Response to Interrogatories

1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 STEIN & ASSOCIATES Michael D. Stein (SBN 132540) 5235 West Allen Street Suite 200 Los Angeles, CA 90067 Tel: (213) 555-0994 Fax: (213) 555-0995 Attorneys for Plaintiff SCOTT ALAN WOODWARD UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SCOTT ALAN WOODWARD, Plaintiff, vs. B-2 VIDEO INCORPORATED, a Missouri corporation; and DOES 1 through 20 inclusive, Defendants. ) ) ) ) )))))) ))) )) ) ) ) ) )) Case No.: PLAINTIFF SCOTT ALAN WOODWARD’S RESPONSES TO DEFENDANT B-2 VIDEO INCORPORATED’S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES ) PROPOUNDING PARTY: Defendant B-2 VIDEO INCORPORATED RESPONDING PARTY: Plaintiff SCOTT ALAN WOODWARD SET NO.: One 2 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Plaintiff Scott Alan Woodward (“Plaintiff”) has not yet completed investigation of the facts relating to this case, has not completed discovery and has not completed his preparation for trial. Accordingly, the following responses are based upon information known at this time and are given without prejudice to Plaintiff’s rights to produce subsequently discovered evidence and facts, and to add to, modify or otherwise change or amend the responses herein. INTERROGATORY NO. 1: State all facts which support YOUR (For the purpose of these interrogatories, the terms “YOU” and “YOUR” shall mean plaintiff Scott Alan Woodward) allegation in paragraph 5 of THE COMPLAINT (For the purpose of these interrogatories, the term “THE COMPLAINT” shall mean the action YOU filed entitled “Scott Alan Woodward v. B-2 Video Incorporated, and Does 1-20” United States District Court Case No. _____________) that “[B-2], and/or its agents, assured, promised and/or represented that Plaintiff would remain employed indefinitely and could only be terminated for good cause.” RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 1: As set forth more fully in Plaintiff’s complaint, Plaintiff was repeatedly advised, both expressly and implicitly, throughout the tenure of his employment with B-2 by various supervisors, that in light of his steadily favorable performance evaluations, so 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 long as he performed his job satisfactorily, he would always have a job with B-2. INTERROGATORY NO. 2: Identify all DOCUMENTS (For the purpose of these interrogatories, the term “DOCUMENTS” is used in the broad sense and includes, but is not limited to, anything coming within the definition of “writings” and “recordings” set forth in Rule 1001(l) of the Federal Rules of Evidence) which memorialize, support, refer, relate to or pertain in any way to the facts set forth in YOUR response to Interrogatory No. 1. RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 2: B-2 Video Incorporated Employee Personnel Manual, dated September 15, 2002; Plaintiff’s performance evaluations. INTERROGATORY NO. 3: Identify all COMMUNICATIONS (For the purpose of these interrogatories, the term “COMMUNICATIONS” shall mean any transmission of any sort whatsoever, by one or more persons, to one or more persons, by any means whatsoever including, but not limited to, telephone conversations, letters, telegrams, e-mail transmissions, teletypes, telecopies, written memoranda, radio, cable, television, and face to face conversations) which memorialize, support, refer, relate to or pertain in any way to the facts set forth in YOUR response to Interrogatory No. 1. 4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 3: Plaintiff objects to this Interrogatory on the grounds that it is overbroad, vague and unduly burdensome. Without waiving the foregoing objections, Plaintiff responds as follows: Plaintiff was advised throughout his employment with B-2, both orally and in writing, about his entitlement to a lifetime position so long as his performance remained satisfactory. INTERROGATORY NO. 4: Identify all PERSONS (For the purpose of these interrogatories, the term “PERSONS” shall mean any natural person, firm, sole proprietorship, association, partnership, limited partnership, joint venture, corporation or other form of legal entity) who have knowledge of the facts set forth in YOUR response to Interrogatory No. 1. RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 4: Peter Ornellas, Todd Williamson, Maria Chevette and Donna Ray Peterson. DATED: March 31, 2004 STEIN & ASSOCIATES By: _________________________________ Michael D. Stein Attorneys for Plaintiff SCOTT ALAN WOODWARD 5 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 VERIFICATION SCOTT ALAN WOODWARD declares: 1. I am the plaintiff in the above-captioned action. 2. I have read the foregoing “PLAINTIFF SCOTT ALAN WOODWARD’S RESPONSES TO DEFENDANT B-2 VIDEO INCORPORATED’S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES” (“the Response”) and know its contents. I am informed and believe that the matters set forth in the Response are true and accurate, and on that ground I allege, to the best of my knowledge and information, that the matters therein stated are true and accurate. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that the foregoing is true and correct and that this Verification was executed on March 31, 2004 at Los Angeles, California. ________________________________ Scott Alan Woodward 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 PROOF OF SERVICE STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ss: COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) I am employed in the County of Los Angeles, State of California. I am over the age of 18 years and am not a party to the within action. My business address is 5235 West Allen Street Suite 200, Los Angeles, CA 90067. On March 31, 2004, I served the foregoing document described as PLAINTIFF SCOTT ALAN WOODWARD’S RESPONSES TO DEFENDANT B-2 VIDEO INCORPORATED’S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES on the interested parties in this action by placing a true copy thereof enclosed in a sealed envelope addressed as follows: Peter Crawford, Esq. 27255 Van Buren Road Torrance, California 93627 ___ BY MAIL I deposited such envelope into the Firm’s office mail at Los Angeles, California. I am readily familiar with the Firm’s practice of collection and processing correspondence for mailing. Under that practice, in the ordinary course of business, the mail is affixed with postage thereon fully prepaid and deposited with the U.S. Postal Service in Los Angeles, California on the same day. I am aware that on motion of a party served, service is presumed invalid if the postal cancellation date or the postage meter date is more than one (1) day after the date of deposit for mailing in this affidavit. ___ BY PERSONAL SERVICE I hand delivered such envelope to the offices of the addressee(s) listed above. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that the foregoing is true and correct. I declare that I am employed in the office of a member of the bar of this Court at whose direction the service was made. Executed March 31, 2004 at Los Angeles, California. _____________________________ Harriet Evans