Preview
Electronically Filed 04/22/2013 06:42:34 PM ET
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE ELEVENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
IN AND FOR MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA
CIVIL ACTION
WELLS FARGO BANK, NA,
Plaintiff,
CASE NO.: 13-2010-CA-030707
vs. DIVISION: 32
CARLOS G. ORCHARD , et al,
Defendant(s).
PLAINTIFF’S RESPONSE TO
DEFENDANT CARLOS G. ORCHARD’S REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION, RE: MERS TRACKING
Plaintiff WELLS FARGO BANK, NA, by its undersigned counsel, pursuant to Rule 1.350, Florida Rules of
Civil Procedure, responds to the request for production to Plaintiff served by the defendants onDecember 13, 2012,
paragraph by paragraph, as follows:
COMMON OBJECTIONS TO EACH REQUEST
1. Plaintiff objects to Defendant’s Requests to the extent that Defendant seeks confidential,
proprietary, or trade secret information.
2. Plaintiff objects to Defendant’s Requests to the extent the Defendant’s Requests seek documents
protected by the attorney-client privilege, the attorney work product doctrine, the self-critical analysis privilege, the
bank examination privilege, the investigatory privilege, the regulatory privilege, the deliberative process privilege,
the accountant-client privilege, or any other applicable privilege or protection.
3. Plaintiff objects to Defendant’s Requests to the extent Defendant's Requests seek information or
documents not relevant, not reasonably related to the matters at issue in the case, and not reasonably calculated to
lead to the discovery of admissible evidence.
4, Plaintiff objects to Defendant’s Requests to the extent Defendant's Requests seek documents
which are in the public domain or otherwise are readily accessible to Defendant, or are obtainable from some source
that is more convenient, less burdensome or less expensive.
Serial: 23312687
FILE_NUMBER: F10034496 DOC_ID: M0250555. Plaintiff objects to Defendant’s Requests to the extent Defendant’s Requests seek information
about which Plaintiff has no personal knowledge or documents which are not in Defendants possession, custody,
control.
6. Plaintiff objects to Defendant’s Requests to the extent Defendant’s Requests seek information
relating to a time period that is unduly burdensome and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of
admissible evidence.
7. Plaintiff objects to Defendant’s Requests to the extent Defendant's Requests seek information that
is not already in existence or requires Plaintiff to create a document not already in existence.
8. Plaintiff objects to Defendant’s Request without a mutually acceptable confidentiality agreement
and protective order.
9. Plaintiff objects to Defendant’s Requests to the extent Defendant’s Requests seek information from
Plaintiff's counsel and not Plaintiff.
10. Plaintiff objects to Defendant’s Definitions and/or Instructions to the extent they impose a greater
burden, create a broader scope of discovery, or are otherwise inconsistent with Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.280 and 1.350.
I. Plaintiff specifically reserves the right to supplement or amend these Responses and Objections.
Neither the fact that an objection is interposed to a particular Request nor the fact that no objection is interposed
necessarily means that responsive documents exist.
12. Plaintiff, through its Responses and Objections to Defendant's Requests, does not waive its’ right
to challenge the relevance, materiality, or admissibility of the documents or object to the use of the document at trial
or any other proceeding in this case.SPECIFIC RESPONSES AND OBJECTIONS
l.a-d. Plaintiff objects to the production of any documents which contain any information which is
privileged or confidential under Florida law. In addition, Plaintiff objects to the production of any documents which
are not relevant and designed or calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Plaintiff further objects
to the definitions and instructions as confusing, burdensome and not promulgated in accordance with the Florida
Rules of Civil Procedure. Without waiving this objection, see attached MERS printout.
I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing has been furnished by regular
U.S. Mail, to all parties on the attached service list Dated this [oF ny of, ( 2013.
Ronald R Wolfe & Associates, P.L.
P.O. Box 25018
Tampa, Florida 33622-5018
(813) 251-4766
(813) 251-1541 Fax
Address for Electronic Service: eservice@wolfelawfl.com
By3
D Eleane Sosa-Bruzon
Florida Bar No. 0014768
a Alberto Orizondo
Florida Bar No. 0070176
CHARLINE CALHOUN
FLORIDA BAR
NO. 16144Service List
CARLOS G. ORCHARD
c/o STEVEN J. BROTMAN, Esq.
