Need help with discovery respond

 

Hello! I just had to drop my attorney for some reason and I need help with my Discovery response while searching for a new attorney Most of the answers to the discovery questions will be objections and documents will be available following reasonable search I did attach the other side discovery respond so that will be an example but not to copy their respond. I would like to have the response to be worldly and effective also I will provide the link to the complaint so you can have an idea of how to respond. most of the questions they ask are not relevant to my complaints

Don't use plagiarized sources. Get Your Custom Essay on
Need help with discovery respond
Just from $13/Page
Order Essay

  Edit Order

 

1

TO: Plaintiff Weltee Wolo through her counsel, Tyler W. Brennan, Tyler W. Brennan Law,

LLC, T3 Building, 323 N. Washington Avenue, Suite 200, Minneapolis, MN 55401.

Pursuant to Rule 34 of the Minnesota Rules of Civil Procedure, Defendant Whispering

Pines Assisted Living, Inc. (“Whispering Pines” or “Defendant”) requests that Plaintiff Weltee

Wolo (“Wolo” or “Plaintiff”) produce and permit Whispering Pines to inspect and copy the

following documents, electronically stored information, and things, within thirty (30) days of the

date of service hereof.

In responding to the following requests, unless the context indicates otherwise, you are to

construe them in light of the following:

DEFINITIONS

1. The term “Document” shall have the broadest meaning which can be ascribed to it

pursuant to Rule 26 of the Minnesota Rules of Civil Procedure. Among other things, the term

“Document” refers to and includes any written, printed, typed or other graphic matter of any kind

or nature, all computer materials, processes, data and compilations thereof from which information

can be obtained, including, but not limited to, papers, letters, correspondence, telegrams, inter-

STATE OF MINNESOTA

DISTRICT COURT

COUNTY OF ANOKA TENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT

Case Type: Employment

Weltee Wolo,

Plaintiff,

vs.

Whispering Pines Assisted Living, Inc.,

Defendant.

Court File No.

The Honorable

DEFENDANT’S REQUESTS FOR

PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS TO

PLAINTIFF (SET I)

2

office communications, memoranda, notes, notations, notebooks, reports, records, minutes of

meetings, schedules, tables, charges, transcripts, publications, scrapbooks, diaries, E-mail,

electronic mail, voice mail, electronic bulletin board postings, tabulations, vouchers, accounts,

statements, affidavits, abstracts, agreements, contracts, diaries, calendars, plans, specifications,

drawings, sketches, photostats, photographs, charts, graphs and other similar objects, and any kind

of transcript, transcription or recording of any conversation, discussion or oral presentation of any

kind, and any information stored on, and reproducible in documentary form from a computer or

other electronic, magnetic, optical or laser based information storage device, including but not

limited to floppy disks, hard disks, tapes, backup tapes, CD-ROM, DVD’s, USB drives, thumb

drives, external data storage devices, handheld PC’s, or PDA’s and any drafts, revisions or

amendments of the above, in the possession or within the control of Plaintiff, her attorneys or

agents, or known by Plaintiff to exist, including materials deemed to be subject to any evidentiary

privilege. The term “Document” specifically includes Electronically Stored Information.

2. “Electronically Stored Information” or “ESI” shall include all electronic

information permitted to be discovered under Rule 34 of the Minnesota Rules of Civil Procedure,

including, without limitation: Internet web pages, word-processing documents, spreadsheets,

presentation documents, graphics, animations, images, email (including attachments which shall

be kept with the email), instant messages, text messages, voice mail, audio, video, and audiovisual

recordings, databases and database subsets, and other user or machine-created computer files or

other digital information which is stored on computer networks, servers, computer systems,

desktop computers, laptop computers, home computers, the Internet, an Intranet, archives, discs,

CD’s, diskettes, drives, zip drives, tapes, cartridges, flash drives, and other external storage media,

personal digital assistants, handheld wireless devices, smart phones, cellular telephones,

3

blackberries, pagers, iPhones, iPads, iPods, and voicemail systems. All of the ESI requested herein

shall be produced with all metadata preserved.

3. The term “Communications” means all forms of oral, written, and nonverbal

communication, including, but not limited to, communications taking place face-to-face, via

telephone, facsimile, electronic mail, voice mail, electronic messaging (e.g., instant messaging),

or by means of correspondence, letters, statements, or otherwise.

4. The term “Person” refers to and includes natural persons, corporations,

partnerships, proprietorships, joint ventures, unincorporated associations, trusts, estates,

governments (and agencies thereof), quasi-public entities, and other forms of legal entities.

5. The terms “reflecting,” “concerning,” “evidencing,” “referred to,” “related to,”

“regarding,” “depicted,” or “displayed” mean and include, without limitation, regarding, showing,

reflecting, referring to, alluding to, responding to, relating to, connected with, commenting upon,

with respect to, consisting of, comprising, constituting, discussing, recording, or in any way

touching upon or pertaining to.

6. The singular form of a word shall also refer to the plural, and words used in the

masculine, feminine, or neuter gender shall refer to and include all genders.

7. “And” includes the disjunctive “or”; “or” includes the conjunctive “and.”

8. “Defendant,” “Whispering Pines,” or “WPAL” shall refer to Whispering Pines

Assisted Living, Inc., as well as its agents, attorneys, or anyone acting or purporting to act on its

behalf.

