Wrongful Death Suit filed Nov. 13, 2013 in California, #3

[LuckyLucy2]

^ Dina is not claiming Jonah was responsible for Max's death. She is saying he was neglligent in letting Rebecca Zahau watch Max while she was with another Zahau family member, as they had a verbal agreement that he would NOT leave Max with Rebecca under those conditions.

It really makes me wonder what another Zahau family member has done in the past to warrent that. Have other Zahau family members been negligent when watching children, or did Dina just know that one family member in particular was extremely jealous of little Max?

JMO

 

[LuckyLucy2]

The victims in the OJ Simpson trial were murdered and the defendant was found not guilty. So are you suggesting that the jury got it right and OJ was innocent?

It IS the same only a flawed investigation was done in The Zahau case and no one was found guilty because it was not investigated as a murder.

I posted the Simpson depositions simply as an example of scope and relevance -- I am NOT saying it is an identical case. The questions are far reaching and the court allowed very expansive questions as IMO they will in this case.

No, I'm saying law enforcement and the Medical Examiner were correct in both cases. The victims of OJ Simpson were murdered. Rebecca Zahau committed suicide.

 

[screecher]

snipped

^ Dina is not claiming Jonah was responsible for Max's death....
JMO

BBM

From the HONORABLE CHRISTOPHER WHITTEN:

Prejudice to Defendant

While the Defendant is unable to describe any prejudice to his ability to defend this
litigation which is directly caused by Plaintiff’s failure to follow this Court’s order, he is
unquestionably prejudiced by the delay. Every extra hour that an allegation that a father caused
the death of his own son, over and above that which is necessary to resolve the issue on its
merits, is inexcusable. The stress such claims would be expected to cause far exceeds the stress
that might be expected in a breach of contract or similar type of case.

http://www.courtminutes.maricopa.gov/docs/Civil/072015/m6938464.pdf

 

[K_Z]

Holey buckets, Screecher-- now THAT is one helluva smackdown for Plaintiff Dina Shacknai from the Judge. Yikes!! That case is progressing even worse than we thought for Plaintiff Dina Shacknai.

That case is going to be dismissed by the Judge, IMO-- after 2 rounds of sanctions on the Plaintiff DS, he has threatened multiple times to dismiss, and I think he will do it. Unbelievable the level of hubris and defiance on the part of DS. Even I didn't think she had THAT much chutzpah, to openly defy a Judge over and over, in a case SHE filed! This whole order from July 27, 2015 is a "must read"-- and will certainly be "explored" in her deposition in the Zahau case, IMO. And she does NOT come out looking reasonable or cooperative or professional. Yikes. Who does this??

From Judge Whitten's order:

This case is over two years old and discovery has barely begun. The Court does not attempt to determine the reason for delay between the time the case was filed and the beginning of this calendar year. The delay since then has been Plaintiff’s fault.

In February of this year the Defendant sent interrogatories and requests for production of documents to the Plaintiff. Her responses were due on March 30, 2015. On April 7, 2015, having not received any responses at all, the Defendant filed a motion to compel. On May 13, 2015 the Court issued an order compelling the Plaintiff to respond to the requests by June 15, 2015. In that order, the Court sanctioned Plaintiff by awarding Defendant’s fees to be paid by her and warned that, if she failed to comply with the order, more serious sanctions, potentially including dismissal, would be considered.

June 15, 2015, came and went and the Plaintiff did nothing.

On June 16, 2015, the Plaintiff filed a motion asking for ten more days to comply with the order. That motion was set for argument on July 27, 2015.

June 26, 2015, came and went and the Plaintiff did nothing.

On July 24, 2015 the business day before argument on the motion for an extension was set, the Plaintiff finally delivered a set of discovery responses that were altogether worthless.

In this case, the Plaintiff herself is responsible for not complying with the order. When the order was issued, she represented herself. When the deadline passed, she represented herself. When the extra time she requested passed, she represented herself.

Nature of the Bad Conduct

The Court was careful to warn the Plaintiff in its May 13, 2015 order that “should the Plaintiff fail to comply with this order, additional and harsher sanctions may be imposed, including dismissal of her case.” In the face of such an explicit warning, describing Plaintiff’s failure as anything other than willful strains credibility.

