DISCOVERY DEMAND · Web viewPre-litigation memo James, As per our conversation, here are my finings...

Reynolds & Starr P.C.Attorneys at law

1234 I’m Trying LNKansas City, Mo.

[email protected]

1800-555-9999

MemoTo: James Reynolds [[email protected]]

From: Ashley Bauer [[email protected]]

cc: Pre-litigation

Date: 11/17/2017

Re: Pre-litigation memo

James,

As per our conversation, here are my finings for Mr. Crows potential personal injury/ wrongful

death suit regarding the potential: parties, causes of action, damages, court and next steps. Below

is what I have found, and believe to be correct for this case.

Parties: In this case the plaintiffs I have named are:

1) Gregory Crow, Samantha’s husband;

2) Jessica, the Crow’s oldest child;

3) Bradley, the Crows oldest son which is age five; and

4) Cooper, the Crows youngest son who is age three.

I have named them all as plaintiffs as, Mo. Rev. Stat. § 537.080.1 defines who may bring a

wrongful death action as follows: if there be no persons in class (1) (spouse, children or their

lineal descendants, or parents), or (2) (siblings or their descendants) entitled to bring the action,

then by a plaintiff ad litem..

In this case I have named two defendants:

1) Dr. Richard Sayer, the drunk driver whom ran Samantha over and killed her; and

2) The Small Valley Country Club, the place where Dr. Sayer was provided the alcohol in which

to become intoxicated.

I have identified two defendants because The Small Valley Country Club A.K.A. Tavern Keeper

was the entity that provided Dr. Sayer with the liquor to become intoxicated, and Dr. Sayer is the

one who got behind the wheel while intoxicated and killed Samantha Crow, so both parties

contributed to the accident; therefore, assuming the negligence of both, they are joint tortfeasors.

Cause of Actions: I have determined the cause of action suit against each defendant to be both

1) negligence; and 2) wrongful death

Elements of Negligence in action are: The elements necessary to prove a cause of action for

negligence are as follows: (1) a duty, or obligation, recognized by the law, requiring the actor to

conform to a certain standard of conduct, for the protection of others against unreasonable risks:

2

(2) A failure on his part to conform to the standard required; (3) A reasonably close casual

connection between conduct and the resulting injury; and (4) Actual loss or damages resulting to

the interest of another. See Gorman v. St. Louis- San Fransisco R.R.C.O., 427 S.W. 2d 390 1968

Burden of proof a plaintiff bears: In Missouri a claim for negligence requires that a plaintiff

plead facts which demonstrate (1) defendant owed a duty to plaintiff; (2) Defendant breached

that duty; (3) The breach of that duty proximately caused plaintiffs injury; Krause v. U.S. Truck

Co., Inc., 787 S.W. 2d 708, 710 (Mo. banc. 1990) and (4) central to such a claim plaintiff must

establish injury. See City Quick v. All Tel Missouri, Inc., 694 S.W. 757, 759 (Mo. App 1985)

Elements of Wrongful Death include: 1) the death was caused in whole, or in part by the conduct

of the defendant; 2) the defendant was negligent or strictly liable for the victim’s death; 3) there

is a surviving spouse, children, beneficiaries, or dependents; and 4) Monterey damages or human

damages such as loss of contortion have resulted from the victim’s death. Mo. Rev. Stat. 537.080

R.S.M.o.

Burden of proof a plaintiff must bear: In wrongful death actions, a plaintiff must establish that

"but for" the defendant's actions or inactions, the patient would not have died. But-for causation

is also known as "causation in fact." Washington v. Myer, 897 S.W.2d . This Court has explained:

The general rule is that if a defendant is negligent and his [or her] negligence combines with that

of another, or with any other independent, intervening cause, he [or she] is liable, although his

[or her] negligence was not the sole negligence or the sole proximate cause, and although his [or

her] negligence, without such other independent intervening cause, would not have produced the

injury.

3

The burden of proof for the wrongful death claim against The Small Valley Country Club: The

plaintiff will have to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the person in question was, at

the time, obviously, actually and apparently intoxicated in order to prove by a preponderance of

the evidence that the bartender knew, or should have known, such fact. Furthermore, to be

successful upon such a cause of action, the plaintiff would have to prove by a preponderance of

the evidence that serving the additional intoxicating liquor, after the subject person was already

obviously, actually and apparently intoxicated, was a contributing proximate cause of the

ensuing injuries.

I see no reason to pursue any additional intentional torts because the plaintiffs will already be

able to recover damages of emotional distress and then some through means of wrongful death

action. Mo. Rev. Stat. 537.762.1 or Missouri’s strict liability Statute which provides that a

defendant who is only liable due to selling the product in the stream of commerce can be

dismissed if another defendant is a party from whom plaintiff can fully recover. I see no reason

to try to apply this as I doubt that Dr. Sayer will be able to cover the full amount on his own, and

even if he is it will drastically lower the amount of award for the plaintiffs.

Damages: The damages recoverable for wrongful death are monetary damages from the

defendants being negligent and causing wrongful death. These damages can be collected from

both defendants, as long as all elements to negligence and wrongful death are proven by plaintiff:

There is also no limitation on recovery for wrongful death in Missouri. See MO. Rev. Stat. §

537.090 RSMo 1978 (1982 Cum. Supp.) The damages may include: Medical and funeral

expenses, lost earnings, reasonable value of the loss of consortium or companionship, reasonable

value of the loss of services, comfort, instruction, guidance, support, counsel, and training,

4

property damage. Additionally, the jury may award an amount of money to compensate for the

deceased’s suffering between the time of the injury and the time of death. Importantly any

suffering the deceased suffered between the time of injury and the time of death is merged into a

wrongful death Statute. There is not a separate claim for the decedent’s pain and suffering prior

to death.

Actual and Punitive damages may be awarded in a negligence action if the defendant showed

complete indifference to or conscious disregard for the safety of others. This is so if the

defendant knew or had reason to know that there was a high degree of probability that the action

would result in injury Stojkovic v. Weller, 802 S.W. 2d 152 (Mo. Banc. 1991) Punitive damages

are monetary amount awarded to a plaintiff for the purposes of punishing the defendant, or to

deter him from engaging in the same conduct in the future. I believe we will be able to get

punitive damages out of Dr. Sayer for sure; however, in the State of Missouri it will be harder to

prove for the Small Valley Country Club.

