Nothing yet. Haytham Faraj Sent from my iPhone
Haytham,
Today is the day by which Carver is
supposed to produce documents to your office in response to our subpoena.
Please let me know whether or not you receive anything.
Kevin
From: Haytham Faraj
[mailto:haytham@puckettfaraj.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 09, 2011
3:56 PM
To: 'Kevin Duff'
Subject: RE: Motion to Quash
Carver Dep Re: (Cynowa v. CSSS) Notice of Deposition for the Continuation of
Larry Carver's Evidence Deposition
Kevin,
If she is moved by
your email I recommend we speak to her by telephone to coordinate an acceptable
time for everyone. I liked the tone of your email.
From: Kevin Duff
[mailto:kduff@rddlaw.net]
Sent: Wednesday, February 09, 2011
4:01 PM
To: 'THERESA JOHNSON'
Cc: 'Peter V. Bustamante';
'Haytham Faraj'; 'John Murray'; 'Kathleen M. Pritchard'
Subject: RE: Motion to Quash
Carver Dep Re: (Cynowa v. CSSS) Notice of Deposition for the Continuation of
Larry Carver's Evidence Deposition
Theresa,
We have provided a significant and
reasonable amount of notice of the deposition. Mr. Carverâs
evidence deposition was not previously concluded. There has been
additional discovery with respect to him since he was initially deposed.
It is unreasonable for you to take the position that because you took an
evidence deposition of him approximately 18 months before the close of
discovery and 21 months before trial that we are foreclosed, for example, from
completing his evidence deposition or examining him on areas where we did not
previously have an opportunity to ask him questions.
We are willing to attempt to reschedule
this deposition to March 10 or 11, provided we are able to obtain confirmation
that everyone is available that date. To this end, please let me know
which of those dates you are available. If one of these dates is not
mutually agreeable, or if we are not able to confirm that the witness is
available one of those dates, then we will keep the current date and time as
provided in our notice and subpoena.
Kevin
From: THERESA JOHNSON
[mailto:theresavjohnson@prodigy.net]
Sent: Wednesday, February 09, 2011
2:44 PM
To: Kevin Duff
Cc: Peter V. Bustamante; Haytham
Faraj; John Murray; Kathleen M. Pritchard
Subject: Motion to Quash Carver
Dep Re: (Cynowa v. CSSS) Notice of Deposition for the Continuation of Larry
Carver's Evidence Deposition
Kevin,
We're moving to Quash your intended dep of Carver. We will not be in
attendance unless there is a court order granting you the right to depose
Carver a second time.
Theresa V. Johnson
Attorney at Law
Law Office of Theresa V. Johnson
200 East Chicago
Ave. Suite 200
Westmont, IL
60559
Tel.: (630) 321-1330
Fax: (630) 321-1185
From: Kevin
Duff <kduff@rddlaw.net>
To: THERESA JOHNSON
<theresavjohnson@prodigy.net>
Cc: Haytham Faraj
<haytham@puckettfaraj.com>; John Murray <jmurray@rddlaw.net>;
Kathleen M. Pritchard <kpritchard@rddlaw.net>
Sent: Tue, February 8, 2011
4:11:07 PM
Subject: RE: (Cynowa v. CSSS)
Notice of Deposition for the Continuation of Larry Carver's Evidence Deposition
Theresa,
I am writing to confirm the Carver deposition
on February 17 at noon EST. Please advise.
Kevin
P.S. I donât have Peter
Bustamanteâs email address. Could you please provide it?
From: John Murray
[mailto:jmurray@rddlaw.net]
Sent: Monday, January 31, 2011
4:05 PM
To: 'THERESA JOHNSON'
Cc: 'Kevin Duff'; 'Haytham Faraj'
Subject: (Cynowa v. CSSS) Notice
of Deposition for the Continuation of Larry Carver's Evidence Deposition
Theresa:
Attached please find a Notice of Deposition for the
Continuation of Larry Carverâs evidence deposition, as well as a copy of
the subpoena and rider that was served upon Mr. Carver on January 30,
2011. Please see attached. Thanks.
Regards,
John E. Murray, Esq.
Associate Attorney
Rachlis Durham Duff & Adler, LLC
542 South Dearborn
Street, Suite 900
Chicago, IL 60605
Office: (312) 733-3950
Direct: (312) 275-0338
Mobile: (810)
824-7197
Fax: (312) 733-3952
Email: jmurray@rddlaw.net
Firm website: www.rddlaw.net
RACHLIS
DURHAM DUFF
& ADLER, LLC E-MAIL CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE
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.
n 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.
|