Preview
FILED
DALLAS COUNTY
12/9/2013 9:38:43 AM
GARY FITZSIMMONS
DISTRICT CLERK
CAUSE NO. DC-12-12887
MUGDOCK TAVERN § IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF
INVESTMENTS §
and DUFFY I, LP, §
§
Plaintiffs, §
§
v. §
§
CAT SEATTLE, LLC, ASCEND §
HEALTH CORPORATION, and §
RICHARD KRESCH, Individually, § DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS
§
Defendants and Counter- §
Plaintiffs, §
§
v. §
§
Duffy I, LP and JAMES P. §
GRAHAM §
§
Counter-Defendants. § 134TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT
____________________________________________________________________________
DEFENDANTS/COUNTER-PLAINTIFFS’ AMENDED MOTION FOR LETTERS
ROGATORY
_____________________________________________________________________________
TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT:
Pursuant to Rule 201.1(c) of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure, Defendants/Counter-
Plaintiffs Ascend Health Corporation, CAT Seattle, LLC and Richard Kresch (collectively,
“Ascend Defendants”) hereby file this Amended Motion for Letters Rogatory, and would
respectfully show the Court the following:
CAT SEATTLE, LLC, ASCEND HEALTH CORPORATION, AND RICHARD KRESCH’S
AMENDED MOTION FOR LETTERS ROGATORY – Page 1
DAL 79245126v1
I. ARGUMENT AND AUTHORITIES
1. Since filing the initial Motion for Letters Rogatory, the Ascend Defendants have
learned that one of the potential third-party witnesses, Richard St. Peter, actually resides in the
State of Nevada—not the State of Washington. This Amended Motion attaches a revised letter
rogatory and corresponding exhibits for the Court’s entry. In addition, the Ascend Defendants,
without changing any of the document requests, would like to change the mode of examination
of Mr. St. Peter from a deposition on written questions to an oral deposition. Other than these
two changes, the rest of the Ascend Defendants’ Motion for Letters Rogatory is the same.
2. “On motion by a party, the court in which an action is pending must issue a letter
rogatory on terms that are just and appropriate, regardless of whether any other manner of
obtaining the deposition is impractical or inconvenient.” TEX. R. CIV. P. 201.1(c).
3. As the Court is aware, this case centers on the purchase sale of the Schick Shadel
Hospital in Seattle, Washington. Several witnesses in possession of responsive and relevant
documents reside in the state of Washington.
4.. As such, the Ascend Defendants seek to serve subpoenas that would compel the
following witnesses to appear for depositions on written questions and produce relevant
documents in their possession: (1) Mary Ellen Stewart, the former chief executive officer of the
hospital; (2) Richard St. Peter, another former chief executive of the hospital; and (3) Erick M.
Davis, a doctor with connections to the hospital and Counter-Defendant James Graham
(“Graham”).
5. The letters rogatory, addressed to the appropriate authorities in the state of
Washington, that the Ascend Defendants request the Court to sign and issue are attached hereto
CAT SEATTLE, LLC, ASCEND HEALTH CORPORATION, AND RICHARD KRESCH’S
AMENDED MOTION FOR LETTERS ROGATORY – Page 2
DAL 79245126v1
as Exhibit “A,” (Mary Ellen Stewart) Exhibit “B,” (Richard St. Peter) and Exhibit “C” (Erick
M. Davis).
6. It would be just and appropriate for the Court to issue the said letters rogatory. As
these witnesses reside outside of this Court’s subpoena range, it is difficult for the Ascend
Defendants to obtain this discovery without such letters rogatory. Moreover, one reason the
Ascend Defendants are requesting, among other things, communications and correspondence
between these witnesses and Graham is because Plaintiffs/Counter-Defendants have not been
forthcoming with these documents, which surely exist but have not been produced.
WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, the Ascend Defendants respectfully request
that the Court grant this Motion, issue and sign the letters rogatory attached hereto as Exhibits
“A”-“C”, and grant the Ascend Defendants such further relief to which they may be entitled.
Respectfully submitted,
\s\ Victor D. Vital______________
Victor D. Vital
Texas State Bar No. 00794798
Charles P. Floyd
Texas State Bar No. 24055487
GREENBERG TRAURIG, LLP
2200 Ross Avenue, Suite 5200
Dallas, Texas 75201
214-665-3600 - Telephone
214-665-3601- Facsimile
ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANTS
CAT SEATTLE, LLC, ASCEND
HEALTH CORPORATION, and
RICHARD KRESCH, Individually
CAT SEATTLE, LLC, ASCEND HEALTH CORPORATION, AND RICHARD KRESCH’S
AMENDED MOTION FOR LETTERS ROGATORY – Page 3
DAL 79245126v1
CERTIFICATE OF CONFERENCE
Pursuant to Local Rule 2.07(c)(2), the undersigned counsel for movant certifies
that counsel for movant has complied with the local rule regarding a conference on the
initial Motion for Letters Rogatory.
/s/ Nicholas A. Sarokhanian
Nicholas A. Sarokhanian
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
The undersigned certifies that a true and correct copy of the foregoing was served on the
following counsel of record via e-mail on December 9, 2013:
Charles C. Frederiksen
Glast, Phillips & Murray, P.C.
14801 Quorum Drive, suite 500
Dallas, Texas 75254
/s/ Nicholas A. Sarokhanian
Nicholas A. Sarokhanian
CAT SEATTLE, LLC, ASCEND HEALTH CORPORATION, AND RICHARD KRESCH’S
AMENDED MOTION FOR LETTERS ROGATORY – Page 4
DAL 79245126v1
Exhibit “A”
Page 5 of Motion for Letters Rogatory and Exhibits Page 1 of Exhibit A
CAUSE NO. DC-12-12887
MUGDOCK TAVERN § IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF
INVESTMENTS §
and DUFFY I, LP, §
§
Plaintiffs, §
§
v. §
§
CAT SEATTLE, LLC, ASCEND §
HEALTH CORPORATION, and §
RICHARD KRESCH, Individually, § DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS
§
Defendants and Counter- §
Plaintiffs, §
§
v. §
§
DUFFY I, LP and JAMES P. §
GRAHAM §
§
Counter-Defendants. § 134TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT
LETTER ROGATORY TO THE CLERK OF COURT FOR THE SUPERIOR COURT
OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, KENT DIVISION
STATE OF TEXAS §
§
COUNTY OF DALLAS §
TO: Clerk of Court for the Superior Court of King County, Washington, Kent Division
King County Courthouse
401 4th Avenue N
Kent, Washington 98032
GREETINGS:
CAT Seattle, LLC, Ascend Health Corporation, and Richard Kresch (collectively, the
“Ascend Defendants”), parties before this Court in the above-styled cause, has requested, after
notice to all parties before this Court, that Mary Ellen Stewart (“Stewart”), residing in your
Page 6 of Motion for Letters Rogatory and Exhibits Page 2 of Exhibit A
jurisdiction at 13689 18th Ave. SW, Burien, Washington 98166-1046, be compelled to produce
certain documents and to provide responses to written deposition questions regarding those
documents.
