Davis vs. TurtleBoy Sports et al

Saturday, May 14, 2016

Second Set of Questions for Gaffney

Second Set of Questions for Gaffney

Legal Advice- no way. These are the second set of Questions for Mr. Gaffney. I have it better to ask the Questions before seeking documents. Depending on the Answers to Questions the documents would be chosen to ascertain the veracity of the Answers.

OMMONWEALTH OF MASACHUSETTS

WORCESTER, SS SUPERIOR COURT 16-0288 B

********************************

Michael Gaffney, Plaintiff

Vs.

Gordon T. Davis *

Defendant

Vs.

InCity Times

Rosalie Tirella

Defendants *

********************************

DEFENDANT SECOND SET OF INTERROGATORIES 25-28

TO BE ANSWERED BY PLAINTIFF UNDER OATH

DEFINITIONS

A. IDENTIFY, OR IDENTITY, when used in reference to:

1. PERSON OR INDIVIDUAL shall mean to state his or her full name, present or last known residence address (designating which), job title, employment address, business and residence telephone numbers.

2. A firm, corporation or other organization shall mean to state in full name, present or last known address and telephone number (designating which), the legal for of such entity or organization, and the IDENTITY of its chief executive officers.

3. DOCUMENT shall mean to state the title (if any); the DATE; the IDENTITY of author, sender, recipient, letter, memorandum, book, telegram, chart, etc.; or some means of identifying it; and to IDENTIFY its present location and custodian;

4. LOCATION OR PLACE shall mean to name a physical place in such detail as to satisfy Rule 34(b) of the Massachusetts Rules of Civil Procedure, with respect to “reasonable particularity”;

5. An ORAL communication shall mean to state the DATE, subject matter, communicator, communicate, nature of the communication (i.e., by telephone or face – to – face, etc.), whether it was recorded in any way, and, if so, the manner in which it was recorded, and the identity of any witnesses thereto;

6. COST OR AMOUNT shall mean to state the total cost or amount and to itemize the cost or amount of each component of the total, including but not limited to material equipment, depreciation, salvage value, labor, taxes, overhead and profit;

7. STATE OR STATEMENT shall mean to state in detail the DATE; the IDENTITY of the person making the statement; the person to whom it is directed; the substance of the statement; whether it was recorded in any manner, and if so, the manner in which it was recorded and the IDENTITY of its present location and custodian; whether it was verified by the person making the statement; the IDENTITY of any witnesses thereto, and whether the statement was written or oral.

B. DATE shall mean the exact day, month, and year, if ascertainable, or, if not, the best available approximation including relationship to other events (indicating whether a DATE is exact or approximate.

C. DESCRIBE shall mean to specify in detail and to particularize the content of the answer to the question and not just to state in summary or outline fashion, including but not limited to stating each DATE, fact, including but not limited to stating each DATE, fact, event, occurrence and IDENTIFYING each DOCUMENT and IDENTIFYING each individual who can testify as to the alleged dates, facts, events, and occurrences.

D. DOCUMENT shall mean any physical embodiment of information, including but not limited to every writing or record of every type and description that is of has been in the possession, control or custody of the responding PLAINTFF or of which the responding PLAINTFF has knowledge.

E. INCIDENT shall mean the claim of the PLAINTIFF and the surrounding events and circumstances, including any counterclaim filed or to be filed by the Defendants.

F. PLAINTIFF shall mean MICHAEL T. GAFFNEY

A. DEFENDANT shall mean GORDON T. DAVIS

INSTRUCTIONS

1. In answering each interrogatory, please identify each individual who was a source of and information provided in the answer.

2. The answer to the interrogatories must include all information known to you and all persons acting on your behalf or under your control, including but not limited to you and all persons acting on your behalf or under your control, including but not limited to you attorneys, investigators, insurance carriers and their representatives. If you do not have information to answer an interrogatory, you are under duty to make a reasonable effort to obtain such.

3. These interrogatories are to be deemed continuing in nature and it is hereby requested that any newly discovered, corrected of additional information responsive to these interrogatories be supplied as soon as is reasonably practicable upon receipt thereof.

INTERROGATORIES

25.Please indicate whether the mental anguish you allegedly suffered affected you relationship with your wife and family in any way negative.

26. Please indicate everyone and all people who attended any and all of your fundraising events for any and all of your candidacies for City Council of Worcester MA.

27. Please provide everyone and all people who contributed anything to your campaigns for City Councillor. Please include contributors of money and in kind contributions.