Public Interest and Prejudice to the Judicial System

If every case were handled as this case has been, the civil justice system would grind to a complete halt. There has been no meaningful exchange of any information between the parties despite the fact that it is two years old. While the only portion of that two year window the Court is looking at here is the last half year, the delays in that window fall entirely on the Plaintiff’s lap.

Warnings

It would have been impossible to more explicitly warn Plaintiff how important it was that she obeys the order that she respond to Defendants interrogatories and request for production. In its May 13, 2015 order the Court noted that “should the Plaintiff fail to comply with this order, additional and harsher sanctions may be imposed, including dismissal of her case.”

Appropriate Sanction

While dismissal of Plaintiff’s claims might be justified on the current record, the Court is mindful that dismissal as a sanction should be rarely used. Lesser sanctions might be appropriate here, especially where this is the first violation of a Court order to respond to discovery requests (the previous violation having been a violation of the applicable rules).
Many of the discovery requests Plaintiff issued on February 13, 2015 were aimed at determining what damages the Plaintiff was going to assert and, if those claims would be bolstered by expert testimony, who those experts were, what they would say and upon what they would base their opinions.

Plaintiff did not respond to those requests by the original March 30, 2015 deadline. She did not do so by the Court ordered deadline of June 15, 2015. She did not do so within the extra time she requested, by June 26, 2015. In fact, she did not really do so even in her July 24, 2015 responses.

As a sanction, Plaintiff is precluded from calling any witness (other than herself) on the subject of her damages. Neither may Plaintiff admit hearsay evidence related to her damages claim (e.g. “my doctor told me …”).

In addition, Plaintiff shall supplement her July 24, 2015 responses to the Defendant’s February 13, 2015 Uniform and Non-Uniform Interrogatories and Requests for Production by
August 14, 2015. Those responses shall be complete, in no way resembling her July 24, 2015 responses.

Finally, Plaintiff shall pay all fees incurred by Defendant in his attempts to get responses to his February 13, 2015 discovery request (less those already awarded as part of the previous Court order). Counsel for Defendant shall file an affidavit in support of this amount by August 7, 2015.

Within 30 days of the order determining the amount of attorney’s fees as described above, Plaintiff shall also pay an amount equal to the amount of attorney fees awarded to a charity to be determined by Defendant. Defendant shall notify Plaintiff of the chosen charity in writing within ten days of this order. Evidence of Plaintiff’s payment to this charity shall be provided to defense counsel within the 30 day period described above.

To clearly guide the parties’ future decisions in complying with Court orders and their obligations under the rules, the Court has now twice imposed sanctions less than dismissal and has reviewed the Plaintiff’s inexcusable delay in detail.

http://www.courtminutes.maricopa.gov/docs/Civil/072015/m6938464.pdf

 

[screecher]

Yeppers. Quite the flogging, Whitten is more than a little irritated with her defiance. She carries the biggest sense of entitlement I've seen anyone carry in a very long time.

That's ok, though, Whitten has dropped the hammer on her, imo, one more act of defiance, she's outta there. Lol

 

[surelock]

Where can we find out more about the agreement that Dina and Jonah had regarding Max being left in Rebecca's care while around particular Zahaus? It is so peculiar of an arrangement there has to be a backstory.

Are you saying what happened to Max was because "one family member in particular was extremely jealous of little Max"? What is the basis? If Dina was concerned about Max being around Rebecca and her sister, why was she unreachable for many hours following Max's accident?

Max's accident is a separate topic unless one somehow thinks it is justification for what Rebecca endured. Who would even go there and why?