It is the opinion of this Court that justice will be served by Stewart’s provision of such
documents and written deposition testimony, as Stewart allegedly has knowledge of relevant
facts and custody, possession, and/or control of relevant documents. Thus, in the furtherance of
justice, this Court respectfully requests and authorizes you to do all of the following:
1. Subpoena, summon, or otherwise compel Stewart to appear for a deposition on
written questions and to produce the documents requested in the Texas subpoena
attached hereto as Exhibit “A” and in the Texas intent to issue subpoena for
deposition on written questions duces tecum attached hereto as Exhibit “B.”
2. Subpoena, summon, and otherwise compel the said answers to the written
questions and said produced documents to be sent under cover duly sealed to the
attorney of record for the Ascend Defendants at the following address: Victor D.
Vital, Greenberg Traurig, LLP, 2200 Ross Avenue, Suite 5200, Dallas, Texas
75201.
This Court respectfully requests that you or your appointee permit the practices and
procedures of Texas state courts to control the taking of Stewart’s testimony and the production
of Stewart’s documents.
Your assistance in this matter is greatly appreciated.
Page 7 of Motion for Letters Rogatory and Exhibits Page 3 of Exhibit A
SIGNED on this ____ day of November 2013.
________________________
Honorable Dale Tillery
District Court Judge for the
134th Judicial District Court
of Dallas County, Texas
Page 8 of Motion for Letters Rogatory and Exhibits Page 4 of Exhibit A
CAUSE NO. DC-12-12887
MUGDOCK TAVERN § IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF
INVESTMENTS §
and DUFFY I, LP, §
§
Plaintiffs, §
§
v. §
§
CAT SEATTLE, LLC, ASCEND §
HEALTH CORPORATION, and §
RICHARD KRESCH, Individually, § DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS
§
Defendants and Counter- §
Plaintiffs, §
§
v. §
§
Duffy I, LP and JAMES P. §
GRAHAM §
§
Counter-Defendants. § 134TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT
____________________________________________________________________________
DEFENDANTS/COUNTER-PLAINTIFFS’ NOTICE OF INTENT TO ISSUE
SUBPOENA FOR DEPOSITION ON WRITTEN QUESTIONS DUCES TECUM TO
MARY ELLEN STEWART
_____________________________________________________________________________
TO: All counsel of record.
TO: Mary Ellen Stewart, 13689 18th Avenue SW, Burien, Washington 98166-1046.
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that, pursuant to Rules 200 and 205 of the Texas Rules of
Civil Procedure, CAT Seattle, LLC, Ascend Health Corporation, and Richard Kresch
(collectively, “Ascend Defendants”) intend to serve a subpoena for deposition on written
questions duces tecum to Mary Ellen Stewart, 13689 18th Avenue SW, Burien, Washington
Page 9 of Motion for Letters Rogatory and Exhibits Page 5 of Exhibit A
98166-1046 (“Stewart”). The Ascend Defendants will take the deposition on written questions
of Evans before a certified court reporter at 10:00 a.m. on December 9, 2013 at the offices of
Buell Realtime Reporting, LLC, located at 1411 Fourth Avenue, Suite 820, Seattle, Washington
98101.
The questions that will be posed at the deposition are listed on Exhibit “A” attached
hereto. Pursuant to Rules 200.1(b) and 205.2 of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure, Stewart is
directed to produce at the deposition all documents, items, and tangible things designated and
described on Exhibit “B” attached hereto.
The deposition and documents may be used as evidence in the above-styled and
numbered cause.
All parties are requested to supplement their discovery responses at least 48 hours prior to
the depositions.
Respectfully submitted,
_________________________
Victor D. Vital
Texas State Bar No. 00794798
Charles P. Floyd
Texas State Bar No. 24055487
GREENBERG TRAURIG, LLP
2200 Ross Avenue, Suite 5200
Dallas, Texas 75201
214-665-3600 - Telephone
214-665-3601- Facsimile
ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANTS
CAT SEATTLE, LLC, ASCEND
HEALTH CORPORATION, and
RICHARD KRESCH, Individually
Page 10 of Motion for Letters Rogatory and Exhibits Page 6 of Exhibit A
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
The undersigned certifies that a true and correct copy of the foregoing was served on the
following counsel of record pursuant to the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure by U.S. certified
mail, return receipt requested and facsimile on November __, 2013:
Charles C. Frederiksen
Glast, Phillips & Murray, P.C.
14801 Quorum Drive, suite 500
Dallas, Texas 75254
Victor Vital
Page 11 of Motion for Letters Rogatory and Exhibits Page 7 of Exhibit A
EXHIBIT “A”
1. Please state your full name, occupation, official title, home address, and business address.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
2. Are you the custodian of records for your documents, communications, files, and other
records?
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
3. In your capacity as the custodian of records, are you familiar with whether you maintain
records of your business activities?
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
4. Are the documents that are responsive to the requests in Exhibit “B” kept under your
care, supervision, custody, or control?
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
5. Was it in the regular course of your business activity for you or other persons with
personal knowledge of the act, event, condition, opinion, or diagnosis identified in the
documents responsive to the requests in Exhibit “B” to make such documents or to
transmit such information to be included in the documents?
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
6. Were the documents responsive to the requests in Exhibit “B” made at or near the time of
the act, event, condition, opinion, or diagnosis identified in the records or within a
reasonable time thereafter?