28. Please refer to Worcester Magazine stories attached to instant Questions. Did you author any of the social media posts with your name appearing in the reference Worcester Magazine stories?

By the Pro Se Plaintiff

Gordon T. Davis

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I, Gordon T. Davis, Pro Se Defendant, hereby certify that I have this day served the foregoing Question 25-28 by mailing first class, postage prepaid to:

Michael Gaffney

416 Belmont St. Suite 102

Worcester, Massachusetts 0l604

______________________________ ________________________

Gordon T. Davis May 4, 2016

Emergency Motion For Delay of Deposition

Emergency Motion for Delay of Deposition

This is not legal advice. When a matter does not have time to go through the normal court process found in Rules of Superior Civil Court, a party can contact the Court by himself (ex parte). That party does not have to inform the other parties before hand of what he is asking the Court to do. The moving party does have to inform the other parties as soon as possible.

COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS

WORCESTER, SS

SUPERIOR COURT C.A. No. 1685CV00217 D

********************************

GORDON T. DAVIS, Plaintiff

Vs.

TURTLEBOY SPORTS INC.,

AIDEN KEARNEY,

Defendants

********************************

PLAINTIFF’S EMERGENCY MOTION FOR POSTPONEMENT OF DEFENDANT’S DEPOSITION AND DUCES TACUMJ.

Background

1. The Plaintiff has filed a Motion for Protect Order for which a Hearing is scheduled for May 17, 2016. (Exhibit 1)

2. After filing of the Motion for Protective Order the Defendants scheduled a Deposition of the Plaintiff’s bank. It is scheduled to take place on May 12, 2016. ( Exhibit 2)

Motion

The Plaintiff respectfully asks the Court to postpone the Defendants’ Deposition of the Bank until after the Court has ruled on the Plaintiff’s Motion for a Protective Order.

Argument

As evidenced in the Defendants’ publications found in the Motion for Protective Order, the Defendants have a history of the misuse of confidential and private information. The Protective Order is intended to prevent the Defendants’ intentional dissemination of confidential and privileged information t0 the public with the purpose of harassment, annoyance, and ridicule of the Plaintiff and his family.

The ruling by the Court will not take place until after the scheduled Deposition.

The Defendants’ will have the opportunity to discover the same information after the Court has ruled on the Protective Order.

Conclusion

The Plaintiff respectfully moves for an emergency order to postpone the Deposition of the Plaintiff bank on May 12, 2016.

Respectfully submitted,

Gordon T. Davis Pro se Plaintiff Worcester MA 01604

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I, Gordon T. Davis, pro se Plaintiff do here by certify that I have served the a copy of the Emergency Motion to Postpone the Defendants’ Deposition of the Plaintiff’s Bank by mean of email and first class mail to their attorney

Margaret M. Melican, Esq.

2 Foster St.

Worcester MA 01608

Monday, April 11, 2016

Motion to Compel Answers

Like before this is not legal advice. Mr. Gaffney is refusing to answer the Interrogatories. I have asked the Courrt to compel Mr. Gaffney's answer. It is curious how Mr. Gaffney, a licensed attorney, seems to have misread Rule 33.

COMMCOMMONWEALTH OF MASACHUSETTS

WORCESTER, SS

SUPERIOR COURT

16-0288 B

********************************

Michael Gaffney, Plaintiff *

Vs. *

Gordon T. Davis *

Defendant *

Vs. *

InCity Times *

Rosalie Tirella *

Defendants * *

********************************

DEFENDANT GORDON T. DAVIS’ MOTION TO COMPEL PLAINTIFF TO ANSWER INTERROGATORIES

The Pro Se Defendant Gordon T. Davis respectfully requests this Court to compel the Plaintiff Mr. Gaffney to answer the interrogatories served upon him by the Defendant.

Background

1. On February 23, 2016 the Plaintiff filed with this Court a one million dollar complaint for defamation. (Exhibit 1)

2. On the same day the Plaintiff informed the news media of his complaint. (Exhibit 2)

3. The Plaintiff has not as of the date of this motion served the complaint to the Defendant per the authorized agents described in the Court rules.

4. On March 8, 2016 the individual Defendant Gordon T. Davis answered the complaint. (Exhibit 3)

5. On March 19, 2016 Defendant Mr. Davis served the Plaintiff with a set of interrogatories. (Exhibit 4).

6. On March 25, 2016 the Plaintiff refused to provide answers to the interrogatories. The Plaintiff asserted that the complaint was not served and therefore the interrogatories are premature. (Exhibit 5)

Argument

7. Rule 33 of the Civil Court allows the Plaintiff to be served interrogatories without leave of Court after the commencement of the action by the Defendant.

