Date post: | 27-Jul-2015 |
Category: |
Documents |
Upload: | jillian-sheridan |
View: | 953 times |
Download: | 2 times |
IN THE STATE COURT OF GWINNETT COUNlY STATE OF GEORGIA
MIDLAND FUNDING LLC, ASSIGNEE OF CHASE BANK (USA), N.A.,
Plaintiff,
vs.
JILL SHERIDAN
Defendant.
CIVILACfION FILE NO. 10-7271-4
RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT'S REQUEST FOR PRODUCfION OF DOCUMENTS
COMES NOW Plaintiff, by and through counsel, and responds to
Defendants' Request for Production of Documents, as set forth in the following
manner below:
GENERAL OBJECTIONS
Plaintiff generally objects and responds to the Document Requests on the
grounds set forth in paragraphs "A" through "T" below. All general objections
shall be deemed to be continuing and shall be construed as supplementing each
specific objection and/or response to the Document Requests. No specific
objection and no response contained herein shall be interpreted as limiting in any
way the scope or effect of any general objection. Plaintiff objects generally to the
Document Requests to the extent they exceed the scope permitted by O.C.G.A. §
9-11-34·
A. Plaintiff objects generally to the Document Requests to the
extent they exceed the scope permitted by O.C.G.A. § 9-11-34.
B. Each response is subject to all objections as to relevance and
materiality or any other objections that would require the exclusion of any
statement herein if such statement were to be made by a witness present and
testifying in Court.
C. A response to any Document Request is not intended and
should not be construed to be a waiver by Plaintiff of all or any part of any
objection to any Document Request.
D. Plaintiff objects generally to the Document Requests to the
extent they assume facts that are inaccurate.
E. Plaintiff objects generally to the Document Requests to the
extent they are argumentative.
F. Plaintiff objects generally to the Document Requests to the
extent they are defective in forIfi.
G. Plaintiff objects generally to the Document Requests to the
extent they are overly broad.
H. Plaintiff objects generally to the Document Requests to the
extent they are unduly burdensome.
1. Plaintiff objects generally to the Document Requests to the
extent they are oppressive.
J. Plaintiff objects generally to the Document Requests to the
extent they are not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible
evidence.
K. Plaintiff objects generally to the Document Requests to the
extent they impose on it an unreasonable burden of inquiry.
L. Plaintiff objects generally to the Document Requests to the
extent they seek information that is subject to the attorney-client privilege, work
product privilege, or any other privilege or legal protection. The inadvertent or
mistaken production of information and/ or documents subject to the protections
of the attorney-client privilege, work product privilege, or any other privilege or
legal protection shall not constitute a general, inadvertent, implicit, subject
matter, separate, independent, or other waiver of such privilege or protection and
does not put in issue or constitute the affirmative use of the advice of counselor
of any privileged communications. All such inadvertently produced information
and/ or documents shall be returned to Plaintiffs attorneys, along with any copies
made thereof.
M. Plaintiff objects generally to the Document Requests to the
extent they seek information that is of a confidential, proprietary, or trade secret
nature.
N. Plaintiff objects generally to the Document Requests to the
extent they seek information that was prepared in anticipation of litigation.
O. Plaintiff objects generally to the Document Requests to the
extent they are not properly limited as to time.
P. Plaintiff objects generally to the Document Requests to the
extent they seek documents not in its possession, custody, or control.
Q. Plaintiff reserves its right to supplement its objections and
responses to the Document Requests to the extent necessary and appropriate.
R. Plaintiff objects to producing any document that does not
relate to the claims or defenses asserted in this action by any party. Production of
documents that do not relate to the claims and defenses set forth therein shall not
be deemed an acknowledgment that such documents are relevant or admissible.
S. Plaintiff objects generally to the Document Requests to the
extent they seek to require Plaintiff to produce documents in a form other than as
they are kept in the usual course of business.
T. Plaintiff objects generally to the Document Requests on the
grounds that the place, date, and time for production specified therein is
unreasonable. Accordingly, Plaintiff will make available non-privileged, relevant,
and responsive documents at a time and location that is mutually convenient to
all parties.
of:
RESERVATIONS
1. These responses are made without waiver of, and with preservation
(a) The right to object to all requests as to competency,
relevancy, materiality, confidentiality, privilege, and admissibility of the
responses, or the subject matter thereof, as evidence for any purpose in
any further proceeding in this action (including the trial of this action) or
in any other action;
- (b) The right to object to the use of any such responses, or the -
subject matter thereof, on any ground in any further proceeding in this
action (including the trial of this action) or in any other action;
Cc) The right to object on any ground at any time to a demand or
request for production or other document request or other discovery
proceeding;
Cd) The right to object on any ground to any request revised by
Defendant in response to any objection herein that a request, or any part
thereof, is vague, ambiguous, overbroad, or unduly burdensome; and
Ce) The right at any time to revise, correct, add to, supplement
or clarify any of the responses contained herein.
2. The following responses, and any further responses to the
Document Requests, or to their subject matter, are made expressly without
acknowledgment of materiality or relevance of documents described in the
Document Requests, or that the Document Requests are in any way reasonably
calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. If one or more
documents are produced which are protected by the attorney-client privilege or
any other privilege, such production is inadvertent and is not intended as a
waiver of such privilege.
