…May 27, 2016 e-mail Correspondence from Laura Menninger to Bradley Edwards. This obstruction of discovery by refusing to attend subpoenaed depositions that were noticed to her about one month ago on May 4, 2016 should not be condoned. See…
…May 27, 2016 e-mail Correspondence from Laura Menninger to Bradley Edwards. This obstruction of discovery by refusing to attend subpoenaed depositions that were noticed to her about one month ago on May 4, 2016 should not be condoned. See…
…May 27, 2016 e-mail Correspondence from Laura Menninger to Bradley Edwards. This obstruction of discovery by refusing to attend subpoenaed depositions that were noticed to her about one month ago on May 4, 2016 should not be condoned. See…
…May 27, 2016 e-mail Correspondence from Laura Menninger to Bradley Edwards. This obstruction of discovery by refusing to attend subpoenaed depositions that were noticed to her about one month ago on May 4, 2016 should not be condoned. See…
…May 27, 2016 e-mail Correspondence from Laura Menninger to Bradley Edwards. This obstruction of discovery by refusing to attend subpoenaed depositions that were noticed to her about one month ago on May 4, 2016 should not be condoned. See…
…¶ 8-11. Mr. Rodriguez subsequently was prosecuted and imprisoned for this bribery and obstruction scheme. These actions and conviction, which did not occur until after the deposition Plaintiff seeks to proffer, are quintessential character impeachment evidence that no one has…
…May 27, 2016 e-mail Correspondence from Laura Menninger to Bradley Edwards. This obstruction of discovery by refusing to attend subpoenaed depositions that were noticed to her about one month ago on May 4, 2016 should not be condoned. See…
…12 Tr. at 168:18 - 181:24. It appears that Defendant’s misleading tally of questions posed to her includes all the times questions were repeated or needlessly re-worded due to her obstructionist deposition tactics. Indeed, Defendant, who claimed…
…12 Tr. at 168:18 - 181:24. It appears that Defendant’s misleading tally of questions posed to her includes all the times questions were repeated or needlessly re-worded due to her obstructionist deposition tactics. Indeed, Defendant, who claimed…
…12 Tr. at 168:18 - 181:24. It appears that Defendant’s misleading tally of questions posed to her includes all the times questions were repeated or needlessly re-worded due to her obstructionist deposition tactics. Indeed, Defendant, who claimed…
…was itself an obvious lie. 13 The questions Defendant refused to answer fall squarely within this Court’s earlier order. Defendant can have no legitimate basis for obstructing the search for truth by refusing to answer. The Court should…
…was itself an obvious lie. 13 The questions Defendant refused to answer fall squarely within this Court’s earlier order. Defendant can have no legitimate basis for obstructing the search for truth by refusing to answer. The Court should…
…01/05/24 Page 14 of 17 The questions Defendant refused to answer fall squarely within this Court’s earlier order. Defendant can have no legitimate basis for obstructing the search for truth by refusing to answer. The Court should…
…07/15/21 Page 14 of 17 The questions Defendant refused to answer fall squarely within this Court’s earlier order. Defendant can have no legitimate basis for obstructing the search for truth by refusing to answer. The Court should…