9. “You” or “Your” shall refer to Plaintiff Weltee Wolo, as well as her agents,

attorneys, or anyone acting or purporting to act on her behalf.

4

10. “Plaintiff” or “Wolo” shall refer to Plaintiff Weltee Wolo, as well as her agents,

attorneys, or anyone acting or purporting to act on her behalf.

11. “Complaint” shall mean the Complaint filed and served by Plaintiff in the above-

captioned

matter, and any subsequent amendments thereto.

12. “Answer” shall mean the Answer served by Defendant in the above-captioned

matter, and any subsequent amendments thereto.

DOCUMENT-SPECIFIC INSTRUCTIONS

13. You are requested and required to produce each Document designated below that

is within your care, custody, or control or otherwise available, including Documents in the

possession of your attorneys, accountants, advisors, or other persons directly or indirectly acting

for you or with you. If all Documents requested cannot be produced in their entirety, produce each

Document requested to the extent possible, specify the reason for the inability to produce the

remaining Documents, and state whatever information or knowledge you have regarding the

unproduced Documents. If you maintain that any Document has been destroyed, set forth the

contents of the Document, the location of any copies of the Document, the date of and reason for

such destruction, and the name and address of all persons who ordered, authorized, or participated

in such destruction.

14. If any Document is withheld from production on the basis of privilege or otherwise,

identify each such Document and the grounds upon which production of each Document is being

withheld. Include:

(a) the date;

(b) the author;

(c) the type of Document;

5

(d) the addressee(s) or other intended recipient(s);

(e) the title, heading, or other designation numerical on the Document; and

(f) the privilege type and basis for the privilege.

15. These Requests shall be deemed continuing so as to require supplemental responses

if ACA obtains further information between the times responses are served and the time of trial.

REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS

REQUEST NO. 1: All Documents and Communications that You referred to, relied

upon, consulted, or used in any way to draft the Complaint, Your Initial Disclosures, and/or Your

responses to Defendant’s First Set of Interrogatories to Plaintiff.

REQUEST NO. 2: All Documents and Communications relating to, referring to,

supporting, and/or refuting any of the allegations in the

Complaint.

REQUEST NO. 3: All Documents and Communications relating to, referring to,

supporting, and/or refuting the allegation that Defendant failed to pay You for Your accrued,

unused vacation time, as set forth in paragraphs 9 and 35–38 of

the Complaint.

REQUEST NO. 4: All Documents and Communications relating to, referring to,

supporting, and/or refuting the allegation that Defendant’s stated reason for terminating You is a

mere pretext for discrimination and reprisal and/or has no factual basis, as set forth in paragraphs

14–15 of the Complaint.

REQUEST NO. 5: All Documents and Communications relating to, referring to,

supporting, and/or refuting the allegation that Defendant failed to pay You earned wages within

24 hours of Your demand, as set forth in paragraphs 19 and 31–34 of the Complaint.

REQUEST NO. 6: All Documents and Communications relating to, referring to,

supporting, and/or refuting the allegation that Defendant’s decision to terminate Your employment

6

otherwise occurred under circumstances that give rise to an inference of unlawful discrimination,

as set forth in paragraphs 20–24 of the Complaint.

REQUEST NO. 7: All Documents and Communications relating to, referring to,

supporting, and/or refuting the allegation that Defendant took adverse actions against You in

reprisal to activity protected under MHRA, as set forth in paragraphs 25–30 of the Complaint.

REQUEST NO. 8: All Documents and Communications relating to, referring to,

supporting, and/or refuting your allegation that other employees of Defendant were similarly

situated to You, but treated more favorably than You, as set forth in paragraphs 25–30 of the

Complaint.

REQUEST NO. 9: All Documents and Communications relating to, referring to, and/or

reflecting any and all complaints of any kind that You allege to have made to Defendant at any

time.

REQUEST NO. 10: All Documents and Communications relating to, referring to, and/or

reflecting any and all reports of discrimination and/or reprisal that You allege to have made to

Defendant at any time.

REQUEST NO. 11: Journals, diaries, calendars, appointment books, agendas,

notebooks, and notes written or maintained by You from 2018 through and including the present

relating to or referring to any of the allegations in the Complaint and/or Your employment with

Defendant.

REQUEST NO. 12: All Documents and Communications relating to Your employment

with Whispering Pines Assisted Living, Inc. and any change in Your employment status, job

duties, promotions, and/or job transfers, including but not limited to all contracts, agreements,

memoranda, policies, handbooks, complaints filed, performance reviews, performance

7

improvement plans, warnings, disciplinary actions, termination notices, resignation letters, and

reports that are related to any of the allegations in the Complaint.

REQUEST NO. 13: All Documents that are the property of Whispering Pines Assisted

Living, Inc. or that you removed or directed to be removed from Whispering Pines Assisted Living,

Inc.’s premises, including but not limited to its physical premises and computer systems.

REQUEST NO. 14: All Documents relating to, referring to, supporting, and/or refuting

the alleged discriminatory culture which existed in the workplace, as alleged in paragraph 12 of

the Complaint.

REQUEST NO. 15: All Documents and Communications submitted to or received from,

the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the Minnesota Department of

Human Rights (MDHR), and/or the Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic

Development (DEED), including but not limited to documents relating to any charges of

discrimination and/or applications for unemployment benefits that You have made since 2016.