________________________________________________________________________
Page 12 of Motion for Letters Rogatory and Exhibits Page 8 of Exhibit A
________________________________________________________________________
7. Were the documents responsive to the requests in Exhibit “B” made and kept in your
regular course of daily business activities by you?
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
8. Were the documents responsive to the requests in Exhibit “B” transmitted to your files,
and did you maintain the records as part of your official duties as the custodian of records
for you?
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
9. Please hand the originals or exact duplicates of the documents responsive to the requests
in Exhibit “B” to the court reporter taking your deposition for photocopying and
attachment to this deposition. Have you now given all of the documents responsive to the
requests in Exhibit “B” to the court reporter taking your deposition? If not, identify for
the court reporter the documents you did not produce and explain why you did not
produce them.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
10. In the event you are unable to find any of the documents responsive to the requests in
Exhibit “B,” how long do you maintain your files, and do you ever destroy your files?
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
11. Are you aware of any other person that may have possession of documents pertaining to
the subject matter of this lawsuit? If so, please state the name and address of such entity
or person, if known.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Page 13 of Motion for Letters Rogatory and Exhibits Page 9 of Exhibit A
12. Have you been requested or directed by a person to withhold or protect, for any reason,
the documents responsive to Exhibit “B”? Has any person suggested that you should
withhold or protect the documents responsive to Exhibit “B”? If so, please state the name
and address of the person who conveyed this information to you and when such event
occurred.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
13. Do you know or have reason to believe that the documents responsive to Exhibit “B”
have in any manner been edited, purged, culled, or otherwise culled? If so, please
identify such documents and explain why and how they were altered or removed.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
14. If any of the documents responsive to Exhibit “B” were, but are no longer, in your
possession, custody, or control, or no longer exist, state whether (1) they are missing or
lost, (2) they were destroyed, (3) they were transferred to others, or (4) they were
otherwise disposed of, and explain the circumstances surrounding their disposition,
including the date of such disposition.
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
15. Are the documents you handed to the court reporter true and correct copies of the
documents in your possession, custody, or control?
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Page 14 of Motion for Letters Rogatory and Exhibits Page 10 of Exhibit A
Signed this ___ date of _______, 2013.
_____________________________________
Mary Ellen Stewart
Sworn to and subscribed before me this ____ day of ______, 2013.
________________________________
Notary Public for the State of Washington
Page 15 of Motion for Letters Rogatory and Exhibits Page 11 of Exhibit A
EXHIBIT “B”
INSTRUCTIONS AND DEFINITIONS
The following instructions and definitions shall govern:
1. If any requested document or information described in this request was, but no
longer is, in your possession, or subject to your custody or control, or in existence, state whether:
a. It is missing or lost;
b. It has been destroyed;
c. It has been transferred, voluntarily or involuntarily, to others; or
d. It has been disposed of otherwise.
In each instance, explain the circumstances surrounding such disposition and identify the
person(s) directing or authorizing same, and the date(s) thereof. Identify each document or the
information by listing its author, his or her address, type of document (e.g., letter, memorandum,
telegram, chat, photograph, etc.) and/or format of information, date, subject matter, present
location(s), and custodian(s), and state whether the document (or copies) are still in existence.
2. Pursuant to Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 196.4, all data or information that
exists in electronic or magnetic media form shall be produced in its original format on machine-
readable magnetic disk, tape, or CD-ROM, or paper print-out if electronic production is
impracticable. Paper printouts shall be organized and labeled to identify the database, drive or
other media where the original data are stored. All data or information produced in electronic or
magnetic media shall be labeled to identify its format and/or the appropriate computer software
or other means necessary to retrieve it.
3. If any document called for herein is withheld from production for any reason,
including, but not limited to, on a claim of privilege or other asserted protection against
discovery by any statute, rule, doctrine, decision or other ground, please provide a privilege log
setting forth the following information for each document withheld:
a. A description of the document, including the type of document, date,
author, and recipient;
b. The identity of all other persons who received copies of the documents;
c. The basis for withholding the document;
d. A brief description by subject matter of the privileged matter; and
e. The request(s) as to which the document is responsive.
Page 16 of Motion for Letters Rogatory and Exhibits Page 12 of Exhibit A
4. “Document” as used herein is used in the broadest sense permitted by the Texas
Rules of Civil Procedure and shall include, but is not limited to, all written, recorded, or graphic
materials of any nature whatsoever and all copies thereof, whether draft or final, within the
possession, custody, or control of Plaintiff or of any person acting or purporting to act for or on
behalf of Plaintiff, or in concert with it, including but not limited to: information stored on
computer or computer-accessible medium (such as servers, routers, directories, files, databases,
computer databases, imaging, disks, hard drives, back-up, magnetic tapes, data cells, drums, or
CDs), Palm Pilot, Blackberry, or similar device, voice mail, printouts, affidavits, contracts,
agreements, correspondence, e-mails, telegrams, memoranda, records, forms, reports, books,
notebooks, notes, summaries, or records of telephone conversations, personal conversations, or
interviews, diaries, calendars, telex messages, transcripts, appointment or scheduling books,
daytimers, time sheets, statistical statements, work papers, drafts, graphs, charts, slides,
demonstrative or visual aids, accounts, analytical records, minutes or records of meetings or
conferences, consultants' reports, appraisals, expense accounts, reports or summaries of
negotiations, brochures, lists, journals, advertisements, computer tapes and cards, data processing
input and output, microfilm, and all other written, printed, recorded, or photographic matter or
sound reproductions, however produced or reproduced.
5. The term “computer database” or “database” shall include any information that
may be obtained by electronic or computer means including, but not limited to personal digital
assistants (PDAs) or other handheld computing devices, servers, routers, hard drives, diskettes,
tapes, imaging, CD, software, e-mail, voice mail, data back-up, directories, indexes, files,
databases, or data compilations.
6. The term “person” means any natural person or any legal entity, including a
proprietorship, partnership, limited partnership, trust, firm, corporation, association,
governmental agency, or other organization or association.
7. The terms “reflect,” “reflecting,” “regard,” “regarding,” “refer to,” “refers
to,” “referring to,” “relate to,” “related to,” and “relating to” mean constituting, consisting of,
bearing on, evidencing, indicating, connected with, associated with, or in any way connected
with the matter discussed, in whole or in part.
