Free Response - District Court of Arizona - Arizona

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Law Office of James Burr Shields 382 East Palm Lane Phoenix, Arizona 85004-1531 (602) 307-0780 (Office) (602) 307-0784 (Facsimile)
James Burr Shields II, State Bar #011711 John A. Conley, State Bar #016429 Blake Simms, State Bar #021595 Attorneys for Plaintiff

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT IN AND FOR THE STATE OF ARIZONA

) ) ) ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) vs. ) ) 5. Home Mortgage, Inc., an ) Arizona corporation conducting ) business in Arizona, ) 6. Carl Brown; ) 7. Molly Brown; ) 8. Greg Brown; ) 9. Jane Doe Brown; ) 10. Does 1-10; ) 11. XYZ Corporations; ) 12. Black Partnerships; ) ) Defendants. ) _________________________________)

1. 2. 3. 4.

Cathleen Channel, Theresa Wharry, Stacie Hanson, Monique Nichols,

Case No. CIV 2003-0100 PHX ROS

PLAINTIFFS' RESPONSE TO DEFENDANTS' STATUS REPORT AND REQUEST TO EXTEND DISCOVERY CALENDAR

Plaintiffs, Cathleen Channel, Theresa Wharry, Stacie Hanson, and Monique Nichols, by and through counsel undersigned, hereby file their Response to Defendants' Status Report and Request to Extend Discovery Calendar. Plaintiffs join in Defendants request for the Court to allow for additional discovery but ask that the Court limit further discovery to a very specific matter. Plaintiffs, pursuant to communications with former codefendant Greg Brown, learned Defendants Carl Brown and Molly Brown may have placed in their personal bank account the proceeds of a sale of Defendant HMI's assets. Plaintiffs, by issuing subpoenas for this
Document 100 Filed 11/01/2006 Page 1 of 3

Case 2:03-cv-00100-ROS-MEA

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

bank account and from the company that purchased Defendant HMI's assets, were able to confirm this deposit. Plaintiffs, well in advance of Carl and Molly Brown's deposition, requested all information related to this deposit. Plaintiffs never received any such documents. Plaintiffs, on October 4, 2006, deposed Defendants Carl and Molly Brown. Mr. Brown, while unable to recall ever looking at a bank statement and repeatedly denying recollection of numerous other facts, was able to recall he paid out of the same personal account into which he distributed the company's sale proceeds various HMI debts. Mr. Brown and his legal counsel indicated they had mailed to Plaintiffs' counsel various canceled checks from the account. Plaintiffs' counsel searched their records and could find no evidence of receiving these documents. The parties believe some sort of mix up, such as a problem at the Post Office, may have caused Plaintiffs' non-receipt of the items. The parties, during the deposition, agreed Defendants would send to Plaintiffs copies of the documents to which Mr. Brown referred. Defendants indicated they would send the documents the day after the depositions. The parties also agreed Defendants would allow Plaintiffs to reopen Defendants' deposition and ask Defendants questions regarding these documents. Defendants, immediately after the depositions concluded, did send to Plaintiffs the documents to which Mr. Brown referred. Plaintiffs, again, had no record of previously receiving them. Plaintiffs reviewed the documents and determined they would need to question about the documents Defendants Carl and Molly Brown. Plaintiffs' counsel and Defendants' counsel conferred for the purpose of coming up with a mutually convenient date for doing so. The parties anticipated the deposition, in which Plaintiffs agreed to limit the scope to questions regarding the new documents, would take place within one to three weeks following the deposition. The parties eventually settled on October 25, 2006, as the date on which the depositions would proceed. Defendants' counsel, a few days prior to this date, contacted Plaintiffs' counsel and stated Defendants might, due to Mr. Brown's health, need to
-2Document 100 Filed 11/01/2006 Page 2 of 3

Case 2:03-cv-00100-ROS-MEA

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

postpone the deposition. Plaintiffs' counsel, due to Mr. Brown's need to undergo cancer treatment, expressed a willingness to indefinitely postpone the deposition. Defendants' counsel indicated he would follow up with Plaintiffs' as to whether the postponement would be necessary. A few days later, Defendants' counsel sent to Plaintiffs' counsel an E-mail message including an attachment. The attachment was a letter from Mr. Brown's physician stating Mr. Brown would need to undergo hormone and radiation therapy. Plaintiffs' counsel and Defendants' counsel discussed the matter and, due to the nature of the treatment Mr. Brown was to undergo, agreed to postpone the depositions. Plaintiffs seek to reopen Carl and Molly Brown's deposition for the very limited purpose of questioning them about the above-referenced documents. Plaintiffs request the Court issue an order giving Plaintiffs additional time in which to conduct this deposition. RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED this ____ day of November, 2006. LAW OFFICE OF JAMES BURR SHIELDS

____s/ W. Blake Simms__________________ James Burr Shields Blake Simms Attorneys for Plaintiffs CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on the 1st day of November, 2006, I electronically submitted the attached document to the Clerk's Office using the CM/ECF System for filing and transmittal of a Notice of Electronic Filing to the following CM/ECF registrants: John E. Karow, Esq. 11350 North 104th Place Scottsdale, Arizona 85259 Attorney for Defendants Dennis Hall, Esq. 14614 North Kierland Boulevard, Suite 300 Scottsdale, Arizona 85254 Attorneys for Defendant Greg Brown ____s/ Gail Ivey___________________
-3Document 100

Case 2:03-cv-00100-ROS-MEA

Filed 11/01/2006

Page 3 of 3