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

Case 1:07-cv-00031-GMS

Document 125

Filed 06/26/2008

Page 1 of 2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF DELAWARE WILLIAM JOSEPH WEBB, JR., Plaintiff, v. FIRST CORRECTIONAL MEDICAL, ET AL, Defendants. --------------------------------------------------------------) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Case No. 07-031 GMS JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

DEFENDANTS CORRECTIONAL MEDICAL SERVICES, INC., GINA WOLKEN AND DR. NIAZ'S RESPONSE IN OPPOSITION TO PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO STRIK D.I. 104 THROUGH 107 AND MOTION TO COMPEL NEW COUNSEL TO ACCEPT SERVICE FOR WOLKEN, NIAZ AND GOMBEH-ALIE OR SUBMIT ADDRESSES TO COURT1 (D.I . 124) Defendants, Correctional Medical Services, Inc., Gina Wolken, and Dr. Niaz (collectively, "Respondents"), by and through their undersigned counsel, hereby oppose the Plaintiff's Motion to Strike D.I. 104 through 107 and also oppose his Motion to Compel New Counsel to Accept Service for defendants Gina Wolken, Dr. Niaz and Dr. Gombeh-Alie or to Submit their Addresses to the Court. (D.I. 124) In opposition to the relief requested, Respondents state as follows: 1. Plaintiff's Motion is little more than another response to the docket items he

wishes the Court would strike. He, in essence, opposes the earlier-filed motions to dismiss for failure timely or properly to effect service (D.I. 104-107) by arguing that the undersigned should either accept service for Drs. Niaz and Gombeh-Alie and Ms. Wolken, or provide him with their home addresses. Granting Plaintiff's Motion would create an exception to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure governing service by giving
1

Neither Gina Wolken, nor Dr. Niaz, nor Dr. Alie has properly been served with process yet. Accordingly, they reserve all defenses and do not waive service by filing this opposition to Plaintiff's Motion.

Case 1:07-cv-00031-GMS

Document 125

Filed 06/26/2008

Page 2 of 2

plaintiffs the option of simply demanding counsel accept service instead of complying with the Rule. 2. Plaintiff also argues that "new counsel should not receive the benefit of the

previous counsel's work-product" (D.I. 124, Motion at 1-2), but offers no support for this proposition. Under Plaintiff's theory, a client could never discharge an attorney without losing the benefit of the work for which he or she has already paid and would be forced to start the case over again. 3. Plaintiff's assertion that he has "already withdrawn the letter" in which he

threatened prior counsel if she did not provide him with information notwithstanding, he has not properly served the individual defendants and so those Motions addressing that issue should not be stricken. 4. Plaintiff offers no authority in support of his assertion that counsel should be

compelled to accept service on behalf of the individual defendants. That request should also be denied. BALICK & BALICK, LLC /s/ James E. Drnec James E. Drnec, Esquire (#3789) 711 King Street Wilmington, Delaware 19801 302.658.4265 Attorneys for Correctional Medical Services, Inc., Dr. Alie, Gina Wolken, and Dr. Niaz Date: June 26, 2008

2

Case 1:07-cv-00031-GMS

Document 125-2

Filed 06/26/2008

Page 1 of 1

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, James Drnec, hereby certify that on the 26th day of June 2008, the foregoing Defendants Correctional Medical Services, Inc., Gina Wolken and Dr. Niaz's Response in Opposition to Plaintiff's Motion to Strike D.I. 104 Through 107 and Motion to Compel New Counsel to Accept Service for Wolken, Niaz and Gombeh-Alie or Submit Addresses to Court was filed via CM/ECF and served upon the following in the manner indicated:

William Joseph Webb, Jr. SBI #256056 Delaware Correctional Center 1181 Paddock Road Smyrna, DE 19977 Catherine C. Damavandi, Esquire Department of Justice 820 N. French St. Wilmington, DE 19801

VIA FIRST CLASS MAIL

VIA CM/ECF FILING

/s/ James E. Drnec James E. Drnec, Esquire (#3789)