8. The terms “you,” “your,” and “yours” refer to Mary Ellen Stewart, and/or your
present or former partners, employees, agents, consultants, experts, representatives, heirs,
successors and assigns, and attorneys, as well as all other individuals, persons, and entities in the
employ of or who act, have acted, purport to act, or have purported to act on its behalf.
9. “BoP” refers to the Washington Board of Pharmacy, including its employees,
agents, representatives, and investigators.
10. The term “Transactions” refers to the transactions effected under, by and/or
related to the August 3, 2011 Asset Purchase Agreement between CAT Seattle, LLC and Duffy I,
L.P. and all associated and related instruments and agreements (e.g., Real Estate Purchase
Page 17 of Motion for Letters Rogatory and Exhibits Page 13 of Exhibit A
Agreement), as well as the August 23, 2012 Amendment to the Asset Purchase Agreement.
DOCUMENTS TO BE PRODUCED AT DEPOSITION
Please produce the following documents and communications in your possession, custody, and
control relating to the following:
1. All communications with or involving James Graham regarding the Schick Shadel
Hospital in Seattle, Washington, the Schick Shadel Hospital in Denton, Texas, the
Ascend Defendants, the Transactions, the BoP, and/or the subject matter of this case.
2. All communications with or involving Erick Davis, M.D. regarding the Schick Shadel
Hospital in Seattle, Washington, the Schick Shadel Hospital in Denton, Texas, the
Ascend Defendants, the Transactions, the BoP, and/or the subject matter of this case.
3. All communications with or involving Kathy Evans regarding the Schick Shadel Hospital
in Seattle, Washington, the Schick Shadel Hospital in Denton, Texas, the Ascend
Defendants, the Transactions, the BoP, and/or the subject matter of this case.
4. All communications with or involving Kristin Todora regarding the Schick Shadel
Hospital in Seattle, Washington, the Schick Shadel Hospital in Denton, Texas, the
Ascend Defendants, the Transactions, the BoP, and/or the subject matter of this case.
5. All communications with or involving Richard St. Peter regarding the Schick Shadel
Hospital in Seattle, Washington, the Schick Shadel Hospital in Denton, Texas, the
Ascend Defendants, the Transactions, the BoP, and/or the subject matter of this case.
6. All communications with or involving Kalyan Dandala, M.D. regarding the Schick
Shadel Hospital in Seattle, Washington, the Schick Shadel Hospital in Denton, Texas, the
Ascend Defendants, the Transactions, the BoP, and/or the subject matter of this case.
7. All communications with or involving Marvy Schmidt regarding the Schick Shadel
Hospital in Seattle, Washington, the Schick Shadel Hospital in Denton, Texas, the
Ascend Defendants, the Transactions, the BoP, and/or the subject matter of this case.
8. All communications with or involving Elaine Oksendahl regarding the Schick Shadel
Hospital in Seattle, Washington, the Schick Shadel Hospital in Denton, Texas, the
Ascend Defendants, the Transactions, the BoP, and/or the subject matter of this case.
9. All communications with or involving Debra Kristiansen regarding the Schick Shadel
Hospital in Seattle, Washington, the Schick Shadel Hospital in Denton, Texas, the
Ascend Defendants, the Transactions, the BoP, and/or the subject matter of this case.
Page 18 of Motion for Letters Rogatory and Exhibits Page 14 of Exhibit A
10. All communications with or involving Doug Beck regarding the Schick Shadel Hospital
in Seattle, Washington, the Schick Shadel Hospital in Denton, Texas, the Ascend
Defendants, the Transactions, the BoP, and/or the subject matter of this case.
11. All communications with or involving Jace Graham regarding the Schick Shadel Hospital
in Seattle, Washington, the Schick Shadel Hospital in Denton, Texas, the Ascend
Defendants, the Transactions, the BoP, and/or the subject matter of this case.
12. All communications with or involving any other employee of Palo Petroleum, Inc.
regarding the Schick Shadel Hospital in Seattle, Washington, the Schick Shadel Hospital
in Denton, Texas, the Ascend Defendants, the Transactions, the BoP, and/or the subject
matter of this case.
13. All of James Graham’s communications with or involving Erick Davis, M.D. regarding
the Schick Shadel Hospital in Seattle, Washington, the Schick Shadel Hospital in Denton,
Texas, the Ascend Defendants, the Transactions, the BoP, and/or the subject matter of
this case.
14. All of James Graham’s communications with or involving Kathy Evans regarding the
Schick Shadel Hospital in Seattle, Washington, the Schick Shadel Hospital in Denton,
Texas, the Ascend Defendants, the Transactions, the BoP, and/or the subject matter of
this case.
15. All of James Graham’s communications with or involving Kristin Todora regarding the
Schick Shadel Hospital in Seattle, Washington, the Schick Shadel Hospital in Denton,
Texas, the Ascend Defendants, the Transactions, the BoP, and/or the subject matter of
this case.
16. All of James Graham’s communications with or involving Richard St. Peter regarding the
Schick Shadel Hospital in Seattle, Washington, the Schick Shadel Hospital in Denton,
Texas, the Ascend Defendants, the Transactions, the BoP, and/or the subject matter of
this case.
17. All of James Graham’s communications with or involving Kalyan Dandala, M.D.
regarding the Schick Shadel Hospital in Seattle, Washington, the Schick Shadel Hospital
in Denton, Texas, the Ascend Defendants, the Transactions, the BoP, and/or the subject
matter of this case.
18. All of James Graham’s communications with or involving Marvy Schmidt regarding the
Schick Shadel Hospital in Seattle, Washington, the Schick Shadel Hospital in Denton,
Texas, the Ascend Defendants, the Transactions, the BoP, and/or the subject matter of
this case.
19. All of James Graham’s communications with or involving Elaine Oksendahl regarding
the Schick Shadel Hospital in Seattle, Washington, the Schick Shadel Hospital in Denton,
Page 19 of Motion for Letters Rogatory and Exhibits Page 15 of Exhibit A
Texas, the Ascend Defendants, the Transactions, the BoP, and/or the subject matter of
this case.
