title to the five other Strategic

luxury hotel properties that were the subject of similar false Grant Deeds during this same period of

months. (Id. tt 6.) Plaintiffs in those cases have also filed applications for temporary restraining

orders to prevent the criminal scheme from being perpetuated as to those properties.
ARGUMENT

A temporary restraining order and preliminary injunction are necessary to maintain the status

10 quo until final determination of the merits of Plaintiff's claims. Strategic has already suffered

significant, non-compensable economic harm as a result of Defendant's criminal acts. The Court

should grant Plaintiff's Application because Plaintiff will suffer even greater—indeed irreparable—

13 harm should Defendant be allowed to further alienate interest in the Subject Property. In contrast,

14 Defendant cannot suffer any legally cognizable harm through the issuance of a temporary restraining

15 order and injunction, as it has no legitimate interest whatsoever in the Subject Property,

16 A, Legal Standard
17 A temporary restraining order serves to preserve the status quo until an application for

18 preliminary injunction may be heard, and "[t]he general purpose of [a preliminary] injunction is the

19 preservation of the status quo until a final determination on the merits of the action," (See

20 Continental Baking Co, v. Katz (1968) 68 Cal.2d 512, 528 [a preliminary injunction is granted when,

21 after "balancing the respective equities of the parties, [the court] concludes that, pending a trial on the

22 merits, the defendant should ... be restrained from exercising the right claimed by him" ],)

23 'interrelated'4
"In deciding whether to issue a preliminary injunction, a court must weigh two

factors: (1) the likelihood that the moving party will ultimately prevail on the merits and (2) the

25 relative interim harm to the parties from issuance or nonissuance of the injunction." (Bzzit v, State

(1992) 4 Cal.4th 668, 677-678.) The court's analysis "must be guided by a 'mix'f the potential-
27 merit and interim-harm factors; the greater the plaintiff's showing on one, the less must be shown on

28 the other to support an injunction," (Id, at 678.) And "[i]f the denial of an injunction would result in

Gibson, Dunn &

Crutcher LLP MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF'S EXPARTE APPLICATION
FOR TRO AND ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION — CASE NO. CGC-19-579067
 great harm to the plaintiff, and the defendants would suffer little harm if it were granted, then it is an

abuse of discretion to fail to grant the preliminary injunction." (Robbins v. Super. Ct. (1985) 38

Cal,3d 199, 205,) Here, both factors are plainly satisfied and weigh in favor of the requested relief.

B. Plaintiff and Its Parent Company, Strategic, Will Suffer Irreparable Harm
Without a TRO, while Defendant Would Suffer No Harm Should a TRO Issue.

Without a temporary restraining order, there is nothing to prevent Defendant from once again

attempting to illicitly transfer interest in the Subject Property to some new shell company or third

party, causing Plaintiff further, non-compensable economic harm. Indeed, other Delaware shell
LLCs affiliated with Defendant have already purported to transfer title to two Strategic properties in
10 Orange County from one of their shell LLCs to another, in both cases using Belitskiy as their agent,

(Needham Decl. tt 8.) Now that Defendant in this action is on notice of the claims against it, there is
12 significant risk that it will pass title in the Subject Property to successive shell entities, thus forcing
13 Plaintiff into in an expensive and time-consuming game of cat and mouse. Defendant could also
14 attempt to borrow money against the property, forcing Plaintiff to sue new defendants who would
15 undoubtedly claim protection under a bona fide deed of trust. Strategic has already suffered
16 economic damage through the obstruction of the sale of its properties due to Defendant's criminal
17 acts. Moreover, this false Grant Deed threatens the ability of the parties to the transaction to obtain

complete title insurance—a prerequisite to the potential buyer securing financing and, in turn,
19 consummation of the transaction, Should Defendant be allowed to continue perpetrating its real
20 estate crimes, Plaintiff will suffer even greater harm than it has already endured,