ICE LEGAL PA
SERVICE@ICELEGAL.COM
CHERI A. PRINCE A/K/A CHERI PRINCE
980 N Royal Poinciana Boulevard
Miami Springs, FL 33166
Preview
Electronically Filed 04/22/2013 06:42:34 PM ET IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE ELEVENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA CIVIL ACTION WELLS FARGO BANK, NA, Plaintiff, CASE NO.: 13-2010-CA-030707 vs. DIVISION: 32 CARLOS G. ORCHARD , et al, Defendant(s). PLAINTIFF’S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT CARLOS G. ORCHARD’S REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION, RE: MERS TRACKING Plaintiff WELLS FARGO BANK, NA, by its undersigned counsel, pursuant to Rule 1.350, Florida Rules of Civil Procedure, responds to the request for production to Plaintiff served by the defendants onDecember 13, 2012, paragraph by paragraph, as follows: COMMON OBJECTIONS TO EACH REQUEST 1. Plaintiff objects to Defendant’s Requests to the extent that Defendant seeks confidential, proprietary, or trade secret information. 2. Plaintiff objects to Defendant’s Requests to the extent the Defendant’s Requests seek documents protected by the attorney-client privilege, the attorney work product doctrine, the self-critical analysis privilege, the bank examination privilege, the investigatory privilege, the regulatory privilege, the deliberative process privilege, the accountant-client privilege, or any other applicable privilege or protection. 3. Plaintiff objects to Defendant’s Requests to the extent Defendant's Requests seek information or documents not relevant, not reasonably related to the matters at issue in the case, and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. 4, Plaintiff objects to Defendant’s Requests to the extent Defendant's Requests seek documents which are in the public domain or otherwise are readily accessible to Defendant, or are obtainable from some source that is more convenient, less burdensome or less expensive. Serial: 23312687 FILE_NUMBER: F10034496 DOC_ID: M0250555. Plaintiff objects to Defendant’s Requests to the extent Defendant’s Requests seek information about which Plaintiff has no personal knowledge or documents which are not in Defendants possession, custody, control. 6. Plaintiff objects to Defendant’s Requests to the extent Defendant’s Requests seek information relating to a time period that is unduly burdensome and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. 7. Plaintiff objects to Defendant’s Requests to the extent Defendant's Requests seek information that is not already in existence or requires Plaintiff to create a document not already in existence. 8. Plaintiff objects to Defendant’s Request without a mutually acceptable confidentiality agreement and protective order. 9. Plaintiff objects to Defendant’s Requests to the extent Defendant’s Requests seek information from Plaintiff's counsel and not Plaintiff. 10. Plaintiff objects to Defendant’s Definitions and/or Instructions to the extent they impose a greater burden, create a broader scope of discovery, or are otherwise inconsistent with Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.280 and 1.350. I. Plaintiff specifically reserves the right to supplement or amend these Responses and Objections. Neither the fact that an objection is interposed to a particular Request nor the fact that no objection is interposed necessarily means that responsive documents exist. 12. Plaintiff, through its Responses and Objections to Defendant's Requests, does not waive its’ right to challenge the relevance, materiality, or admissibility of the documents or object to the use of the document at trial or any other proceeding in this case.SPECIFIC RESPONSES AND OBJECTIONS l.a-d. Plaintiff objects to the production of any documents which contain any information which is privileged or confidential under Florida law. In addition, Plaintiff objects to the production of any documents which are not relevant and designed or calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Plaintiff further objects to the definitions and instructions as confusing, burdensome and not promulgated in accordance with the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure. Without waiving this objection, see attached MERS printout. I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing has been furnished by regular U.S. Mail, to all parties on the attached service list Dated this [oF ny of, ( 2013. Ronald R Wolfe & Associates, P.L. P.O. Box 25018 Tampa, Florida 33622-5018 (813) 251-4766 (813) 251-1541 Fax Address for Electronic Service: eservice@wolfelawfl.com By3 D Eleane Sosa-Bruzon Florida Bar No. 0014768 a Alberto Orizondo Florida Bar No. 0070176 CHARLINE CALHOUN FLORIDA BAR NO. 16144Service List CARLOS G. ORCHARD c/o STEVEN J. BROTMAN, Esq. ICE LEGAL PA SERVICE@ICELEGAL.COM CHERI A. PRINCE A/K/A CHERI PRINCE 980 N Royal Poinciana Boulevard Miami Springs, FL 33166