 

[*Lash*]

Depo questions for Dina:

• Have you ever lied for your twin sister Nina?
• Has your sister ever lied for you?
• When and how did you learn Max would not survive?
• Do you know where Jonah was at the time of his accident?
• Do you know where Jonah's older siblings were at the time of the accident?
• Do you believe Jonah has withheld info regarding Max's accident?
• Have you ever had an addiction to or abused a controlled substance?
• Before Jonah, were you ever involved in any other domestic violence situations?
• Have you ever been blackmailed by Jonah?
• Have you ever blackmailed Jonah?
• Were you at the Spreckels mansion on July 12 after LE arrived?
• You allowed Rebecca to care for Max, you must have trusted her, correct?
• Did you give Rebecca's mugshot to any media outlets?
• Did you attempt to call or text Rebecca using another persons phone on July 11th?
• How did you respond when Jonah told you Rebecca had killed herself?
• Did you try to console Jonah after hearing Rebecca killed herself?
• How did you become familiar with the LeftHanded Kitten forum?

 

[kimi_SFC]

Where can we find out more about the agreement that Dina and Jonah had regarding Max being left in Rebecca's care while around particular Zahaus? It is so peculiar of an arrangement there has to be a backstory.

Are you saying what happened to Max was because "one family member in particular was extremely jealous of little Max"? What is the basis? If Dina was concerned about Max being around Rebecca and her sister, why was she unreachable for many hours following Max's accident?

Max's accident is a separate topic unless one somehow thinks it is justification for what Rebecca endured. Who would even go there and why?

RBBM
I ran a search by accessing the forum main page at the top of the page

Granted, I'm on tapatalk, so if you're accessing via web, it would be
Ongoing Case Discussion -> Rebecca Zahau Nalepa
I'm showing it to you this way because I'm unable to post the link via tapatalk :blushing:

From this point, I entered "Max Shacknai" into the search bar, and there were over 80 results. My initial reply to you included thread topics and links (to mostly locked threads that are still available for you to read).
However, I didn't want to go too far O/T, so I've edited down my post. I can post the most pertinent threads and links if you'd like. I want to remain within the confines of TOS.
Idk if the answer to your questions are within those threads. However, there is a plethora of information from the previous work put in by my fellow WSers. It's definitely a great place to start IMO.

HTH....


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[kittychi]

They were both with Rebecca the days in question. I can't imagine they will be able to wiggle out of their depositions. If they do, that would present larger implications IMO - and not good ones at that.

Lots of depo questions for Jonah, too. Big ones.

Many about knots.
One is, "have you ever seen Rebecca, Dina, Nina or Adam tie that tugboat hitch knot?"
and follow up with "who do you think tied the knots around Rebecca's feet, hands and neck?"

JS will be very adept at answering dep questions without really giving any information, IMO, so I do hope whoever takes his dep is very skilled.

I feel sympathy for JS because of the loss of Max, but not for the rest of this mess. IMO it has cost him a LOT, TONS of money to try to stay in the background for the last 4 years. IMO he has the answer to ALL of the dep questions my fellow sleuths have come up with for Dina and Nina and to most of the questions we have all had for the last 4 years.

Jonah Shacknai, it is your turn to talk now.

 

[bourne]

snipped



BBM

From the HONORABLE CHRISTOPHER WHITTEN:

Prejudice to Defendant

While the Defendant is unable to describe any prejudice to his ability to defend this
litigation which is directly caused by Plaintiff’s failure to follow this Court’s order, he is
unquestionably prejudiced by the delay. Every extra hour that an allegation that a father caused
the death of his own son, over and above that which is necessary to resolve the issue on its
merits, is inexcusable. The stress such claims would be expected to cause far exceeds the stress
that might be expected in a breach of contract or similar type of case.

http://www.courtminutes.maricopa.gov/docs/Civil/072015/m6938464.pdf

Thanks screecher for this weblink!

What I find fascinating is that the Judge makes mention of two things:
1) "She objected to a request for a signed release of medical records ..." (page 2 of Docket Code 005 Form V000A); and
2) "Two requests for nonprivileged text messages regarding two relevant and specifically named persons since July 11, 2011..." (page 2-3 of same docket).

I am wondering what medical records Jonah had requested from Dina? Dina's own personal medical records? Max's medical records??? For what purpose was Jonah seeking these medical records? Does Jonah, like most of us, believe that Dina has some type of personality disorder or alcoholic binge syndrome that helps explain her bizarre, grandiose, violent rage behaviors?