While financial harm is generally compensable in damages, "insolvency or the inability to

otherwise pay money damages is a classic type of irreparable harm." (California Retail Portfolio
23 Fund GMBH ck Co, KG v. Hopkins Real Estate Grp. (2011) 193 Cal. App, 4th 849, 857; see also
24 Friedman v. Friedman (1993) 20 Cal, App. 4th 876, 890 (holding that monetary loss constitutes
25 irreparable harm where "there is some showing that one against whom injunctive relief is sought is
26 insolvent or otherwise unable to respond in damages").) Here, Plaintiff has no chance of securing the
27 damages of millions of dollars it will suffer by the loss or further delay of its transaction from a 26-
28 year-old convicted felon and a shell LLC with no known assets. Without an injunction, Plaintiff is

Gibson, Dunn &

Crutcher LLP MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF'S EX PARTE APPLICATION
FOR TRO AND ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE FOR PRELIMINARY IN]UNCTION — CASE NO. CGC-19-579067
 1 guaranteed to suffer irreparable economic harm should Defendant continue its criminal scheme by
2 once again purporting to transfer interest in the Subject Property.

Further, California law is clear that real property is unique, and that money damages are

4 insufficient to compensate a party whose interest in real property has been transferred without his or

5 her consent, (See, e.g., Glynn v. Marquette (1984) 152 Cal.App.3d 277, 280 ["every piece of

6 property is unique and [a] remedy by way of damages is inadequate."]; Lewis v. Superior Court

7 (1994) 30 Cal.App,4th 1850, 1876 ["[R]eal property is unique and its loss cannot be compensated in

8 money."],) There is therefore no question that Plaintiff would be irreparably harmed should

9 Defendant be permitted to further transfer title to the Subject Property.

10 Defendant, on the other hand, has no rightful claim of. ownership in the Subject Property and

11 cannot face harm should it be enjoined from further encumbering title to Plaintiff's property by filing

12 even more false deeds. Defendant has no relation to Strategic or its affiliates, had no authority. to file

13 the deed, and has no interest in the Subject Property to lose. (Needham Decl, tt 5,) The temporary

14 restraining order that Plaintiff requests can do nothing to Defendant but prevent it from engaging in

15 further crimes related to the Subject Property. Given that Plaintiff will be irreparably injured by the

16 denial of a temporary restraining order and Defendant will face no cognizable harm whatsoever, the

17 balance of the equities tilts sharply in favor of granting Plaintiff's Application, (See Robbins, 38

18 Cal.3d at 205.)

19 C. Plaintiff Will Succeed on the Merits of Its Action to Quiet Title.

20 There is no doubt Plaintiff will succeed on the merits. Plaintiff is the rightful owner of the

21 Subject Property and the Grant Deed is patently false, "It has been uniformly established that a

22 forged document is void ab initio and constitutes a nullity; as such it cannot provide the basis for a

23 superior title[.]" (8'utzke v, Bill Reid Painting SeI vice Inc, (1984) 151 Cal.App.3d 36, 43; see also

24 Montgomery v. Bank ofAm, Nat. Tr, 4 Sav. Ass 'n (1948) 85 Cal, App. 2d 559, 564 ("A void
25 instrument such as ... a forged deed does not convey anything and cannot be made the foundation of a

26 good title."); Trout v. Taylor (1934) 220 Cal, 652, 656 ("Numerous authorities have established the

27 rule that an instrument wholly void, such as ... a forged instrument ... cannot be made the foundation

Gibson, Dunn &

Crutcher LLp MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF'S EX PARTE APPLICATION
FOR TRO AND ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE FOR PRELIMINARY IN JUNCTION — CASE NO. CGC-19-579067
 of a good title" ); Civ, Code $ 3412 ["A coutt-ordered cancellation of a deed is available if the deed is
void or voidable"].)

Here, Belitskiy and Defendant are criminals with no relationship to Plaintiff and no ownership

interest in the Subject Property. (Needham Decl. tt 5.) Defendant had no authority to sign the deed

on behalf of Plaintiff, Strategic, or any other affiliates of Strategic. (Id.) Moreover, the false Grant

Deed, having a grantor different than the owner of record title, is void on its face and can transfer no

interest whatsoever in the Subject Property. (See Boyle v. Vesuvio Holdings, No. B256055, 2016 WL

5956751, at *6 (Cal. Ct, App. Oct. 14, 2016) (" Where the assignor holds no interest to assign, the

assignment is void"),)

10 Defendant intentionally recorded the false Grant Deed with the San Francisco County

Assessor-Recorder on September 17, 2018, knowing it was false. Defendant cannot possibly show