REQUEST NO. 16: All Documents and Communications relating to any administrative

charge or proceeding or lawsuit to which You were a party within the last ten years relating to

Your employment with any Employer that rely on or are similar or related to the factual allegations

or claims at issue in this lawsuit.

REQUEST NO. 17: All Documents and Communications relating to any complaint of

harassment, discrimination, or retaliation that you alleged against any employer within the last ten

years.

REQUEST NO. 18: All Documents and Communications relating to Your efforts to seek

employment from December 11, 2020, through and including the present, including but not limited

to any resumes, applications for employment, cover letters, reference letters, job inquiries, offers

8

of employment, employment agreements, independent contractor and consulting agreements or

arrangements, job advertisements or postings, rejection letters, and any other communications with

any Employer.

REQUEST NO. 19: All Documents and Communications relating to the termination of

Your employment from any Employer, whether voluntary or involuntary, occurring at any time

after the end of Your employment with Whispering Pines Assisted

Living, Inc.

REQUEST NO. 20: All Documents and Communications relating to any training or

education that You have applied for or received from December 11, 2020, through and including

the present.

REQUEST NO. 21: Documents sufficient to show any income or other compensation

received by or owed to You, including but not limited to paychecks, paystubs, invoices, settlement

payments, statements of work, Form W-2s, Form 1099s, social security benefits, social security

disability benefits, unemployment insurance benefits, workers’ compensation benefits, and long-

term or short-term disability benefits from December 11, 2020, through and including the present.

REQUEST NO. 22: Your federal and state income tax returns for the tax years 2020

through and including the present, including all supporting documentation.

REQUEST NO. 23: All Documents and Communications relating to, referring to,

supporting, and/or refuting Your claim for damages in this lawsuit, including but not limited to

documents relating to the claim for damages as set forth in paragraphs 20–38 of the Complaint,

your initial disclosures, and/or the calculation of damages claimed.

REQUEST NO. 24: All Documents and Communications relating to, referring to,

supporting, and/or refuting any injuries, including physical, mental, and emotional injuries, You

allegedly sustained as a result of Whispering Pines Assisted Living, Inc.’s conduct from 2018

9

through and including the present, including but not limited to all medical records and

psychotherapy notes.

REQUEST NO. 25: Completed and executed authorization forms for the release of

medical records and psychotherapy notes for each physician, psychiatrist, psychologist, therapist,

social worker, or other healthcare professional identified in response to Interrogatory Number 11

of Defendant’s First Set of Interrogatories to Plaintiff with whom You have consulted and/or from

whom You have received or sought treatment.

REQUEST NO. 26: All Documents and Communications relating to and/or referring to

each expert you intend to call as a witness at trial, including but not limited to all Documents and

Communications sent to or received from each expert, resumes, curriculum vitae, and reports.

REQUEST NO. 27: All affidavits, sworn statements, notes, and other documents sent to,

received from, or otherwise relating to any person you intend to call as a witness at trial, either in

person, through deposition testimony, or through an affidavit regarding, referring, and/or relating

to any claim or allegation in this Action.

REQUEST NO. 28: All affidavits, sworn statements, and communications regarding,

referring, and/or relating to any claim in this Action.

REQUEST NO. 29: All social media postings relating to any of the allegations in the

Complaint, including but not limited to postings on Facebook, LinkedIn, Twitter, YouTube,

Instagram, Snapchat, TikTok, blogs, wikis, and other social media sites.

REQUEST NO. 30: All Documents and Communications that contain or otherwise relate

to facts that you contend refute, in any way, any of Defendant’s defenses in this Action.

REQUEST NO. 31: A complete copy of all the Facebook information from January 1,

2018, to the present, for any Facebook account currently or previously maintained by You. You

10

can download a complete copy of such information by logging into each applicable Facebook

account, choosing “Settings & Privacy,” choosing “Settings,” choosing “Your Facebook

Information,” and then choosing “Download Your Information.” On the “Download Your

Information” page, you can then select the date range of January 1, 2018 to the present, selecting

a Media Quality of “High” or “Medium,” and selecting “HTML” as the Format before clicking

“Create File.”

REQUEST NO. 32: All Documents identified in Section 2 of Your Initial Disclosures.

Dated: November 19, 2021 SPENCER FANE LLP

By: /s/ Randi J. Winter

Randi J. Winter, #0391354

Jose A. Castro, #0399696

100 South Fifth Street, Suite 2500

Minneapolis, MN 55402

Telephone: (612) 268-7000

Facsimile: (612) 268-7001

rwinter@spencerfane.com

Attorneys for Defendant Whispering Pines Assisted

Living, Inc.

1

TO: Plaintiff Weltee Wolo, Pro Se, 3140 Northdale Blvd NW, Coon Rapids, Minnesota

55433, welteewolo26@gmail.com.

Defendant Whispering Pines Assisted Living, Inc (“Defendant”), as and for its answers,

responses and objections to Plaintiff’s Interrogatories to Defendant (First Set) states as

follows:

GENERAL OBJECTIONS

1. Defendant objects to the Interrogatories to the extent that they seek information

protected by the attorney-client privilege, work-product doctrine, other applicable privilege, or

information that is protected by the Minnesota Rules of Civil Procedure, federal law, or

Minnesota law.

