Sie sind auf Seite 1von 9

Case 8:11-cv-00485-AG-AJW

Document 514-3

#:13386

Filed 05/07/12

Page 1 of 9

Page ID

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

Marc Steven Colen, sbn 108275 Law Offices of Marc Steven Colen

5737 Kanan Road, Ste. 347

Agoura Hills, CA 91301 Tele: 818.716.2891

Attorney for Defendants Todd Sankey and

The Sankey Firm, Inc.,

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SOUTHERN DIVISION

)

(

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.: 8:11-cv-00485 AG (AJWx)

Hon. Andrew Guilford Courtroom 10D

DEFENDANTS TODD SANKEY

AND THE SANKEY FIRM’S

OBJECTIONS TO DECLARATIONS

Date Action Filed:

May 4, 2009

Trial Date:

June 5, 2012

Hearing Date:

May 21, 2012

Lisa Liberi, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

vs.

Orly Taitz, et al.,

Defendants

Liberi v. Taitz Case No.: 8:11-cv-00485 AG

Response to Paintiffs’ Statement of Facts

pg. 1"""""""""""""""""

 

Case 8:11-cv-00485-AG-AJW

Document 514-3

Filed 05/07/12

Page 2 of 9

Page ID

 

#:13387

1

PELIMINARY STATEMENT

 

2

 

3

A

Separate Statement of Uncontroverted Facts requires that the proposed

4

uncontroverted facts be separately delineated so that a full and proper

5

response be made. Instead, Plaintiffs provide a litany of compound colloquies

6

each of which contains a multitude of allegations, assumptions that may be

7

proposed facts but are not separately identified as such. This issue may have

8

been obviated to some degree by quoting verbatim the particular admission or

9

other evidence on which they rely. Because of the mess that Plaintiffs have

10

created and submitted, it is not possible to respond to what should have been

11

an easy task except to either admit or deny – and that is what Todd Sankey

12

and the Sankey Firm, Inc. will do.

 

13

 

14

It

must be further noted that Plaintiffs’ Statement relies on the Plaintiffs’ own

15

inadmissible, irrelevant, baseless and conclusory allegations, opinions,

16

including unsubstantiated legal and medical opinions, conjecture, allegations

17

by the Plaintiffs themselves and the inadvertent Admissions by the Sankey

18

Defendants. As to the last, it is certainly reasonable that the Plaintiffs so rely

19

but if the Motion to Withdraw Admissions is granted then there is no

 

20

supportive evidence for the colloquies provided. Once that occurs the untrue

21

admissions will be reduced to the truth and the Plaintiffs will have to try the

22

case on its merits.

 

23

 

24

In addition, the Plaintiffs’ have improperly objected to every discovery

25

request, even refusing to provide a single document that supports any of the

26

allegations of the First Amended Complaint. Not a single document. Until

27

Plaintiffs are forced by an order to be derived from Todd Sankey’s several

28

 

Liberi v. Taitz Case No.: 8:11-cv-00485 AG

 

Response to Paintiffs’ Statement of Facts

pg. 2"""""""""""""""""

 

Case 8:11-cv-00485-AG-AJW

Document 514-3

Filed 05/07/12

Page 3 of 9

Page ID

 

#:13388

1

motions to compel pending, it is impossible to adequately respond at this

2

point. Lastly, evidence may not exist that proves a negative.

 

3

 

4

In view of all of the above, Todd Sankey and The Sankey Firm, Inc. submits

5

the Declaration of Todd Sankey previously filed which states the truth rather

6

than untrue Admissions. This Introductory Statement is applicable to all of

7

the following responses and incorporated by this reference.

 

8

 

9

 

Responses to Assertedly Uncontroverted Facts

 

10

 

11

No. 1

12

13

Todd Sankey and The Sankey Firm, Inc. first state that anything done by

14

anyone other then themselves is irrelevant; they have no connection with nor

15

responsibility for any other persons. Todd Sankey and The Sankey Firm, Inc.

16

did not even know that Plaintiffs existed prior to the being served with the

17

Complaint. Statements of what the Plaintiffs believed, knew or trusted is

18

inadmissible. As to Todd Sankey and The Sankey Firm, Inc., this colloquy is

19

denied.

20

21

The evidence is the Declaration of Todd Sankey.

 

22

 

23

No. 2

24

25

Todd Sankey and The Sankey Firm, Inc. state that they have no knowledge of

26

the actions of anyone else and they have no connection with nor responsibility

27

for any other persons. Todd Sankey and The Sankey Firm, Inc. did not even

28

know that Plaintiffs existed prior to the being served with the Complaint.

 

Liberi v. Taitz Case No.: 8:11-cv-00485 AG

 

Response to Paintiffs’ Statement of Facts

pg. 3"""""""""""""""""

 

Case 8:11-cv-00485-AG-AJW

Document 514-3

Filed 05/07/12

Page 4 of 9

Page ID

#:13389

1

Further, this statement is irrelevant as to anyone other than the Plaintiffs. As

2

to themselves, the statement is denied.

 

3

 

4

The evidence is the Declaration of Todd Sankey.

 

5

 

6

No. 3

7

8

This statement is unintelligible. NS and TSFI are not identified and no

9

response may be made.

10

11

No. 4

12

13

This statement is unintelligible. NS and TSFI are not identified and no

14

response may be made.

15

16

No. 5

17

18

This statement is unintelligible. NS and TSFI are not identified and no

19

response may be made.

20

21

No. 6

22

23

This statement is unintelligible. TSFI is not identified and no response may

24

be made.