12 any ownership interest whatsoever in the Subject Property. In the unlikely event that Defendant even

13 appears and this matter goes to trial, Plaintiff will win on the merits of its claims, as it will show that

14 it holds valid title to the Subject Property and made no conveyance of the Subject Property to

15 Defendant or otherwise. Accordingly, the Court should grant this Application to prevent Defendant

16 from further encumbering title in the Subject Property until Plaintiff's lawful title in the Subject

17 Property can be restored.

CONCLUSION
19 Defendant's criminal schemes to record false Grant Deeds have threatened the closure of a

20 sale of Strategic properties worth over one billion dollars, including the Subject Property in this

21 County. Strategic and its subsidiaries, including Plaintiff, will continue to suffer irreparable harm if

Defendant's illicit behavior is permitted to continue, A temporary restraining order is therefore

23 necessary, and the Court should grant Plaintiff's'x Parte Application for a Temporary Restraining

Order and Order to Show Cause for Preliminary Injunction to preserve the status quo until trial.

26

27

28

Gibson, Dunn 8
Crutcher LLP MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF'S EEPARTE APPLICATION
FOR TRO AND ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION — CASE NO. CGC-I 9-579067
 DATED: September 12, 2019

GIBSON, DUNN k CRUTCHER LLP

BENJAMIN B. WAGNER
JAMES P. FOGELMAN
ANDREW PAULSON
LAUREN TRAINA
NATHAN POWELL

By. ~ .m:~~.-v~
Benjamin B. Wag
10 Attorneys for Plaintiff SHR St. Francis, L.L,C,

12

13

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

23

24

25

26

28

Gibson, Dorm &

Crutcher LLP MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF'S EXPARTE APPLICATION
FOR TRO AND ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION — CASE NO. CGC-19-579067
 GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP
BENJAMIN WAGNER, SBN 163581
bwagner@gibsondunn,corn
ANDREW PAULSON, SBN 267095 ELECTRONICALLY
apaulson@gibsondunn,corn FILED
NATHAN L, POWELL, SBN 318066 Superior Court of California,
County of San Francisco
npowell@gibsondunn.corn
1881 Page Mill Road 09/12/2019
Palo Alto, CA 94304-1211 Clerk of the Court
Telephone: 650,849,5300 BY: BOWMAN LIU
Deputy Clerk
Facsimile: 650.849,5333

GIBSON, DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP

JAMES P, FOGELMAN, SBN 161584
j fogelman@gibsondunn.corn
LAUREN TRAINA, SBN 300218
ltraina@gibsondunn.corn
333 South Grand Avenue
10 Los Angeles, CA 90071-3197
Telephone; 213,229.7000
Facsimile: 213.229,7520

12 Attorneys for Plaintiff SHR St, Francis, L.L. C,

13

14 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

15 FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO

16

17 SHR ST. FRANCIS, L,L.C., a Delaware limited CASE NO. CGC-19-579067

liability company,
DECLARATION OF PATRICIA A.
Plaintiff, NEEDHAM IN SUPPORT OF EXPARTE
19 APPLICATION FOR TEMPORARY
RESTRAINING ORDKR AND ORDER TO
20 SHOW CAUSE FOR PRELIMINARY
SHR GROUP LLC, a Delaware limited liability INJUNCTION
21 company,
[Ex Parte Application For Temporary Restraining
Defendant. Order; Declaration of Nathan Powell;
Memorandum of Points and Authorities; and
23 (Proposedj" Order filed concurrently t

24 HEARING:
Date: September 19, 2019
25 Time: 9:00 a.m.
Dept.: 501
26
Action Filed: September 6, 2019
27 Trial Date; None Set

Gibson, Dunn &

DECLARATION OF PATRICIA A, NEEDHAM IN SUPPORT OF EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR TRO AND
Crutcher LLP ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION — CASE NO. CGC-19-579067
 DECL'ARATION OF PATRICIA A. NEEDHAM

I, PATRICIA A. NEEDHAM, declare;

1. I am the Executive Vice President-General Counsel for Strategic Hotels A Resorts

LLC (" Strategic" ), parent company to Plaintiff SHR St. Francis, L.L.C. in the above-entitled action.