Court: Because the plaintiff(s) and both defendant’s residency and corporation’s establishment

are all in Jefferson City, Mo. And it is also where the accident causing injury to the plaintiff

happened, Personal jurisdiction would be in a district court; however Because Samantha Crow

earned $225,000.00 annual income and the amount of lost earning alone will be well into the

millions, the amount exceeds the jurisdictional limit of the district court Under U.S.C. 1332 (a)

(2) Art. III U.S. Const. the subject matter jurisdiction of this case will be held in a Missouri

circuit court because the amount in controversies exceeds $75, 000.00. The venue I have

determined appropriate is: 301 E. High St, Jefferson City, MO. 65101

5

Next Steps: The next steps to take would be to file a complaint against both the defendants, and

hire someone to serve them each a summons and complaint MO. R. CIV. P. 54 States that the

person whom serves the documents must be made by the sheriff or a person over the age of 18

years old who is not a party to the action. MO. R. CIV. P. 55.25 state that the defendant has

thirty days after the time of issuance to answer the complaint, or up to forty-five days if notice

was published. After we receive the complaint, we will then begin with the discovery demands,

deposition notices, judicial subpoena, and duces tecum for each party involved in the case.

If everything looks good to you, please let me know and I will write up the summons and

complaint for each defendant, file it with the courts, have them served, and enter it into the

calendar.

Ashley Bauer paralegal

6

Summons and complaint:

CIRCUIT COURT FOR STATE OF MISSOURI

COUNTY OF COLE

[GREGORY CROW] ,

[ JESSICA CROW], [BRADLEHY CROW], [COOPER CROW]

Plaintiff

v. SUMMONSAction No.

[ DR. RICHARD SAYER];

and

[SMALL VALLEY COUNTRY CLUB]

Defendant

To the person(s) named as Defendant(s) above,

7

A lawsuit has been filed against you, PLEASE TAKE NOTICE THAT YOU ARE SUMMONED to answer the complaint of the plaintiff(s) herein and to serve a copy of your answer on the plaintiff(s) attorney, James Reynolds or Reynolds & Starr, P.C., at the address indicated below within 20 days after service of this Summons (not counting the day of service itself), or within 30 days after service is complete if the Summons is not delivered personally to you within the State of Missouri.

YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT should you fail to answer; a judgment will be entered against you by default for the relief demanded in the complaint.

CLERK OF COURT

Date:

Signature of Clerk or Deputy Clerk Signature of Attorney

JAMES REYNOLDS

REYNOLDS & STARR, P.C.

2300 W. 11TH STREET 5TH FLR. STE # 105

JEFFERSON CITY, MO.

65101

TEL: 1-(800) 555-9999

FAX: 1-(800) 555-9991

[email protected]

8

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF MISSOURI,

COUNTY OF COLE (19TH JUDICIAL CUIRCUIT)

[GREGORY CROW]

[JESSICA CROW]

[BRAD CROW]

[COOPER CROW]

Plaintiff(s),

vs.[DR. RICHARD SAWYER]

AND

[SMALL VALLEY COUNTRY CLUB]

Defendant(s)

Case No.: 123456

COMPLAINT

Plaintiffs Gregory Crow, Jessica Crow, Bradly Crow, Cooper Crow, by and through their

attorney, James Reynolds and Reynolds and Starr, P.C. now files suite against Dr. Richard Sayer

and Small Valley Country Club in support thereof stated as follows:

Facts

1. That Gregory Crow is the surviving spouse of Samantha Crow and is the Personal

Representative of the Estate of Samantha Crow and resides in Cole County State of Missouri.

9

2. That Jessica Crow is the surviving daughter of Samantha Crow and resides in Cole County

Missouri State.

3. That Bradly Crow is the surviving son of Samantha Crow and resides in Cole County,

Missouri State.

4. That Cooper Crow is the surviving son of Samantha Crow and resides in Cole County

Missouri State.

5. That the amount of this claim exceeds the jurisdictional limit of $75k for the District Court of

Missouri and the appropriate venue for this claim is Cole County Circuit Court, under Mo. Rev.

Stat. 527.010, RSMo, and Mo. Rev. Stat. 527.020, RSMo,

6. That the venue lies in the Circuit Court of Cole County under Mo. Rev. Stat. 508.010.2,

RSMo. Because defendants reside in Cole County, and because the negligent acts of defendants

resulting in the wrongful death of Samantha Crow occurred in Cole County.

7. That Small Valley Country Club located at 2300 West What-a-way Ave, Jefferson City, Cole

County, MO. 65103 is a corporation authorized to do business in the State of Missouri, and is in

the business of selling alcoholic liquors to the general public among other golf and recreational

activities.

8. That on or about September 18, 2016 Dr. Richard Sayer was driving his BMW on his way

home from attending a fundraising golf outing at the Small Valley Country Club, heading

Southbound on New Town road mile marker 13.

10

9. That on September 18, 2016 decedent, Samantha Crow, was also on New Town Rd. at mile

marker 13, as a pedestrian, for the purposes of training for an up-coming marathon.

10. That Dr. Sayer hit Samantha Crow with his vehicle, and caused the instant death of Samantha

Crow.

11. That Dr. Richard Sayer failed to stop, and left the scene of the accident, and continued on his

way home.

12. That five hours later that night the Cole County Police department conducted brief

investigation of accident which lead them to Dr. Richard Sayers home located at 1576 Super

Sweet Rd. Jefferson City, Mo. 65101, where they found hair and blood on Dr. Sayers bumper

from Samantha Crow.

13. That the Cole County Police department gave Dr. Sayer a breathalyzer and found Dr. Richard

Sayer to be two times over the legal limit for blood alcohol content.

14. That the Cole County Sheriffs department arrested Dr. Richard Sayer for the murder of

Samantha Crow, and driving while under influence.

15. That at the time of decedents death, she was married to Gregory Crow, and was also survived

by her three adolescent children: Jessica, Bradly, and Cooper and are entitled to recover under

Fed. R. Civ. P. R. 15 (c) (1) (b) and Mo. Rev. Stat. 537.100, 537.090, RSMo,537.080, 537.095.3

11

16. That at the time of death Samantha Crow was earning approximately $225,000.00 per year as

equity partner/trial attorney at West & Crow, LLC located at 550 Never- mind Ave, Jefferson

City, MO.

17. That at the time of decedents death, all of the plaintiff’s health insurance benefits were

provided through Samantha’s firm.

18. That at the time of death decedent had a life insurance policy in place all proceeds to be

payable directly to her husband.

19. That Samantha Crow also had $2.5 million saved in her 401K individual retirement account

and had Gregory Crow named as sole beneficiary.

20. That it is estimated had Samantha Crow lived, it is estimated that she would have retired at

age 65 years of age.

21. At all times herein mentioned, the decedent Samantha Crow was acting in careful and

prudent manner did not assume the risk of her injuries and death was not contributory

negligence.

