-1-

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

NORTHERN DIVISION

MAXIE MCNABB, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:06cv664-MHT

)

SANDERS LEAD COMPANY, INC., )

)

Defendant. )

DEFENDANT’S OBJECTIONS TO PLAINTIFF’S WITNESS AND EXHIBIT LIST

Pursuant to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the and the Uniform

Scheduling Order entered by this Honorable Court, Defendant Sanders Lead Company,

Inc. (“Defendant”), by counsel, hereby formally objects to certain witnesses and exhibits

on the Plaintiff’s Witness and Exhibit List and does hereby show unto the Court as

follows:

1. The only witnesses listed in the Plaintiff’s Initial Disclosures were the

Plaintiff, Anne Baker, Joe Owens and Sam Kitchens. (See Attached

Exhibit 1) The response given to the Defendant’s interrogatories

regarding the identity of individuals who may have discoverable

information was to “See Initial Disclosures.” (See Attached Exhibit 2) At

no time has this response been supplemented by the Plaintiff. Therefore,

the Plaintiff should be barred from being able to use these witnesses at

trial for failing to disclose the witnesses in a timely manner. The Plaintiff

had ample opportunity to identify individuals likely to have discoverable

Case 2:06-cv-00664-MHT-SRW Document 46 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 1 of 13
-2-

information, yet failed to do so. It was not until the witness list was

submitted on October 17, 2007 that the Plaintiff ever indicated his

intention to use Nicholas O’Brian Williams, Randolph E. Harley, III,

Robert E. Brundidge, Jr., Bobby Taylor Streeter, Timothy Rayborn,

Anthony L. Duncan, and Edward Meadows as witnesses. The Plaintiff

failed to identify these individuals in his Initial Disclosures, Responses to

Interrogatories, or his Deposition. At no time were any of his responses

supplemented to disclose these individuals. This severely prejudices the

Defendant by not affording the Defendant an opportunity to conduct

discovery upon these individuals. The Plaintiff has ample opportunity to

identify individuals likely to have discoverable information, yet failed to do

so. Therefore, the Plaintiff should be barred from using said witnesses at

trial.

2. Defendant formally objects to the witness Nicholas O’Brian Williams, the

second witness listed by the Plaintiff on his witness list. (See attached

Exhibit 3) The reasons for said objection are that at no time prior to the

filing of the witness list was Mr. Nicholas O’Brian Williams ever identified

by the Plaintiff as a person who may have knowledge or discoverable

information pertaining to the Plaintiff’s claim. The witness was not

identified in the Plaintiff’s initial disclosures or any supplemental

disclosures. The Plaintiff was directly asked in the Defendant’s First

Interrogatories the following question:

 “Provide the name, and, if available to you, the address and phone

Case 2:06-cv-00664-MHT-SRW Document 46 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 2 of 13
-3-

number, of each and every person who has or may have

knowledge of discoverable matters pertaining to your employment

with Sanders and/or the basis for your claim that Sanders has

discriminated against you in any way. This interrogatory is

continuing in nature pursuant to Rule 26(e) of the Federal Rules of

Civil Procedure.” (See attached Exhibit 4)

The response given by the Plaintiff was “See Initial Disclosures.” (See

attached Exhibit 2). At no time was this interrogatory ever supplemented. 

The first notice given that the Plaintiff was intending to use this witness at

trial was when he was identified in the Plaintiff’s Witness List. The

Defendant would be severely prejudiced by not being afforded the

opportunity to depose and/or discover information pertaining to this

witness. Therefore, the Plaintiff should be barred from being able to use

this witness at trial for failing to disclose the witness in a timely manner.