I have worked for Strategic for approximately 14 years. I make this declaration in support of

Plaintiff's Ex Parte Application for Temporary Restraining Order and Order to Show Cause for

Preliminary Injunction (the "Application" ). I have personal, firsthand knowledge of the facts stated

herein and, if called upon to do so, could and would competently testify thereto,

2. Strategic is a Chicago-based company that, through subsidiaries and affiliates, owns

10 several luxury hotel properties throughout the United States, including California. A subsidiary of

Strategic typically owns the real property and improvements thereon for each hotel, and the hotels are

12 operated by different management companies under different brand names. Title to each property is

13 vested in Strategic's subsidiaries— such as SHR St, Francis, L.L,C,—which are formed as Delaware

14 limited liability companies.

15 3. Plaintiff SHR St. Francis, L.L.C. is a subsidiary of Strategic and is the rightful owner
16 of the Westin St. Francis. A true and correct copy of the Grant Deed transferring interest in the
17 Westin St. Francis to SHR St, Francis, L,L,C, is attached hereto as Exhibit A, SHR St, Francis,

L.L.C. has not transferred to any other entity or person any of its real property interest in the Westin

19 St. Francis as described in the Grant Deed attached as Exhibit A.

20 4, On September 5, 2018, Daniil Belitskiy executed a Grant Deed purporting to transfer

21 SHR St. Francis, L.L.C,'s ownership interest in the Westin St, Francis to SHR Group LLC. A true

and correct copy of this false Grant Deed is attached hereto as Exhibit 8. Plaintiffs did not discover

23 the existence of this Grant Deed until August 16, 2019.

24 5. Neither Belitskiy nor the entity to whom this false Grant Deed purportedly transfers

ownership in the Westin St. Francis have any relationship to Plaintiff or its affiliates or authority to

file deeds on behalf of Plaintiff or its affiliates.

27

Gibson, Dunn 8,
Crutcher LLP DECLARATION OF PATRICIA A. NEEDHAM IN SUPPORT OF F~PAJYTE APPLICATION FOR TRO AND
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION — CASF. NO. CGC-19-579067
 6, On September 6, 2019, Plaintiffs filed this action, Five of Strategic's other

subsidiaries have also filed actions in San Mateo, Los Angeles, and Orange Counties to quiet title to

the five other Strategic properties that were the subject of similar false Grant Deeds.

7. For many months, Strategic and its affiliates have been involved in a process to sell

Strategic's luxury botel portfolio, including the Westin St. Francis, which is valued at more than a

hundred million dollars. The total value of the portfolio is well over one billion dollars. The cloud

on title to the Strategic properties caused by the false deeds, which would be compounded by any

further false deeds, is causing economic harm to Strategic, the Plaintiffs, and their affiliates by

delaying the sale of these properties.

10 8. A group of LLCs related to Defendants in this action have already purported to

transfer title in two Strategic properties in Orange County from one of their shell Delaware LLCs to

another of their shell Delaware LLCs. These transfers are the subject of the quiet title action filed by

two of Strategic's subsidiaries in Orange County Superior Court.

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing
16 is true and correct and that this Declaration was executed on September 12, 2019, at Chicago, Illinois.

17

19 Patricia A, Needham

24

25

27

Gibson, Dorm &

Crutortor i.l.p DECLARATION OF PATRICIA A, NEEDHAM IN SUPPORT OF EXPARTE APPLICATION FOR TRO AND
ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE FOR PRELiMINARY INJUNCTION — CASE NO. CGC-19-579067
xiit
 IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
//A Aw~ SW FranCiSCe ASSIISOf -Pt.COI dei

'Ibi
I)hii Ti~g @SISSOI'AeCOrfIIf
ooc- kees-xss6963-ee
Tftf
AECOAOINQ AEQUESTEO 8Y aoot if-FIDELITY NpTIONaL ~ Coraparfy
Fr Ldatr, JUN IR, lflie5 Ill el!OI
WHEN AECOROEff MAIL TO T.'1 &83N87SS
Affb MAIL TAX STATEfrlENTS TO
c Hotel s 6
Strat,ag I Resorts REEL J153 XPlAGE 6167
cf31/Jl /I,-3
rrooffzss 77 West, trfacker Dr I ve Ittf6
c!TY Chicago, IL 60601
STATE 4 Ztp

