Jack Gunn ( 21110))
2 Krohn & Moss, LT
111 W. Monroe, Suite 711
3 Phoenix, Arizona 85003
4 (602) 275-5588
s
7
S 1
9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
10 FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA
11 LANE SENNETT, ) Case No. CV 04-0161 PHX ROS
I2 ) SPECLAL AMENDED AFFIDAVIT OF (
13 Plaintiff, ) JACK GUNN PROFFERED FOR THE ¤
) EXCLUSIVE PURPOSE OF
14 vs. ) COMPLYING WITH THE COURT’S
15 ) ORDER OF JULY 8, 2005
FLEETWOOD MOTOR HOMES OF) 1
16 CALIFORNIA INC AND)
WORKHORSE CUSTOM CHASSIS,) ;
17 5
LLC )
18 )
19 Defendant.
20
21 NOW COMES the Affiant, being first duly sworn and under oath, and hereby
22 attests to the following:
23 l. I am over eighteen years of age and competent to testify in a court of _
24 ·
25 law if called to do so.
26 2. I am one ofthe attorneys for the Plaintiff and I make this Affidavit
27 pursuant to the Court’s Order. The Court Ordered my Affidavit based
28
on representations made by Fleetwood and its counsel regarding a pre-
1
Case 2:04—cv—00161—FiOS Document 129 Filed 08/26/2005 Paget of4 6
I deposition conversation prompted by Fleetwood’s defiance of a
j subpoena/request for production to the deponent.
4 3. My experience litigating cases such as these reveals it is industry
5 standard for Motor Home manufactures to have lemon law training and
6 awareness. I base this particular assumption on the facts described
7
S below.
9 4. In litigating cases such as these, I have seen lemon law training from
I0 Damon (attached hereto as Exhibit A), Coachmen (attached hereto as
I; Exhibit B), Monaco (attached hereto as Exhibit C), Winnebago
13 (attached hereto as Exhibit D), and Workhorse (this is provided under
M protective order in this case and can be provided to the Court upon
1; request). I
17 5 . This training contains statements that can be used against E
18 manufacturers and as such the training has often been heavily protected
LE by the manufacturers from discovery.
21 6. F1eetwood’s in its responses to discovery in this case indicate that it
22 performs lemon law training, just not in written form, which based on
ii 1l4 above, would make them different from the rest ofthe industry.
25 7. In fact, after the conference with the Court, I personally deposed Frank
26 Jacks (in relation to Kemper v Coachmen, ND. lll. No. 03C 9392), who
27 is an ex-employee of`Fleetwood.. I
28
S. Frank Jacks testified that Fleetwood had written lemon law training 3
during his employment there. Specifically, Jacks’ testified "lemon law ‘
-
ase 2:04—cv—00161—FlOS Document 129 Filed 08/26/2005 Page 2 of 4
1 training" was industry standard, was generally found in policy and
j procedures manuals, and that .Iacl
s
6 9.. Furthermore, I am a member of a listserv of consumer protection
v
8 attorneys and recently in another deposition Frank lacks testified that
9 RVIA (Recreational Vehicle Industries Association), which upon
10 information and belief, Fleetwood is a member of, has distributed to the
2; recreational vehicle manufactures a four (4) volume set of lemon law
is guidance manuals. See email attached hereto as Exhibit "F.â€
12 10. Based upon all ofthe above I believe my prior assertion that Fleetwood
; has written lemon law training is likely. My assumption it came from
17 Fleetwood’s TIME program was based on the correspondence attached I
IS hereto as Exhibit "G." It seems as though this assumption is wrong as
Lg counsel for Fleetwood has personally averred to this Court Fleetwood’s
21 TIME program does not contain lemon law training, and I have no
22 basis to doubt that averment. Had counsel for Fleetwood not provided
ii me the correspondence attached hereto as Exhibit “G" I would not have
25 assumed F leetwood’s TIME program contained lemon law training.
26 11.. I have not, and do not, intend to testify in this case as to these matters p
22 or any other matters despite Fleetwood’s representations to the
za e
contrary. Rather, I intend to examine any witness offered by Fleetwood
on this subject and inquire accordingly, without reference to any
3
ase 2:04—cv—00161—FlOS Document 129 Filed 08/26/2005 Page 3 of 4
i particular credentials or experience I may have, like any other lawyer
j doing his j ob would.
4 12. I incorporate by reference the exhibits from my original Affidavit.
5 FURTHER AFFIANT SAYEIH NAUGHT.
6
.% Gunn
9
10 XC
H Sworn and subscribed to thisjggékday o&l¤`ii'7» , , 2005.
12 f V2 Q
13 - ·—
rf { r iii ‘
E; \` mic ';=.; i·.: >
1'7
18
19
20
22
23
24
25 U
26
27
4
ase 2:04-cv-00161-ROS Document 129 Filed 08/26/2005 Page 4 of 4
Case 2:04-cv-00161-ROS
Document 129
Filed 08/26/2005
Page 1 of 4
Case 2:04-cv-00161-ROS
Document 129
Filed 08/26/2005
Page 2 of 4
Case 2:04-cv-00161-ROS
Document 129
Filed 08/26/2005
Page 3 of 4
Case 2:04-cv-00161-ROS
Document 129
Filed 08/26/2005
Page 4 of 4
United States Free Forms
Canada Free Forms
United Kingdom Free Forms
Australia Free Forms