Preview
Filed: 9/8/2023 9:55 AM
JOHN D. KINARD - District Clerk
EXHIBIT E INTERROGATORIES Galveston County, Texas
Envelope No. 79337810
By: Rolande Kain
9/8/2023 10:22 AM
CAUSE NO. 22-CV-0729
RICHARD VILLNAVE AND DARIUS § IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF
STEWART §
Plaintiffs, § GALVESTON COUNTY, TEXAS
§
VS. §
§ 10TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT
ENCORE DREDGING PARTNERS, LLC §
Defendant §
INLAND DREDGING COMPANY’S ANSWERS
TO PLAINTIFFS’ INTERROGATORIES
NOW COMES, through undersigned counsel, Defendant, Inland Dredging Company
(“Defendant” or “Inland”), who submits these answers to the Interrogatories propounded by
Plaintiffs, Richard Villnave and Darius Stewart (“Plaintiffs”), as follows:
GENERAL OBJECTIONS
Defendant generally objects to the Interrogatories as follows:
a) Defendant generally objects to the Interrogatories as they seek the knowledge of a
business over the period of its existence. An entity in and of itself, possesses no
knowledge except through its various agents or employees, each of whom may possess
different levels of knowledge or understanding as to any given matter at any given time.
b) The following are the responses of Defendant and are prepared by counsel based upon
reasonable investigation conducted and information assembled to date. Discovery and
investigation in this case are continuing. The right to supplement and amend these
responses with additional information, or if errors are discovered, is specifically reserved.
These responses are also given without prejudice to Defendant’s right to rely at trial on
subsequently discovered information or information inadvertently omitted in these
responses as a result of mistake, error or oversight.
c) Defendant objects to the Interrogatories to the extent that it seeks disclosure of
information that may have come into the possession of counsel during the course of
discovery. Defendant further objects to these Interrogatories to the extent that it seeks
information or documents equally accessible to Plaintiffs.
d) This response is made solely for the purposes of the instant action. It is subject to all
objections as to competence, relevance, materiality, propriety and admissibility, and any
and all objections and grounds that would require the excluding of any statements
EXHIBIT
E
contained therein, as if any statements contained therein were made by a witness present
and testifying in court, all of which objections and grounds are expressly reserved to be
interposed in motions at the time of the trial.
e) Defendant generally objects to the Interrogatories to the extent that it seeks information
that is protected from discovery by the attorney-client privilege, the attorney work
product doctrine or the anticipation of litigation privilege. Such information will not be
provided. Defendant generally objects to the extent that the discovery seeks information
which is irrelevant and immaterial to the subject matter of this lawsuit and is not
reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Furthermore, by
providing responses to the Interrogatories, Defendant does not waive any objections as to
the admissibility at trial of any of the information or documents referenced or provided.
f) Defendant generally objects to the extent that the discovery requests seek the disclosure
of the mental impressions, conclusions, memoranda, notes or summaries, legal research
or legal theories of Defendant’s attorneys, and to the extent that the discovery requires
disclosure of the mental impressions, conclusions or opinions of Defendant’s
representatives insofar as they relate to the value or merit of a claim or defense respecting
strategy or tactics.
g) Defendant objects to this discovery insofar as it seeks confidential business information
without any showing of need that would justify requiring it to make such disclosure.
h) These general objections are applicable to every discovery request and all response
thereto.
Expressly subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, Defendant answers
these Interrogatories as follows:
PLAINTIFFS’ FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES TO DEFENDANT
INTERROGATORY NO. 1:
Identify the person(s) from whom the information was obtained in answering these
interrogatories and the attached Requests for Production and specify the information that each
supplied.
ANSWER:
Information responsive to these Interrogatories is obtained from Mark Daigle and Jenifer
Lake of Encore Dredging Partners, LLC.
2
INTERROGATORY NO. 2:
If you contend that Plaintiffs’ injuries were caused by his own contributory negligence, fault,
lack of care, inattention to duties, or failure to take ordinary precautions commensurate with his
own safety, please state your contention and generally the facts upon which each contention is
based.
ANSWER:
Please refer to both Motions for Summary Judgment filed by Encore.