3. Defendant formally objects to the witness Randolph E. Harley, III, the third

witness listed by the Plaintiff on his witness list. (See attached Exhibit 3)

The reasons for said objection are that at no time prior to the filing of the

witness list of was Mr. Randolph E. Harley, III ever identified by the

Plaintiff as a person who may have knowledge or discoverable information

pertaining to the Plaintiff’s claim. The witness was not identified in the

Plaintiff’s initial disclosures or any supplemental disclosures. The Plaintiff

was directly asked in the Defendant’s First Interrogatories the following

Case 2:06-cv-00664-MHT-SRW Document 46 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 3 of 13
-4-

question:

 “Provide the name, and, if available to you, the address and phone

number, of each and every person who has or may have

knowledge of discoverable matters pertaining to your employment

with Sanders and/or the basis for your claim that Sanders has

discriminated against you in any way. This interrogatory is

continuing in nature pursuant to Rule 26(e) of the Federal Rules of

Civil Procedure.” (See attached Exhibit 4)

The response given by the Plaintiff was “See Initial Disclosures.” (See

attached Exhibit 2). At no time was this interrogatory ever supplemented. 

The first notice given that the Plaintiff was intending to use this witness at

trial was when he was identified in the Plaintiff’s Witness List. The

Defendant would be severely prejudiced by not being afforded the

opportunity to depose and/or discover information pertaining to this

witness. Therefore, the Plaintiff should be barred from being able to use

this witness at trial for failing to disclose the witness in a timely manner.

4. Defendant formally objects to the witness Robert E. Brundidge, Jr., the

fourth witness listed by the Plaintiff on his witness list. (See attached

Exhibit 3) The reasons for said objection are that at no time prior to the

filing of the witness list of was Mr. Robert E. Brundidge, Jr. ever identified

by the Plaintiff as a person who may have knowledge or discoverable

information pertaining to the Plaintiff’s claim. The witness was not

Case 2:06-cv-00664-MHT-SRW Document 46 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 4 of 13
-5-

identified in the Plaintiff’s initial disclosures or any supplemental

disclosures. The Plaintiff was directly asked in the Defendant’s First

Interrogatories the following question:

 “Provide the name, and, if available to you, the address and phone

number, of each and every person who has or may have

knowledge of discoverable matters pertaining to your employment

with Sanders and/or the basis for your claim that Sanders has

discriminated against you in any way. This interrogatory is

continuing in nature pursuant to Rule 26(e) of the Federal Rules of

Civil Procedure.” (See attached Exhibit 4)

The response given by the Plaintiff was “See Initial Disclosures.” (See

attached Exhibit 2). At no time was this interrogatory ever supplemented. 

The first notice given that the Plaintiff was intending to use this witness at

trial was when he was identified in the Plaintiff’s Witness List. The

Defendant would be severely prejudiced by not being afforded the

opportunity to depose and/or discover information pertaining to this

witness. Therefore, the Plaintiff should be barred from being able to use

this witness at trial for failing to disclose the witness in a timely manner.

5. Defendant formally objects to the witness Bobby Taylor Streeter, the fifth

witness listed by the Plaintiff on his witness list. (See attached Exhibit 3)

The reasons for said objection are that at no time prior to the filing of the

witness list of was Mr. Bobby Taylor Streeter ever identified by the Plaintiff

Case 2:06-cv-00664-MHT-SRW Document 46 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 5 of 13
-6-

as a person who may have knowledge or discoverable information

pertaining to the Plaintiff’s claim. The witness was not identified in the

Plaintiff’s initial disclosures or any supplemental disclosures. The Plaintiff

was directly asked in the Defendant’s First Interrogatories the following

question:

 “Provide the name, and, if available to you, the address and phone

number, of each and every person who has or may have

knowledge of discoverable matters pertaining to your employment

with Sanders and/or the basis for your claim that Sanders has

discriminated against you in any way. This interrogatory is

continuing in nature pursuant to Rule 26(e) of the Federal Rules of

Civil Procedure.” (See attached Exhibit 4)

The response given by the Plaintiff was “See Initial Disclosures.” (See

attached Exhibit 2). At no time was this interrogatory ever supplemented. 

