Preview
CRAMER & ANDERSON LLP
LAW OFFICES
46 WEST STREET ~ P.O. BOX 278 ~ LITCHFIELD, CT 06759-0278 ~ (660) 567-8718 - JURIS # 12732
DOCKET NUMBER: LLI-CV-14-6009898-S SUPERIOR COURT
ANN MARIE NONKIN J.D. OF LITCHFIELD
Vv. AT LITCHFIELD
MICHAEL PESCHEL, ET AL JULY 8, 2014
DEFENDANTS PESCHEL’S OBJECTION TO DISCOVERY REQUESTS
Pursuant to Connecticut Practice Book Sections 13-8 et. seq. and 13-10 et. seq., the
Defendants Michael Peschel and Judy Peschel hereby object to interrogatories 1 and 4
through 9; and object to production requests 1, 2 and 6 of Plaintiffs First Set of Interrogatories
and Requests for Production Directed to the Defendants Michael and Judy Peschel dated June
6, 2014, all as set forth below:
INTERROGATORIES
1. Please state the following:
(a) Your full name, and any other names by which you have been known.
(b) Your date of birth;
(c) Your business address;
(d) Your motor vehicle operator’s license number;
(e) Your home address;
ANSWER: OBJECTION - The information sought herein as to the name and address of
the Defendants is known to the Plaintiff as evidenced by the Plaintiff's writ of summons
and complaint. The balance of the information sought herein is not likely to lead toCRAMER & ANDERSON LLP
LAW OFFICES
46 WEST STREET ~ P. 0. BOX 278 - LITCHFIELD, CT 06759-0278 ~ (660) 567-8718 - JURIS # 12732
admissible evidence in this case, and accordingly is not the proper subject of
discovery.
4. State the names and addresses of all persons known to you who were present at the time
of the incident alleged in the Complaint or who observed or witnessed all or part of the incident.
ANSWER: OBJECTION — Objection is hereby interposed to this interrogatory as it is
drafted in terms by which it cannot reasonably be answered. Specifically, the
interrogatory references an “incident”; however, the complaint does not reference an
incident. It references numerous events that occurred both prior to the Defendants’
purchase of their residence and subsequent to the Defendants’ purchase of their
residence in 2012. Accordingly, it is impossible to identify persons that might have been
witness to “the incident”, without specificity as to what the incident might entail.
5. As to each individual named in response to Interrogatory #4, state whether to your
knowledge, or the knowledge of your attorney, such individual has given any statement or statements as
defined in the Connecticut Practice Book Rule 13-1 concerning the subject matter of the Complaint in
this lawsuit. If the answer to this Interrogatory is affirmative, state also:
(a) The date on which the statement or statements were taken;
(b) The names and addresses of the person or persons who took such statement or statements;CRAMER & ANDERSON LLP
LAW OFFICES
46 WEST STREET ~ P.O, BOX 278 - LITCHFIELD, CT 06759-0278 - (660) 567-8718 - JURIS # 12732
(c) The names and addresses of any person when such statement or statements were taken;
(d) Whether such statement or statements were written, made by recording device or taken by
court reporter or stenographer;
(ce) The names and addresses of each person having custody or a copy or copies or such
statement or statements;
ANSWER: OBJECTION — See Objection to interrogatory 4 which is incorporated herein
by reference.
6. If, at the time of the incident alleged in the Complaint, you were covered by an insurance
policy under which an insurer may be liable to satisfy part or all of a judgment, state the following:
(a) The name(s) and address(es) of the insured(s);
(b) The amount of coverage under each insurance policy;
(c) The name(s) and address(es) of said insurer(s).
ANSWER: OBJECTION — Without regard to whether any such insurance exists, the
Defendants have decided not to make a claim against their insurance company relative
to the substance of any of the claims asserted by the Plaintiff herein. Accordingly,
whether the Defendants have insurance is not germane to any issue in this case.CRAMER & ANDERSON LLP
LAW OFFICES
48 WEST STREET ~ P.O. BOX 278 - LITCHFIELD, CT 06759-0278 ~ (660) 567-8718 - JURIS # 12732
7. If at the time of the incident, which is the subject of this lawsuit, you were protected
against the type of risk which is the subject to this lawsuit by excess umbrella insurance, or any other
insurance, state:
(a) The name(s) and address(es) of the insured(s);
(b) The amount of coverage under each insurance policy;
(c) The name(s) and address(es) of said insurer(s).
ANSWER: OBJECTION - See Objection to interrogatory 6.
8. State whether any insurer, as described in Interrogatories 6 & 7 above, has
disclaimed/reserved its duty to indemnify and insured or any other person protected by said policy.
ANSWER: OBJECTION - This request is not applicable, as insofar as the Defendants
have not made a claim against any insurance carrier relative to the allegations in the
Plaintiff's complaint, no insurance company has taken any position with regard to such
claim.