COUNT I NEGLIGENCE

(Plaintiff(s) v. Dr. Richard Sayer [herein after referred to as defendant])

12

22. Plaintiffs: Gregory Crow, Jessica Crow, Bradly Crow, and Cooper Crow, by and through

their attorney James Reynolds and Reynolds & Starr, P.C. re-allege and incorporate by reference

herein all of the allegations contained in paragraphs 1-21 above and individually, claim damages

against Dr. Richard Sayer [herein after referred to as Defendant] for the following:

23. That on September 18, 2016 defendant displayed gross flagrant character and extreme

negligence in operating his vehicle while under the influence of alcohol with blood alcohol

content over two times the legal limit.

24. Defendant acted recklessly and wantonly by traveling in excess of the legal speed limit and

hitting Samantha crow, then fleeing the scene of accident.

25. That defendant owed legal duty to decedent to operate vehicle free of intoxicants and provide

decedent Samantha Crow a safe place to walk/ run.

26. That defendant failed to fulfill legal duty by driving under influence of alcohol over legal

limit.

27. As proximate result of defendants acts of negligence the decedent, Samantha Crow suffered

fatal injuries.

COUNT II WRONGFUL DEATH

(Plaintiff’s v Dr. Richard Sayer)

13

28. Plaintiffs: Gregory Crow, Jessica Crow, Bradly Crow, and Cooper Crow, by and through



against Dr. Richard Sayer [herein after referred to as Defendant] for the following:

29. That defendant breached Missouri laws, and used reckless and negligent care in operating his

vehicle that directly caused the death of Samantha Crow on September 18, 2016.




leaving plaintiff’s to directly sustain damages which include but are not limited to: mental

anguish, emotional pain and suffering, loss of support, loss of nurture.

WHEREFORE: The Plaintiff ‘s Gregory Crow, Jessica Crow, Bradly Crow, and Cooper Crow

individually, claim damages against the Defendant in Pecuniary damages, loss of support, paid

college, loss of guidance, consortium, punitive damages, funeral and burial cost and the cost of

court in an amount that exceeds the jurisdiction of the District Court of Missouri, to be

determined at trial, plus costs, and for any further relief that this Honorable Court determines

necessary and appropriate.

14

COUNT III NEGLIGENCE

(Plaintiff(s) v Small Valley Country Club

The Plaintiffs: Gregory Crow, Jessica Crow, Bradly Crow, and Cooper Crow, by and through



against Small Valley Country Club [herein after referred to as Defendant] for the following:

31. That pursuant to Mo. Rev. Stat. 311. 310, RS.10.1986, and Mo. Rev. Stat. 537.053 defendant

had a duty to recognize intoxicated patrons, or keep track by reason of consumption, reasonably

assume patron should have been intoxicated.

32. On September 18, 2016 defendant sold or gave certain intoxicating beverages to Dr. Sayer

whom became intoxicated as a result.

33. That as a direct result of his intoxication Dr. Richard Sayer got into his vehicle and drove.

34. That as a direct and proximate result of his intoxication Dr. Richard Sayer committed the

negligent acts of:

a) Drove his vehicle in a manner that was unsafe, and a speed that exceeded the limit.

b) Hit Samantha Crow with his vehicle which resulted in her immediate death.

15

c) Dr. Richard Sayer failed to stop and fled the scene of the accident.

35. That as a direct and proximate cause of defendants supplying Dr. Richard Sayer with

intoxicating beverages causing him to become intoxicated and negligently failing to encourage

him to call a cab, plaintiffs have suffered damages.

COUNT IV WRONGFUL DEATH

(Plaintiff(s) v Small Valley Country Club)

The Plaintiffs: Gregory Crow, Jessica Crow, Bradly Crow, and Cooper Crow, by and through



against Small Valley Country Club [herein after referred to as Defendant] for the following:

29. That pursuant to Mo. Rev. Stat. 311. 310, RS.10.1986, and Mo. Rev. Stat. 537.053 defendant

had a duty to recognize intoxicated patrons, and breached Missouri laws, used reckless and

negligent care in serving Dr. Richard Sayer intoxicating liquors that directly and proximately

caused the death of Samantha Crow on September 18, 2016.

16




leaving plaintiff’s to directly sustain damages which include but are not limited to: mental

anguish, emotional pain and suffering, loss of support, loss of nurture.

WHEREFORE: The Plaintiff ‘s Gregory Crow, Jessica Crow, Bradly Crow, and Cooper

Crow individually, claim damages against the Defendant in Pecuniary damages, loss of support,

paid college, loss of guidance, consortium, punitive damages, funeral and burial cost and the cost

of court in an amount that exceeds the jurisdiction of the District Court of Missouri, to be

determined at trial, plus costs, and for any further relief that this Honorable Court determines

necessary and appropriate.

Dated this [day] of [Month], [year].

17

[Court Clerk Name]

[Court Clerk Signature] [Date]

[Attorney Name]James Reynolds

Reynolds & Starr P.C.6999 W 11th 5th FLR STE 105

Jefferson City, MissouriPhone 1 (800) 555-9999

Fax: 1-(800) [email protected]





18

Answers to complaint:

Reynolds & Starr, P.C.1234 W. 11th Ave. Suit #105Jefferson City, Mo. 65101

P1-(800) 555-9999 | F 1-(800) [email protected]



cc: Samantha Crow

Date: December 2, 2017

Re: Dr. Sayers answers and defense to pleading

James,

As you asked I reviewed Dr. Sayers answers to our pleadings. Defendant claims Statute

of limitations, assumption of risk, contributory negligence and comparative negligence. After

19

examining Missouri State law, I have determined most of these defenses have no merit. Below

you will find my analysis of each defense as it would apply according to Missouri State tort law.

1.) Statute of Limitations: Missouri recognizes Statute of Limitations as a defense to a

wrongful death action Mo. Sup. Ct. R. 55.08. Missouri wrongful death statute Mo. Rev. Stat.

537.080 says that under 537.100 R.S.MO. every action instituted under 537.080 shall be

commenced within three years. Meaning that the Plaintiff has up to three years to file suit. Since

Samantha’s Crow was killed last September 18th of last year (2016) our case is well within the

three-year limit. Therefore, Dr. Sayer’s defense claims for statute of limitations to have no merit.

