Motion-Secondary: GPM HOUSTON PROPERTIES LTD vs. FIREMAN'S FUND INSURANCE COMPANY

• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 

						
                                
Preview
                                Filed 12 December    21 A11:25
                                                                                     Chris Daniel - District Clerk
                                                                                     Harris Coun!
                                                                                     ED101) 017240765
                                                                                     By: angellia Dozier
                                     CAUSE NO


 GPM HOUSTON PROPERTIES, LTD.
 TRIYAR COMPANIES, LLC.                                      IN THE DISTRICT COURT
 TRIYAR COMPANIES, INC. (Fka
 TRIYAR COMPANIES, LLC)
 TRIYAR COMPANIES, INC.
 SJM REALTY, LTD.
                                                                  JUDICIAL DISTRICT
                         aintiffs
 Vs.

 FIREMAN’S FUND INSURANCE                                    HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS
 COMPANY

                       Defendant                             JURY TRIAL REQUESTED


             PLAINITFF         RIEF IN SUPPORT OF PRODUCTION OF EMPLOYEE
                               EVALUATIONS AND REPORTS

        TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT:

       At the last hearing the Court entertained argument about the production to Adrew

 Abram employmentfile.

                MAY LEAD TO THE DISCOVERY               OF ADMISSIBLE EVIDENCE

       At the hearing opposing counsel argued
                                         that the personnel file was not relevant. While

 not conceding that issue, Plaintiffs would show that iscovery    is intended to be broad, and the

test is whether the discovery may lead to admissible evidence It is impossible
                                                                         to know if the

 discovery will lead to admissible evidence without seeing it. If in fact the personnel file is not

 relevant, then the Court can make that judgment at trial.     king a decision on the relevance or

 admissibility of documents   s premature. There is ample opportunity for the Cou      to later rule

that the documentsare
             not relevant or admissible, if in f act that tums out to be the case.
EFENADANT S COUNSEL ACKNOWLEDGESTHAT THE TREND IS TO
                  ALLOW DISCOVERY OF PERSONNEL DOCUMENTS

         Attached to this Brief is an exce t from a rec ent paper by Jamie Cooper, a partner
                                                                                           at

 Martin Disiere Jefferson & Wisdom counsel for Fireman's Fund Insurance
                                                                   in this case In that

paper, she acknowledge that the trend throughout the country          is to order the production of

 ortions of the personnel _ ile.

          In this case, Mr. Abrams lied to his superiors about his activities in handling the claim

which is the subject
                 of this suit, and he negligently handled the claim in bad faith. He was later

 fired for negligently handling other claims and lying to his superiors. Clearly, Abrams engaged

 in a pattem
        of bad faith. According
                            to Mr. Carron, Abrams supervisor,
                                                      Abrams received an

unspecified number of wamings about his unacceptable conduct before he was justifiably fired.

 Plaintiffs are entitled to discover his job performance reviews, and the reports, memos         and

 emails discussing his firing and the grounds for his termination. Plaintiffs do not want sensitive

 medical information or information regarding sick days, vacations or other personal information

 Plaintiffs are entitled to this information to test the veracity of Mr. Carron s testimony, test the

veracity of Abrams     testimony about his performance and any critic sm of his performance and

 tablish that Defendant knew of his shortcomings and made no attempt to supervise him. It will

 also be pr _ tive of his bad faith claims hand
                                            ing in this case. Plaintiffs are also entitled to

discover these documentsbecausethey
                              may lead to the discovery of other admissible evidence

          For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiffs request that this Court Order Defendant to produce

Abrams performance reviews and all documents containing or discussing criticisms and the

 reaso   for terminating him, including any written material effecting his termination.
Respectfully submitted,

                                                      /s/ James Comell
                                                      _ames L. Comell
                                                        ORNELL      ARDUE
                                                      State Bar No. 04834800
                                                      jcomell@comell pardue.net
                                                      2727 Allen Parkway Suite 1675
                                                      Houston, Texas     77019
                                                      Telephone: (713) 526 0500
                                                      Facsimile:   (713) 526 7974

                                              ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFFS
                               CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

         Thereby certify that a true and correct copy of the above and foregoing instrument will be
sent to the following counsel of record December 21 _ by:

        Hand Delivery
        Regular Mail
        Electronic mail/ecf


                                                           ames L. Cornell