20. All of James Graham’s communications with or involving Debra Kristiansen regarding
the Schick Shadel Hospital in Seattle, Washington, the Schick Shadel Hospital in Denton,
Texas, the Ascend Defendants, the Transactions, the BoP, and/or the subject matter of
this case.
21. All of James Graham’s communications with or involving Doug Beck regarding the
Schick Shadel Hospital in Seattle, Washington, the Schick Shadel Hospital in Denton,
Texas, the Ascend Defendants, the Transactions, the BoP, and/or the subject matter of
this cas
Preview
FILED DALLAS COUNTY 12/9/2013 9:38:43 AM GARY FITZSIMMONS DISTRICT CLERK CAUSE NO. DC-12-12887 MUGDOCK TAVERN § IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF INVESTMENTS § and DUFFY I, LP, § § Plaintiffs, § § v. § § CAT SEATTLE, LLC, ASCEND § HEALTH CORPORATION, and § RICHARD KRESCH, Individually, § DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS § Defendants and Counter- § Plaintiffs, § § v. § § Duffy I, LP and JAMES P. § GRAHAM § § Counter-Defendants. § 134TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT ____________________________________________________________________________ DEFENDANTS/COUNTER-PLAINTIFFS’ AMENDED MOTION FOR LETTERS ROGATORY _____________________________________________________________________________ TO THE HONORABLE JUDGE OF SAID COURT: Pursuant to Rule 201.1(c) of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure, Defendants/Counter- Plaintiffs Ascend Health Corporation, CAT Seattle, LLC and Richard Kresch (collectively, “Ascend Defendants”) hereby file this Amended Motion for Letters Rogatory, and would respectfully show the Court the following: CAT SEATTLE, LLC, ASCEND HEALTH CORPORATION, AND RICHARD KRESCH’S AMENDED MOTION FOR LETTERS ROGATORY – Page 1 DAL 79245126v1 I. ARGUMENT AND AUTHORITIES 1. Since filing the initial Motion for Letters Rogatory, the Ascend Defendants have learned that one of the potential third-party witnesses, Richard St. Peter, actually resides in the State of Nevada—not the State of Washington. This Amended Motion attaches a revised letter rogatory and corresponding exhibits for the Court’s entry. In addition, the Ascend Defendants, without changing any of the document requests, would like to change the mode of examination of Mr. St. Peter from a deposition on written questions to an oral deposition. Other than these two changes, the rest of the Ascend Defendants’ Motion for Letters Rogatory is the same. 2. “On motion by a party, the court in which an action is pending must issue a letter rogatory on terms that are just and appropriate, regardless of whether any other manner of obtaining the deposition is impractical or inconvenient.” TEX. R. CIV. P. 201.1(c). 3. As the Court is aware, this case centers on the purchase sale of the Schick Shadel Hospital in Seattle, Washington. Several witnesses in possession of responsive and relevant documents reside in the state of Washington. 4.. As such, the Ascend Defendants seek to serve subpoenas that would compel the following witnesses to appear for depositions on written questions and produce relevant documents in their possession: (1) Mary Ellen Stewart, the former chief executive officer of the hospital; (2) Richard St. Peter, another former chief executive of the hospital; and (3) Erick M. Davis, a doctor with connections to the hospital and Counter-Defendant James Graham (“Graham”). 5. The letters rogatory, addressed to the appropriate authorities in the state of Washington, that the Ascend Defendants request the Court to sign and issue are attached hereto CAT SEATTLE, LLC, ASCEND HEALTH CORPORATION, AND RICHARD KRESCH’S AMENDED MOTION FOR LETTERS ROGATORY – Page 2 DAL 79245126v1 as Exhibit “A,” (Mary Ellen Stewart) Exhibit “B,” (Richard St. Peter) and Exhibit “C” (Erick M. Davis). 6. It would be just and appropriate for the Court to issue the said letters rogatory. As these witnesses reside outside of this Court’s subpoena range, it is difficult for the Ascend Defendants to obtain this discovery without such letters rogatory. Moreover, one reason the Ascend Defendants are requesting, among other things, communications and correspondence between these witnesses and Graham is because Plaintiffs/Counter-Defendants have not been forthcoming with these documents, which surely exist but have not been produced. WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, the Ascend Defendants respectfully request that the Court grant this Motion, issue and sign the letters rogatory attached hereto as Exhibits “A”-“C”, and grant the Ascend Defendants such further relief to which they may be entitled. Respectfully submitted, \s\ Victor D. Vital______________ Victor D. Vital Texas State Bar No. 00794798 Charles P. Floyd Texas State Bar No. 24055487 GREENBERG TRAURIG, LLP 2200 Ross Avenue, Suite 5200 Dallas, Texas 75201 214-665-3600 - Telephone 214-665-3601- Facsimile ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANTS CAT SEATTLE, LLC, ASCEND HEALTH CORPORATION, and RICHARD KRESCH, Individually CAT SEATTLE, LLC, ASCEND HEALTH CORPORATION, AND RICHARD KRESCH’S AMENDED MOTION FOR LETTERS ROGATORY – Page 3 DAL 79245126v1 CERTIFICATE OF CONFERENCE Pursuant to Local Rule 2.07(c)(2), the undersigned counsel for movant certifies that counsel for movant has complied with the local rule regarding a conference on the initial Motion for Letters Rogatory. /s/ Nicholas A. Sarokhanian Nicholas A. Sarokhanian CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE The undersigned certifies that a true and correct copy of the foregoing was served on the following counsel of record via e-mail on December 9, 2013: Charles C. Frederiksen Glast, Phillips & Murray, P.C. 14801 Quorum Drive, suite 500 Dallas, Texas 75254 /s/ Nicholas A. Sarokhanian Nicholas A. Sarokhanian CAT SEATTLE, LLC, ASCEND HEALTH CORPORATION, AND RICHARD KRESCH’S AMENDED MOTION FOR LETTERS ROGATORY – Page 4 DAL 79245126v1 Exhibit “A” Page 5 of Motion for Letters Rogatory and Exhibits Page 1 of Exhibit A CAUSE NO. DC-12-12887 MUGDOCK TAVERN § IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF INVESTMENTS § and DUFFY I, LP, § § Plaintiffs, § § v. § § CAT SEATTLE, LLC, ASCEND § HEALTH CORPORATION, and § RICHARD KRESCH, Individually, § DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS § Defendants and Counter- § Plaintiffs, § § v. § § DUFFY I, LP and JAMES P. § GRAHAM § § Counter-Defendants. § 134TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT LETTER ROGATORY TO THE CLERK OF COURT FOR THE SUPERIOR COURT OF KING COUNTY, WASHINGTON, KENT DIVISION STATE OF TEXAS § § COUNTY OF DALLAS § TO: Clerk of Court for the Superior Court of King County, Washington, Kent Division King County Courthouse 401 4th Avenue N Kent, Washington 98032 GREETINGS: CAT Seattle, LLC, Ascend Health Corporation, and Richard Kresch (collectively, the “Ascend Defendants”), parties before this Court in the above-styled cause, has requested, after notice to all parties before this Court, that Mary Ellen Stewart (“Stewart”), residing in your Page 6 of