Nonprivileged text messages -- are these text messages Jonah sent Dina on day of Max's accident? What constitutes "Privileged" text messages anyway -- AZlawyer??? Are text messages only privileged if they are made between legally bound entities like lawyer to client, or doctor to patient, or clergyman to confessor? Are text messages between two laypeople not privileged?

 

[screecher]

question for ms. romano

Tell us, Ms. Romano, why did you tell LE you were unable to go to the LE station to be questioned, as you couldn't leave your grown *ss son alone, to have your hair yanked out, and all that other mean stuff they did to you, when in fact the son is an adult, attends college, drives by himself, seems quite capable of being 'alone'?

Tell us, Ms. Romano, who did you leave that grown *ss son with, when you accompanied ms. ex-shacknai #2 to where-ever it was she went? Oh. And BTW, just exactly what did the two of you do, and what did you purchase?

 

[screecher]

Thanks screecher for this weblink!

What I find fascinating is that the Judge makes mention of two things:
1) "She objected to a request for a signed release of medical records ..." (page 2 of Docket Code 005 Form V000A); and
2) "Two requests for nonprivileged text messages regarding two relevant and specifically named persons since July 11, 2011..." (page 2-3 of same docket).

I am wondering what medical records Jonah had requested from Dina? Dina's own personal medical records? Max's medical records??? For what purpose was Jonah seeking these medical records? Does Jonah, like most of us, believe that Dina has some type of personality disorder or alcoholic binge syndrome that helps explain her bizarre, grandiose, violent rage behaviors?

Nonprivileged text messages -- are these text messages Jonah sent Dina on day of Max's accident? What constitutes "Privileged" text messages anyway -- AZlawyer??? Are text messages only privileged if they are made between legally bound entities like lawyer to client, or doctor to patient, or clergyman to confessor? Are text messages between two laypeople not privileged?

Thank you for bringing those two items here. They popped out for me too, I was just to lazy to go back and bring them here. lol

And yep, Whitten seemed pretty pissed off with all of that.

 

[screecher]

Where can we find out more about the agreement that Dina and Jonah had regarding Max being left in Rebecca's care while around particular Zahaus? It is so peculiar of an arrangement there has to be a backstory.

Are you saying what happened to Max was because "one family member in particular was extremely jealous of little Max"? What is the basis? If Dina was concerned about Max being around Rebecca and her sister, why was she unreachable for many hours following Max's accident?

Max's accident is a separate topic unless one somehow thinks it is justification for what Rebecca endured. Who would even go there and why?

BBM

Exactly. It seems (at least to me) it is used continually as a justification to what Rebecca endured. Excusing, explaining and admitting (in a not so round about way) culpability in her death, imo. Not smart in a public forum. But oh well, all the more for the Zahaus to work with.

 

[K_Z]

Thanks screecher for this weblink!

What I find fascinating is that the Judge makes mention of two things:
1) "She objected to a request for a signed release of medical records ..." (page 2 of Docket Code 005 Form V000A); and
2) "Two requests for nonprivileged text messages regarding two relevant and specifically named persons since July 11, 2011..." (page 2-3 of same docket).

I am wondering what medical records Jonah had requested from Dina? Dina's own personal medical records? Max's medical records??? For what purpose was Jonah seeking these medical records? Does Jonah, like most of us, believe that Dina has some type of personality disorder or alcoholic binge syndrome that helps explain her bizarre, grandiose, violent rage behaviors?

Nonprivileged text messages -- are these text messages Jonah sent Dina on day of Max's accident? What constitutes "Privileged" text messages anyway -- AZlawyer??? Are text messages only privileged if they are made between legally bound entities like lawyer to client, or doctor to patient, or clergyman to confessor? Are text messages between two laypeople not privileged?

BBM. Jonah, Max's biological father, shared custody with Dina at the time of Max's death. As a custodial parent, he would not need Dina's "permission" to get all, or parts, of Max's medical records. He has standing on his own to request those records (including death records).