INTERROGATORY NO. 3:
State your version of the Occurrences, including the date, time, location, and weather conditions,
and contract controlling the dredge pipe at issue when the incidents occurred.
ANSWER:
Please refer to the Motions for Summary Judgment prepared by Encore, as well as the
documents produced in Inland Dredging Company’s Response to Request for Production.
INTERROGATORY NO. 4:
Identify the relationship between you and Encore Dredging Partners as it relates to the M/V
Ranger and its dredge pipe.
ANSWER:
Encore Dredging Partners is a holding and management company. Encore owns Inland
Dredging Partners. Inland Dredging Company is the operational entity and the entity which
operated the dredge RANGER at the time of the incident.
INTERROGATORY NO. 5:
Identify the pipe management plan applicable to the M/V Ranger and its dredge pipe.
ANSWER:
Please refer to documents produced in Response to Request for Production.
INTERROGATORY NO. 6:
State both the exact locations of the M/V Ranger and the orientation of its dredge pipe the date of
the Occurrence.
3
ANSWER:
Please refer to documents produced in Response to Request for Production.
INTERROGATORY NO. 7:
When did you anticipate litigation arising from the Occurrences? In other words, on what date
did you believe it was possible that Plaintiffs would sue you as a result of the Occurrences?
ANSWER:
Inland was aware of the possibility for litigation when Mr. Villnave referenced it during
his emails, which speak for themselves as to the potential for legal action.
INTERROGATORY NO. 8:
Identify every witness whom you may call to testify at the trial of this case.
ANSWER:
Any witness identified in any document produced in Response to Request for Production
or in any prior disclosures may be called as a witness at trial.
INTERROGATORY NO. 9:
Identify all governmental authorities that you reported the Occurrence to.
ANSWER:
None.
INTERROGATORY NO. 10:
Identify all Notices to Mariner, by date and name each and every, issued related to M/V Ranger
and the dredge pipe.
ANSWER:
Please refer to Response for Request for Production of Documents.
INTERROGATORY NO. 11:
Identify all applicable planning, designing, constructing, operating, and managing
environmentally acceptable open-water and confined dredged material placement areas of the
dredge pipe alleged in this lawsuit and/or applicable to the M/V Ranger.
4
ANSWER:
Please refer to Response for Request for Production of Documents.
INTERROGATORY NO. 12:
Identify all lights, flashing, red or yellow by placement area on the dredge pipe alleged in this
lawsuit and/or applicable to the M/V Ranger on January 14, 2022.
ANSWER:
Please refer to Response for Request for Production of Documents.
INTERROGATORY NO. 13:
Identify all complaints received related to the M/V Ranger and her dredge pipe, whether written
or oral, by date and time from June 1, 2021 to January 31, 2022.
ANSWER:
Other than those expressed by plaintiffs after their alleged incident occurred, none
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE Respectfully submitted,
I hereby certify that a copy of STAINES, EPPLING & KENNEY
the above and foregoing pleading has
been served on all counsel of record via
the service method indicated below:
[ ] U.S. Mail /s/ Corey P. Parenton___________________
[ ] Facsimile COREY P. PARENTON (#24095858)
[ ] Hand Delivery 3500 North Causeway Boulevard, Suite 820
[x ] ECF Filing Metairie, Louisiana 70002
Telephone: (504) 838-0019
This 21st day of June, 2023. Facsimile: (504) 838-0043
Counsel for Inland Dredging Company
/s/ Corey P. Parenton_______
5
Automated Certificate of eService
This automated certificate of service was created by the efiling system.
The filer served this document via email generated by the efiling system
on the date and to the persons listed below. The rules governing
certificates of service have not changed. Filers must still provide a
certificate of service that complies with all applicable rules.
