What specific "lies" are you referring to? The "al
Post# of 7802
Posted On: 09/15/2015 2:00:03 PM
Re: Coat Tail Rider #1604
What specific "lies" are you referring to? The "allegation" SFRX is denying when the Defendant said in his Motion for Sanctions SFRX got the Interrogatories in November, but SFRX says they got them June?
Was that a lie? If it was why wasn't the Defendant sanctioned for lying to the Court? But why was the Motion never ruled on?
As I'm sure you recall, Judge Cook GRANTED on Jan 8th the Motion to Compel SFRX to answer those Interrogatories filed in November.
11/21/2014 NOTICE OF SERVICE OF INTERROGATORIES
11/21/2014 REQUEST TO PRODUCE
11/21/2014 INTERROGATORIES
01/08/2015 ORDER ON
DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO COMPEL ANSWERS TO INTERRGOTORIES AND RESPONSES TO REQUESTS TO PRODUCE..................GRANTED........01/06/15 MJC
When they failed to comply, he filed a Motion for Sanctions and requested a hearing.
02/04/2015 MOTION FOR SANCTIONS
Party: Volentine, Darrell
02/16/2015 REQUEST FOR HEARING
FROM DARRELL VOLENTINE
This was during the transition from Judge Cook to Judge Foster and he was told they were booked up so Judge Foster would be presiding by the time they had a hearing.
So he filed a SECOND Motion for Sanctions
05/27/2015 MOTION FOR SANCTIONS
*SECOND*
Party: Volentine, Darrell
Then we see vintage Huffman at work, and he lied to the Court and said they never got the Interrogatories until June. But the Defendant has an email from Huffman in November saying because the Defendant filed for a Continuance, he wouldn't be answering at that time.
Notice of Compliance my rear end.......
06/22/2015 NOTICE OF COMPLIANCE
WITH DEFTS DISCOVERY REQUESTS
If SFRX/Huffman can lie to the Judge and the Judge not realize it, perhaps he needs to step aside.
He never even ruled on the Motion. At least Judge Cook made rulings, most of which SFRX did not like in the least.
But which specific "lies", as you call them are you referring to?
Thanks
Was that a lie? If it was why wasn't the Defendant sanctioned for lying to the Court? But why was the Motion never ruled on?
As I'm sure you recall, Judge Cook GRANTED on Jan 8th the Motion to Compel SFRX to answer those Interrogatories filed in November.
11/21/2014 NOTICE OF SERVICE OF INTERROGATORIES
11/21/2014 REQUEST TO PRODUCE
11/21/2014 INTERROGATORIES
01/08/2015 ORDER ON
DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO COMPEL ANSWERS TO INTERRGOTORIES AND RESPONSES TO REQUESTS TO PRODUCE..................GRANTED........01/06/15 MJC
When they failed to comply, he filed a Motion for Sanctions and requested a hearing.
02/04/2015 MOTION FOR SANCTIONS
Party: Volentine, Darrell
02/16/2015 REQUEST FOR HEARING
FROM DARRELL VOLENTINE
This was during the transition from Judge Cook to Judge Foster and he was told they were booked up so Judge Foster would be presiding by the time they had a hearing.
So he filed a SECOND Motion for Sanctions
05/27/2015 MOTION FOR SANCTIONS
*SECOND*
Party: Volentine, Darrell
Then we see vintage Huffman at work, and he lied to the Court and said they never got the Interrogatories until June. But the Defendant has an email from Huffman in November saying because the Defendant filed for a Continuance, he wouldn't be answering at that time.
Notice of Compliance my rear end.......
06/22/2015 NOTICE OF COMPLIANCE
WITH DEFTS DISCOVERY REQUESTS
If SFRX/Huffman can lie to the Judge and the Judge not realize it, perhaps he needs to step aside.
He never even ruled on the Motion. At least Judge Cook made rulings, most of which SFRX did not like in the least.
But which specific "lies", as you call them are you referring to?
Thanks
(0)
(0)