GRANT DEED
1f5519 ltf3519 Lot 1r Bt ock 507
Transfer Tax I s shownEscftorafffo.
on separate pagff
THE uNDEAs!ONED GAAN"oA(e) oKOLARE(e) at t ached he rat,o
~& ApNNo
and Lot 1$ , Btock 307
OQCUMENTAAY TRANSFER TAX ie S CITY TAX
s. I-I computed on full value of properttr conveyed, or Q eernputed on fur vaftre fees value ol !lena or ancrtrnbraneae
rernawine et trrne ol carte,
0 t&ireorporated ftrefu 0 City of

FOR A vALUABLE COIISIDERATION, receipt of Yrhictf is hereby acknowledged,

BRErrST. FRANCIS L,L.C„a Delavrare limited Ilablilty COmpany

hereby GFIANT(s) lo
SHR St. Francis, L.L,C., a Delaware flrnfterd liability company,

the following described real property in the City and County of San Francrsco, State ot California;
SEE E)lHIBIT "A" ATTACHED HERETO AND INCORPORATED HEREIN

Dated June L, 2006

BRE/ST. FRANCIS L.L C„
a Delaware limited liability COmpany

~l
By.
Name:
re&: I LS

ala&A)fft a!fr!e-trvof fffMlrr2

Order: 60600423 Page 1 of 3 Requested By:!nariarj, Printed: 7/187201911:08 AM

Doc; CASFRA:2006 00186963
 ST/flTE GF NEW YORK
IOUNTYDF NEW YORK } S.S.
on Msy st. 20(}o, before ms, Klra Lskl-King, (here insert name and title of the officer}, personally appeared Karen sprogis,
personally known ae ms )or pruned to ms on ths bsekr of estkrfsctory evidence} to bs ths person(s} whase name(s} ka/ars at/bacrtbsd
the wtttdn Instnanent and acknowledged to me that hs/ahs/they executed the same ln his/}ter/otfdr avtholotod capacity(toe}, ond
that by hta/her/Instr sitytab/ro{s} on tho lrtetn/mont tho pefoan(s}| Qr ths srltity upon bshsff of which ths peraall(4} scteaf, Qxscutod
the instrument.
WITNESS my hand and altialal seal,

0 Io&95aatwr17ta-NY0WI 2IOÃ,Z

Order. 60600423 Page 2 of 3 Requested By: rnariarj, Printed: 7/18/2019 11:08 AM

Doc: CASFRA:2006 00186963
 THE LAND REFERREI3TO HEREIN Bc}.OW IS SITUATEO IN THE CITy QF SAN FRANCISCO, COUNTY OF SAN
FRANCISCO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA AND IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:

PARCEL A:

BEQNNING at a point formed by the tnte/section of the Northerly line of Geary Street with the Westerly tine of
powett street; running thence Northerly, along the yyesterty line of powell Street, 275 feet to the corner
formed by the intersect)on of the westerly line of powet I Street with the Southerly line of Post Street; running
thence wesseriy, along the southerly line of post street, 192 feet and 6 inches; thence at a right angle
Southerly 137 feet and 6 inches; thence at a right angle Westerly 22 feet and 8-1/4 inChes; thence at a right
angle Southerly 137 feet and 6 inches to the Northerty line of Geary street„ thence Easterly, along the
No.'therty line of Geary street, 215 feet and 2-1/4 inches ro the point ot beginntrig.

6FING a portion of 50 Vera SOCk NO. 168

Assessor's Parcel No: Lot 1, Block 307

PARCEl. B:

BEGINNING at a Paint On the NOrtherfy line Of Geary Street, diSent thereOn 215 feet and 2-1/4 inChm
westerly from the Westerly fine of Powell Street, as said lines and ail other street tines hereinafter mentioned
are positions according to the '*f4onurnent ti4a p af Fifty vara pistrict of the Cay and County of san Francisco"
filed )anuary 7, 1910, in t4ap book "G at page 151, in the Qfftce of the Recorder in the Gty and county of San
Francisco, State of cattfornia:

