An attorney for Shelly Sterling told a judge Tuesday that a former confidant of her client’s estranged husband turned over documents sought in a lawsuit filed by the former Clippers owner, allowing the defendant to avoid a possible default judgment.
Attorney Caroline Heindel, on behalf of Shelly Sterling, informed Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Richard Fruin that V. Stiviano and her attorney, Mac Nehoray, complied with a court order to produce information the plaintiff’s lawyers said they need to prepare her case.
Shelly Sterling’s lawsuit, filed March 7, seeks the return by Stiviano of any cash, real estate, cars or other belongings considered community property the plaintiff owned with her husband, Donald Sterling.
In August, Fruin ordered Stiviano and Nehoray to turn over materials and answer written questions that Shelly Sterling’s lawyers said may shed light on whether Stiviano lured the real estate mogul into an affair and persuaded him to heap expensive gifts on her.
But Shelly Sterling’s attorneys alleged in court papers filed Oct. 10 that they still had not received the information sought. They asked the judge to impose penalties that included opening the possibility of a default or limiting the evidence the defense could use during trial.
Heindel told Fruin Tuesday that the discovery dispute was resolved and the hearing on the motion should be canceled.
Shelly Sterling’s lawsuit describes Stiviano as a woman who “engages in conduct designed to target, befriend, seduce and then … receives as gifts transfers of wealth from older men whom she targets for such purposes.”
In their discovery motion, Shelly Sterling’s attorneys wanted Stiviano to answer such questions how much money Sterling transferred to her during the years 2010-14 and what expenses he paid on her behalf during that same period for such things as living, traveling, entertainment and debts.
Shelly Sterling’s lawyers also wanted any voice recordings Stiviano has of Donald or Shelly Sterling, as well as any communications between Stiviano and third parties after the public disclosure of the billionaire’s secretly recorded racist rants.
The judge also ordered Stiviano to produce any documents that may reflect whether she destroyed any recordings of the Sterlings after Shelly Sterling sued her.
In addition, Stiviano was told to turn over any documents reflecting compensation she received from Sterling’s company, Beverly Hills Properties, and the Sterling Foundation; any emails between herself and anyone working for Beverly Hills Properties; and any personal work resumes she gave to Sterling.
Stiviano has used the names Vanessa Perez, Monica Gallegos and Maria Valdez, the suit states. She met Sterling at the February 2010 Super Bowl and began a sexual relationship with him that year, the complaint alleges.
In interviews following the release of the Donald Sterling recordings — which earned him a lifetime ban from the NBA and led to a dispute over the $2 billion sale of the Clippers — Stiviano denied having a sexual relationship with him. Sterling, however, described his comments on the tapes as being the result of a heated exchange during a “lovers’ quarrel.”
Trial of Shelly Sterling’s case is scheduled for March 9.
— City News Service