08.11.2010 Plaintiff's Response to Defendant's Request for Production of Documents - Midland v Sheridan

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·

jill

Typewritten Text

EXHIBIT B

jill

Typewritten Text

jill

Typewritten Text

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.



become available.



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.



become available.



become available.



become available.



become available.






Practice Act.






Practice Act.


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


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


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

08.11.2010 Plaintiff's Response to Defendant's Request for Production of Documents - Midland v Sheridan

Documents

document requests

plaintiff objects

general objections plaintiff

extent necessary

documents subject

production of documents

responsive documents

producfion of documents