Thread by @MJJRepository

THREAD: Estate's Opposition

Defense has replied to the "Jane Doe" related motion for a protective order. That motion was filed in August as an effort to prevent the defense from deposing her mom and obtaining records relating to Susan's previously self-withdrawn abuse claims.

The underlying justification Susan and her mom used to fight a depo (and record requests) was that her mom was aging and unwell.

Note the hypocrisy in Finaldi's support of this motion, when his firm pursued multiple complete non-parties since 2016 regardless of health condition.

The defense calls the statements used in her motion "attempts to deflect attention from her deficient evidence...they are false."

Further, they argue her supporting materials are inadmissible and ineffective due to "hearsay, lack foundation and are not properly authenticated."

In an all-too familiar pattern, the estate summarizes how their attempt to meet and confer with the attorneys privately to minimize stress and inconvenience on the party was ignored.

They remind the court that the same lawyer (Finaldi) was sanctioned for this very reason before.

The "factual background" and exhibits described have been redacted and/or sealed. This information presumably mirrors the original evolving claims Finaldi submitted as part of briefly representing Susan in 2016, before voluntarily withdrawing her case from court soon thereafter.

The defense elaborates on the legal necessity to depose a party integral to claims lodged against them and the very rare circumstances that would preclude this.

"[She] has not made a specific and documented factual showing that sitting for depo would be dangerous to her health."

In challenging the motion, the estate describes why the two "blatant hearsay" letters and one from her non-medical daughter fail the burden of proof that she'd be harmed in any way.

Reiterating how they lack verified medical records or admissible documents to support the motion.

Adding to this, the defense notes the conditions of her mom are "experienced by a significant portion of the population—unlikely to be impacted in any way by sitting for a deposition."

They advise a "free pass to avoid depo" would be highly detrimental in their search for truth.

Turning to the declaration by Susan, the defense expands on their arguments by noting she lists significant conditions that were not even mentioned in either medical provider's letters.

This includes alleging significant ones like amnesia and memory loss with no supporting docs.

Nothing noted in Susan's declaration, even if taken at face value, would be sufficient enough "to establish good cause for the protective order."

The estate emphasizes their willingness to accommodate any special needs to alleviate physical or mental stress during a deposition.

In addition to fighting the deposition, Susan and her mother, via Finaldi, have also challenged turnover of records and materials requested by the estate.

The protective order says nothing about how producing relevant documents in her custody could possibly cause harm or injury.

As a reminder, the estate sought 16 separate record requests from Susan's mom.

These materials became relevant to the case after Finaldi decided to repeatedly weasel her unverified claims and records into Wade and James' case filings since 2020, and publicly, including in LN2.

Since Finaldi dubiously injected Susan's claims into filings for Wade and James including on appeal, it is fair game for the defense to now conduct a thorough discovery phase of her post-2016 narrative.

The requests are not nearly as invasive as ones Finaldi sought from Spence.

Once again the defense is seeking sanctions for this motion due to Finaldi's failure to meet and confer.

"Her counsel did not...even attempt to engage in a reasonable & good faith effort to meet and confer prior to filing it—Counsel then ignored Defendants’ request to meet..."