Motion for Letters Rogatory and Exhibits Page 2 of Exhibit A jurisdiction at 13689 18th Ave. SW, Burien, Washington 98166-1046, be compelled to produce certain documents and to provide responses to written deposition questions regarding those documents. It is the opinion of this Court that justice will be served by Stewart’s provision of such documents and written deposition testimony, as Stewart allegedly has knowledge of relevant facts and custody, possession, and/or control of relevant documents. Thus, in the furtherance of justice, this Court respectfully requests and authorizes you to do all of the following: 1. Subpoena, summon, or otherwise compel Stewart to appear for a deposition on written questions and to produce the documents requested in the Texas subpoena attached hereto as Exhibit “A” and in the Texas intent to issue subpoena for deposition on written questions duces tecum attached hereto as Exhibit “B.” 2. Subpoena, summon, and otherwise compel the said answers to the written questions and said produced documents to be sent under cover duly sealed to the attorney of record for the Ascend Defendants at the following address: Victor D. Vital, Greenberg Traurig, LLP, 2200 Ross Avenue, Suite 5200, Dallas, Texas 75201. This Court respectfully requests that you or your appointee permit the practices and procedures of Texas state courts to control the taking of Stewart’s testimony and the production of Stewart’s documents. Your assistance in this matter is greatly appreciated. Page 7 of Motion for Letters Rogatory and Exhibits Page 3 of Exhibit A SIGNED on this ____ day of November 2013. ________________________ Honorable Dale Tillery District Court Judge for the 134th Judicial District Court of Dallas County, Texas Page 8 of Motion for Letters Rogatory and Exhibits Page 4 of Exhibit A CAUSE NO. DC-12-12887 MUGDOCK TAVERN § IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF INVESTMENTS § and DUFFY I, LP, § § Plaintiffs, § § v. § § CAT SEATTLE, LLC, ASCEND § HEALTH CORPORATION, and § RICHARD KRESCH, Individually, § DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS § Defendants and Counter- § Plaintiffs, § § v. § § Duffy I, LP and JAMES P. § GRAHAM § § Counter-Defendants. § 134TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT ____________________________________________________________________________ DEFENDANTS/COUNTER-PLAINTIFFS’ NOTICE OF INTENT TO ISSUE SUBPOENA FOR DEPOSITION ON WRITTEN QUESTIONS DUCES TECUM TO MARY ELLEN STEWART _____________________________________________________________________________ TO: All counsel of record. TO: Mary Ellen Stewart, 13689 18th Avenue SW, Burien, Washington 98166-1046. PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that, pursuant to Rules 200 and 205 of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure, CAT Seattle, LLC, Ascend Health Corporation, and Richard Kresch (collectively, “Ascend Defendants”) intend to serve a subpoena for deposition on written questions duces tecum to Mary Ellen Stewart, 13689 18th Avenue SW, Burien, Washington Page 9 of Motion for Letters Rogatory and Exhibits Page 5 of Exhibit A 98166-1046 (“Stewart”). The Ascend Defendants will take the deposition on written questions of Evans before a certified court reporter at 10:00 a.m. on December 9, 2013 at the offices of Buell Realtime Reporting, LLC, located at 1411 Fourth Avenue, Suite 820, Seattle, Washington 98101. The questions that will be posed at the deposition are listed on Exhibit “A” attached hereto. Pursuant to Rules 200.1(b) and 205.2 of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure, Stewart is directed to produce at the deposition all documents, items, and tangible things designated and described on Exhibit “B” attached hereto. The deposition and documents may be used as evidence in the above-styled and numbered cause. All parties are requested to supplement their discovery responses at least 48 hours prior to the depositions. Respectfully submitted, _________________________ Victor D. Vital Texas State Bar No. 00794798 Charles P. Floyd Texas State Bar No. 24055487 GREENBERG TRAURIG, LLP 2200 Ross Avenue, Suite 5200 Dallas, Texas 75201 214-665-3600 - Telephone 214-665-3601- Facsimile ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANTS CAT SEATTLE, LLC, ASCEND HEALTH CORPORATION, and RICHARD KRESCH, Individually Page 10 of Motion for Letters Rogatory and Exhibits Page 6 of Exhibit A CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE The undersigned certifies that a true and correct copy of the foregoing was served on the following counsel of record pursuant to the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure by U.S. certified mail, return receipt requested and facsimile on November __, 2013: Charles C. Frederiksen Glast, Phillips & Murray, P.C. 14801 Quorum Drive, suite 500 Dallas, Texas 75254 Victor Vital Page 11 of Motion for Letters Rogatory and Exhibits Page 7 of Exhibit A EXHIBIT “A” 1. Please state your full name, occupation, official title, home address, and business address. ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ 2. Are you the custodian of records for your documents, communications, files, and other records? ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ 3. In your capacity as the custodian of records, are you familiar with whether you maintain records of your business activities? ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ 4. Are the documents that are responsive to the requests in Exhibit “B” kept under your care, supervision, custody, or control? ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ 5. Was it in the regular course of your business activity for you or other persons with personal knowledge of the act, event, condition, opinion, or diagnosis identified in the documents responsive to the requests in Exhibit “B” to make such documents or to transmit such information to be included in the documents? ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ 6. Were the documents responsive to the requests in Exhibit “B” made at or near the time of the act, event, condition, opinion, or diagnosis identified in the records or within a reasonable time thereafter? ________________________________________________________________________ Page 12 of Motion for Letters Rogatory and Exhibits Page 8 of Exhibit A ________________________________________________________________________ 7. Were the documents responsive to the requests in Exhibit “B” made and kept in your regular course of daily business activities by you? ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ 8. Were the documents responsive to the requests in Exhibit “B” transmitted to your files, and did you maintain the records as part of your official duties as the custodian of records for you? ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ 9. Please hand the originals or exact duplicates of the documents responsive to the requests in Exhibit “B” to the court reporter taking your deposition for photocopying and attachment to this deposition. Have you now given all of the documents responsive to the requests in Exhibit “B” to the court reporter taking your deposition? If not, identify for the court reporter the documents you did not produce and explain why you did not produce them. ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ 10. In the event you are unable to find any of the documents responsive to the requests in Exhibit “B,” how long do you maintain your files, and do you ever destroy your files? ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ 11. Are you aware of any other person that may have possession of documents pertaining to the subject matter of this lawsuit? If so, please state the name and address of such entity or person, if known. ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ Page 13 of Motion for Letters Rogatory and Exhibits Page 9 of Exhibit A 12. Have you been requested or directed by a person to withhold or protect, for any reason, the documents responsive to Exhibit “B”? Has any person suggested that you should withhold or protect the documents responsive to Exhibit “B”? If so, please state the name and address of the person who conveyed this information to you and when such event occurred. ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ 13. Do you know or have reason to believe that the documents responsive to Exhibit “B” have in any manner been edited, purged, culled, or otherwise culled? If so, please identify such documents and explain why and how they were altered or removed. ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ 14. If any of the documents responsive to Exhibit “B” were, but are no longer, in your possession, custody, or control, or no longer exist, state whether (1) they are missing or lost, (2) they were destroyed, (3) they were transferred to others, or (4) they were otherwise disposed of, and explain the circumstances surrounding their disposition, including the date of such disposition. ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ 15. Are the documents you handed to the court reporter true and correct copies of the documents in your possession, custody, or control? ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ Page 14 of Motion for Letters Rogatory and Exhibits Page 10 of Exhibit A Signed this ___ date of _______, 2013. _____________________________________ Mary Ellen Stewart Sworn to and subscribed before me this ____ day of ______, 2013. ________________________________ Notary Public for the State of Washington Page 15 of Motion for Letters Rogatory and Exhibits Page 11 of Exhibit A EXHIBIT “B” INSTRUCTIONS AND DEFINITIONS The following instructions and definitions shall govern: 1. If any requested document or information described in this request was, but no longer is, in your possession, or subject to your custody or control, or in existence, state whether: a. It is missing or lost; b. It has been destroyed; c. It has been transferred, voluntarily or involuntarily, to others; or d. It has been disposed of otherwise. In each instance, explain the circumstances surrounding such disposition and identify the person(s) directing or authorizing same, and the date(s) thereof. Identify each document or the information by listing its author, his or her address, type of document (e.g., letter, memorandum, telegram, chat, photograph, etc.) and/or format of information, date, subject matter, present location(s), and custodian(s), and state whether the document (or copies) are still in existence. 2. Pursuant to Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 196.4, all data or information that exists in electronic or magnetic media form shall be produced in its original format on machine- readable magnetic disk, tape, or CD-ROM, or paper print-out if electronic production is impracticable. Paper printouts shall be organized and labeled to identify the database, drive or other media where the original data are stored. All data or information produced in electronic or magnetic media shall be labeled to identify its format and/or the appropriate computer software or other means necessary to retrieve it. 3. If any document called for herein is withheld from production for any reason, including, but not limited to, on a claim of privilege or other asserted protection against discovery by any statute, rule, doctrine, decision or other ground, please provide a privilege log setting forth the following information for each document withheld: a. A description of the document, including the type of document, date, author, and recipient; b. The identity of all other persons who received copies of the documents; c. The basis for withholding the document; d. A brief description by subject matter of the privileged matter; and e. The request(s) as to which the document is responsive. Page 16 of Motion for Letters Rogatory and Exhibits Page 12 of Exhibit A 4. “Document” as used herein is used in the broadest sense permitted by the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure and shall include, but is not limited to, all written, recorded, or graphic materials of any nature whatsoever and all copies thereof, whether draft or final, within the possession, custody, or control of Plaintiff or of any person acting or purporting to act for or on behalf of Plaintiff, or in concert with it, including but not limited to: information stored on computer or computer-accessible medium (such as servers, routers, directories, files, databases, computer databases, imaging, disks, hard drives, back-up, magnetic tapes, data cells, drums, or CDs), Palm Pilot, Blackberry, or similar device, voice mail, printouts, affidavits, contracts, agreements, correspondence, e-mails, telegrams, memoranda, records, forms, reports, books, notebooks, notes, summaries, or records of telephone conversations, personal conversations, or interviews, diaries, calendars, telex messages, transcripts, appointment or scheduling books, daytimers, time sheets, statistical statements, work papers, drafts, graphs, charts, slides, demonstrative or visual aids, accounts, analytical records, minutes or records of meetings or conferences, consultants' reports, appraisals, expense accounts, reports or summaries of negotiations, brochures, lists, journals, advertisements, computer tapes and cards, data processing input and output, microfilm, and all other written, printed, recorded, or photographic matter or sound reproductions, however produced or reproduced. 5. The term “computer database” or “database” shall include any information that may be obtained by electronic or computer means including, but not limited to personal digital assistants (PDAs) or other handheld computing devices, servers, routers, hard drives, diskettes, tapes, imaging, CD, software, e-mail, voice mail, data back-up, directories, indexes, files, databases, or data compilations. 6. The term “person” means any natural person or any legal entity, including a proprietorship, partnership, limited partnership, trust, firm, corporation, association, governmental agency, or other organization or association. 