2. Defendant objects to the Interrogatories to the extent they are overly broad in

terms of time and/or scope, unduly burdensome, oppressive, vague, ambiguous, harassing, and/or

unreasonable.

3. Defendant objects to the Interrogatories to the extent they seek information not

relevant to any party’s claims or defenses, and are not proportional to the needs of the case,

considering the importance of the issues at stake in the actions, the amounts in controversy, the

parties’ relative access to relevant information, the parties’ resources, the importance of the

STATE OF MINNESOTA

DISTRICT COURT

COUNTY OF ANOKA TENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT

Case Type: Employment

Weltee Wolo,

Plaintiff,

vs.

Whispering Pines Assisted Living, Inc.,

Defendant.

Case No. ___________________

DEFENDANT’S ANSWERS TO

PLAINTIFF’S INTERROGATORIES TO

DEFENDANT (FIRST SET)

2

discovery in resolving the issues, and whether the burden or expense of the proposed discovery

outweighs its likely benefit.

4. Defendant objects to the Interrogatories to the extent they seek information that is

already within Plaintiff’s possession, custody, or control, and is already within the knowledge of

Plaintiff.

5. Defendant objects to the Interrogatories to the extent they are more appropriately

directed at a third party.

6. Defendant objects to the Interrogatories to the extent they: (i) seek information

that is beyond the scope of discovery allowed pursuant to the Minnesota Rules of Civil

Procedure and/or other discovery guidelines; or (ii) seek to impose upon Defendant duties or

obligations beyond the scope of the applicable rules or governing authorities. Defendant does

not acquiesce, object to, and decline to be bound by Plaintiff’s definitions and instructions to the

extent that such definitions and instructions seek to impose burdens or obligations on Defendant

beyond those imposed by the Minnesota Rules of Civil Procedure.

7. Defendant objects to the Interrogatories to the extent they assume or require

Defendant to reach or state a legal conclusion.

8. Defendant objects to the Interrogatories as premature to the extent they seek

Defendant’s ultimate factual or legal contentions prior to the close of discovery.

9. Defendant has not completed their investigation or discovery regarding the

relevant facts. Accordingly, Defendant’s responses are based upon information known to

Defendant as of the present date and subject to the reservation of rights set forth below.

10. Defendant objects to the Interrogatories to the extent that they seek discovery of

confidential, trade secret, proprietary, financial, or commercially sensitive documents or

information, the disclosure of which would constitute an invasion of the constitutionally-

3

protected right of privacy or could result in substantial competitive injury to Defendant’s

employer or breach by Defendant of an obligation to another to maintain such information as

confidential.

11. All of the General Objections set forth herein are incorporated by reference into

each and every specific Answer to each of Plaintiff’s Interrogatories, and all of the General

Objections shall have the same force and effect as if set forth fully therein. In the interest of

clarity, certain objections may be referred to specifically with respect to a particular

Interrogatory, but the failure to specifically restate a General Objection shall not be construed as

a waiver of any such objection, nor shall such lack of an objection be deemed an admission that

Defendant possess any of the information needed to respond to a particular Interrogatory.

DEFENDANT’S RESERVATION OF RIGHTS

Defendant makes the objections and responses herein without waiver of and with express

reservation regarding:

(a) all questions as to competency, relevancy, materiality, privilege and admissibility as
evidence for any purpose, of its response or subject matter thereof, in any subsequent

proceeding in, or the trial of, this or any other action;

(b) the right to object to the use of any of said responses, or subject matter thereof, in any
subsequent proceeding in, or the trial of, this or any other action;

(c) the right to object on any ground at any time to a demand for further response to these
or any other discovery requests or other discovery procedures involving or relating to

the subject matter of the Interrogatories herein answered; and

(d) the right at any time to revise, correct, add to, or clarify any of the responses provided
herein.

DEFENDANT’S OBJECTIONS AND ANSWERS TO INTERROGATORIES

INTERROGATORY NO. 1:

Identify all individual who provided information, were consulted, or participated in the

preparation of the Answer to these Interrogatories, and specify the particular Answer(s) for which each

person was consulted, furnished information, or participated in preparing.

4

ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 1:

Subject to and without waiving the foregoing General Objections, Defendant answers as

follows: Sharon Compton and Breanne Engberg were consulted in connection with the

preparation of the Answers to these Interrogatories. Jaclyn Vados also previously furnished

information used in the preparation of the Answers to these Interrogatories.

INTERROGATORY NO. 2:

Identify all individuals whom you believe have any information or knowledge, or claim

to have the same, with respect to any facts or matters relating to the allegations made in Plaintiffs

Complaint or Defendant’s Answer. With respect to each individual, state the subject matter of

their knowledge, the date, place, and circumstances that Defendant obtained the knowledge, and

whether a statement was taken, and the individual’s address and telephone number.

ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 2:

In addition to the General Objections, Defendant objects that this Interrogatory is vague

and ambiguous. Defendant further objects to this Interrogatory on the grounds that it is unduly

burdensome. Defendant also objects to this Interrogatory on the grounds that it seeks information

that is already within Plaintiff’s possession, custody, or control, and is already within the

knowledge of Plaintiff. Defendant further objects to this Interrogatory to the extent it seeks

information protected by the attorney-client privilege or work product doctrine. Subject to and

without waiving the foregoing Specific

and General Objections,

Defendant answers as follows:

Defendant refers Plaintiff to the persons identified in the parties’ Initial Disclosures

served in this matter, who may have personal knowledge and/or information relating to the

allegations in Plaintiff’s Complaint and the litigation in this matter. Further, individuals

identified in documents produced by the parties and individuals identified during any witness

deposition testimony may have personal knowledge or information relating to the allegations in

5

Plaintiff’s Complaint and the litigation in this matter. Defendant reserves the right to supplement

this response as discovery is ongoing.

INTERROGATORY NO. 3:

Identify all documents known to you which you know or believe may contain facts or

information related to the claims asserted in Plaintiffs Complaint or Defendant’s Answer.

ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 3:

In addition to the General Objections, Defendant objects that this Interrogatory is

overboard and unduly burdensome, particularly because it purports to require Defendant to

identify “all documents” that may contain any facts or information whatsoever related to any of

the claims asserted in Plaintiff’s Complaint or Defendant’s Answer. Defendant also objects to

this Interrogatory on the grounds that it seeks information that is already within Plaintiff’s

possession, custody, or control, and is already within the knowledge of Plaintiff. Defendant

further objects to this Interrogatory to the extent it seeks information protected by the attorney-

client privilege or work product doctrine. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing Specific

and General Objections, Defendant answers that the documents identified in the parties’ Initial

Disclosures may contain facts or information related to the allegations in Plaintiff’s Complaint

and the litigation in this matter. Further, documents identified and produced by the parties and

documents identified during any witness deposition testimony may contain facts or information

related to the allegations in Plaintiff’s Complaint and the litigation in this matter. Defendant

reserves the right to

supplement this response as discovery is ongoing.

INTERROGATORY NO. 4:

With respect to Plaintiff, state the date of her original hire, all employment end dates, all

employment rehire dates, and her salary or rate of pay during each period of employment

beginning in 2017 – present, her total earnings for her entire employment, all

promotions/raises/bonuses/demotions received, all job titles, and all fringe benefits received

including holidays vacation pay, pension plans, and insurance/benefit programs.

6

ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 4:

In addition to the General Objections, Defendant objects that this Interrogatory is

overboard and unduly burdensome, particularly regarding the scope and time of materials sought.

Defendant further objects that this Interrogatory seeks information that is not relevant to any

party’s claim or defense and is not proportional to the needs of the case. Defendant also objects

to this Interrogatory on the grounds that it seeks information that is already within Plaintiff’s

possession, custody, or control, and is already within the knowledge of Plaintiff. Defendant
further objects to this Interrogatory to the extent it seeks information protected by the attorney-
client privilege or work product doctrine. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing Specific
and General

Objections, Defendant answers as follows:

To the best of its present understanding and believe, Defendant believes that Plaintiff was

first hired as a Certified Nurse Assistant (“CNA”) in 09/2010 at a rate of $10.55/hr. This rate was

then increased to $13/hr. Plaintiff voluntarily left in 04/2016. Plaintiff’s second employment

period began on 06/15/2018, again as a CNA, at a rate of $16.50/hr. Plaintiff voluntarily left on

10/13/2018. Plaintiff’s third employment period began on 01/22/2019, again at $16.50/hr.

Plaintiff went on maternity leave in 04/2019. Plaintiff voluntarily left on 10/15/2019. Plaintiff’s

fourth employment period began on 02/24/2020, as a Team Lead, at a rate of $20/hr. Plaintiff

voluntarily left on 5/15/2020, purportedly due to COVID daycare issues. Finally, Plaintiff’s fifth

employment period began on 10/24/2020, as a CNA, at a rate of $17.50/hr. Further, documents

produced by Defendant pursuant to Minn. R. Civ. P. 33.03 may contain relevant facts or

information.

INTERROGATORY NO. 5:

Identify each employee, officer, or agent of Defendant who was consulted or participated

in the decision to terminate Plaintiffs employment with Defendant. Include the individual(s) full

name, title, dates of employment, and reason for separation from Defendant, if applicable.

7

ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 5:

In addition to the General Objections, Defendant objects that this Seeks confidential and

sensitive non-party personnel information that is not relevant to any party’s claim or defense.

Subject to and without waiving the foregoing Specific and General Objections, Defendant

answers as follows:

Vice President Sharon Compton, Director of Nursing Jacklyn Vados, HR Representative

Sadie Stoll, and RHIT Sonja Johnson were consulted with and/or participated in the decision to

terminate Plaintiff’s employment in December 2020.

INTERROGATORY NO. 6:

Identify all of Plaintiffs direct or indirect supervisors when she worked at Defendant.

Include the individual(s) full name, current and all previous job titles and dates of each, the

reason for separation from Defendant, if

applicable.

ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 6:

In addition to the General Objections, Defendant objects that this Interrogatory is vague

and ambiguous as to the term “indirect supervisors.” Defendant further objects that this

Interrogatory seeks confidential and sensitive non-party personnel information that is not

relevant to any party’s claim or defense and is not proportional to the needs of the case. Subject

to and without waiving the foregoing Specific and General Objections, Defendant answers as

follows:

CNAs typically report to nurses, who in turn report to the Director of Nursing. During

her last stint of employment, Plaintiff would therefore have reported to RN Dawn Hirsch and

Director of Nursing Jacklyn Vados.

