Free Response to Discovery - District Court of Delaware - Delaware

Case 1:07-cv-00244-JJF

Document 31

Filed 01/14/2008

Page 1 of 7

IN THE UNITED STATES. DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE Henry R. Taylor,. Jr. Plaintiff, v. Kathleen D. Feldman, et.al. Defendants. : : : : : : : : JURY TRIAL DEMAND C. NO. 07-244-JJF

DEFENDANTS' RESPONSES TO PLAINITFF' S FIRST REQUESTS FOR PRODUCITON OF DOCUMENTS 1. Defendant's or their counsel are being asked to produce copies of all

request ever made by any other local governmental agency for the court records from the time they were created on April 8,1985 leading up to the date the records are claimed to have been destroyed based on policy. RESPONSE: Objection as to the request for production directed to defendants'

counsel as he is not a party and not subject to Fed.R.Civ.P. 34. Without waiving this objection and assuming that plaintiff is referring to the record of his guilty pleas colloquy of April 8, 1985, for two counts of Burglary 2nd in Superior Court for New Castle County (Cr.A, Nos. IN84-09-0298 and IN84-09-0300) there are no documents in defendants' possession that respond to "all request ever made by any other local governmental agency." However, please refer to copies of documents attached to plaintiff's complaint and the attached document that shows that Superior Court Reporter David G. Meddings' stenographic notes for the period January 28, 1985 to October 10, 1985 were destroyed in October 1995 by the staff of the Delaware Public Archives. [D0001]

Case 1:07-cv-00244-JJF

Document 31

Filed 01/14/2008

Page 2 of 7

2.

Produce any and all documents verifying the exact date, time if known, and

place the records relevant to this civil action were destroyed. RESPONSE: Please refer to prior response and document attached 3. Produce any and all Rules, regulations, the policies, practice and

procedures governing the manner under which the court records were destroyed. RESPONSE: Please refer to response to No. 1, Superior Court Criminal Rule 55, 29 Del.C. chapter 5 and the attached documents that comprise a portion of the State of Delaware, Delaware Public Archives' Retention Schedule and Documents for the Superior Court. [D 0002-0007] 4. Produce any and all communications in any form between each named

party as a defendant relating to the destruction of the court records relevant to Plaintiff's civil action prior to and following the destruction of court files. RESPONSE: Objection, all communication among the defendants was through

or by their attorney and such communications are confidential and not subject to disclosure under the attorney client and /or work product privilege. 5. Produce any and all documents with the name of any Defendant's that have

been cited, involved in, or responsible for the loss or destruction of court files from the time of their employment to date as a person in a position of the publics trust. RESPONSE: Objection, this request seeks documents that are beyond the

scope of Rule 26 and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence.

-2-

Case 1:07-cv-00244-JJF

Document 31

Filed 01/14/2008

Page 3 of 7

6.

Produce copies of any complaints filed against any of the Defendant's as

court reporters as well as all other Defendant's acting to serve the general public as an official currently pending. RESPONSE: Objection, this request seeks documents that are beyond the

scope of Rule 26 and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. 7. Defendant's as court reporters or their counsel are ask to produce

communications in any form with Defendant James Fraizer of the Delaware Public Archives as well as any other court official verifying the nature and consent under which the court records were destroyed. RESPONSE: Objection, all communication among the defendants with

defendant James Frazier was through or by their attorney and such communications are confidential and not subject to disclosure under the attorney client and /or work product privilege. Without waiving such objection, plaintiff is in possession of documents from defendant Frazier prior to the lawsuit 8. Produce copies of all documents showing the name or names of persons

within the judicial branch of the local governmental agency authorizing destruction of court records relevant to this civil action. RESPONSE: Objection, as set out above in response to No. 1, no employees of the judicial branch purged the stenographic notes. Instead, it is a tasked assigned to the Delaware Public Archives pursuant to 29 Del.C. ch. 5.

-3-

Case 1:07-cv-00244-JJF

Document 31

Filed 01/14/2008

Page 4 of 7

9.

Produce documents verifying the persons place of employment within the

judicial branch of the local governmental agency responsible for executing the policy claimed resulting in destruction of court records relevant to this civil action in question. RESPONSE: 10. Please refer to response to No. 8.