Civil Procedure Rule 33: Interrogatories to Parties

(a) Availability: Procedures for Use.

(1) In General.

Any party may serve upon any other party written interrogatories to be answered by the party served or, if the party served is a public or private corporation or a partnership or association or governmental agency, by any officer or agent, who shall furnish such information as is available to the party. Interrogatories may, without leave of court, be served upon the plaintiff after commencement of the action and upon any other party with or after service of the summons and complaint upon that party.[1]

8. On April 2, 2016 Defendant Mr. Davis attempted to engage in a 9c conference with the Plaintiff. (Exhibit 6)

9. As of the date of this motion the Plaintiff has not responded to the request for the 9c conference.

Conclusion

Rule 33 allows without leave, the Defendant Mr. Davis to serve interrogatories upon the Plaintiff Mr. Gaffney. The Defendant respectfully requests the Court to enforce Rule 33 and compel the Plaintiff Mr. Gaffney to answer the Plaintiff’s interrogatories.

The Defendant Mr. Davis served the interrogatories on March 19, 2016 and respectfully requests the Court to use that date as the beginning of the 45 days that the Plaintiff is normally allowed without enlargement to answer the interrogatories.

The Plaintiff Mr. Gaffney is a licensed attorney and he should not be rewarded for misreading Rule 33 or for missing a deadline.

Respectfully submitted

Gordon T. Davis

Pro Se Defendant

[1] Bold print done by writer for emphasis

Saturday, April 2, 2016

Motion to Enlarge Time to Respond to Discovery

This is not legal advice

A party will try sometimes to hurry matters up and cause some sort of error. The other party can ask the Court for more time.

COMMONWEALTH OF MASACHUSETTS

WORCESTER, SS

SUPERIOR COURT C.A. No. 1685CV00217 D

********************************

GORDON T. DAVIS, Plaintiff

Vs.

TURTLEBOY SPORTS INC.,

AIDEN KEARNEY,

Defendants

********************************

PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR LONGER RESPONSE TIME FOR DISCOVERER

Background

1. The Plaintiff has filed this Complaint against the Defendants for defamation. (Exhibit 1)

2. After filing the Complaint Defendant continued to defame the Plaintiff in their publications and the Complaint was amended to include the additional defamation. ( Exhibit 2)

3. The Defendants moved for dismissal for which there is a Hearing on April 19, 2016. (Exhibit 3)

4. The Defendants sent to the Plaintiff Request for Production of Documents and interrogatories on March 8, 2016. (Exhibit 4)

5. The Plaintiff sent the Defendant a Motion for a Protective Order on March 21, 2016 (Exhibit 5)

6. The Defendants on March 28, 2016 sent the Plaintiff a revised Request for Documents. (Exhibit 6)

Motion

The Plaintiff respectfully asks the Court to allow a longer time to respond to the discovery requests than is routinely allowed in Rules 34 and 33. Rule 34 and Rule 33 permit the Court to change the time to respond to discovery. The Plaintiff respectfully moves to extend discovery to 45 day after the ruling on the Motion for Protective Order.

Argument

7. The Court’s ruling on the Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss might make discovery a moot issue.

8. Some of the information demanded by the Defendants is confidential, privileged, and private. The Defendants and their attorney have a history of using such information to harass, oppress, and annoy other parties including private person. (Exhibit 7)

The Protective Order would prevent the misuse of such information and prevent it dissemination to the public.

9. Much of the information and many of the documents are not held by the Plaintiff, such as information regarding the MCAD. This information or documents cannot be obtained in the normal time limits of Rule 34.

10. The complaint is only six weeks old. The discovery can go on for 24 months; there is no urgency preventing the enlargement of time of the response.

Conclusion

Given the evidence and arguments above, there is good cause to allow an enlargement of time to respond to Rules 33 and 34 to 45 days after the ruling on the Protective Order.

Respectfully submitted,

Gordon T. Davis Pro se Plaintiff Worcester MA 01604

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I, Gordon T. Davis, pro se Plaintiff do here by certify that I have served the a copy of the Motion to Enlargement time to respond to Defendants’ Requests for Interrogatories and Production of Documents by mean of first class mail to their attorney at

Margaret M. Melican, Esq.

2 Foster St.

Worcester MA 01608

__________ ________

Gordon T. Davis Date