25

26

No. 7

27

28

Liberi v. Taitz Case No.: 8:11-cv-00485 AG

 

Response to Paintiffs’ Statement of Facts

pg. 4"""""""""""""""""

 

Case 8:11-cv-00485-AG-AJW

Document 514-3

Filed 05/07/12

Page 5 of 9

Page ID

#:13390

1

This statement is unintelligible. NS, TS and TSFI are not identified and no

2

response may be made.

3

4

No. 8

5

6

Todd Sankey and The Sankey Firm, Inc. had no connection with anything to

7

do with the Plaintiffs and did not even know that Plaintiffs existed prior to the

8

being served with the Complaint. As to Todd Sankey and The Sankey Firm,

9

Inc., this colloquy is denied.

 

10

 

11

The evidence is the Declaration of Todd Sankey.

 

12

 

13

No. 9

14

15

This statement is unintelligible. TSFI is not identified and no response may

16

be made.

17

18

No. 10

19

20

This statement is unintelligible. NS, TS and TSFI are not identified and no

21

response may be made.

22

23

No. 11

24

25

Neither Todd Sankey nor The Sankey Firm, Inc. had no interest in anything to

26

do with the Plaintiffs and did nothing that involved or concerned the

 

27

Plaintiffs. The Sankey Defendants did not have any knowledge that the

28

Liberi v. Taitz Case No.: 8:11-cv-00485 AG

 

Response to Paintiffs’ Statement of Facts

pg. 5"""""""""""""""""

 

Case 8:11-cv-00485-AG-AJW

Document 514-3

Filed 05/07/12

Page 6 of 9

Page ID

 

#:13391

1

Plaintiffs existed prior to the being served with the Complaint. On those

2

bases, this statement is denied.

 

3

 

4

The evidence is the Declaration of Todd Sankey.

 

5

 

6

No. 12

7

8

Todd Sankey and The Sankey Firm, Inc. had no interest in anything to do with

9

the Plaintiffs and did nothing that involved or concerned the Plaintiffs. The

10

Sankey Defendants did not have any knowledge that the Plaintiffs existed

11

prior to the being served with the Complaint. On those bases, this statement

12

is denied.

13

14

The evidence is the Declaration of Todd Sankey.

 

15

 

16

No. 13

17

18

Neither Todd Sankey nor the Sankey Firm Defendants had no interest in

19

anything to do with the Plaintiffs and did nothing that involved or concerned

20

the Plaintiffs. The Sankey Defendants did not have any knowledge that the

21

Plaintiffs existed prior to the being served with the Complaint. On those

22

bases, this statement is denied.

 

23

 

24

The evidence is the Declaration of Todd Sankey.

 

25

 

26

No. 14

27

28

 

Liberi v. Taitz Case No.: 8:11-cv-00485 AG

 

Response to Paintiffs’ Statement of Facts

pg. 6"""""""""""""""""

 

Case 8:11-cv-00485-AG-AJW

Document 514-3

Filed 05/07/12

Page 7 of 9

Page ID

#:13392

1

This statement is unintelligible. NS, TS and TSFI are not identified and no

2

response may be made.

3

4

No. 15

5

6

This statement is unintelligible. NS, TS and TSFI are not identified and no

7

response may be made.

8

9

No. 16

10

11

This statement is unintelligible. NS, TS and TSFI are not identified and no

12

response may be made.

13

14

No. 17

15

This statement is unintelligible. NS, TS and TSFI are not identified and no

16

response may be made.

17

18

No. 18

19

20

This statement is unintelligible. NS, TS and TSFI are not identified and no

21

response may be made.

22

23

No. 19

24

25

This statement is unintelligible. NS is not identified and no response may be

26

made.

27

28

No. 20

Liberi v. Taitz Case No.: 8:11-cv-00485 AG

 

Response to Paintiffs’ Statement of Facts

pg. 7"""""""""""""""""

 

Case 8:11-cv-00485-AG-AJW

Document 514-3

Filed 05/07/12

Page 8 of 9

Page ID

#:13393

1

 

2

This statement is unintelligible. TS and TSFI are not identified and no

3

response may be made.

4

5

No. 21

6

7

This statement is unintelligible. TS and TSFI are not identified and no

8

response may be made.

9

10

No. 22

11

12

This statement is unintelligible. NS, TS and TSFI are not identified and no

13

response may be made.

14

15

No. 23

16

17

Neither Todd Sankey nor The Sankey Firm had no interest in anything to do

18

with the Plaintiffs or Taitz and did nothing that involved or concerned the

19

Plaintiffs. The Sankey Defendants did not have any knowledge that Taitz and

20

the Plaintiffs existed prior to the being served with the Complaint. On those

21

bases, this statement is denied.

 

22

 

23

The evidence is the Declaration of Todd Sankey.

 

24

 

25

No. 24

26

27

This statement is unintelligible. NS, TS and TSFI are not identified and no

28

response may be made.

Liberi v. Taitz Case No.: 8:11-cv-00485 AG

 

Response to Paintiffs’ Statement of Facts

pg. 8"""""""""""""""""

Case 8:11-cv-00485-AG-AJW

Document 514-3

#:13394

Filed 05/07/12

Page 9 of 9

Page ID

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

No. 25

Neither Todd Sankey not the Sankey Firm, Inc. is an attorney, but they believe

that no requirement exists that a private investigator must verify that a client

has a “permissible purpose or legal entitlement” nor that they need

“permissible purpose or legal entitlement” to do their jobs. The definition of

“publish” is vague and ambiguous and no further response may be made in

that regard.

The evidence is the Declaration of Todd Sankey.

Respectfully submitted on this 7 th day of May 2012 by

Marc Steven Colen

Marc Steven Colen The Colen Law Firm Attorney for Defendants

Todd Sankey and The Sankey Firm, Inc.

Liberi v. Taitz Case No.: 8:11-cv-00485 AG

Response to Paintiffs’ Statement of Facts

pg. 9"""""""""""""""""