Observations...
Looking at this document (letter from Carey to JMM dated June 24th): Then,
this newspaper article says:
>>Joyce Meyer Ministries proposed a confidentiality agreement that seals the answers and documents it turns over in a wrongful death suit filed by Sheri, Garett and Gavin Coleman's family. Belleville attorney Jack Carey and Chicago attorney Enrico Mirabelli, Sheri's cousin, refused and asked Circuit Judge Mike O'Malley to order the ministries to produce the information that was due last week.<<
The above may not be an entirely accurate reporting -- I do not believe JMM is asking them to seal all of the information, else why would they offer to give them anything? I believe it might be more accurate to say that they want to assist, but they are asking for some appropriate protections and considerations per the following.
In the letter from Carey to JMM, it states:
>>"I am in receipt of your second Stipulation and Protective Order for Confidentiality of Discovery Materials. This second draft was received on the day Joyce Meyers Ministries, Inc. compliance was due."<<
[note to self: The above says "second," seems to indicate that there was a first. Carey does not reference any response to a 1st Stipulation, although a 2nd draft from JMM would seem to be a response by JMM to work on the 1st draft after a request of some sort from Carey.]
Requests from respondents were made about May 26th, 28 days was the requested time for response, i.e. June 23rd would be the date to have responses in (I believe).
Carey also writes in his letter:
>>"Within the past 10 days I have received two confidentiality agreements requesting my signature claiming..."<<
So, after approx. 18 days of the request to the respondents (approx. 13th of June, approx. 13 business days), JMM responded -- apparently feeling that they wished to assist but needed Carey to make a consideration. Their timing appeared consistent with someone who wanted to move in a timely fashion to assist w/responses by the 28 day mark.
To my knowledge, Carey has not released the content of the 1st draft from JMM, nor his response to it. Sometimes this is done by phone w/attorneys, i.e. they discuss what is needed to get into agreement, that then gets applied to a 2nd draft and sent.
Carey's letter notes a "blurb" of text from JMM's 1st/2nd draft:
"3. The information, materials and documents requested, if made public, may cause the Respondent in Discovery, JMM, irreparable harm because (i) the requested materials and documents contain confidential, sensitive information pertaining to the Respondent in Discovery, JMM, or (ii) contains information that Respondent in Discovery, JMM, is required by law to keep confidential."
In other words, they are stating that some of the requested material contains things that are confidential to "JMM" (not necessarily Chris Coleman) OR that they must, by law, keep confidential.
Carey goes on to write:
>>In addition, your client wants to designate as confidential all or any part of the requested materials . . . . How the following inquiries are confidential to Joyce Meyer Ministries, Inc. confounds me, e.g. copies of Christopher Coleman's complete personnel file, copies of the Joyce Meyer Ministries, Inc. policy of employment as it related to Christopher Coleman, copies of Christopher Coleman's W-2's for the last five years, copies of all correspondence, notes, memorandums, deeds, contracts, policies or other documents relating to the termination of Christopher Coleman, etc.
In short, I see nothing in the requested materials that would cause irreparable harm to Joyce Meyer Ministries, Inc. Further, I know no law or contract which would keep Joyce Meyer Ministries, Inc. from complying with the Plaintiffs' Request for Production and Answers to the Interrogatories propounded by the Plaintiffs.<<
The ellipsis in the first sentence gives only "partial" information on their client (JMM). This type of "partial" makes me nervous -- what should have been in the place of the ellipsis? Why wasn't a copy of the letter to which Carey was responding included in his response? What information did Carey not want to include in this letter that was released to the press?
[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=3912039&postcount=942"]Now then...look at what was actually requested:[/ame]
At the above link you will see this:
>>2. Copies of all policies of Joyce Meyer Ministries regarding employment with the organization.<<
Item 2 above is different from that which Casey stated above which says: "copies of the Joyce Meyer Ministries, Inc. policy of employment as it related to Christopher Coleman" Item 2 was not specific to CC, Carey's letter "was" specific to him -- these are two different things.
>>6. Copies of all private airplane manifests, held by Joyce Meyer Ministries, Inc. which list all passengers.<<
Item 6 was not included in Carey's letter, it was included in the request made to JMM originally.
[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=3912039&postcount=942"]Again, at this link[/ame] you see that there is much more requested in the interrogatories, with the first/last items being:
>>1. State the full name, current residence, and business address, and relationship to Joyce Meyer Ministries, Inc. of all persons answering and signing these interrogatories.<<
>>5. List the names and addresses of all other persons (other than yourself and persons heretofore listed) who have knowledge of the facts of the occurrence and damages claimed to have resulted from the actions set forth in Plaintiffs' Complaint.<<
Names AND addresses are being asked, not just names (as in previous items).
The following Item 2:
>>Have you or anyone acting on your behalf had any conversations with any person at any time with regard to the manner in which the occurrence complained of in Plaintiffs' Complaint occurred?<< (and then if answered in the affirmative, state the following)
I wish I had more experience in reading interrogatories for wrongful death suits so that I could compare them to that which is in these. The above almost seems like JMM is being expected to put out a company memo to maybe 100s or 1000s of employees, asking them to report to their bosses per that in the interrogatories and so that they can gather data for this case (items 2, 3 and 4). It is as if Carey is expecting JMM to do the investigating for him, then turn the information to Carey, and maybe with disregard for certain laws which employers must uphold? I have to wonder if there is a precedent for such a thing -- is this commonplace? I just don't know.
Back to Carey stating:
>>In short, I see nothing in the requested materials that would cause irreparable harm to Joyce Meyer Ministries, Inc.<<
Maybe Carey doesn't see what JMM sees per the items he mentioned in the paragraph previous to his statement, but that is NOT all that was requested -- it is only a chunk of that which was requested. I would like to think that JMM wants to assist in every way that they are able. I'm getting the impression that Carey may not be doing "his" work in investigating, but expecting JMM to do so and with disregard to those who would help. Of course, we will see what the judge thinks.
Of COURSE I want Sheri's family to win the civil suit, but I would like to see the suit proceed in an honorable fashion and I'm a little concerned about this type of statement:
>>As I view your Stipulation and Protective Order for Confidentiality of Discovery Materials, if I elect to use any of the materials in subsequent pleadings, memorandums, client communication, press releases, I first must seek the permission of Joyce Meyer Ministries, Inc.
ain't gonna happen."
Whenever I have worked with attorneys (admittedly not very often), there is a "working together" that they try to maintain, and an "ain't gonna happen" sounds to me to be quite strident and not in the spirit of working together to get things moving. It seems that it could be very important to do whatever might be necessary (within reason) to get the civil suit completed (with a guilty for CC) before the criminal case, but I could be wrong. I sincerely do not think that JMM wants to tie Carey's hands, I think they are only asking for considerations which are probably reasonable. We will see what the judge says, eh?
This will be an interesting learning experience.