3. Where a response states in words or substance that plaintiff "will
produce documents responsive to the request, to the extent available," such
response does not mean that Plaintiff in fact has such documents. It means only
that, if Plaintiff has such documents, they will be produced to the extent they are
not privileged. Documents responsive to the Document Requests that are not
objected to or privileged will be furnished in accordance with the provisions of
the O.C.G.A. at a time and place mutually convenient to the parties, and not
necessarily in the manner demanded by Defendant in his Document Requests.
SPECIFIC OBJECTIONS AND RESPONSES
1. Please see attached bill of sale. Plaintiff will provide any additional
documents responsive to this request if they become available.
2. Please see attached monthly statements and attached bill of sale. Plaintiff
will provide any additional documents responsive to this request if they
become available.
3. Plaintiff objects to this Request to the extent that it presupposes that a
written contract need exist, as the card issuer does not always require a
signed application or consent to the cardholder agreement, and no such
signed document or written contract is required under Georgia Law. See
Davis v. Discover Bank, 277 Ga. App. 864. Plaintiff further because the
information sought is already in the possession of, or equally available to,
Defendant. Plaintiff is still in the process of gathering evidence for trial
and will provide Defendant with information responsive to this request if
and as soon as it becomes available.
4. Plaintiff objects to this Request to the extent that it presupposes that a
written contract need exist, as the card issuer does not always require a
signed application or consent to the cardholder agreement, and no such
signed document or written contract is required under Georgia Law. See
Davis v. Discover Bank, 277 Ga. App. 864. Plaintiff further because the
information sought is already in the possession of, or equally available to,
Defendant. Plaintiff is still in the process of gathering evidence for trial
and will provide Defendant with information responsive to this request if
and as soon as it becomes available.
5. Please see attached monthly statements and attached bill of sale. Plaintiff
will provide any additional documents responsive to this request if they
become available.
6. Please see attached monthly statements and attached bill of sale. Plaintiff
will provide any additional documents responsive to this request if they
become available.
7. Plaintiff objects to this Request to the extent that it requires Plaintiff to
respond by acquiring or supplying information which would be irrelevant
to the subject matter or issues of this action, and not reasonably calculated
to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence, on the ground that said
request exceeds the permissible scope of discovery under the Georgia Civil
Practice Act.
8. Please see attached monthly statements and attached bill of sale. Plaintiff
will provide any additional documents responsive to this request if they
become available.
9. Please see attached monthly statements and attached bill of sale. Plaintiff
will provide any additional documents responsive to this request if they
become available.
10. Please see attached monthly statements and attached bill of sale. Plaintiff
will provide any additional documents responsive to this request if they
become available.
11. Please see attached monthly statements and attached bill of sale. Plaintiff
will provide any additional documents responsive to this request if they
become available.
12. Plaintiff objects to this Request to the extent that it requires Plaintiff to
respond by acquiring or supplying information which would be irrelevant
to the subject matter or issues of this action, and not reasonably calculated
to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence, on the ground that said
request exceeds the permissible scope of discovery under the Georgia Civil
Practice Act.
13. Plaintiff objects to this Request to the extent that it requires Plaintiff to
respond by acquiring or supplying information which would be irrelevant
to the subject matter or issues of this action, and not reasonably calculated
to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence, on the ground that said
request exceeds the permissible scope of discovery under the Georgia Civil
Practice Act.
14. Please see attached monthly statements and attached bill of sale. Plaintiff
will provide any additional documents responsive to i request if they
become available.
Daniel A. Green, sq. Georgia Bar No. 105227
IN THE STATE COURT OF GWINNETT COUNIY STATE OF GEORGIA
MIDLAND FUNDING LLC, ASSIGNEE OF CHASE BANK (USA), N.A.,
Plaintiff,
vs.
JILL SHERIDAN
Defendant.
CIVIL ACIION FILE NO. 10-7271-4
RULE 5.2 CERTIFICATE
The undersigned counsel for Plaintiff, Daniel A. Greene, hereby certifies
that a true and correct copy of REQUEST FOR PRODUCfION OF
DOCUMENTS has been served upon the Defendant by depositing the same in
the U.S. Mail affixed with sufficient postage to assure delivery, to the following
address:
JILL SHERIDAN
3266 STONEWALL DRIVE
KENNESAW, GA 30152 Av This JL day of -------,.c---f--1~__t-
Daniel A. Greene, Esq. Georgia Bar No. 105227
IN THE STATE COURT OF GWINNETT COUN1Y STATE OF GEORGIA
MIDLAND FUNDING LLC, ASSIGNEE OF CHASE BANK (USA), N.A.,
Plaintiff,
VS.
JILL SHERIDAN
Defendant.
CMLACfION FILE NO. 10-7271-4
RULE 5.2 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
This is to certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing RULE 5.2
CERTIFICATE was this day served upon the Defendant by depositing the same in
the U.S. Mail affixed with sufficient postage to assure delivery to the following
address:
JILL SHERIDAN
3266 STONEWALL DRIVE
KENNESAW, GA 30152
ThiS~daYOf ~VJ /
FREDERICK J. ATIORNE
Daniel A. Greene, Esq. Georgia Bar No. 105227