Running thence west/arty. along said line of Geary street, 6D feet and 2-1/4 tndtcs to a point thereon, said
point being 137 feet 10 1/2 inches easterly from the easter ty line of f4ason Street; Cence at a right angle
NOrtherty 137 feet and 6 inches; thenre at a right angle westedy 27 feet and 10 1/2 inches; thence at a rtght
angte Northerly 137 feet and 6 inches to the 517urherty line of Post Street," thence at a right angle Easterly,
along said tine of Post s~, 11D feet 9 inches to a point thereoit 192 feet and 6 Iiiches westerly frofn the
westerly line of Powett street,'hence at a right angle southerty 137 feet and 6 inches; thence at' right angte
westerly 22 feet and B- 1/4 inches; thence at a right angle southerly 137 feet and 6 inches so,the point of
beginning,

BHNG a portion of SD Vara Block No, 168

Assessor's Parcel No Lot 13, Block 307

cltIi riIiimsvy I4iIiiIi IIIIIIi 1 i l I i r/f/i t

~ »
i

Order: 60600423 Page 3 of 3 Requested By: manarj, Printed: 7/18/2019 11:08 AM

Doc: CASFRA:2006 00186963
xiit
 RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND IIIIIIIIII ~ IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
WHEN RECORDED, MAIL TO: San Francisco Assessor-Recorder
gag e~q~ «c' ~&
.

Careen Chu Assessor-Recorder

~~st i»~ DOC- 0818-K673396-88
ttonchay, SEP 17, 2818 15:4S:17

~, ~ 'q) f n, h'~
[
o Ttl Pd $ 24S.II8 Rcpt II SM5877292
of a/FT/1-4
DE le~~l

TITLE(S)

G 0 — eu 0

&~&/I

Separate page pursuant to Gov't Code 27361.6

 Ak
t

OOCUMENTAN'TftANSPER'Tftà E
0 COMPUTED ON PULL VALUE OP PROPERTY CONVEVED, Oft
0 COMPUTED ON PULL VALUE LESS UENS E ENOUMBffANCES
ftEMAININQ THEREONh E QP SALLi

W& RAW W AWWWW&%VW% O&&WW'A

Slffnetlrre of rfeclerent o rNfent rfeterrnfnlnff terr ~ ffrrn nemo

GRANT DEED

PURSUANT TO SAN FRANCISCO REAL PROPERTY TRANSFER TAX

ORDIN'ANCE SECTIONS 1102 L $ 314

FOR GROuP IP,WITH NO PAYMENT CONSIDERATION, receipts of which are

hereby. acknowledged,SHR GROUP LLC{SHR St Francis 201?0515POA),a
Delaware Limited Liability company
hereby GRANT{8) to

SHR GROUP LLC,a Delaware Limited Liability company.

the following described real property in the city and county of San
Francisco, State of California
see Exhibit "A"attached hereto and incorporated herein
Dated Sep ~,201 8

SHR GROUP LLC,a Delaware Limited Liability company

By PS~
Name on 'r'I
+&f»&'p'itle:
vice president
 CALIFORNIA ALL- PURPOSE
CERTIFICATE GF ACKNGWLEOQMENT
A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity
of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached,
and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document.

State of California

County of . W4'dit Cfr~

On . 9 K+ '~1 8 before me,+LAN/yf p-tz

sin
~stQ
name an
~uTdtviA
8 csr
+uBU c-..
personally appeared,
Aft/ L~ 561&5'K / 'I

who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory eviden to be the person(s) whose

, name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that
he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by
his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of
which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument.

Icertify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that
the foregoing paragraph is true and correct.
PUNAMBHAl PATEL
NOTARY PUBLIC - CALIFORNIA
WITNESS my hand and oNcial seal. COMMtsstoN di 21yeaee
SAN FRANCISCO COUNTY
lay Comin. Eap. February 11, 2021

No Pu i gnature (Notary Public Seal)