8

INTERROGATORY NO. 7:

Identify all individuals at Defendant who were ever subject to the direct or indirect supervision

of any individual responsive to Interrogatory No. 5 or 6 since January 1, 2016. Include the individual(s)

full name, current and previous job titles and dates of each, the reason for separation from Defendant, if

applicable.

ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 7:

In addition to the General Objections, Defendant objects that this Interrogatory is

overboard and unduly burdensome, as Defendant has nearly 100 employees and dozens, if not

hundreds, of additional former employees during the time period sought by this Interrogatory.

Defendant further objects that this Interrogatory seeks information that is not relevant to any
party’s claim or defense and is not proportional to the needs of the case. Defendant also objects

to this Interrogatory on the grounds that it seeks highly sensitive and confidential non-party

personnel information. See, e.g., Onwuka v. Federal Express Corp., 178 F.R.D. 508, 517 (D.

Minn. 1997) (“[T]he proper balance, between the privacy interests of non-party third persons,

and the discovery interests of a party litigant, is to assure that only those portions of the pertinent

personnel files, which are clearly relevant to the parties’ claims, are open to disclosure and, then,

subject to an appropriate Confidentiality Order as the circumstances require.”). Subject to and

without waiving the foregoing Specific and

General Objections, Defendant answers as follows:

Defendant is available, through its counsel, to meet and confer with Plaintiff regarding a

revised version of this interrogatory that is narrowly tailored for the disclosure of relevant

information, if any, about non-party employees, from a shorter time frame, following the entry of

an adequate protective order preserving and ensuring the confidentiality of any sensitive and/or

confidential non-party information.

INTERROGATORY NO. 8:

For the period from January 1, 2017 to the date of your response, identify every

employee at Defendant. As to each employee, state their name, title, dates of employment,

9

whether they have worked remotely over the past 2 years, name of direct supervisor, and the

reason the employee separated from Defendant, if applicable.

ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 8:

In addition to the General Objections, Defendant objects that this Interrogatory is

overboard and unduly burdensome. Defendant further objects that this Interrogatory seeks

information that is not relevant to any party’s claim or defense and is not proportional to the

needs of the case. Defendant also objects to this Interrogatory on the grounds that it seeks highly

sensitive and confidential non-party personnel information. See, e.g., Onwuka v. Federal

Express Corp., 178 F.R.D. 508, 517 (D. Minn. 1997) (“[T]he proper balance, between the

privacy interests of non-party third persons, and the discovery interests of a party litigant, is to

assure that only those portions of the pertinent personnel files, which are clearly relevant to the

parties’ claims, are open to disclosure and, then, subject to an appropriate Confidentiality Order

as the circumstances

require.”).

INTERROGATORY NO. 9:

Identify the individual(s) who assumed any of Plaintiffs job duties after her termination

until the date of your response and state the individual’s date(s) of employment, age, race,

position, and the reason for the employee’s separation from Defendant, if applicable.

ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 9:

In addition to the General Objections, Defendant to this Interrogatory on the grounds that

it seeks highly sensitive and confidential non-party personnel information. Defendant further

objects to this Interrogatory to the extent it seeks information that is not relevant to any party’s

claim or defense. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing Specific and General Objections,

Defendant answers as follows:

Defendant is available, through its counsel, to meet and confer with Plaintiff regarding

this interrogatory.

10

INTERROGATORY NO. 10:

Identify all statements Defendant has obtained in any form from any person regarding

any of the events or happenings concerning Plaintiffs employment and termination of

employment with Defendant. For each such statement, identify:

a. the content and/or substance of the statement;
b. whether the statement was oral, written, before a court reporter, recorded or otherwise

preserved;

c. the name, address, and telephone number of the person from whom such statement
was taken; and

d. the date, time, and location of the statement.

ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 10:

In addition to the General Objections, Defendant objects that this Interrogatory as it seeks

a legal conclusion regarding the meaning of the term “statements.” Defendant further objects to

this Interrogatory to the extent it seeks information protected by the attorney-client privilege or

work product doctrine. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing Specific and General

Objections, Defendant answers as follows:

Defendant refers Plaintiff to documents produced by Defendant pursuant to Minn. R. Civ.

P. 33.03 that may contain relevant facts or information. Defendant reserve the right to

supplement this response as discovery is ongoing.

INTERROGATORY NO. 11:

Identify all formal and informal document retention policies in effect from January 1, 2017 to

the date of your response, that relate to any documents responsive to Plaintiff’s discovery requests.

ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 11:

In addition to the General Objections, Defendant objects that this Interrogatory as it seeks

information that is not relevant or reasonably related to admissible evidence. Defendant further

objects to this Interrogatory to the extent it seeks information protected by the attorney-client

privilege or work product doctrine. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing Specific and

General Objections,

Defendant answers as follows:

11

Defendant retains employment-related documents for periods of time required under

applicable state and federal law. In addition, Defendant implemented a litigation hold in

connection with this lawsuit.

