Free Uncategorized - District Court of Arizona - Arizona

Quarles & Brady Streich Lang LLP

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Firm State Bar No. 00443100 Renaissance One Two North Central Avenue Phoenix, AZ 85004-2391
TELEPHONE 602.229.5200

Lonnie J. Williams, Jr. (#005966) Dawn C. Valdivia (#020715) Attorneys for Plaintiff Marcela Johnson IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA Marcela Johnson, Plaintiff, v. Charles Schwab Corporation, Defendant. NO. CV 04-0790 PHX-JWS DECLARATION OF DAWN C. VALDIVIA IN SUPPORT OF PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO COMPEL PLAINTIFF'S ATTENDANCE AT DEPOSITION AND REQUEST FOR SANCTIONS

I, Dawn C. Valdivia, declare under penalty of perjury that the following facts are true to the best of my knowledge: 1. I am an associate at Quarles & Brady Streich Lang and counsel for the

Plaintiff Marcela Johnson in this matter. 2. On December 7, 2003, I participated in a conference call with Schwab's

counsel, Michelle Ganz and Christopher Mason. During that call, the parties agreed that Plaintiff could have priority in the deposition scheduling and that we could take the Rule 30(b)(6) deposition before Schwab took Plaintiff's deposition. We also agreed that we would stipulate to ask the Court to extend certain case management deadlines, such as the initial lay witness list and expert disclosures. Mr. Mason indicated that his concern that by agreeing to postpone Ms. Johnson's deposition, Schwab could discover new witnesses during Ms. Johnson's deposition after the lay witness deadline had passed. 3. Ms. Ganz subsequently followed-up with me regarding the extension of the

case management deadlines and provided me with a draft motion. I reminded her that I

Case 2:04-cv-00790-EHC

Document 91

Filed 01/09/2006

Page 1 of 2

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22

had not agree to extend all of the deadlines, but that we would likely agree to extend the deadlines for lay and expert witnesses. I told her that I needed to confer with my cocounsel, Lonnie J. Williams, Jr. 4. After conferring with Mr. Williams, I subsequently proposed to Ms. Ganz

that the parties agree to a stipulation that would allow an amendment to the lay witness list to include any new witnesses discovered during Ms. Johnson's deposition.1 5. Schwab disagreed with my proposal and filed a Motion to Extend the Case

Management Deadlines and a Motion to Compel Ms. Johnson's deposition. DATED this 9th day of January, 2006. s/Dawn C. Valdivia Dawn C. Valdivia Attorneys for Plaintiff Marcela Johnson I hereby certify that on the 9th day of January, 2006, I electronically transmitted the attached document to the Clerk's Office using the CM/ECF Systems for filing and transmittal of a Notice of Electronic Filing to the following CM/ECF registrant: Joseph T. Clees Christopher Mason Michelle H. Ganz Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart, P.C. 2415 E. Camelback Rd., Suite 800 Phoenix, AZ 85016 s/Lisa Young

QBPHX\115637.00002\1959501.2

23 24 25 At that time, neither Ms. Ganz nor Mr. Mason indicated that they were concerned that Schwab may discover new witnesses in Ms. Johnson's supplemental discovery responses 27 after the Court ruled on Schwab's Motion to Compel. However, when Schwab raised the issue in their Motion to Extend the Discovery Deadlines, Plaintiff did not object to 28 broadening the scope of the stipulation. 26
Case 2:04-cv-00790-EHC Document 91
-2Filed 01/09/2006
1

Page 2 of 2