Free Brief in Support of Motion - District Court of Colorado - Colorado


File Size: 141.3 kB
Pages: 4
Date: July 17, 2006
File Format: PDF
State: Colorado
Category: District Court of Colorado
Author: unknown
Word Count: 766 Words, 4,685 Characters
Page Size: Letter (8 1/2" x 11")
URL

https://www.findforms.com/pdf_files/cod/20679/221-4.pdf

Download Brief in Support of Motion - District Court of Colorado ( 141.3 kB)


Preview Brief in Support of Motion - District Court of Colorado
Case 1:03-cv-01973-PSF-MJW

Document 221-4

Filed 07/18/2006

Page 1 of 4

EXHIBIT C

EXHIBIT C

Case 1:03-cv-01973-PSF-MJW

Document 221-4

Filed 07/18/2006

Page 2 of 4

~j

cmor'v-moxT
il `.~LS.~1

KILPATRICK
T T ·

IN LLY

Attorneys at Law

1001 West Fourth St. Winston-Salem NC 27101-2400 t336 607 7300 f336 607 7500 www.KilpatrickStockton.com

July 7, 2006 VIA E-MAIL and FIRST CLASS MAIL Michael R. McCurdy, Esq. Tamara A. Hoffbuhr, Esq. Fairfield and Woods, P.C. Wells Fargo Center, Suite 2400 1700 Lincoln Street Denver, Colorado 80203-4524 Re: J. E. H. Knutson v. Walker Group, Inc. Civil Action No. 03-CV-1973 (PSF-MJW)

Richard S. Gottlieb direct dial 336 607 7484 direct fax 336 734 2643 [email protected]

Dear Mike and Tamara: We are in receipt of Mr. Knutson's Supplemental Response to In errogatories and Requests for Production to Supplemental Proceeding Despite Judg Watanabe's clear and unambiguous Order Mr Knutson's responses remain deficient Rogs 8(f) and 10 Judge Watanabe's Order states that: As to Rog 8(f) and 10, the Defendant shall address ach item of personal property listed separately and provide a specific response as to each item of personal property. As to Rog 10, the Defendant shall address each item separately in his r ~sponse. Notwithstanding the Order, Mr. Knutson's supplemental respon e failed to identify items that Mr Knutson claims are owned by Mrs Knutson Judge Watanabe's Order clearly requires such disclosure. It is also not clear from Mr. Knutson's supplemental responses to these interrogatories if he continues to withhold information on the grounds that some items f property may be exempt under C.R.S. § 13-54-102. If that is the case, Judge Watanabe's Order makes clear that a claim of exemption is not a valid basis for failing to disclose the re luested information and it must be produced.

ATLANTA AUGUSTA CHARLOTTE LONDON NEW YORK RALEIGH

STOCKHOLM WASHINGTON WINSTON-SALEM

Case 1:03-cv-01973-PSF-MJW

Document 221-4

Filed 07/18/2006

Page 3 of 4

Michael R. McCurdy, Esq. Tamara A. Hoffbuhr, Esq. July 7, 2006 Page 2

RFP 14 Judge Watanabe `5 Order states: That the Motion is also GRANTED as to RF 14. The Defendant shall respond fully and provide to Pla ntiff federal and state income tax returns, including sche ules and/or worksheets for himself and his spouse for the past ~ ~ years. Notwithstanding the Order, Mr. Knutson only provided a redac ed copy of his 2004 joint federal returns without copies of K-is or W-2s. Judge Watan be's Order unequivocally requires production of un-redacted copies of Mr. and Mrs. Knut~ on's complete 2003, 2004 and 2005 federal and state returns. RFP 18 Judge Watanabe `5 Order states: That the Motion is also GRANTED as to RF 18. The Defendant shall respond fully and provide laintiff all documents evidencing any bank or investment acco ints, held in his own name orjointly since October 1, 2000, inch ding but not limited to commercial, savings, checking, mv ~stment, or brokerage accounts. Such documents should indica e where the accounts are maintained and the amount for each. While it is true that Walker Group has subpoenaed documents f om a number of financial institutions in connection with the Boulder County matter, it is (ecidedly ~ the case that Mr. Knutson is cooperating with Walker Group to obtain all Locuments relating to his individual and joint accounts. To the contrary, Mike has indicate that Mr. Knutson intends to file a motion to quash those subpoenas and has taken steps to obstruct the financial institutions' compliance with Walker Group's valid subpoenas. Moreover, the District of Colorado and the Boulder County actions are different m tters, requiring separate productions. While we may agree to allow Mr. Knutson to a~ duplicative document oid production we have not reached such an agreement with reg ird to the production of documents responsive to this RFP because Mr Knutson's pno production of bank and brokerage documents included redacted documents. Judge Watana e's Order is clear and the requested documents must be produced by Mr. Knutson.

Case 1:03-cv-01973-PSF-MJW

Document 221-4

Filed 07/18/2006

Page 4 of 4

Michael R. McCurdy, Esq. Tamara A. Hoffbuhr, Esq. July 7, 2006 Page 3

We intend to file a motion to show cause by Friday, July 14 f these documents are not produced. Please let me know by Tuesday, July 11 if Mr. Knut on intends to comply with Judge Watanabe's Order or if we should proceed with the motion o show cause. Thank you for your attention and for your consideration.

4/1
Richard S. Gottlieb RSG:lsa Mr. Mark C. Walker cc: Mr. Douglas E. Leckie Joshua Maximon, Esq.
02560-207219 9393681.1