Free Response to Motion - District Court of Colorado - Colorado

Case 1:00-cv-02350-LTB-MJW

Document 65-2

Filed 02/20/2006

Page 1 of 5

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Civil Action No. 00-CV-02350-LTB-MJW PAULETTE GOMEZ, Plaintiff, v. KING SOOPERS, INC., Defendant.

DECLARATION OF PAULETTE GOMEZ IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR ATTORNEYS' AND EXPERT'S FEES

Paulette Gomez deposes and says: 1. 2. I am the plaintiff in the above-captioned matter. I initiated this action in 1998 to redress injuries I allege resulted from my

employment with, and subsequent separation from, Defendant. 3. Prior to initiating this action, I had never been involved in litigation of any kind. I

had never been a plaintiff, defendant or witness in a case. I had never before retained an attorney. 4. I first retained The Frickey Law Firm to represent me in this matter. I retained

them after seeing their advertisement and learning that the firm would take my case on a contingency basis. I did not have the financial resources to pay an attorney to take my case on an hourly basis.

1 Exhibit A

Case 1:00-cv-02350-LTB-MJW

Document 65-2

Filed 02/20/2006

Page 2 of 5

5.

Mark E. Rau was the first attorney to represent me at The Frickey Law Firm. I

had very little contact with Mr. Rau. Mr. Rau never counseled me with regard to my role as a plaintiff or with regard to my duties and obligations as a litigant. I received only occasional correspondence updating me as to the status of the case. I was never asked to review documents prepared in connection with the case or received from Defendant. 6. At times, I would receive communications directly from the UFCW Local #7's

attorney asking me about events in the case I had no idea were taking place. I would have to hound Mr. Rau with multiple telephone calls before he would communicate with me about what was transpiring in my case. 7. Cecilia Serna took over my case in February, 2003. At that time, Ms. Serna was

still employed by The Frickey Law Firm. It is my understanding that Mr. Rau left The Frickey Law Firm to open a delicatessen. 8. Ms. Serna's approach to handling the case was, from my perspective, no different

from that of Mr. Rau. I received very little communication from Ms. Serna about the status of my case. As with Mr. Rau, I would have to hound Ms. Serna with multiple phone calls before I would hear back from her. 9. Shortly after Ms. Serna assumed responsibility for my case in February, 2003, I

received a call from Kevin Schneider, a UFCW Local #7 representative, in which he discussed settling my case. I attempted repeatedly to contact Ms. Serna to discuss this offer but she never returned my calls. Mr. Schneider called again in May, 2003 with a new settlement offer and again I could not reach Ms. Serna to obtain her advice and counsel. Not knowing what to do and unable to reach my attorney, I rejected the settlement offer outlined by Mr. Schneider.

2 Exhibit A

Case 1:00-cv-02350-LTB-MJW

Document 65-2

Filed 02/20/2006

Page 3 of 5

10.

I didn't find out that Ms. Serna was leaving The Frickey Law Firm until I

received a letter from Janet Frickey, dated March 28, 2005, advising me of this fact and advising me that The Frickey Law Firm would no longer represent me. 11. I only met with Ms. Serna in person on one occasion. On June 21, 2005, I met

with Ms. Serna to review and discuss discovery responses. At that time, Ms. Serna did not indicate that anything was amiss in the prosecution of the case and assured me that by August or September of 2005, the case would be concluded. Ms. Serna never contacted me again after that meeting. 12. The next communication I received relating to my case was from The Frickey

Law Firm on October 17, 2005. In that letter, Ms. Frickey advised me that "this firm has received a number of documents from the U.S. District Court pertaining to your case." I had never seen the documents that were enclosed with the letter. One of those documents was the Court's Minute Order, dated October 13, 2005, through which I learned that I and my attorney had failed to appear before the Court. I had never been advised that the hearing was taking place, let alone that my attendance at it was required. I also learned at this time that Magistrate Judge Watanabe had recommended that my case be dismissed. 13. After I received the letter and its accompanying documents from Ms. Frickey, I

attempted to contact Ms. Serna. All of the phone numbers she had provided to me had been disconnected. I finally reached her at home and asked what had happened to my case and what needed to be done now. She would only respond by saying that she was "sorry." She told me that she could not represent me any longer because she was no longer practicing law. I later learned that her license to practice law had been suspended.

3 Exhibit A

Case 1:00-cv-02350-LTB-MJW

Document 65-2

Filed 02/20/2006

Page 4 of 5

14.

I asked Ms. Serna to return my case file to me so that I could find another

attorney. She claimed that she did not have any files. 15. I then called The Frickey Law Firm to ask if they could represent me. They told

me they could not because of a conflict of interest. I asked if they had my case files and I was told that they would only give them to me if I first obtained a court order. 16. Without an attorney to discuss my situation, I did not yet realize how serious the

circumstances surrounding my case had become. 17. I learned that my case had been dismissed when I received a letter from Ms.

Frickey, dated January 20, 2006, and enclosing Chief Judge Babcock's Order, dated January 10, 2006. At that time I began a frantic search to find a new attorney. I contacted thirteen attorneys in an attempt to obtain representation before finding Smith & West LLC. I met with Jessica West on February 8, 2006 and learned that her firm would be able to take my case on February 10, 2006. 18. In the interim, I received additional correspondence from Ms. Frickey, dated

February 3, 2006, informing me that Defendant had filed this Motion seeking attorneys' and expert witness fees in an amount exceeding $38,000. 19. I am a woman of very modest means. If I am required to pay the fees that

Defendant seeks, I have every reason to believe that I will have to file for bankruptcy. 20. I never instituted my case for the purpose of harassing Defendant in any way or

for any other improper purpose. I regret that the conduct of my former attorneys caused Defendant and this Court any unnecessary inconvenience or expense. I believe that my claims against Defendant are valid and am terribly distressed that it they have been dismissed. Had I

4 Exhibit A

Case 1:00-cv-02350-LTB-MJW

Document 65-2

Filed 02/20/2006

Page 5 of 5

known that my case was being handled as badly as I now know that it was, I would have taken steps sooner to find capable representation. I swear, under penalty of perjury, the foregoing is true and correct.

_/s Paulette Gomez___________________ Paulette Gomez

5 Exhibit A