OBJECTIONS TO "DEPOSITIONS"

ABORTION INDUSTRY IN MELBOURNE, FLORIDA
LAWSUITS
RANEY V AWARE WOMAN
DOCKET / CHRONOLOGICAL FILE
OBJECTIONS TO "DEPOSITIONS"

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
ORLANDO DIVISION
CASE NO.: 97-1197-CIV-ORL-19B

MEREDITH T. RANEY, JR.
Plaintiff,
v.
AWARE WOMAN CENTER FOR CHOICE, INC.,
a Florida corporation,
EDWARD W. WINDLE, JR.,
and PATRICIA B. WINDLE,
Defendants.

OBJECTIONS TO THE FILING OR USE OF THE "DEPOSITION" OF KEITH CHANDLER AND THE "DEPOSITION" OF S.W. SMITH

The Plaintiff, Meredith T. Raney, Jr., by and through his undersigned attorney, hereby makes this objection to the use or filing of what purport to be depositions of Keith Chandler and also S.W. Smith, saying:

1. On February 9, 1999, Defendants served "AWCC MEMORANDUM IN FURTHER SUPPORT OF MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT" to which was attached Exhibit ‘2', purporting to be "Deposition testimony of City Police Chief and arresting officer, May 27, 1998".

2. In the STATEMENT OF THE CASE, contained in the aforesaid Memorandum, Defendants state:

"In fact, Mr. Raney and his counsel voluntarily absented themselves from the May 27, 1998 depositions taken by AWCC of the Police Chief, and one of the arresting officers (Attachments to Doc 47, Filed 5/29/1998). Mr. Raney later claimed lack of sufficient notice. He never sub-stantiated such a position, or sought any relief . . ."

3. Contrary to Defendants' statement, Plaintiff vigorously protested the Defendants' misuse of subpoenas (which were served directly on Mr. Raney by Defendants and not to his attorney)and untimely notices for depositions stated as shown in the copies of the letters attached hereto as Exhibits ‘A' and ‘B'; these letters demonstrate that Mr. Torpy, the attorney for the Defendants, was notified well in advance of May 27, 1998 of Plaintiff's objections.

4. Roy Lucas, Esquire, who made the statement quoted above was not presented with these objections because he was not admitted to the case until July, approximately six weeks later. It was not appropriate to make the informal objections to anybody except Vincent G. Torpy, Jr., Esquire, trial counsel for the Defendants.

5. No attorney recognized by the District Court as attorney for any party to the litigation attended the "depositions".

6. Neither Keith Chandler nor S.W. Smith waived reading nor signing of these "depositions"; neither person is shown to have read or signed these "depositions".

7. Both "depositions" contain the following statement, under oath, in an affidavit signed by the court reporter:

"2. That the deposition was ordered on May 27th, 1998 to be transcribed; and due to a hearing date, the witness was not given time to review and sign said transcript."

8. The record of this case shows that there was no "hearing date" and no legitimate reason to refuse the witnesses the opportunity to review, correct, and sign the transcript.

9. Timely informal objections having been made, the Plaintiff sought protection from the District Court from the untimely "depositions" according to the copy of the motion attached hereto as Exhibit ‘C'. This directly contradicts the statement in Defendants' February 9, 1999 memorandum.

10. After Mr. Lucas had been substituted for Mr. Torpy, Mr. Lucas was asked for an explanation of these "depositions". He explained that he would convert the statements of Chandler and Smith to affidavits. (Please see page 109 of Raney deposition of August 10, 1998).

11. No affidavits from Messers. Chandler and Smith have been filed in this case.

12. William L. Beardon did not appear on May 27, 1998 according to the "Certificate Of Non Appearance" which is attached hereto as Exhibit ‘D'; it states that counsel for the Defendant and Defendant were present. Based on the other material supplied for that time and place, it appears that it was actually Roy Lucas, Esquire, and not really "counsel for the Defendant" who was present at that time.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, Meredith T. Raney, Jr., objects to the use of the so-called "depositions" because of numerous Rule violations, including unauthorized and incorrect behavior by Roy Lucas, Esquire, and requests that the District Court take all appropriate action.

Respectfully submitted,
Christopher F. Sapp <signed>
Post Office Box 1012
Lehigh Acres, Florida 33970
(941) 368-3922
Florida Bar No. 0097823
and
Michael R. Hirsh, Esquire
Hirsh & Heuser
125 Townpark Drive, Suite 300
Kennesaw, Georgia 30144
Attorneys for the Plaintiff

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing has been furnished by U.S. Mail to Roy Lucas, Esquire, Post Office Box 1433, Melbourne, Florida 32902, Susan England, Esquire, 2805 Lakeview Drive, Fern Park, Florida 32730 and to Lawrence M. Siff, Esquire, O'Connor & Meyers, PA, 2801 Ponce de Leon Blvd., 9th Floor, (Coral Gables) Miami, Florida 33134 this 22nd day of February, 1999.

Christopher F. Sapp <signed>
Attorney