1.) Assumption of risk: operates as a viable defense against liability in Missouri for both

negligent and reckless conduct Restatement (Second) of torts 496A and 503 (1965); Rule 55.08

based on voluntary consent express or implied, to accept the danger of a known and appreciated

risk, it bars recovery when plaintiff comprehended the actual danger and intelligently acquiesced

in it. The defendant would have to prove that the plaintiff:1) Voluntary assumption of a known

risk by plaintiff; 2) full knowledge of the danger in inherent in the risk. Thompson v. Brown &

Williamson Tobacco Corp., 207 S.W. 3d 76 2006 Mo. APP. LEXIS 1230, Because I highly

doubt the descendant, Samantha Crow, had actually assumed it was dangerous to go for a jog as

there were probably drunk drivers out, I do not believe this defense has any merit.

3.) Contributory Negligence: The defendant claims that the lawsuit is barred by the

contributory negligence of the decedent, Samantha Crow, for running in the dark on a busy road

and not wearing any reflective clothing. If found of Contributory negligence the Plaintiff would

20

be barred from recovering any damages. The facts defendant must prove by preponderance of

evidence to be successful are:1.) that decedent, Samantha Crow, had knowledge of the

condition;2.) that she had an appreciation of the danger under the surrounding circumstances;

and 3.) that decedent failed to exercise responsible care by placing herself in the way of danger.

However, Missouri has abolished contributory negligence and operates as a “pure” comparative

fault State, Gustafson v. Benda, 661 S.W. 2d (Mo. 1983). If decedent was found to have

contributed to her injuries the courts would not bar Plaintiff from receiving any damages, but

treat it as comparative fault and the award of damages would be reduced by the percentage of the

decedents fault and is measured, therefore I see no merit to this defense.

3.) Comparative Fault: Defendant claims that defendant’s own negligence contributed to

the accident. Missouri is a “pure” comparative fault State and comparative fault is a viable

defense to both negligence and wrongful death in the State of Missouri. The elements to

comparative fault are: 1) Actionable negligence by the defendant causing harm or injury t the

plaintiff; 2) A negligent act by the plaintiff that contributed to his or her own injury; 3) A

measurement of the percentage of the relative contribution of the negligence of both plaintiff and

defendant; 4) An award of damages to the plaintiff reduced by the percentage of his or her own

negligence. In order for the judge to grant the defendant summary judgment for comparative

fault, Defendant would have to prove that decedent was injured through her own negligence. A

defendant wrongdoer must prove by a preponderance of evidence, that must be established by

clear and uncontroverted proof; it must be shown without substantial contradiction that the

plaintiff, or party injured, did not at the time exercise the care of an ordinarily prudent person,

and that such want of care on his part contributed to the injury. Young v. Missouri, K. & T. R.

21

Co., 72 Mo. App. 263, 1897 Mo. App. LEXIS 168. This is the only defense I believe has any

merit, as it is common knowledge that when walking/jogging/bicycling at night, it is good

practice to wear reflective clothing and to run on the opposite side of the road, so you are seen

and able to see the cars traveling at you.

Because Dr. Sayers defenses of statute of limitations and assumption of risk, have no

merit we file a motion to dismiss those claims. Which leaves contributory and comparative

negligence. If defendant is able to prove the decedent, contributed to her own injuries by jogging

after dark and failing to wear reflective clothing to make herself visible to on-coming traffic she

will not be barred as Missouri has stated in all torts actions for damages, if defendant is found to

bear 51% or more of fault, then defendant shall be jointly and severally liable for the amount of

the judgment rendered against the defendants

If the defendant is found to be bear less than 51% of fault, then defendant shall only be

responsible for the percentage of the judgment for which the defendant is determined to be

responsible by the tier of fact MO. Rev. Stat. 537.061.1

To be safe I think we should request that defendant produce interrogatories, and possibly the

clothes that Samantha was wearing the night of the accident, so we can be sure to prepare the

best defense possible.

22

Ashley Bauer (paralegal)

Deposition Notices:

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF MISSOURI

COUNTY OF COLE

__________________________________________

GREGORY CROW,

JESSICA CROW,

BRADLY CROW,

COOPER CROW,

Plaintiff(s),

v.

DR. RICHARD SAYER

Defendant __________________________________________

|||||||||||||

Civil Action No.: 99-1180-JTM

DEPOSITION NOTICE

23

NOTICE OF DEPOSITION PURSUANT TO

MO. R. Civ. P. 58.01 (b) (4)

TO: COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANT

Dr. Richard Sayer,

Lynch, Son & Bradshaw, P.C.

4990 Smith n’ Weston Ave

Jefferson City, MO. 65101

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that, pursuant to MO. R. Civ. P 58.01 (b) (4), plaintiff has provided

noticed to defendant that deposition may be used at trial.will take the depositions upon oral

examination, to be recorded by stenographic means and videotape, at the offices of Reynolds and

Starr located at 2300 W. 11th Street 5th Floor Suite # 105, Jefferson City, MO. 65101. Holding

Defendant (Dr. Richard Sayer) on the events on the night of September 18, 2016. Deposition will

commence at 2:00 p.m. on December 13, 2017. If necessary, deposition will be adjourned until

completed.

Dated: November 25, 2017

Respectfully submitted

COUNSEL FOR

PLAINTIFF(S): GREGORY CROW, JESSICA CROW, BRADY CROW, COOPER CROW

24





25

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF MISSOURI

COUNTY OF COLE

__________________________________________

GREGORY CROW,

JESSICA CROW,

BRADLY CROW,

COOPER CROW,

Plaintiff(s),

v.

SMALL VALLEY COUNTRY CLUB

Defendant __________________________________________

|||||||||||||

Civil Action No.: 99-1180-JTM

DEPOSITION NOTICE

NOTICE OF DEPOSITION PURSUANT TO

FED. R. CIV. P. 30(B)(6) and, Mo. R. Civ. P. 58.01 (b) (4)

TO: CLERK OF THE COURT

COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANTS

Small Valley Country Club

Weil Gotshal & Manges L.L.P.

26

767 Fifth Avenue


PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 30(b)(6) and MO. R. Civ. P 58.01 (b)

(4), plaintiff will take the depositions upon oral examination, to be recorded by stenographic

means and videotape, at the offices of Reynolds and Starr located at 2300 W. 11th Street 5th Floor

Suite # 105, Jefferson City, MO. 65101. Holding Corporation (Small Valley Country Club).

Small Valley Country Club is requested to designate the person or persons most knowledgeable

and prepared to testify on behalf of Small Valley Country Club, concerning the subject matter

described in the complaint pertaining to the night of September 18, 2016. The deposition(s) will

commence at 9:00 a.m. on December 10, 2017. If necessary, each deposition will be adjourned

until completed.