Jennifer Buzbee on behalf of Anthony Buzbee
Bar No. 24001820
efiling@txattorneys.com
Envelope ID: 79337810
Filing Code Description: Motion for Sanctions
Filing Description: Motion for Sanctions
Status as of 9/8/2023 10:23 AM CST
Case Contacts
Name BarNumber Email TimestampSubmitted Status
Camilla Muhlherr camilla.muhlherr@hfw.com 9/8/2023 9:55:57 AM SENT
Gloria Compton gloria.compton@hfw.com 9/8/2023 9:55:57 AM SENT
Thomas Nork Tom.Nork@hfw.com 9/8/2023 9:55:57 AM SENT
Alejandro Mendez-Roman alex.mendez@hfw.com 9/8/2023 9:55:57 AM SENT
Associated Case Party: Richard Villnave
Name BarNumber Email TimestampSubmitted Status
Amanda Dees adees@txattorneys.com 9/8/2023 9:55:57 AM SENT
Laura Tucker laura@seklaw.com 9/8/2023 9:55:57 AM SENT
Daedra Minigan dminigan@txattorneys.com 9/8/2023 9:55:57 AM SENT
Caroline Adams cadams@txattorneys.com 9/8/2023 9:55:57 AM SENT
Jesse Rubio jrubio@txattorneys.com 9/8/2023 9:55:57 AM SENT
Anthony Buzbee tbuzbee@txattorneys.com 9/8/2023 9:55:57 AM SENT
Anthony Dolcefino adolcefino@txattorneys.com 9/8/2023 9:55:57 AM SENT
Associated Case Party: Inland Dredging Company, LLC
Name BarNumber Email TimestampSubmitted Status
Corey Parenton 24095858 corey@seklaw.com 9/8/2023 9:55:57 AM SENT
Jason Kenney jason@seklaw.com 9/8/2023 9:55:57 AM SENT
Corey PParenton corey@seklaw.com 9/8/2023 9:55:57 AM SENT
Associated Case Party: Encore Dredging Partners, LLC
Automated Certificate of eService
This automated certificate of service was created by the efiling system.
The filer served this document via email generated by the efiling system
on the date and to the persons listed below. The rules governing
certificates of service have not changed. Filers must still provide a
certificate of service that complies with all applicable rules.
Jennifer Buzbee on behalf of Anthony Buzbee
Bar No. 24001820
efiling@txattorneys.com
Envelope ID: 79337810
Filing Code Description: Motion for Sanctions
Filing Description: Motion for Sanctions
Status as of 9/8/2023 10:23 AM CST
Associated Case Party: Encore Dredging Partners, LLC
Name BarNumber Email TimestampSubmitted Status
Corey PParenton corey@seklaw.com 9/8/2023 9:55:57 AM SENT
Preview
Filed: 9/8/2023 9:55 AM JOHN D. KINARD - District Clerk EXHIBIT E INTERROGATORIES Galveston County, Texas Envelope No. 79337810 By: Rolande Kain 9/8/2023 10:22 AM CAUSE NO. 22-CV-0729 RICHARD VILLNAVE AND DARIUS § IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF STEWART § Plaintiffs, § GALVESTON COUNTY, TEXAS § VS. § § 10TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT ENCORE DREDGING PARTNERS, LLC § Defendant § INLAND DREDGING COMPANY’S ANSWERS TO PLAINTIFFS’ INTERROGATORIES NOW COMES, through undersigned counsel, Defendant, Inland Dredging Company (“Defendant” or “Inland”), who submits these answers to the Interrogatories propounded by Plaintiffs, Richard Villnave and Darius Stewart (“Plaintiffs”), as follows: GENERAL OBJECTIONS Defendant generally objects to the Interrogatories as follows: a) Defendant generally objects to the Interrogatories as they seek the knowledge of a business over the period of its existence. An entity in and of itself, possesses no knowledge except through its various agents or employees, each of whom may possess different levels of knowledge or understanding as to any given matter at any given time. b) The following are the responses of Defendant and are prepared by counsel based upon reasonable investigation conducted and information assembled to date. Discovery and investigation in this case are continuing. The right to supplement and amend these responses with additional information, or if errors are discovered, is specifically reserved. These responses are also given without prejudice to Defendant’s right to rely at trial on subsequently discovered information or information inadvertently omitted in these responses as a result of mistake, error or oversight. c) Defendant objects to the Interrogatories to the extent that it seeks disclosure of information that may have come into the possession of counsel during the course of discovery. Defendant further objects to these Interrogatories to the extent that it seeks information or documents equally accessible to Plaintiffs. d) This response is made solely for the purposes of the instant action. It is subject to all objections as to competence, relevance, materiality, propriety and admissibility, and any and