INTERROGATORY NO. 12:

Identify all possible sources of electronically stored information (ESI) that include any

documents responsive to Plaintiff’s Request for Production of Documents and/or these

interrogatories. As to each, state:

a. the hardware utilized,
b. the software utilized,
c. the location of the source,
d. the custodian of the source,
e. whether the source is keyword searchable,
f. whether the source is indexed and/or catalogued,
g. the location of any index or catalog,
h. the type of documents available on the source,
i. the employees who use the source in Defendant’s course of business, and
j. the business purpose of the source

ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 12:

In addition to the General Objections, Defendant objects that this Interrogatory is
overboard and unduly burdensome. Defendant further objects that this Interrogatory seeks
information that is not relevant to any party’s claim or defense and is not proportional to the

needs of the case. Defendant also objects to this Interrogatory on the grounds that it is vague and

ambiguous. Defendant further objects that this Interrogatory is an improper, compound

interrogatory. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing Specific and General Objections,

Defendant answers as follows:

Defendant maintains an office iPhone that may contain responsive text messages with

Plaintiff. In addition, Defendant uses Gmail as its e-mail service provider. Individual computers

in Defendant’s possession, custody, and/or control may also contain responsive information.

Defendant reserves the right to supplement this response as discovery is ongoing.

12

INTERROGATORY NO. 13:

Identify all statements that you allege or believe constitute, contain, describe, or reflect an

admission against the interest of Plaintiff.

ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 13:

In addition to the General Objections, Defendant objects that this Interrogatory as it seeks

a legal conclusion. Defendant further objects to this Interrogatory to the extent it seeks

information protected by the attorney-client privilege or work product doctrine. Subject to and

without waiving the foregoing Specific and

General Objections, Defendant answers as follows:

Defendant refers Plaintiff to the documents produced by Defendant pursuant to Minn. R.

Civ. P. 33.03 that may contain relevant statements. Defendant reserve the right to supplement

this response as discovery is ongoing.

INTERROGATORY NO. 14:

Identify each instance in which Plaintiff received a performance review during her

employment.

ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 14:

In addition to the General Objections, Defendant objects that this Interrogatory is vague

and ambiguous. Defendant also objects to this Interrogatory as seeking information that is not

relevant to any party’s claim or defense. Defendant further objects to the extent this

Interrogatory is overbroad and unduly burdensome, in that it seeks documents over a 10-year

period when Plaintiff did not maintain continuous employment with Defendant. Subject to and

without waiving the foregoing Specific and General Objections, Defendant answers as follows:
Defendant refers Plaintiff to the documents produced by Defendant pursuant to Minn. R.

Civ. P. 33.03 that may contain relevant facts or information. Defendant reserve the right to

supplement this response as discovery is ongoing.

13

INTERROGATORY NO. 15:

Identify each employee handbook in effect during Plaintiff’s employment with Defendant

and, for each handbook identified, identify the dates during which that handbook was in effect.

ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 15:

In addition to the General Objections, Defendant objects that this Interrogatory seeks

information that is not relevant to any party’s claim or defense and is not proportional to the

needs of the case. Defendant also objects to this Interrogatory because it is overbroad and

unduly burdensome, in that it seeks all handbooks in effect over the course of a ten-year time

period when Plaintiff did not maintain continuous employment with Defendant. Subject to and

without waiving the foregoing Specific and

General Objections, Defendant as follows:

Defendant refers Plaintiff to the documents produced by Defendant pursuant to Minn. R.

Civ. P. 33.03 that may contain relevant facts or information, including the employee handbook

from January 2019, which was in effect during Plaintiff’s final two years of employment with

Defendant.

INTERROGATORY NO. 16:

Identify and describe in detail each instance in which Plaintiff complained of

discrimination to Defendant.

ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 16:

In addition to the General Objections, Defendant objects that this Interrogatory seeks

information that is already within Plaintiff’s possession, custody, or control, and is already

within the knowledge of Plaintiff. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing Specific and

General Objections, Defendant answers that the documents produced by Defendant pursuant to

Minn. R. Civ. P. 33.03 contain relevant facts and information. Defendant is also aware that

Plaintiff formally filed a charge of discrimination on 12/26/2020, labeled EEOC #26E-2021-

00059. Defendant reserve the right to supplement this response as discovery is ongoing.

14

INTERROGATORY NO. 17:

Identify all employees who were employed in the same position as Plaintiff.

ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 17:

In addition to the General Objections, Defendant objects that this Interrogatory is

overboard and unduly burdensome due to being indefinite as to time period, and because it seeks

information relating to approximately 60 current employees and dozens, if not hundreds, of

former employees. Defendant further objects that this Interrogatory seeks information that is not

relevant to any party’s claim or defense and is not proportional to the needs of the case.

Defendant also objects to this Interrogatory on the grounds that it seeks highly sensitive and

confidential non-party personnel information. See, e.g., Onwuka v. Federal Express Corp., 178

F.R.D. 508, 517 (D. Minn. 1997) (“[T]he proper balance, between the privacy interests of non-

party third persons, and the discovery interests of a party litigant, is to assure that only those

portions of the pertinent personnel files, which are clearly relevant to the parties’ claims, are

open to disclosure and, then, subject to an appropriate Confidentiality Order as the circumstances

require.”).