Dated: November 25, 2017

Respectfully submitted

COUNSEL FOR

PLAINTIFF(S): GREGORY CROW, JESSICA CROW, BRADY CROW, COOPER CROW

27





Discovery Demands:

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI

[GREGORY CROW],

[JESSICA CROW],

[BRADLEY CROW],

[COOPER CROW],

Plaintiff,

vs.SMALL VALLEY COUNTRY CLUB

Defendant

Case No.: 12345

DISCOVERY DEMAND

Plaintiff’s first request for production of documents and things to defendant Small Valley Country Club

28

Plaintiff’s Gregory Crow, Jessica Crow, Bradly Crow, Cooper Crow, by and through their

attorney, James Reynolds, and Reynolds & Starr, P.C. request defendant, Small Valley

Country Club, production of documents and things to be answered in full and in

accordance with the Rules of Civil Procedure and of the Courts.

1.) List of all employee’s names, phone numbers, and addresses that were working on

the night of September 18, 2016.

2.) A list of all club members and other friends, or witnesses, names, phones numbers,

and addresses that attended the fundraising function at your establishment Small Valley

Country Club on the night of September 18, 2016.

3.) Complete list of all bar tabs of the table Dr. Richard Sayer was sitting on the night of

September 18, 2016.

4.) A copy of any and all video surveillance from both inside of the bar, and outside

parking lot from the night of September 18, 2016.

5.) All credit/debit card receipts from Dr. Richard Sayer on the night of September 18,

2016.

6.) A complete list of all beverage, names and amounts Dr. Richard Sayer had to drink

and well as any and all food he ordered for the night of September 18, 2016.

29

7.) Please attach a copy of Small Valley Country Club’s current Employee Handbook.

And any other instructions in which you tell employee’s what to do, and how to handle

intoxicated patrons.

Dated this 25th day of November, 2017

Reynolds & Starr, P.C.

BY:

James Reynolds

2300 W. 11th St. 5th FLR. STE # 103


Phone: 1- (800) 555-9999

Fax: 1- (800) 555- 9991

[email protected]

Discovery demand #2

James ReynoldsReynolds and Starr, P.C.Jefferson City, Mo. 651011-(800) [email protected]

30

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF MISSOURI, COUNTY OF COLE

[GREGORY CROW],

[JESSICA CROW],

[BRADLEY CROW],

[COOPER CROW],

Plaintiff,

vs.[DR. RICHARD SAYER]

Defendant

Case No.: 21659

DISCOVERY DEMANDS

Plaintiff’s first request for production of documents and things to defendant Dr. Richard Sayer

Plaintiff’s Gregory Crow, Jessica Crow, Bradly Crow, Cooper Crow, by and through their

attorney, James Reynolds, and Reynolds & Starr, P.C. request defendant, Dr. Richard

Sayer, production of documents and things, and Request for Admission to be answered

in full and in accordance with the Rules of Civil Procedure and of the Courts. Please

attach a copy of your answers to each attachment included in this document.

1.) Please provide a copy of your “good driver” video footage from the device that is

installed in your car. If you cannot provide a copy please provide us with the name of

your insurance agency, so we may subpoena the information from them.

31

2.) Please provide a copy of all of your credit card and or bank statements showing all

activity on the night of September 18, 2016.

3.) The names, phone numbers, and addresses of everyone you were with or

associated with on the night of September 18, 2016

4.) State where you work:

a) For how long;

b) Your position;

c) yearly income;

d) List any assets you may have.

5) Please provide in your own words what you remember from the night of the accident

on September 18, 2016.

6.) Complete the request for admissions attached below.

James Reynolds

32

2300 W. 11th St. 5th FLR. STE # 103


Phone: 1- (800) 555-9999

Fax: 1- (800) 555- 9991

[email protected]

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF MISSOURI, COLE COUNTY

[GREGORY CROW],

[JESSICA CROW],

[BRADLEY CROW],

[COOPER CROW],

Plaintiff,

vs.

Case No.: [Number]

DISCOVERY DEMAND

33

mailto:[email protected]

DR. RICHARD SAYER],

Defendant

First Request for production of Admissions to defendant Dr. Richard Sayer

You are requested to admit within 30 days of service, of this request for admissions to

admit that:

1. [ ] Each of the following facts is true ( if more than one, number each fact

consecutively.)

2. [ ] The original of each of the documents, copies of which are attached, is genuine

( if more than one, number each document consecutively)

1.) Admit that you were involved in an accident on the night of September 18, 2016, that

resulted in the death of Samantha Crow.

2.) Admit that you own and were driving 2016 red BMX license plate number RT56JZ.

3.) Admit that on the night of September 18, 2016 you were driving while under the

influence of alcohol over the legal limit.

34

4.) Admit that as a result of Samantha Crows death plaintiff’s, Gregory Crow, Jessica

Crow, Bradly Crow, and Cooper Crow, experienced personal injuries.

5.) Admit that you directly contributed to the Plaintiffs injuries.

6.) Admit that you owed a legal duty to others on the road, not to drive while intoxicated,

7.) Admit that you failed your duty to fulfill your legal obligation to not drive drunk, and

as a direct result caused the plaintiff and his family the loss of support., loss of nurture,

and severe emotional distress.

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Missouri that the

foregoing answers are true and correct.

Date Printed Name

Signature of Party or Attorney

Dated this 25th day of November, 2017.

Reynolds & Starr, P.C.

35

James Reynolds

2300 W. 11th St. 5th FLR. STE # 103


Phone: 1- (800) 555-9999

Fax: 1- (800) 555- 9991

[email protected]

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF STATE OF MISSOURI

COUNTY OF COLE

INDEX NUMBER:56565

GREGORY CROW (ET’ALL)

____________________________ SUBPOENA DUCES TECUM

Plaintiff/Petitioner

vs.

36

DR. RICHARD SAYER (ET’ALL)

___________________________

Respondent/Defendant

TO: Officer Eric Buck of the Small Valley Police Department

YOU ARE HEREY COMMANDED, Under MO. R. Civ. P. 57.09(b) (1) that all

business and excuses being laid aside, for you to appear and attend before the HON:

WILLIAM MICHALEK at, 301 E. High Street , Jefferson City, MO. 65101 , on the 09

day of DECEMBER, 2017 , at

11: 00 “fore” , o’clock, in the A.M., and at any recessed or adjourned date to give

testimony in this action on the part of, Plaintiff(s), and that you bring with you, and

produce:

Entire investigation file, including, but not limited to: Defendant. (Richard Sayer’s)

Intoxication Printout, any and all Statements made by Defendant, any and all

Audio/Visual footage of Defendant, all physical evidence including Photographs of

accident scene and any other pertinent information relating to the accident and Death of

Samantha Crow on September 18, 2016

37

Failure to comply with this subpoena is punishable as a contempt of Court and

shall make you liable to the person on whose behalf this subpoena was issued for a

penalty not to exceed fifty dollars and all damages sustained by reason of your failure to

comply.

