Free Letter - District Court of Delaware - Delaware

Case 1:06-cv-00258-GMS

Document 31

Filed 12/08/2006

Page 1 of 2
Swartz Campbell LLC 300 Delaware Avenue 11th Floor, Suite 1130 P.O. Box 330 Wilmington, DE 19899

Nicholas E. Skiles
Attorney at Law

voice (302) 656-5935 facsimile (302) 656-1434 [email protected] www.swartzcampbell.com

December 8, 2006 Via Electronic Filing The Honorable Gregory M. Sleet U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware 844 North King Street Lock Box 19 Wilmington, DE 19899 RE: Anne M. Rowan vs. James T. Chandler & Son, Inc., et al U.S.D.C., District of Delaware, Civil Action No. 06-258 (GMS)

Dear Judge Sleet: In anticipation of the discovery teleconference scheduled for December 12, 2006 at 2:00 p.m. in the above-captioned matter, the parties jointly submit the following items to be presented to the Court: Plaintiff's Issues: · Defendants' objections to and failure to answer in full Plaintiff's Interrogatories; Defendants' objections to and failure to produce requested documents;

·

Defendants' Issues: · Plaintiff's Answers to Interrogatories concerning the calculation of damages.

Plaintiff has requested the following categories of information in her Interrogatories and Requests for Production of Documents, which defendants have objected to or otherwise failed to provide: (1) A statement of all facts underlying the reason for the plaintiff's termination from employment with defendants;

Case 1:06-cv-00258-GMS

Document 31

Filed 12/08/2006

Page 2 of 2

The Honorable Judge Gregory M. Sleet December 8, 2006 Page 2

(2)

Information concerning comparators, including lists of all employees terminated or disciplined in the prior 5 years; Information concerning plaintiff's performance, including her sales and commissions; Financial records of defendants which plaintiff has requested in light of plaintiff's joint employer theory and defendants' position in its previous lawsuit filed against plaintiff wherein it claimed Funeral Services was the successor to Chandler Funeral Services and Chandler was the alter ego, a claim which they now dispute. Information concerning communications with counsel in the prior litigation and documents in defendants' own possession concerning the initiation and continuation of their lawsuit against plaintiff and documents concerning the claims raised in the previous action (successor theory, assignment of employment contract, misappropriation of trade secrets).

(3)

(4)

(5)

Plaintiff has also represented to defendants that she will supplement her responses to defendants' discovery requests to address the concerns raised by counsel. The parties have exchanged numerous correspondence concerning plaintiff's discovery requests and defendants' objections thereto but have been unable to reach an agreement as to these discovery requests. Respectfully submitted,

FERRY, JOSEPH & PEARCE, P.A.

YOUNG CONAWAY STARGATT & TAYLOR, LLP

/s/ Robert K. Pearce
Robert K. Pearce, Esq. (DE ID #191)

/s/ Teresa A. Cheek
Teresa A. Cheek, Esq. (DE ID #2657)

SWARTZ CAMPBELL LLC

/s/ Nicholas E. Skiles
Nicholas E. Skiles, Esq. (DE ID #3777)