Produce a copy of the contract to provide services to the Superior Court of

New Castle County involving all court Reporters during the years 1989- 2007. RESPONSE: Objection, this request seeks documents that are beyond the scope of Rule 26 and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Without waiving such objection, defendants do not possess documents that are responsive to this request. 11. Produce copies of any documents past and present revealing any

complaints before the review board subject to formal proceedings where there has been however slight any violations of the provisions of the Delaware Court Reporter code of Responsibility. RESPONSE: Objection, this request seeks documents that are beyond the scope of Rule 26 and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Without waiving such objection, defendants do not possess documents that are responsive to this request. 12. Provide a copy of the form for filing a complaint against court reporters.

RESPONSE: Objection, this request seeks documents that are beyond the scope

-4-

Case 1:07-cv-00244-JJF

Document 31

Filed 01/14/2008

Page 5 of 7

of Rule 26 and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Without waiving such objection, defendants do not possess documents that are responsive to this request.

13.

Produce copies of the "Request for Proposal" for court reporting services

published during the years 2002 - 2007. RESPONSE: Objection, this request seeks documents that are beyond the scope of Rule 26 and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Without waiving such objection, defendants do not possess documents that are responsive to this request. 14. Produce a copy of any and all court issued memorandum relating to the

destruction of the court files or any other documents relevant to this civil action. RESPONSE: Please refer to Superior Court Criminal Rule 55.

15.

Produce copies of documents relating to any steps taken to recover or make

up for the loss or destruction of court files relevant to this civil action. RESPONSE: Objection, this request seeks documents that are beyond the scope of Rule 26 and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Without waiving such objection, defendants do not possess documents that are responsive to this request.

-5-

Case 1:07-cv-00244-JJF

Document 31

Filed 01/14/2008

Page 6 of 7

16.

Produce documents of any and all reliable, secondary or substitute

evidence so as to possibly reconstruct the court records of the proceedings relevant to this civil action. RESPONSE: Objection, this request seeks documents that are beyond the scope of Rule 26 and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Without waiving such objection, defendants will produce the relevant Guilty Plea Form, Plea Agreement and Sentencing Order. 17. Produce documents verifying each named defendants involvement in the

loss or destruction of court files from the time of their employment as court reporters or otherwise over the past twenty years to date. RESPONSE: Objection, this request seeks documents that are beyond the scope of Rule 26 and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Without waiving such objection, defendants do not possess documents responsive to this request.

/s/ Marc P. Niedzielski Marc P. Niedzielski, I.D. #2626 Deputy Attorney General Department of Justice 820 N. French Street, 6th Flr. Wilmington, DE 19801 (302) 577-8400 Attorney for Defendants DATED: January 14, 2008

-6-

Case 1:07-cv-00244-JJF

Document 31

Filed 01/14/2008

Page 7 of 7

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I certify that on the date indicated below I served two copies of the attached document by regular U.S. Mail on the following: Henry R. Taylor, Jr. SBI 00159464 Delaware Correctional Center Smyrna, DE 19977

/s/ Marc P. Niedzielski Marc P. Niedzielski (2616) Deputy Attorney General Department of Justice 820 North French Street Carvel Building, 6th Floor Wilmington, DE 19801

-7-

Case 1:07-cv-00244-JJF

Document 31-2

Filed 01/14/2008

Page 1 of 7

D000001

Case 1:07-cv-00244-JJF

Document 31-2

Filed 01/14/2008

Page 2 of 7

D000002

Case 1:07-cv-00244-JJF

Document 31-2

Filed 01/14/2008

Page 3 of 7

D000003

Case 1:07-cv-00244-JJF

Document 31-2

Filed 01/14/2008

Page 4 of 7

D000004

Case 1:07-cv-00244-JJF

Document 31-2

Filed 01/14/2008

Page 5 of 7

D000005

Case 1:07-cv-00244-JJF

Document 31-2

Filed 01/14/2008

Page 6 of 7

D000006

Case 1:07-cv-00244-JJF

Document 31-2

Filed 01/14/2008

Page 7 of 7

D000007