WITNESS, WILLIAM MICHALEK one of the, JUDGES of said Court,

located

At: 301 E. High Street, Jefferson City, MO. 65101 , on the day of

, 20 .

( Judge’s Signature ) ( Date)

38

Attorney for Plaintiff(s)

James ReynoldsReynolds & Starr P.C.

6999 W 11th 5th FLR STE 105Jefferson City, MissouriPhone 1 (800) 555-9999


CIRCUIT COURT IN THE STATE OF MISSOURI

COUNTY OF COLE

Gregory Crow et’all ) case number: 99901

Plaintiffs ) HON. William Michalek

v. )

)

Dr. Richard Sayer et’all )

Defendants )

39

TRIAL BRIEF IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS’S MOTION TO PRECLUDE EVIDENCE OF PRIOR MISDEMEANOR DWI CONVICTION

Plaintiffs Gregory Crow, Jessica Crow, Bradly Crow and Cooper Crow, by and through their

attorney James Reynolds, and Reynolds & Starr, P.C. hereby submits the following trial brief in

opposition to Defendants motion to preclude conviction of DWI evidence. To further support

Plaintiffs states as follows:

Introduction:

Plaintiff’s submit this opposition to defendant, Dr. Richard Sayer’s motion to preclude recent

evidence of his misdemeanor DWI conviction. Floating the Courts directives to file a motion on

the basis that his misdemeanor DWI charges are irrelevant and un-admissible. Defendants

baseless strategy is to avoid complete discovery and statement of relevant facts that ultimately

show his use of negligent and reckless behavior to which injured Plaintiffs. The Plaintiffs

respectfully request that the Court deny Defendants motion to preclude evidence of DWI

conviction, so that the Plaintiffs may fully present their facts and claims to the Court and be

permitted to get justice, and move on with their life.

Statement of facts

On September 18, 2016 Samantha Crow, a 42-year-old wife and mother of three was killed

while running Southbound on New Town Rd. Jefferson City Missouri while training for an

40

upcoming marathon. On the night of her death Samantha wore dark grey sweatpants and a

black sweatshirt with no reflective clothing as she told her husband she anticipated to be home

before sunset. Samantha had started her run at 5pm and anticipated to be home by 7pm.

Samantha apparently ran much longer as at 8:34pm Samantha was running towards her home

when she was struck by a BMW driven by Dr. Richard Sayer, a well- known and respected

cardiologist in the community.

At the time of the accident, Dr. Sayer was on his way home from a fundraising golf outing held

at the Small Valley Country Club, where he is a member. Dr. Sayer and Samantha were both

heading in the same direction when Dr. Sayer struck Samantha with his car. Dr. Sayer thought

he had hit a deer, so he did not stop and proceeded to drive home. The speed limit on New

Town Rd. is 35 miles per hour, at the time the accident occurred Dr. Sayer had been traveling at

50 miles per hour. As a result of the impact, Samantha’s body flew 167 feet, breaking her neck

and killing her instantly. There is no evidence that Samantha was alive and/or conscious for any

length of time after the accident, and she never saw the car coming.

Approximately five hours later a quick investigation by the police led them to Dr. Sayers house

where his was found parked in the garage, beneath a tarp. There was significant damage to the

front bumper, including blood stains and strands of hair. Dr. Sayer submitted to a breathalyzer

administered by the police. Even though the breathalyzer was administered nearly five hours

after the accident took place, Dr. Sayers blood alcohol content was more than twice the legal

limit. Dr. Sayer was arrested immediately and tried for (felony) second degree man-slaughter,

41

(felon) second degree vehicular man-slaughter, (felony) leaving the scene of the accident, and

(misdemeanor) driving while intoxicated.

During the trial Dr. Sayer admitted to ordering several rum and Diet Pepsi cocktails, Benedictine

and Brandy and a White Crème de Menthe at the golf outing that evening. The record

subpoenaed from the country club for the criminal trial also showed that Dr. Sayer had paid for a

$100.00 bottle of Silver Oak Cabernet Sauvignon.

The criminal trial lasted for nearly ten days. After five hours of deliberation the jury acquitted Dr.

Sayer of all felony charges. He was convicted of a misdemeanor driving while intoxicated, fined

$1,000.00 and given a one-year jail sentence.

At the time of Samantha Crows death, Samantha was 42 years old. She and her husband

Gregory, had been married for thirteen years and had three children together: Jessica (eight

years old), Bradley (five years old), Cooper (three years old). At the time of her death,

Samantha was an equity partner at a local law firm, West & Crow, LLC. She was a well- known

trial attorney that earned $225,000.00 per year in her position. All of the family’s health

insurance benefits were provided through Samantha’s firm. At the time of her death, Samantha

had a $1 million life insurance policy in place, naming al proceeds to be payable directly to her

husband. As well, Samantha had $2.5 million saved in her 401k individual retirement account.

Her husband Gregory is named as the sole beneficiary of that account. Had Samantha lived it is

42

estimated that she would have retired at age 65. Gregory was at the time of Samantha’s death,

a stay at home dad, unemployed outside of the home.

Argument

1. Defendants misdemeanor DWI conviction is relevant to Plaintiffs claims of negligence

and wrongful death.

The Defendant was the ultimate reason for the death of Samantha Crow, as he struck her with

his vehicle while driving while intoxicated and recklessly ignoring the stated speed limit. The

Defendant was recently acquitted of all felony charges relating to the murder of Samantha

Crow, but an acquittal does not prove the Defendants “factual innocence”, instead an acquittal

merely proves that the jury entertained a reasonable doubt of Defendants guilt. Fed. R. Evid. R.

404 (b), states that the court shall admit relevant other crimes evidence unless it’s probative

value is substantially outweighed by its potential for un-fair prejudice to the defendant.

Clearly the conviction has probative value, but is not un-fair. The DWI conviction is would

not be used to confuse the issues, or be mis-leading or outweighing in anyway, but telling of

the truth in actual facts and circumstances of the happenings and events that lead to

Samantha’s death. Relevancy should mean logically probative, and a conviction in the

ordinary criminal trial of the same offense in issue at a subsequent civil trial would be

logically probative.

43

2. Convictions are to be admitted as prima facie evidence of

Under the prima facie rule the record of conviction in the criminal case is admissible in the

subsequent civil case as prima facie evidence of the facts stated, thereby shifting the burden of

disproving the facts to the accused. The leading case giving a criminal judgement such

presumptive force in a subsequent civil suit is Schleeper v. State, 928, S.W. 2d 252, 253 (Mo.

