Griever/2005-03-23 Bubba & Lynne Respond to Interrogatories

From HypertWiki
< Griever
Revision as of 21:27, 2 October 2005 by Woozle (talk | contribs)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Staddon vs. Griever: Bubba & Lynne Respond to Interrogatories

Notes

  • Official Title: defendants Willard Dale Griever and Norma Lynne Griever's response to plaintiff's interrogatories
  • Submitted to the court on 2005-03-23; received by Plaintiff Nick on 2005-09-30.
  • Links have been added for purposes of cross-reference and clarity; they were not present in the original printed document.
  • Contact information for individuals named in the responses has been omitted from this transcription for reasons of privacy.

Nick Notes

  • I do not seem to have the document to which this document responds, or at least it's not obvious at first glance. I will look again more carefully when I am done transcribing.

Contents

I hereby serve upon you the following answers of Defendants Willard Dale Griever and Norma Lynne Griever to Plaintiffs' First Interrogatories pursuant to O.C.G.A. Section Template:OCGA code

OBJECTION TO PREAMBLE

To the extent that the preamble to the interrogatories of the Plaintiff seeks to impose upon the Defendant any duties or requirements in the excess of those specified by the appropriate provisions of the Georgia Civil Practice Act, the Defendant objects to same. Defendant objects to each of the Plaintiffs' interrogatories to the extent that they seek information regarding communications between Defendant and legal counsel on the grounds that such communications are privileged and are not subject to discovery or seek information regarding materials prepared by or for Defendant or Defendant's representatives in anticipation of litigation or for trial on the grounds that the Plaintiff has not made the required showing for the discovery of such work product material under O.C.G.A. §Template:OCGA code(b)(3) or which seeks information already in the possession of Plaintiff.

Responses

1.

Defendants are not in possession of any items of merchandise belonging to Nick Staddon or Red House Media. The merchandise that was purchased to be sold through VBZ.NET has always belonged to RDA. Portions of the merchandise that was initially puchased to be sold in the store has been either taken by the plaintiff, stolen in the burglary of the Red House on 6/09/02, sold in the store, or retained by RDA.

2.

The plaintiff has a record of the items sold through the store and the names and addresses of those who bought the merchandise.

3.

A list of persons familiar with the business relationship of the parties includes but is not limited to:

  • Nick Staddon (Durham, NC)
  • Livia Wade (Athens, GA)
  • Frank Whitehill (Monroe, GA)
  • Jessica Whitehill (Monroe, GA)
  • Cimmeria Griever (Athens, GA)
  • Angela Griever (Athens, GA)
  • Jody Moore (unknown at present)
  • Jeremy Moore (Mt. Airey, GA)
  • Juliet Easton (Hull, GA)
  • Scott Pelletier Stephanos
  • John Kisiah (Asheville, NC)

4.

See above.

5.

See documents which are or will be produced by Defendants.

6.

Defendants have no such written or recorded documents.

7.

As discovery is still ongoing at this early stage of litigation, Defendants have not yet determined who, if anyone, they will call as an expert witness at the trial of this case.

8.

None.

9.

Editing is currently in progress on this article. Although editing is incomplete, the author or editor has saved their work to prevent loss. Please check back later by reloading the page, and do not edit while this message is still showing. Thank you.