Free Memorandum in Opposition to Motion - District Court of Connecticut - Connecticut

Case 3:03-cv—00986-JCH Document 96-3 Filed 06/24/2005 Page1 0f4
Exh1b1t 2

Case 3:03-cv—00986-JCH Document 96-3 Filed 06/24/2005 Page 2 of 4
A i JUN 2 O gpg
9 ·27 Pine Street
O & New Canaan, Connecticut 06840
Telephone: (203) 966-6664
Facsimile: (203) 966-5710
ATTORNEYS M- LAW www.0rourkeandassoc.c0m
VIA FACSIMILE, E-MAIL, AND REGULAR MAIL .
June 16, 2005
Raymond W. Bertrand, Esq.
Paul, Hastings, Janofsky, & Walker, LLP
1055 Washington Boulevard
Stamford, CT 06901-2217
Re: Wood v. Sempra Energy
Dear Raymond:
Following up on our conversation yesterday in which I advised we would provide a list of
documents and information that we believe Sempra should supplement, we request that
Sempra update the information with regard to Response to Interrogatory N0. 3 of
Sempra’s January 23, 2004 response to Plaintiffs lnterrogatories and Production
Requests, setting forth updated employment status and bonus compensation (including
Steven Soule).
E If you have any q tions, please do not hesitate to call me.
Very truly yo ,
Bre an J. O’Rourke
J O/cl 1

V Case 3:03-cv—00986-JCH Document 96-3 Filed 06/24/2005 Page 3 of 4
' Paul, Hastings, Ja ofsky & W Ik
H 1055 Washington B0‘Ul8V3fd - St:im1:idlL0T 06901
Avronmavs telephone 203 961 7400 · facsimile 203 359 3031 - www.paulhas!ings.c0m
(203) 961-7477
raymonclbertrand(aipaulhastings.com
]une 15, 2004 2830900004
VIA QPS
Brendan O'Rourke
O'Rourke & Associates, LLC
27 Pine Street
New Canaan, CT 06840
Re: .S`u.ran E. Wood v. Sempra Energy Trading Corporation
Docket No. 3:03·CV—986 {ICH)
Dear Attorney O’Rourke:
Following up on our conversation from yesterday in which you agreed to supplement your
client’s interrogatory responses and to produce certain documents, please provide the
items listed below. Defendant requests Plaintiff supplement her responses and produce
the requested documents sufficiently in advance of the pre-trial conference so that it can
comply with the requirements set forth in the Court’s pre-trial order.
1) Plaintiffs supplemental responses to Defendant’s Interrogatory #s 2, 5, 6, 7, 8,
in and 11. i ‘ ‘
i 2) The following documents:
a. Ms. Wood’s 2003 and 2004 tax returns;
b. Any documents that relate to Ms. Wood’s efforts to mitigate her damages;
c. Pay stubs from Ms. Wood’s current employer;
d. Any employment agreement entered into between Ms. Wood’s and her °
current employer;
e. Any documents relating to Ms. V/ood’s “equity share" in the
"Environmental Company" referred to Plaintiffs Response to
Defendant’s lnterrogatory number 2. .
f. Any documents relating to the valuation of the "Environmental
Company" in which Ms. Wood owns an "equity share." gg Plaintiffs A
Response to Defendant’s Interrogatory number 2.
. rf '"‘‘t
p ~_ . L _ at V it fu;-if »_·_, .;— `. _. j__·..‘*=:s·z.;.:

pCase‘3:03-cv—00986-JCH Document 96-3 Filed 06/24/2005 Page 4 of 4
Paul Hastings
Brendan O’Rourke
june 15, 2004
Page 2
g. Beneits information from Ms. Wood’s current employer (e.g. financial,
retirement, medical, dental, stock);
h. Any and all information regarding the Bonus plan referred to in the
"Compensatory Damages Spreadsheet" provided to Defendant’s counsel
on or about june 8, 2005.
3) A non-privileged damages estimate.
Thank you in advance for your anticipated cooperation. If you have any questions, feel
free to contact me at (203) 961-7477.
Very truly yours,
@/( (/L
Raymond Bertrand ll
for PAUL, HASTINGSJANOFSKY & WALKER LLP
sm/29az0:.1 _
4
I- 1 --·'...¥}.
if é-" ` " 0 _ _ - ....5. j.