Free Status Report - District Court of Federal Claims - federal

631i812805 i0:59 202-775-8217 Case 1:98-cv-00720-GWM

Document SALTNAI,IFiled 03/15/2005 293-7 A[4DSTEVEt4S

Page 1 of 2 RAGE

02/83

SALTMAN& STEVENS,P.CJ
(202) 452-2140 Fa.¢ (202) 7754217 [email protected]

E-mail:

March 10, 2005 VIA FACSLMILE David Harrir~.on A. U.S. Department Justice of Commercial Litigation Branch Civil Division Arm:Classificaffon Uuit 1100L Street, N.W.,8t~ Floor Washiagton, D.C. 20530 Re: Dear David: I amin receipt ofyour letter dated March 2005. I disagree with your suggestionthat 9, Precision Pine intends to "renege" on an a~eement. Thegovernmentsought interrogatory answers signed in conformity with the requirements of Rule 33. As the case law and numerous autho)ities cited therein providedby Precision Pine make clear (and whichyour letter does not discuss), s~gnatuxeofcotmseIsatisfies Rule 33. Accordingly,the government been provided has with wha[it ~ought Thegovernment identified no authority to the contrary madthe lone case cited in your has letter indicates that cotmselmay',in fact, sign interrogatoryanswers behalf of a corporation. on .Sh~Rpard AmericanBroadcasting Companies, F.3d 1469, 1482(D.C. Cir. 1995). v. 62 Moreover,that case provides Federal Ruleof CivS1Procedure33 expressly permits a representative of a corporate party to verify the corporation's answerswithout personal knowledge of every responseby "fumish[ing]such informationas is available to the party." [Citations omitted]. Of course, the representative musthave a basis for signing the responsesand for thereby stating on behalf of the corporationthat the responsesare accurate. ld....: Asto the contention yourletter "that counselof recordmay sign interrogatoriesas an in not agent of the corporation, this is simplyincorrect. As one of the cases Precision Pine providedto the government yesterday holds: Precision pine & Timber Inc. v. United States, CoFC 98-720C No.

85/1012885 18:59 202-775-8217 Case 1:98-cv-00720-GWM

Document 293-7 SALTMNIFiledSTEVENS AND 03/15/2005

Page 2 of 2 03/03 PAGE

David Harring~om A. U.,% Dcpas~nen~ March 2005 10~ Pa~c 2 Plaintiff's argument: that the MagistrateJudgeerred by allo;~in~ defensecounsel instead of an employee the defendant, to sign the interrogatory responseslacks of merit as weI1.... Thus, it wasnot error for MagistrateJudgeRobinson to not compelan actual of~cer of the defendant to sign th~ interrogatory responses when defendant's counsel Mda~eady signed them. Gluckv. Ansett .Australia Ltd., 204 F.1LD.217, 221 (D.D.C. 2001)(emphasissupplied). Furthermore, wholly consistent with myexperience with the waythat the government respondsto interrogatories in cases at the Courtof Federal Claims,the government itself did not "verify" i~s original interrogatories answerson damages this case that wereprovidedto in Pre~isionPine backin the su.rrm~erof 2003. In this regard, it appearsthat ~hegovernment understandsthat the signature of counsel satisfies RCFC If you have somespecific concern 33. about a particular aspect of Precision Pine's interrogatowresponses, I wouldbe happyto discuss it with you. Withrespect to the end date of the suspension,aS noted in myletter of March 2005, I 8, arn currently p~eparing stipulations, including one addressingthe end of the suspension.I fully expect that a stipulation is possible. Although cite a letter dated December 1996 you 5, purportingto lift the suspension "alP' of Precision Pine's sales, that le~er wassigned by one on CO one NationaI Forest. I think you wouldagree that this single COdid not have the on authority mlift the suspensionon all of Precision Pine sales teNon-wide. Indeed, if that one CO did havesuch authority, subsequent letters actually sent by other COs that do formallylift the suspension on other National Forests wouldhave been wholly unnecegsary. I suggest that wecontinue to workthroughstipulations and other issues amicablyas we have been doing, as I believe that there is common ~oumd be found. to Verytruly yours: SALTM~kNSfT, EVENS, & P.O.

Richard W. Goeken RWG/eef

MAR-18-28fl~11:86

2~2 775 8217

97g

P.83