Banc. 1998), the trial court properly allowed the prosecution to introduce evidence proving

Defendant hired a man to murder his stepmother. Such proof was evidence of an ultimate fact in

the first trial, but was only evidential to the crime alleged in the second trial.

The 14th Amendment’s due process clause as the basis for it’s “Fundamental fairness” rational,

by not allowing the admission of the Defendants conviction would deprive the Plaintiffs of a fair

trial, as it is a main source of evidence. Without it the Plaintiffs have not only lost their wife and

mother, but their satisfaction of justice.

Lastly the Model Code has suggested: “Evidence of a subsisting judgement adjudging a person

guilty of a crime or misdemeanor is admissible as tending to prove the facts recited therein and

every fact essential to sustain the judgement.” The code recognizes that most courts reject such

evidence, but states that when the accused has been found guilty beyond reasonable doubt, the

verdict has sufficient value to be considered by the civil court, and necessarily includes a finding

of all facts essential to sustain the judgment.

44

Conclusion

For the forgoing reasons as stated above, Plaintiff respectfully request that the court deny

Defendants motion to preclude.

POST-TRIAL MOTION MEMO AND NOTICE OF APPLEAL

MISSOURI CIRCUIT COURT OF COLE COUNTY, MISSOURI WILLIAM MICHALEK, JUDGE

)

Gregory Crow et’al )

Appellants, ) NOTICE OF APPEAL

)

vs. )

) Judge, William Michalek

Dr. Richard Sayer et’al )

Respondents. )

45

)

Pursuant to MO. R. Civ. P. Rule 080.1 and Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 4 (a) (1) and 4

(a) (4) Plaintiffs appeal to the Missouri Court of Appeals Southern District Court for 1. Erring in

admitting evidence by allowing Defendants motion to preclude relevant evidence and 2. Erring

in facts presented at trial to jury. Final judgment in favor of Defendants, Dr. Richard Sayer, and

Small Valley Country Club for dismissing Plaintiffs personal injury negligence and wrongful

death claim for failing to provide burden of proof.

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED: December 14, 2017

Gregory Crow, Jessica Crow, Bradly Crow, Cooper Crow

Of counsel

James Reynolds

Reynolds and Starr, P.C.

46

1234 W.11 Ave.


1- (800) 555-9999

CIVIL PROCEDURE FORM NO. 8-A(2)

IN THE ___19th_____ JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, ____COLE_____ COUNTY, MISSOURI

Judge or Division:

William Michalek

Circuit Court Case Number: A0169985

(Date File Stamp)

Plaintiff/Petitioner:

Gregory Crow et’al

Appellate Number:35412

Filing as an Indigent

Date of Judgment/Decree/Order: (ATTACH A COPY)

Court Reporter:

Marrie

vs.Date Post Trial Motion Filed:

12/16/2017 Sound Recording Equipment

Defendant/Respondent:

Dr. Richard Sayer

Date Ruled Upon:12/12/2017

The Record on Appeal will consist of:____ Legal File only or

__X__ Legal File and Transcript

Notice of Appeal to Missouri Court of Appeals - Civil

District: Western Eastern Southern

Notice is given that ___Appellants______________ appeals from the judgment/decree/order entered in this

action on ____12/12/2017______________________ (date).

47

Appellant’s Name

(If multiple, list all or attach additional pages)

Gregory Crow et’al

Respondent’s Name


Dr. Richard Sayer et’al

Address

6575 Mountain Rd.


Address

4567 Apple Ave.


Appellant’s Attorney/Bar Number


James Reynolds/ 45-7896

Respondent’s Attorney/Bar Number


John Hash/97-5465

Address

1576 W. 11th Ave.


Address

3331 Wichita St.


E-mail Address

[email protected]

E-mail Address

[email protected]

Telephone

1-(800) 555-9999

Telephone

1-(800) 555-5555

Brief Description of Case

This case is a personal injury and wrongful death action brought by Appellant against Dr. Richard Sayer for driving while intoxicated and killing decedent, Samantha Crow, and the dram shop that over- served Dr. Sayer, known as Small Valley Country Club. (See attached)

48

Issues Expected To Be Raised On Appeal (May be completed on a separate page. Appellant is not bound by this list.)

1.) Error in admitting evidence

2.) Error in facts

Signature of Attorney or Appellant Date

49

Certificate of Service on Persons other than Registered Users of the Missouri eFiling System

I certify that on ___________________ (date), a copy of the foregoing was sent to the following by facsimile, hand-delivery, electronic mail or U.S. mail postage prepaid to their last known addresses.

______________________________________________________________________________________

______

______________________________________________________________________________________

______

______________________________________________________________________________________

______

______________________________________

Appellant or Attorney for Appellant

50

Directions to Clerk

Transmit a copy of the notice of appeal and all attached documents to the clerk of the Court of Appeals and to any person other than registered users of the eFiling system in a manner prescribed by Rule 43.01. Clerk shall then fill in the memorandum below. See Rule 81.08(i). Forward the docket fee to the Department of Revenue as required by statute.

Memorandum of the Clerk

I have this day served a copy of this notice by regular mail registered mail certified mail facsimile transmission to each of the following persons at the address stated below. If served by facsimile, include the time and date of transmission and the telephone number to which the document was transmitted.______________________________________________________________________________________

______

______________________________________________________________________________________

______

______________________________________________________________________________________

______

______________________________________________________________________________________

______

______________________________________________________________________________________

______

______________________________________________________________________________________

______

I have transmitted a copy of the notice of appeal to the clerk of the Court of Appeals,

51

_____________________ District.

Docket fee in the amount of $70.00 was received by this clerk on ___________________ (date) which will be disbursed as required by statute.

No docket fee was received because:

a docket fee is not required by law under ____________________________________ (cite specific statute or other authority).

a motion to prosecute the appeal in forma pauperis was received on ________________ (date) and was granted on _______________(date).

____________________________ ______________________________________

Date Clerk

52

Additional Parties and Attorneys

List every party involved in the case not listed on page 1, indicate the position of the party in the circuit court (e.g. plaintiff, defendant, intervenor) and in the Court of Appeals (e.g. appellant or respondent) and the name of the attorney of record, if any, for each party. Attach additional pages to identify all parties and attorneys if necessary.

Party Name Attorney NameJessica Crow James Reynolds/ 45-7896Address Address6575 Mountain Rd 6575 Mountain Rd.

City, State, Zip Code City, State, Zip CodeJefferson City, MO. 65101 Jefferson City, MO. 65101

E-mail [email protected](800) 555-9999

Party Name Attorney NameBradley Crow James Reynolds/ 45-7896Address Address6575 Mountain Rd 6575 Mountain Rd.