INS'I'RUCTIONS FOR COMPLETING THIS FORM

ADDITIONAL OPTIONAL INFORMATI ON This form compliss with current California statutes regarding notary warding and,
DESCRIPTION OF THE ATTACHED DOCUMENT ifnssdsd, should be completed and attached ta the document. Acknowledgments
fram other states may bs completedfor documsnai being sent io that state sa long
as ths wording doss not rsffuire the California notary to violate California notary
law.
(Title or description of allached document) ~ State and County information must be the State and County where the document
signer(s) personally appeared beibre the notary public for acknowledgment.
~ Date of notarlrsition must be thc date that tbc signer(s) personally appceml which
(Title or description oi allachsd document conllnusd) must sbo be the same date the acknowledgment is completed.
~ i g//o
pi/ ~ lbe notary public must print his or her name as it appears within his or her
Number of Pages~& Document Date commission followed by a comma and then your title (notary public).
s Print the name(s) of document signer(s) who pmsonally appear at the time of
notarization.
CAPACITY CLAIMED BY THE SIGNER ~ Indicate thc correct singular or plural forms by crossing off incouect forms (i.c.
bstshetgwy; is /ere) cr cuuling tho coned forms. Failure to comctly indicate this

~ Individual (s)
Corporate Officer ~
information may lead to rejection of document recording.
Tbc notary seal impression must be ckmr and photogmphicalry reprcduCibl.
Impression must not cover text or linm. If seal impression smudgcs, ruweai if a
su8icient area permits, otherwise complete a different acknowledgment form.
v Signature of the notary public must match the signature on file with the office of
Partner(s) the county clerk
C3 Attorney-in-Fact Additional information is not nxtuircd but could help to ensure this
Trustee(s) aclmowledgment is not misused or attached to a ddferent document.
Indicate title or type of coached document, number of pager and date,
Other Indicate the capacity claimed by thc signer. If the claimed capacity is a
corporate oificer, indicate the title (Lu CEO, CIQ, Secretary),
2015 Version wvwv.Notnryclasses.corn 800-873-9865 s Securely attach this docuiuent to the signed document with a staple.
 EQL4hit, A

THE LAND REFERRED TO HEREIN BELOW IS SITUATED IN 'THE CrN OF 5AN FRANCSCO, COUNTY OF SAN
FRANCISm O'ATE OF CALIFORNIA AND IS DESCRIBED AS ALLOWS:

~
I
I

BMNNING ate point foirned by the intersection of the Northerly line of Geary Stnaat with the Westerly gne of
. Poweg Sbeetl runrling thence Northerly, along the Weslmly line of powel Streel, 275 feet to the corner
Ibifned by the Intersection of the westerly Itne of powell street with the southerly line of Post Sheet; running
thence Westerly, akwo the Southerly Nne of Post Street, 192 feet and 6 Inches; thence at a right angle
Southerly 137 feet anA inches; thence at a right angle Westerly 22 feet and 8-1/4 inches; thenoe at a right
angle Southerly 13'7 feet and 6 Inches to the Northerly line of Geary Street; thence Easterly, along the
Northerly line of Geary Street, 215 feet and 2-1/4 Inches to the point of beginning,

BEING a portian of 50 Vera Nock No. 168

Assessor's Parcel No: Lot 1, Block 307

PARCEL 8:

BEGINNING at a point on the Northerly line of Geary Stnast, distant thereon 215 feet and 2-1/4 inches
Westerly from the Westerly linc of Powelt Street, as said lines arid ail other street gnes hen&mlter rnentloned
are posldons accordlno to the "f4onueent f4ap of Fifty vera Dltncc of the oty and county of san Francisco"
filed 3anuary 7, 1910, & Iiiap took "G" at Page 151, in the Office of the Recotler In the CIty and County of San
Francisco. Stale of Caiiiornia:

Running thence Wesierly, ahng said line of Geary Street, 60 feet and 2-1/4 inches to a point thereon, said
point being 137 feet 10 1/2 Inches easterly fronI the easterly line of Mason Street; thence at a right angle I(
, "I
Northerly 137 feat and 6 inches; thence at a right angle Westerly 27 fest and 10 1/2 inches; thence ate right '
angle Northerly 137 feet and 6 inches to the Southerly Nne of Post Street; thence at a right angle Easterly,
along said One of Post Street, 110 feet 9 Inches to a point thereon 192 feet and 6 inclies westerly flem.the . ii.Ii
Westerly line of Powell Street; thence ate right angle Southerly 137 feet and 6 Inches; thenae at'a right angle I
~

westerly 22 feet and 8-1/4 Inches; thence at a right angle Southerly 137 feat and 6 kIches to.tfIe point of
beginning, r
I