9. Please identify each expert whom you expect to call as a witness at trial and, as to each
expert, state the subject matter on which the expert is to testify, the substance of the facts and opinions
to which the expert is to testify and a summary of the grounds for each opinion.
ANSWER: OBJECTION - The Defendants have not made a final decision to date as to
experts they will call at trial, and there is no scheduling order in place at the presentCRAMER & ANDERSON ip
LAW OFFICES
46 WEST STREET ~ P 0. BOX 278 - LITCHFIELD, CT 06759-0278 ~ (860) 567-8718 - JURIS # 12732
time relative to the disclosure of experts. The Defendants will timely disclose experts in
accordance with any such scheduling order when entered by the court.
REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION
1. A copy of all of your insurance policies for UpCountry Services of Sharon, Inc., in
response to Interrogatories #6 and #7,
RESPONSE: OBJECTION is hereby interposed on the basis that because the Defendants
did not assert any claim against any insurance policy relative to the allegations in the
Plaintiffs complaint, a copy of such insurance policy is not germane to this action.
D, A copy of the declaration page(s) evidencing the insurance policy or policies identified in
response to Interrogatories #6 and #7.
RESPONSE: OBJECTION - see objection to #1
6. Copies of any and all billing statements from UpCountry and any and all other
contractors for the property known as 140 Millerton Road, Lakeville, Connecticut.
RESPONSE: OBJECTION - That the Defendants were billed, and the amount the
Defendants paid for maintenance of their property is not germane to any of the
allegations in the complaint and not likely to lead to admissible evidence in this case.CRAMER & ANDERSON Lip
LAW OFFICES
46 WEST STREET ~ P. 0. BOX 278 ~ LITCHFIELD, CT 06759-0278 ~ (860) 567-8718 - JURIS # 12732
DEFENDANTS PESCHEL
\J
illiam C. Franklin#100205
For Cramer & Anderson, LLP
Their Attorneys
CERTIFICATION OF SERVICE
| hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing was sent to all counsel and pro se parties of
record via e-mail as set forth below on July 8, 2014:
Email: wconti@contilevylaw.com
William A. Conti, Esq.
Conti & Levy
P.O. Box 239
Torrington, CT 06790-0239
Email: ponziani@litchfieldcavo.com
Peter John Ponziani, Esq.
82 Hopmeadow Street, Suite 210
Simsbury, CT 06089
William C. Franklin#100205
Commissioner Superior Court
Preview
CRAMER & ANDERSON LLP LAW OFFICES 46 WEST STREET ~ P.O. BOX 278 ~ LITCHFIELD, CT 06759-0278 ~ (660) 567-8718 - JURIS # 12732 DOCKET NUMBER: LLI-CV-14-6009898-S SUPERIOR COURT ANN MARIE NONKIN J.D. OF LITCHFIELD Vv. AT LITCHFIELD MICHAEL PESCHEL, ET AL JULY 8, 2014 DEFENDANTS PESCHEL’S OBJECTION TO DISCOVERY REQUESTS Pursuant to Connecticut Practice Book Sections 13-8 et. seq. and 13-10 et. seq., the Defendants Michael Peschel and Judy Peschel hereby object to interrogatories 1 and 4 through 9; and object to production requests 1, 2 and 6 of Plaintiffs First Set of Interrogatories and Requests for Production Directed to the Defendants Michael and Judy Peschel dated June 6, 2014, all as set forth below: INTERROGATORIES 1. Please state the following: (a) Your full name, and any other names by which you have been known. (b) Your date of birth; (c) Your business address; (d) Your motor vehicle operator’s license number; (e) Your home address; ANSWER: OBJECTION - The information sought herein as to the name and address of the Defendants is known to the Plaintiff as evidenced by the Plaintiff's writ of summons and complaint. The balance of the information sought herein is not likely to lead toCRAMER & ANDERSON LLP LAW OFFICES 46 WEST STREET ~ P. 0. BOX 278 - LITCHFIELD, CT 06759-0278 ~ (660) 567-8718 - JURIS # 12732 admissible evidence in this case, and accordingly is not the proper subject of discovery. 4. State the names and addresses of all persons known to you who were present at the time of the incident alleged in the Complaint or who observed or witnessed all or part of the incident. ANSWER: OBJECTION — Objection is hereby interposed to this interrogatory as it is drafted in terms by which it cannot reasonably be answered. Specifically, the interrogatory references an “incident”; however, the complaint does not reference an incident. It references numerous events that occurred both prior to the Defendants’ purchase of their residence and subsequent to the Defendants’ purchase of their residence in 2012. Accordingly, it is impossible to identify persons that might have been witness to “the incident”, without specificity as to what the incident might entail. 