all objections and grounds that would require the excluding of any statements EXHIBIT E contained therein, as if any statements contained therein were made by a witness present and testifying in court, all of which objections and grounds are expressly reserved to be interposed in motions at the time of the trial. e) Defendant generally objects to the Interrogatories to the extent that it seeks information that is protected from discovery by the attorney-client privilege, the attorney work product doctrine or the anticipation of litigation privilege. Such information will not be provided. Defendant generally objects to the extent that the discovery seeks information which is irrelevant and immaterial to the subject matter of this lawsuit and is not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Furthermore, by providing responses to the Interrogatories, Defendant does not waive any objections as to the admissibility at trial of any of the information or documents referenced or provided. f) Defendant generally objects to the extent that the discovery requests seek the disclosure of the mental impressions, conclusions, memoranda, notes or summaries, legal research or legal theories of Defendant’s attorneys, and to the extent that the discovery requires disclosure of the mental impressions, conclusions or opinions of Defendant’s representatives insofar as they relate to the value or merit of a claim or defense respecting strategy or tactics. g) Defendant objects to this discovery insofar as it seeks confidential business information without any showing of need that would justify requiring it to make such disclosure. h) These general objections are applicable to every discovery request and all response thereto. Expressly subject to and without waiving the foregoing objections, Defendant answers these Interrogatories as follows: PLAINTIFFS’ FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES TO DEFENDANT INTERROGATORY NO. 1: Identify the person(s) from whom the information was obtained in answering these interrogatories and the attached Requests for Production and specify the information that each supplied. ANSWER: Information responsive to these Interrogatories is obtained from Mark Daigle and Jenifer Lake of Encore Dredging Partners, LLC. 2 INTERROGATORY NO. 2: If you contend that Plaintiffs’ injuries were caused by his own contributory negligence, fault, lack of care, inattention to duties, or failure to take ordinary precautions commensurate with his own safety, please state your contention and generally the facts upon which each contention is based. ANSWER: Please refer to both Motions for Summary Judgment filed by Encore. INTERROGATORY NO. 3: State your version of the Occurrences, including the date, time, location, and weather conditions, and contract controlling the dredge pipe at issue when the incidents occurred. ANSWER: Please refer to the Motions for Summary Judgment prepared by Encore, as well as the documents produced in Inland Dredging Company’s Response to Request for Production. INTERROGATORY NO. 4: Identify the relationship between you and Encore Dredging Partners as it relates to the M/V Ranger and its dredge pipe. ANSWER: Encore Dredging Partners is a holding and management company. Encore owns Inland Dredging Partners. Inland Dredging Company is the operational entity and the entity which operated the dredge RANGER at the time of the incident. INTERROGATORY NO. 5: Identify the pipe management plan applicable to the M/V Ranger and its dredge pipe. ANSWER: Please refer to documents produced in Response to Request for Production. INTERROGATORY NO. 6: State both the exact locations of the M/V Ranger and the orientation of its dredge pipe the date of the Occurrence. 