'
iI
~

BEING a portke of SO Vera Bio'ck No. 168 II

'I
Assesse's PaICet No. Lot 13, Sock 307 'I
I
I

I
I I

e
I
.i
I
iil»
 GIBSON, DUNN k CRUTCHER LLP
BENJAMIN WAGNER, SBN 163581
bwagner@gibsondunn,corn
ANDREW PAULSON, SBN 267095 ELECTRONICALLY
apaulson@gibsondunn.corn
NATHAN L. POWELL, SBN 318066 FILED
npowell@gibsondunn.corn Superior Court of California,
County of San Francisco
1881 Page Mill Road
Palo Alto, CA 94304-1211 09/12/2019
Clerk of the Court
Telephone: 650.849.5300 BY: BOWMAN LIU
Facsimile: 650.849.5333 Deputy Clerk

GIBSON, DUNN 2 CRUTCHER LLP

JAMES P, FOGELMAN, SBN 161584
j fogelman@gibsondunn.corn
LAUREN TRAINA, SBN 300218
Itraina@gibsondunn.corn
333 South Grand Avenue
10 Los Angeles, CA 90071-3197
Telephone: 213.229,7000
Facsimile: 213.229,7520

12 Attorneys for Plaintiff SHR St, Francis, L.l.. C,

13

14 SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

15 FOR THE COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO

16

17 SHR ST. FRANCIS, L.L.C., a Delaware limited CASE NO. CGC-19-579067

liability company,
PROOF OF SERVICE
Plaintiff,
HEARING:
Date: September 18, 2019
20 Time; 9:00 a.m,
SHR GROUP LLC, a Delaware limited liability Dept.: 501
21 company,
Action Filed: September 6, 2019
22 Defendant. Trial Date: None Set

23

I am employed in the City of Palo Alto, County of Santa Clara, State of California. I am over the age
of 18 years and am not a party to this action, My business address is 1881 Page Mill Road, Palo Alto,
25 California 94304, in said County and State..On September 12, 2019, I served the following;
26 PLAINTIFF'S EX I'ANTE APPLICATION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER AND
ORDER TO SHOXV CAUSE FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION

Gibson, Dunn &

Crutcher LLP
 MEMORANDUM OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF'S KX PARTE
APPLICATION FOR TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER AND ORDER SHOW CAUSKt FOR
PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION

DECLARATION OF PATRICIA A. NEEDHAM IN SUPPORT OF EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR

TKMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER AND ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE FOR PRELIMINARY
INJUNCTION

DECLARATION OF NATHAN POWELL IN SUPPORT OF EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR

TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER AND ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE FOR PRELIMINARY
INJUNCTION

[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF'S EX PARTE APPLICATION FOR TEMPORARY

RESTRAINING ORDER AND ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION

by placing a true copy thereof in an envelope addressed to the person named below at the address shown:

10 Business Filings Incorporated

108 West 13'" Street
Wilmington, DE 19801
800-891-7183
12
BY UNITED STATES MAIL. I placed the envelope for collection and mailing, following our
13 ordinary business practices, I am readily familiar with this business's practice for collecting and
processing correspondence for mailing, On the same day that correspondence is placed for
14 collection and mailing, it is deposited in the ordinary course of business with the United States
Postal Service, in a sealed envelope with postage fully prepaid.
15
BY OVERNIGHT DELIVERY. I enclosed the documents in an envelope or package provided by
16 an overnight delivery carrier and addressed to the persons at the addresses listed on the Service List.
I placed the envelope or package for collection and overnight delivery at an office or a regularly
17 utilized drop box of the overnight delivery carrier.

BY PERSONAL SERVICE: I placed a true copy in a sealed envelope addressed to each person[s]
19 named at the address[es] shown and giving same to a messenger for personal delivery to the Agent
for Service of Process.
20
BY FACSIMILE; From facsimile machine telephone number (650) 849-S333, on the above-
mentioned date, I served a full and complete copy of the above-referenced document[s] by facsimile
transmission to the person[s] at the number[s] indicated.

23 I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true
and correct and that the foregoing document(s) were printed on recycled paper.

Executed at Palo Alto, California, on September 12, 2019.

26

27 Nathan Powell

Gibson, Dunn tt
Crutcher LLP