Party Name Attorney NameCooper Crow James Reynolds/ 45-7896Address Address6575 Mountain Rd 6575 Mountain Rd.



53

Party Name Attorney NameSmall Valley Country Club Elizabeth Silverton/ 33-996854Address AddressMartin Luther King Blvd. 10th FR Ste # 505 7999 Sacks 5th Ave.City, State, Zip Code City, State, Zip CodeJefferson City, MO. 65102 Jefferson City, MO. 65101


54

Reynolds & Starr, P.C.Attorneys at Law

1234 W. 11 Street Suit 105Jefferson City, Mo. 65101Phone: 1-(800) 555-9999

fax: 1-(800) 555-9991



cc: Gregory Crow, Jessica Crow, Bradly Crow, Cooper Crow.

Date: 12/13/2017

Re: Post-Trial Memo

As per our conversation regarding Mr. Crows trial judgment and post-trial action I have

determined that both a motion for new trial and an appeal to the appellant court should be made,

as the Judge wrongly excluded evidence of Defendants DWI conviction that would have made a

difference in the outcome of the trial, therefore a motion for a new trial and to amend MO.

Sup.Ct. Rule 78.04 should be filed. We will have (30) days after the entry of the judgment. If no

timely motion for new trial is filed. If a motion for new trial is filed, the judgment becomes final

55

at the expiration of ninety (90) days after the filing of the motion or, if such motion is passed on

at an earlier date, at the later of: 1) thirty (30) days after the entry of judgment.

Under Missouri Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 80.01 you have the right to appeal if you feel that

an error has been made in deciding the judgment. To begin the appeal process we must first file

the notice of appeal with the clerk in the Court of appeal no later than ten (10) days after the

judgment becomes final MO. R. Civ. P. R. 30.01 (d). In accordance with Missouri Court of

Appeals Special Rule 300 (a), in addition to filing a notice of appeal, the appellant in a civil case

must file a civil case form. The form and contents of a notice of appeal are contained in Form 8-

A for civil cases. At the time of the filing the notice of appeal with the clerk of the trial court, a

docket fee of $70.00 or forma pauperis finding by the trial court must be filed. MO. Civ. P. Rule

30.01(d), section 488.031. The appellant shall also serve a copy of the notice of appeal on all

other parties to the judgment.

The notice of appeal must specify the parties taking the appeal, the judgment or order appealed

from, the court to which the appeal is taken and must be signed. The clerk of the Court of Appeal

court clerk shall give notification of the filing of the notice of appeal by mailing copies to all

parties to the judgment other than the party or parties taking the appeal.

When filing for appeal we need to give specifics as to exactly what grounds for which the appeal

is being filed. Before filing the notice of appeal, you should first consider if any of the following

errors were made: Error in law, error of facts, in fact collecting improper jury instructions, error

in admitting evidence, was an error made by bias jury members present, or improper verdict by

the jury happened? You should also consider whether any evidence was obtained using

56

unconstitutional means such as failing to obtain discovery approval. The only other factor to

consider would be the timing of the appeal as late filings required written “good reason”, though

I believe we have plenty of time to discuss filing for appeal with Mr. Crow.

If the motion for new trial is granted and the DWI evidence can be admitted, the court will open

the original judgment and take additional testimony, amend findings of facts and redirect a new

judgment, that will most likely be favorable to our clients. If the motion is denied, then we will

move to appeal in the appellant court. Beings whether or not the trial court will grant our motion

for new a trial is unknown, I think it is a clever idea, that we file both a motion for new trial and

a notice to appeal, as if the motion for new trial is not granted, or we do not like the verdict of the

second trial, a timely appeal has already been filed, and we will be able to begin preparation for

appeal in the appellant court.

Please let me know what you think is best, and what you want me to do, I have attached the civil

appeal form as well, please look it over and if all looks good to you please sign the notice of

appeal, and I will go file it at the appellant court.

Kind regards,

Ashley Bauer (paralegal)

Pleg-220 Combined Coarse Assessment Reflection

57

In taking the time to reflect on all that I have learned and accomplished in Pleg-220. In the beginning of this class I was very intimidated to prepare: Intra-Office memorandums, summons and complaints, answers to complaints, discovery demands, deposition notices, judicial subpoena duces tecum, trial briefs, and notice of motion to appeal. I was also unaware of the time, amount of research and thought that goes into each one of these documents.

There is tremendous value in learning the preparation of these legal documents, as they are the standard for any legal office and firm in which a paralegal might work. The skills obtained in this project are of learning the preparation of legal documents and will be easily applied in tort law or any litigation that takes place in any firm I end up working, and having a solid foundation of knowledge in the preparation of said legal documents will come in very handy as I will not have to ask any questions or slow the firm down.

During the process of creating my combined coarse assessment, I was able to change my work process by creating an even work flow, and completing a little bit of work each day. If I had the chance to complete this project again, one thing that I would do try to do differently would be to make sure that I kept organized notes that were on my computer instead of on paper and scattered all around my home, and complete each document systematically and possibly even keep a running document that combined all of the documents to make this last submission easier to submit.

Some advice that I would give to new students about to take this class would be to stay calm, ask questions early and get your class post out of the way by Sunday or Monday in order to allow yourself enough time to complete each document according to the rubrics.

The program outcomes I feel I met are:

1. Distinguish appropriate legal terminology and utilize terms correctly in legal documents

I feel that I met this outcome in part as I have learned many new legal terms and documents, and what those documents entail.

Design and compose legal documents, including but not limited to correspondence, pleadings, briefs, and memoranda, that are relevant to different substantive areas of law.

I have met this requirement in full, in the making of our combined coarse assessment, midterm, and even through our discussions.

Utilize electronic and print resources to locate primary and secondary law-related legal documents to research, summarize, and evaluate legal issues.

58

This program outcome has been met in full, as I had to utilize Lexis to locate State specific statutes and apply them to cases for our combined coarse assignment

Apply appropriate paralegal specific knowledge, skills and behaviors to analyze and interpret primary and secondary law sources and related legal documents.

This outcome was met in full by creating the combined coarse assignment.

After the completion of my Plege-220 combined coarse assignment I now feel confident in my newly found abilities to create legal: intra-office memos, summons and complaint, review answers to complaints, create discovery demands, deposition notices, judicial subpoena duces tecum, trial briefs, and notices of appeal. In doing so I believe I may now considered an asset to any law firm across the country as I possess the knowledge skills and know-how.

59

DISCOVERY DEMAND · Web viewPre-litigation memo James, As per our conversation, here are my finings...

Documents

Transcript of DISCOVERY DEMAND · Web viewPre-litigation memo James, As per our conversation, here are my finings...