7. The terms “reflect,” “reflecting,” “regard,” “regarding,” “refer to,” “refers to,” “referring to,” “relate to,” “related to,” and “relating to” mean constituting, consisting of, bearing on, evidencing, indicating, connected with, associated with, or in any way connected with the matter discussed, in whole or in part. 8. The terms “you,” “your,” and “yours” refer to Mary Ellen Stewart, and/or your present or former partners, employees, agents, consultants, experts, representatives, heirs, successors and assigns, and attorneys, as well as all other individuals, persons, and entities in the employ of or who act, have acted, purport to act, or have purported to act on its behalf. 9. “BoP” refers to the Washington Board of Pharmacy, including its employees, agents, representatives, and investigators. 10. The term “Transactions” refers to the transactions effected under, by and/or related to the August 3, 2011 Asset Purchase Agreement between CAT Seattle, LLC and Duffy I, L.P. and all associated and related instruments and agreements (e.g., Real Estate Purchase Page 17 of Motion for Letters Rogatory and Exhibits Page 13 of Exhibit A Agreement), as well as the August 23, 2012 Amendment to the Asset Purchase Agreement. DOCUMENTS TO BE PRODUCED AT DEPOSITION Please produce the following documents and communications in your possession, custody, and control relating to the following: 1. All communications with or involving James Graham regarding the Schick Shadel Hospital in Seattle, Washington, the Schick Shadel Hospital in Denton, Texas, the Ascend Defendants, the Transactions, the BoP, and/or the subject matter of this case. 2. All communications with or involving Erick Davis, M.D. regarding the Schick Shadel Hospital in Seattle, Washington, the Schick Shadel Hospital in Denton, Texas, the Ascend Defendants, the Transactions, the BoP, and/or the subject matter of this case. 3. All communications with or involving Kathy Evans regarding the Schick Shadel Hospital in Seattle, Washington, the Schick Shadel Hospital in Denton, Texas, the Ascend Defendants, the Transactions, the BoP, and/or the subject matter of this case. 4. All communications with or involving Kristin Todora regarding the Schick Shadel Hospital in Seattle, Washington, the Schick Shadel Hospital in Denton, Texas, the Ascend Defendants, the Transactions, the BoP, and/or the subject matter of this case. 5. All communications with or involving Richard St. Peter regarding the Schick Shadel Hospital in Seattle, Washington, the Schick Shadel Hospital in Denton, Texas, the Ascend Defendants, the Transactions, the BoP, and/or the subject matter of this case. 6. All communications with or involving Kalyan Dandala, M.D. regarding the Schick Shadel Hospital in Seattle, Washington, the Schick Shadel Hospital in Denton, Texas, the Ascend Defendants, the Transactions, the BoP, and/or the subject matter of this case. 7. All communications with or involving Marvy Schmidt regarding the Schick Shadel Hospital in Seattle, Washington, the Schick Shadel Hospital in Denton, Texas, the Ascend Defendants, the Transactions, the BoP, and/or the subject matter of this case. 8. All communications with or involving Elaine Oksendahl regarding the Schick Shadel Hospital in Seattle, Washington, the Schick Shadel Hospital in Denton, Texas, the Ascend Defendants, the Transactions, the BoP, and/or the subject matter of this case. 9. All communications with or involving Debra Kristiansen regarding the Schick Shadel Hospital in Seattle, Washington, the Schick Shadel Hospital in Denton, Texas, the Ascend Defendants, the Transactions, the BoP, and/or the subject matter of this case. Page 18 of Motion for Letters Rogatory and Exhibits Page 14 of Exhibit A 10. All communications with or involving Doug Beck regarding the Schick Shadel Hospital in Seattle, Washington, the Schick Shadel Hospital in Denton, Texas, the Ascend Defendants, the Transactions, the BoP, and/or the subject matter of this case. 11. All communications with or involving Jace Graham regarding the Schick Shadel Hospital in Seattle, Washington, the Schick Shadel Hospital in Denton, Texas, the Ascend Defendants, the Transactions, the BoP, and/or the subject matter of this case. 12. All communications with or involving any other employee of Palo Petroleum, Inc. regarding the Schick Shadel Hospital in Seattle, Washington, the Schick Shadel Hospital in Denton, Texas, the Ascend Defendants, the Transactions, the BoP, and/or the subject matter of this case. 13. All of James Graham’s communications with or involving Erick Davis, M.D. regarding the Schick Shadel Hospital in Seattle, Washington, the Schick Shadel Hospital in Denton, Texas, the Ascend Defendants, the Transactions, the BoP, and/or the subject matter of this case. 14. All of James Graham’s communications with or involving Kathy Evans regarding the Schick Shadel Hospital in Seattle, Washington, the Schick Shadel Hospital in Denton, Texas, the Ascend Defendants, the Transactions, the BoP, and/or the subject matter of this case. 15. All of James Graham’s communications with or involving Kristin Todora regarding the Schick Shadel Hospital in Seattle, Washington, the Schick Shadel Hospital in Denton, Texas, the Ascend Defendants, the Transactions, the BoP, and/or the subject matter of this case. 16. All of James Graham’s communications with or involving Richard St. Peter regarding the Schick Shadel Hospital in Seattle, Washington, the Schick Shadel Hospital in Denton, Texas, the Ascend Defendants, the Transactions, the BoP, and/or the subject matter of this case. 17. All of James Graham’s communications with or involving Kalyan Dandala, M.D. regarding the Schick Shadel Hospital in Seattle, Washington, the Schick Shadel Hospital in Denton, Texas, the Ascend Defendants, the Transactions, the BoP, and/or the subject matter of this case. 18. All of James Graham’s communications with or involving Marvy Schmidt regarding the Schick Shadel Hospital in Seattle, Washington, the Schick Shadel Hospital in Denton, Texas, the Ascend Defendants, the Transactions, the BoP, and/or the subject matter of this case. 19. All of James Graham’s communications with or involving Elaine Oksendahl regarding the Schick Shadel Hospital in Seattle, Washington, the Schick Shadel Hospital in Denton, Page 19 of Motion for Letters Rogatory and Exhibits Page 15 of Exhibit A Texas, the Ascend Defendants, the Transactions, the BoP, and/or the subject matter of this case. 20. All of James Graham’s communications with or involving Debra Kristiansen regarding the Schick Shadel Hospital in Seattle, Washington, the Schick Shadel Hospital in Denton, Texas, the Ascend Defendants, the Transactions, the BoP, and/or the subject matter of this case. 21. All of James Graham’s communications with or involving Doug Beck regarding the Schick Shadel Hospital in Seattle, Washington, the Schick Shadel Hospital in Denton, Texas, the Ascend Defendants, the Transactions, the BoP, and/or the subject matter of this cas