|
Haytham: The VA has taken the position that since Piper was a VA
employee at the time of the events that gave rise to this litigation and thus
any questioning related thereto affects the VA’s interests. And,
more importantly, the VA has made it clear that current VA employees cannot be
contacted unless granted permission to do so by the VA Counsel’s Office. As the correspondence shows, we did request to interview
and/or depose various VA employees regarding the events in question, including
Neil Piper, largely using the information contained in Plaintiff’s
previous discovery responses and our own understanding of the facts.
However, even using Plaintiff’s own language in some cases, the VA denied
our request. It is our expectation that the VA would have a similar reaction to
Plaintiff’s requests. The main effect of the January 19th
letter from VA Counsel is to “punt” the issue of Neil Piper to another
Office of Regional Counsel. We will contact this other office, and have
already placed a voicemail and email requesting contact information relating
thereto. Our main goal is simply to ensure that Plaintiff’s request
is denied in the same fashion as we were denied previously. In addition, despite Plaintiff’s claims in his recent
January 5th VA request that “Piper is believed to have spoken
with and exchange emails with CSSS managers/employees regarding the reasons
Chris Cynowa was terminated from CSSS, exchanged emails from CSSS
managers/employees and that Chris was allegedly dangerous and/or possessed some
form of a weapon/gun and/or AK-47,” it is important to note that there is
no current claim based on any of these statements or evidence. This
testimony may be relevant to countering our defense of qualified privilege, but
it certainly does not and cannot provide a basis for relief as an additional
defamatory statement. To the extent Plaintiff attempts to use this as an
additional basis for relief, we have already planned to draft a motion in
limine barring such statements/evidence and limiting Plaintiff only to those
specific allegations in his complaint. In fact, Plaintiff does not even
disclose this Piper testimony when asked, for each allegedly defamatory
statement, to list the precise words and their supposed publisher. (See Plaintiff’s Answer to
Defendants’ First Set of Interrogatories, at 4-5, Answers to No. 7;
Defendants’ Third Amended Response to Defendants’ First Set of
Interrogatories, at 7-8, Answers to No. 7.) Nevertheless, we plan to contact this other Office of
Regional Counsel to see if Plaintiff has contacted them and what their position
is as it relates to interviews and/or evidence depositions of Mr. Piper. Regards, John E. Murray, Esq. Associate Attorney Rachlis Durham Duff &
Adler, LLC Office: (312) 733-3950 Direct: (312) 275-0338 Fax: (312) 733-3952 Email: jmurray@rddlaw.net Firm website: www.rddlaw.net RACHLIS This transmission may be: (1) subject to
the Attorney-Client Privilege, (2) an attorney work product, or (3) strictly
confidential. If you are not the intended recipient of this message, you may
not disclose, print, copy or disseminate this information. If you have received
this in error, please reply and notify the sender (only) and delete the
message. Unauthorized interception of this e-mail is a violation of federal
criminal law. From: Haytham Faraj
[mailto: Thanks John, Do you have any
contact information on Mr. Piper? Nothing prevents us from asking him questions
without notifying his local counsel, if we think that it benefits us. Do
you know what he’ll say? Mr. Piper is not a represented
party. Government counsel represent their own agencies and not members of
their agencies. I go through this all the time. In any event, the
VA is not a party to the action. From: John Murray
[mailto:jmurray@rddlaw.net] Haytham: Attached please find the email and regular correspondence as
they relate to interviewing, deposing and/or trial appearances of VA
employees. On January 19, 2011, Robert Vega, counsel for the VA,
responded to Plaintiff’s requests for interviews and depositions and
appearances at trial of several VA employees. The letter is included in
this package. In short, we are mainly concerned about the possibility
that Plaintiff may be able to conduct an evidence deposition of Neil Piper, as
Plaintiff intends to potentially use him to testify that he heard the allegedly
defamatory statements published beyond simply being made by Bill Slater to
Officer Adrowski. However, despite these concerns, Vega notified
Plaintiff that Mr. Piper is located at a different government facility involving
another Office of Regional Counsel, and so basically he left it to Plaintiff to
follow-up with them and make her request as it relates to Piper with
them. I plan to follow-up with Vega to determine if Plaintiff has
communicated with this other Office of Regional Counsel. Vega informed me
that he hasn’t heard from Plaintiff since her January 5, 2011 request
letter. Let us know if you have any additional questions relating to
the attached correspondence. Thanks. Regards, John E. Murray, Esq. Associate Attorney Rachlis Durham Duff & Adler, LLC Office: (312) 733-3950 Direct: (312) 275-0338 Fax: (312) 733-3952 Email: jmurray@rddlaw.net Firm website: www.rddlaw.net RACHLIS
This
transmission may be: (1) subject to the Attorney-Client Privilege, (2) an
attorney work product, or (3) strictly confidential. If you are not the
intended recipient of this message, you may not disclose, print, copy or
disseminate this information. If you have received this in error, please reply
and notify the sender (only) and delete the message. Unauthorized interception
of this e-mail is a violation of federal criminal law. |