So my opinion is that Jonah is requesting some very specific information from Dina's medical records that she is apparently unwilling to provide. Because of his marriage with her, he probably knows a lot already about her medical history, medications, etc. but wants some of that information entered officially and formally into the lawsuit record. Or he believes her medical records contain "new" information that is relevant to the lawsuit she has brought against him. IMO.

Remember these comments from Jonah? BBM. (There are other sources for this and other info online, but I'll keep it brief.)

On Sept. 13, 2008, Jonah Shacknai reported to police that Dina attempted to choke him and that his attack-trained female German Shepherd became excited and came between the two. He blamed his wife’s behavior on prescription medications and alcohol, according to a supplemental report.

Weeks later, in a formal letter to Chief John Bennett of the Paradise Valley Police Department dated Jan. 26, Jonah wrote Dina previously filed “false and misleading reports” about bruises on her body stemming from contact with their dog.

“Importantly,” Shacknai wrote, "Dina has been treated medically for years for a bruising disorder, whereby the slightest contact with an object or other material causes bruises. This information can certainly be verified medically.”

Source: http://www.nbcsandiego.com/news/local/Details-Shed-on-Shacknai-Divorce.html#ixzz3iEd7Wr6w
Follow us: @nbcsandiego on Twitter | NBCSanDiego on Facebook

 

[SweetT]

Lots of depo questions for Jonah, too. Big ones.

Many about knots.
One is, "have you ever seen Rebecca, Dina, Nina or Adam tie that tugboat hitch knot?"
and follow up with "who do you think tied the knots around Rebecca's feet, hands and neck?"

JS will be very adept at answering dep questions without really giving any information, IMO, so I do hope whoever takes his dep is very skilled.

I feel sympathy for JS because of the loss of Max, but not for the rest of this mess. IMO it has cost him a LOT, TONS of money to try to stay in the background for the last 4 years. IMO he has the answer to ALL of the dep questions my fellow sleuths have come up with for Dina and Nina and to most of the questions we have all had for the last 4 years.

Jonah Shacknai, it is your turn to talk now.

I agree, but I also believe as Dina is finding out, money goes deeper than justice.

 

[Zinn]

The Judge specifically mentioned that hearsay would not be allowed in relation to the damages claim. He provided the example "My doctor told me...". Perhaps the request for DS's medical records was an attempt by JS to verify hearsay claims related to assessing damages.

All of the above is just my opinion.

 

[Gilgamesh]

Depo Question for Adam:

Why did you TEXT Jonah that his girlfriend was dead????

 

[justice be served]

Depo Question for Adam:

Why did you TEXT Jonah that his girlfriend was dead????

Another question for Adam: Is texting a routine manner of communication for you or your family to communicate the death of a family member? For instance, when your mother died?

Of course, Rebecca was not yet married to Jonah - but, come on, really? A text?? Almost as bizarre as a medical examiner in a major metropolitan area who cannot get to the scene of a very suspicious death for 13 hours.

 

[justice be served]

^ Dina is not claiming Jonah was responsible for Max's death. She is saying he was neglligent in letting Rebecca Zahau watch Max while she was with another Zahau family member, as they had a verbal agreement that he would NOT leave Max with Rebecca under those conditions.

It really makes me wonder what another Zahau family member has done in the past to warrent that. Have other Zahau family members been negligent when watching children, or did Dina just know that one family member in particular was extremely jealous of little Max?

JMO

I know this "verbal agreement" that you refer to has been discussed routinely but do we know that it in fact is true? I'm not asking you to provide a link but I just don't recall where it came from.

Q for Jonah Shacknai: Was there ever an agreement between Dina and yourself that Rebecca or her family members not be alone with Max?

 

[screecher]

The Judge specifically mentioned that hearsay would not be allowed in relation to the damages claim. He provided the example "My doctor told me...". Perhaps the request for DS's medical records was an attempt by JS to verify hearsay claims related to assessing damages.

All of the above is just my opinion.

I honestly think Whitten is going to throw this case in the trash bin. Sooner than later. I really doubt the judge will tolerate any more of her making a mockery of his rulings, his calendar and himself.

For whatever reasons, the woman is unable to pull it together. To quote another judge:


"I'm telling you it looks like there's a defect that you might want to cure."