3 ANSWER: Please refer to documents produced in Response to Request for Production. INTERROGATORY NO. 7: When did you anticipate litigation arising from the Occurrences? In other words, on what date did you believe it was possible that Plaintiffs would sue you as a result of the Occurrences? ANSWER: Inland was aware of the possibility for litigation when Mr. Villnave referenced it during his emails, which speak for themselves as to the potential for legal action. INTERROGATORY NO. 8: Identify every witness whom you may call to testify at the trial of this case. ANSWER: Any witness identified in any document produced in Response to Request for Production or in any prior disclosures may be called as a witness at trial. INTERROGATORY NO. 9: Identify all governmental authorities that you reported the Occurrence to. ANSWER: None. INTERROGATORY NO. 10: Identify all Notices to Mariner, by date and name each and every, issued related to M/V Ranger and the dredge pipe. ANSWER: Please refer to Response for Request for Production of Documents. INTERROGATORY NO. 11: Identify all applicable planning, designing, constructing, operating, and managing environmentally acceptable open-water and confined dredged material placement areas of the dredge pipe alleged in this lawsuit and/or applicable to the M/V Ranger. 4 ANSWER: Please refer to Response for Request for Production of Documents. INTERROGATORY NO. 12: Identify all lights, flashing, red or yellow by placement area on the dredge pipe alleged in this lawsuit and/or applicable to the M/V Ranger on January 14, 2022. ANSWER: Please refer to Response for Request for Production of Documents. INTERROGATORY NO. 13: Identify all complaints received related to the M/V Ranger and her dredge pipe, whether written or oral, by date and time from June 1, 2021 to January 31, 2022. ANSWER: Other than those expressed by plaintiffs after their alleged incident occurred, none CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE Respectfully submitted, I hereby certify that a copy of STAINES, EPPLING & KENNEY the above and foregoing pleading has been served on all counsel of record via the service method indicated below: [ ] U.S. Mail /s/ Corey P. Parenton___________________ [ ] Facsimile COREY P. PARENTON (#24095858) [ ] Hand Delivery 3500 North Causeway Boulevard, Suite 820 [x ] ECF Filing Metairie, Louisiana 70002 Telephone: (504) 838-0019 This 21st day of June, 2023. Facsimile: (504) 838-0043 Counsel for Inland Dredging Company /s/ Corey P. Parenton_______ 5 Automated Certificate of eService This automated certificate of service was created by the efiling system. The filer served this document via email generated by the efiling system on the date and to the persons listed below. The rules governing certificates of service have not changed. Filers must still provide a certificate of service that complies with all applicable rules. Jennifer Buzbee on behalf of Anthony Buzbee Bar No. 24001820 efiling@txattorneys.com Envelope ID: 79337810 Filing Code Description: Motion for Sanctions Filing Description: Motion for Sanctions Status as of 9/8/2023 10:23 AM CST Case Contacts Name BarNumber Email TimestampSubmitted Status Camilla Muhlherr camilla.muhlherr@hfw.com 9/8/2023 9:55:57 AM SENT Gloria Compton gloria.compton@hfw.com 9/8/2023 9:55:57 AM SENT Thomas Nork Tom.Nork@hfw.com 9/8/2023 9:55:57 AM SENT Alejandro Mendez-Roman alex.mendez@hfw.com 9/8/2023 9:55:57 AM SENT Associated Case Party: Richard Villnave Name BarNumber Email TimestampSubmitted Status Amanda Dees adees@txattorneys.com 9/8/2023 9:55:57 AM SENT Laura Tucker laura@seklaw.com 9/8/2023 9:55:57 AM SENT Daedra Minigan dminigan@txattorneys.com 9/8/2023 9:55:57 AM SENT Caroline Adams cadams@txattorneys.com 9/8/2023 9:55:57 AM SENT Jesse Rubio jrubio@txattorneys.com 9/8/2023 9:55:57 AM SENT Anthony Buzbee tbuzbee@txattorneys.com 9/8/2023 9:55:57 AM SENT Anthony Dolcefino adolcefino@txattorneys.com 9/8/2023 9:55:57 AM SENT Associated Case Party: Inland Dredging Company, LLC Name BarNumber Email TimestampSubmitted Status Corey Parenton 24095858 corey@seklaw.com 9/8/2023 9:55:57 AM SENT Jason Kenney jason@seklaw.com 9/8/2023 9:55:57 AM SENT Corey PParenton corey@seklaw.com 9/8/2023 9:55:57 AM SENT Associated Case Party: Encore Dredging Partners, LLC Automated Certificate of eService This automated certificate of service was created by the efiling system. The filer served this document via email generated by the efiling system on the date and to the persons listed below. The rules governing certificates of service have not changed. Filers must still provide a certificate of service that complies with all applicable rules. Jennifer Buzbee on behalf of Anthony Buzbee Bar No. 24001820 efiling@txattorneys.com Envelope ID: 79337810 Filing Code Description: Motion for Sanctions Filing Description: Motion for Sanctions Status as of 9/8/2023 10:23 AM CST Associated Case Party: Encore Dredging Partners, LLC Name BarNumber Email TimestampSubmitted Status Corey PParenton corey@seklaw.com 9/8/2023 9:55:57 AM SENT