INTERROGATORY NO. 18:

For each individual identified in your answer to Interrogatory No. 17, please provide the

following:

a. The employee’s date of hire;
b. The employee’s starting wage;
c. The employee’s race;

ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 18:

In addition to the General Objections, Defendant objects that this Interrogatory is
overboard and unduly burdensome due to being indefinite as to time period, and because it seeks

personnel information relating to approximately 60 current employees and dozens, if not

15

hundreds, of former employees. Defendant further objects that this Interrogatory seeks

information that is not relevant to any party’s claim or defense and is not proportional to the
needs of the case. Defendant also objects to this Interrogatory on the grounds that it seeks highly
sensitive and confidential non-party personnel information. See, e.g., Onwuka v. Federal
Express Corp., 178 F.R.D. 508, 517 (D. Minn. 1997) (“[T]he proper balance, between the
privacy interests of non-party third persons, and the discovery interests of a party litigant, is to
assure that only those portions of the pertinent personnel files, which are clearly relevant to the
parties’ claims, are open to disclosure and, then, subject to an appropriate Confidentiality Order

as the circumstances require.”).

INTERROGATORY NO. 19:

State whether you paid Plaintiff her earned but unpaid PTO at the time of her termination.

ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 19:

In addition to the General Objections, Defendant objects that this Interrogatory to the

extent it seeks a legal conclusion. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing Specific and

General Objections, Defendant as follows:

Plaintiff was not entitled to the payout of any “earned but unpaid PTO” at the time of her

termination in December 2020. The operative policy in effect at the time of Plaintiff’s

termination states as follows:

Termination Policy Regarding Vacation Pay

An employee who voluntarily terminates employment will only be paid for

accrued vacation time; provided a two week, written notice is given. Unused

vacation time may not be used as part of an employees [sic] 2 week notice.

Unused vacation pay will be processed and paid out in the subsequent payroll pay

periods.

16

Plaintiff did not voluntary terminate her employment, and she did not provide a two week,

written notice in advance of voluntary termination. See also documents produced pursuant to

Minn. R. Civ. P. 33.03.

INTERROGATORY NO. 20:

Describe in detail your investigation into the allegations raised against Plaintiff,

including:

a. The name of each employee interviewed;
b. The date on which such employee was interviewed;
c. Whether you took notes during the interview; and
d. Summarize what each such employee stated during the interview.

ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 20:

In addition to the General Objections, Defendant objects that this Interrogatory is

overboard and unduly burdensome. Subject to and without waiving the foregoing Specific and

General Objections, Defendant answers as follows:

Another employee, Wendy Naylor, made an unsolicited complaint to Whispering Pines’

management about an incident of potential emotional abuse of a vulnerable adult by Plaintiff.

The employee submitted an incident report, which was reviewed by Defendant’s Director of

Nursing, Jacklyn Vados. Ms. Vados interviewed the employee who made the complaint,

reviewed surveillance footage of the incident, interviewed the client subject to the potential

abuse, interviewed Nicole, the LPN for the assisted living home where the incident took place,

and interviewed Plaintiff. Defendant also refers Plaintiff to responsive documents produced

pursuant to Minn. R. Civ. P. 33.03.

INTERROGATORY NO. 21:

State whether an employee (current or former) has ever filed a charge of discrimination against

you, commenced a lawsuit against you, or threatened a lawsuit against you. For each such individual,

identify the following:

a. His/her name;

17

b. The basis for the charge, lawsuit, or threatened lawsuit;

c. Whether the matter has been resolved or is ongoing; and

d. The individual’s contact information.

ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 21:

In addition to the General Objections, Defendant objects that this Interrogatory is

overboard and unduly burdensome due to being indefinite as to time period and scope.

Defendant further objects that this Interrogatory seeks information that is not relevant to any

party’s claim or defense and is not proportional to the needs of the case. Subject to and without

waiving the foregoing Specific and General Objections, Defendant answers as follows:

Defendant is available, through its counsel, to meet and confer with Plaintiff regarding a
revised version of this interrogatory that is narrowly tailored for the disclosure of relevant

information from a reasonable time period.

INTERROGATORY NO. 22:

State whether you have every disciplined any employee for engaging in inappropriate

conduct relating to race or racism and, if your answer is in the affirmative, provide the name of

each employee who has been disciplined and describe the disciplinary action taken against each

such employee.

ANSWER TO INTERROGATORY NO. 22:

In addition to the General Objections, Defendant objects that this Interrogatory is
overboard and unduly burdensome due to being indefinite as to time period and scope.
Defendant further objects that this Interrogatory seeks information that is not relevant to any
party’s claim or defense and is not proportional to the needs of the case. Subject to and without
waiving the foregoing Specific and General Objections, Defendant answers as follows:

18

Defendant is available, through its counsel, to meet and confer with Plaintiff regarding a
revised version of this interrogatory that is narrowly tailored for the disclosure of relevant
information from a reasonable time period.

AS TO OBJECTIONS:

Dated: November 29, 2021 SPENCER FANE LLP

By: /s/ Randi J. Winter

Randi J. Winter, #0391354

Jose A. Castro, #0399696

100 South Fifth Street, Suite 2500

Minneapolis, MN 55402

Telephone: (612) 268-7000

Facsimile: (612) 268-7001

rwinter@spencerfane.com

jcastro@spencerfane.com

Attorneys for Defendant Whispering Pines Assisted

Living, Inc.

AS TO ANSWERS:

I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct to the best of my

knowledge.

Dated: Whispering Pines Assisted Living, Inc.

/s/

By:

Its:

Calculator

Calculate the price of your paper

Total price:$26
Our features

We've got everything to become your favourite writing service

Need a better grade?
We've got you covered.

Order your paper