5. As to each individual named in response to Interrogatory #4, state whether to your knowledge, or the knowledge of your attorney, such individual has given any statement or statements as defined in the Connecticut Practice Book Rule 13-1 concerning the subject matter of the Complaint in this lawsuit. If the answer to this Interrogatory is affirmative, state also: (a) The date on which the statement or statements were taken; (b) The names and addresses of the person or persons who took such statement or statements;CRAMER & ANDERSON LLP LAW OFFICES 46 WEST STREET ~ P.O, BOX 278 - LITCHFIELD, CT 06759-0278 - (660) 567-8718 - JURIS # 12732 (c) The names and addresses of any person when such statement or statements were taken; (d) Whether such statement or statements were written, made by recording device or taken by court reporter or stenographer; (ce) The names and addresses of each person having custody or a copy or copies or such statement or statements; ANSWER: OBJECTION — See Objection to interrogatory 4 which is incorporated herein by reference. 6. If, at the time of the incident alleged in the Complaint, you were covered by an insurance policy under which an insurer may be liable to satisfy part or all of a judgment, state the following: (a) The name(s) and address(es) of the insured(s); (b) The amount of coverage under each insurance policy; (c) The name(s) and address(es) of said insurer(s). ANSWER: OBJECTION — Without regard to whether any such insurance exists, the Defendants have decided not to make a claim against their insurance company relative to the substance of any of the claims asserted by the Plaintiff herein. Accordingly, whether the Defendants have insurance is not germane to any issue in this case.CRAMER & ANDERSON LLP LAW OFFICES 48 WEST STREET ~ P.O. BOX 278 - LITCHFIELD, CT 06759-0278 ~ (660) 567-8718 - JURIS # 12732 7. If at the time of the incident, which is the subject of this lawsuit, you were protected against the type of risk which is the subject to this lawsuit by excess umbrella insurance, or any other insurance, state: (a) The name(s) and address(es) of the insured(s); (b) The amount of coverage under each insurance policy; (c) The name(s) and address(es) of said insurer(s). ANSWER: OBJECTION - See Objection to interrogatory 6. 8. State whether any insurer, as described in Interrogatories 6 & 7 above, has disclaimed/reserved its duty to indemnify and insured or any other person protected by said policy. ANSWER: OBJECTION - This request is not applicable, as insofar as the Defendants have not made a claim against any insurance carrier relative to the allegations in the Plaintiff's complaint, no insurance company has taken any position with regard to such claim. 9. Please identify each expert whom you expect to call as a witness at trial and, as to each expert, state the subject matter on which the expert is to testify, the substance of the facts and opinions to which the expert is to testify and a summary of the grounds for each opinion. ANSWER: OBJECTION - The Defendants have not made a final decision to date as to experts they will call at trial, and there is no scheduling order in place at the presentCRAMER & ANDERSON ip LAW OFFICES 46 WEST STREET ~ P 0. BOX 278 - LITCHFIELD, CT 06759-0278 ~ (860) 567-8718 - JURIS # 12732 time relative to the disclosure of experts. The Defendants will timely disclose experts in accordance with any such scheduling order when entered by the court. REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION 1. A copy of all of your insurance policies for UpCountry Services of Sharon, Inc., in response to Interrogatories #6 and #7, RESPONSE: OBJECTION is hereby interposed on the basis that because the Defendants did not assert any claim against any insurance policy relative to the allegations in the Plaintiffs complaint, a copy of such insurance policy is not germane to this action. D, A copy of the declaration page(s) evidencing the insurance policy or policies identified in response to Interrogatories #6 and #7. RESPONSE: OBJECTION - see objection to #1 6. Copies of any and all billing statements from UpCountry and any and all other contractors for the property known as 140 Millerton Road, Lakeville, Connecticut. RESPONSE: OBJECTION - That the Defendants were billed, and the amount the Defendants paid for maintenance of their property is not germane to any of the allegations in the complaint and not likely to lead to admissible evidence in this case.CRAMER & ANDERSON Lip LAW OFFICES 46 WEST STREET ~ P. 0. BOX 278 ~ LITCHFIELD, CT 06759-0278 ~ (860) 567-8718 - JURIS # 12732 DEFENDANTS PESCHEL \J illiam C. Franklin#100205 For Cramer & Anderson, LLP Their Attorneys CERTIFICATION OF SERVICE | hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing was sent to all counsel and pro se parties of record via e-mail as set forth below on July 8, 2014: Email: wconti@contilevylaw.com William A. Conti, Esq. Conti & Levy P.O. Box 239 Torrington, CT 06790-0239 Email: ponziani@litchfieldcavo.com Peter John Ponziani, Esq. 82 Hopmeadow Street, Suite 210 Simsbury, CT 06089 William C. Franklin#100205 Commissioner Superior Court