Free Answering Brief in Opposition - District Court of Delaware - Delaware

¤12¤3f1Ef2·1`I¤¤fJE 15:·=1·1`Z¤ IFM1 —> Sue C¤¤iI¤1fC¤·1`Z¤¤1
Case 1:04-cv-00911-GIVIS Document 158-2 Filed 03/16/2006 Page 1 014
EXHIBIT 1
Z E 11:19025 NHL QU-QI-H1/W

03I"|B,*'200E 152-10 IFP.}1 ·> SUE gggyggq
Case 1:04-cv-00911-GI\/IS Document 158-2 Filed 03/16/2006 Page20f4
f N
I IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
` POR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY
EAN K-OIEACZ = _
; DOCKET NO. 03-ev~4s0s (SSS)
: CIVIL ACTION
v. =
¤ SEANAN’S COMPLAINT 1N
DELAWARE RIVER AND BAY : ADMIRALTY POR MAINTENANCEF
AUTHORITY ; CURE AND OTHER RELIEF
: FILING FEE WAIVED
; EB U.S.C. 51916
PROPOSED DISCOVERY PLAN
1. Cenferenee Date;
January 6, 2004
2. Brief Factual Statement:
This is a ncn-jury actien filed by Plaintiff te reccver
maintenance and cure and various ether things related tm
Defendant’s arbitrary refusal te pay Plaintiff’a maintenance and
cure cencurrently with the need.
Plaintiff was wtnrking as an A.B. abcbard Defenciarulfa ‘iTH1"f";’.
MV DELAWARE, en August 9, 2002. He was directing cars during the
lsading precese in Lewes, DE preparatery tc making a creasing tu
Cape May, N.J. Plaintiff alleges that he was standing behind an
SUV, with his back te the SUV. and he was waiting fer 2 cars ta
pass in the adjacent lane. Plaintiff alleges that the SUV bacaed
up withmut warning and struck Plaintiff in the back, r._:.iuS5n¤;;
injuries te Plaintiff*s neck, back and elbew.
Defendant alleges that the claim is fraudulent, as the
driver ef the SUV and three ether eyewitnesses said that the
vehicle never centacted the Plaintiff.
E ‘d wa 90:2 mh 90-91-nw

03f1Ef200E 15:d0 IFAX + Sus Q 003f004
Case 1:04-cv-00911-GIVIS Document 158-2 Filed 03/16/2006 Page 3 014
gra
- - ..
_ Plaintiff was taken by ambulance te a nearby hespital where
he was treated. x·rayed and released. Plaintiff alleges that he
WEE unable te werk until December 2002.
Defendant has never paid him his maintenance and has paid
nene ef his medical bills. Defendant alleges that maintenance
and sure are net ewed in this ease.
3. D1eeevery-Hndertaken:
Plaintiff has served his Initial Diselesures and dieeevery
requests.
Defendant intends te serve written diseevery and te depeee
the Plaintiff. driver ef the SUV and all eyewitnessss.
4. Discovery Prebleme:
There sheuld be nene since these EAEES are very easy te
prepare.
5. Dieeevery needs;
The parties feresee that diseevery may inelude but will new
necessarily be limited te interregateries, requests fer
preductien ef decuments. depesitiens ef parties and witnesses,
medical examinatiens ef plaintiff, and eubpeenas served en nen-
parties fer varieus deeuments.
6. Time Needed fer Discovery:
Plaintiff prepeses an April 30, 2004 diseevery deadline.
Defendant requests a diseevery deedline ef June 30. 2004.
7. Expert Testimeny;
Nene needed by Plaintiff.
Defendant dees net feresee the need fer expert testimeny tut
reserves the right te present an expert at the end ef diseevery.
S. Diepesitive Meeieneg
V i Wd LUIZ HHJ. 90-91-HHN

03f1Ef200E 15:dU IFAX + Sus Q 00df004
Case1:04—cv-00911-GIVIS D0cument158-2 Filed 03/16/2006 Page40f4
_- Nana anticipated by Plaintiff.
Defendant anticipates that it will file a metien dismissing
the claim fer punitive damages, which are net reeeverable se a
matter ef law.
9. Ready fe: Trial:
Plaintiff suggests June 1, 2004 at the latest. Plaintitt
requests an expedited hearing bssause maintenance is invslvea.
Defendant suggests August 1, 2004 te allew time fer exper?
discovery, if any, dispesitive metimns and p:e—trial preparatimn.
CLO. Status ef Settlement Negstietisnsa
There have been ne settlement diacussiens.
Q J Nd LUZZ HI-IJ, QO·9[—H`/W