The first notice given that the Plaintiff was intending to use this witness at

trial was when he was identified in the Plaintiff’s Witness List. The

Defendant would be severely prejudiced by not being afforded the

opportunity to depose and/or discover information pertaining to this

witness. Therefore, the Plaintiff should be barred from being able to use

this witness at trial for failing to disclose the witness in a timely manner.

6. Defendant formally objects to the witness Timothy Rayborn, the sixth

witness listed by the Plaintiff on his witness list. (See attached Exhibit 3)

Case 2:06-cv-00664-MHT-SRW Document 46 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 6 of 13
-7-

The reasons for said objection are that at no time prior to the filing of the

witness list of was Mr. Timothy Rayborn ever identified by the Plaintiff as a

person who may have knowledge or discoverable information pertaining to

the Plaintiff’s claim. The witness was not identified in the Plaintiff’s initial

disclosures or any supplemental disclosures. The Plaintiff was directly

asked in the Defendant’s First Interrogatories the following question:

 “Provide the name, and, if available to you, the address and phone

number, of each and every person who has or may have

knowledge of discoverable matters pertaining to your employment

with Sanders and/or the basis for your claim that Sanders has

discriminated against you in any way. This interrogatory is

continuing in nature pursuant to Rule 26(e) of the Federal Rules of

Civil Procedure.” (See attached Exhibit 4)

The response given by the Plaintiff was “See Initial Disclosures.”(See

attached Exhibit 2). At no time was this interrogatory ever supplemented. 

The first notice given that the Plaintiff was intending to use this witness at

trial was when he was identified in the Plaintiff’s Witness List. The

Defendant would be severely prejudiced by not being afforded the

opportunity to depose and/or discover information pertaining to this

witness. Therefore, the Plaintiff should be barred from being able to use

this witness at trial for failing to disclose the witness in a timely manner.

7. Defendant formally objects to the witness Anthony L. Duncan, the seventh

Case 2:06-cv-00664-MHT-SRW Document 46 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 7 of 13
-8-

witness listed by the Plaintiff on his witness list. (See attached Exhibit 3)

The reasons for said objection are that at no time prior to the filing of the

witness list of was Mr. Anthony L. Duncan ever identified by the Plaintiff

as a person who may have knowledge or discoverable information

pertaining to the Plaintiff’s claim. The witness was not identified in the

Plaintiff’s initial disclosures or any supplemental disclosures. The Plaintiff

was directly asked in the Defendant’s First Interrogatories the following

question:

 “Provide the name, and, if available to you, the address and phone

number, of each and every person who has or may have

knowledge of discoverable matters pertaining to your employment

with Sanders and/or the basis for your claim that Sanders has

discriminated against you in any way. This interrogatory is

continuing in nature pursuant to Rule 26(e) of the Federal Rules of

Civil Procedure.” (See attached Exhibit 4)

The response given by the Plaintiff was “See Initial Disclosures.” (See

attached Exhibit 2). At no time was this interrogatory ever supplemented. 

The first notice given that the Plaintiff was intending to use this witness at

trial was when he was identified in the Plaintiff’s Witness List. The

Defendant would be severely prejudiced by not being afforded the

opportunity to depose and/or discover information pertaining to this

witness. Therefore, the Plaintiff should be barred from being able to use

Case 2:06-cv-00664-MHT-SRW Document 46 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 8 of 13
-9-

this witness at trial for failing to disclose the witness in a timely manner.

8. Defendant formally objects to the witness Edward Meadows, the eighth

witness listed by the Plaintiff on his witness list. (See attached Exhibit 3)

The reasons for said objection are that at no time prior to the filing of the

witness list of was Mr. Edward Meadows ever identified by the Plaintiff as

a person who may have knowledge or discoverable information pertaining

to the Plaintiff’s claim. The witness was not identified in the Plaintiff’s

initial disclosures or any supplemental disclosures. The Plaintiff was

directly asked in the Defendant’s First Interrogatories the following

question:

 “Provide the name, and, if available to you, the address and phone

number, of each and every person who has or may have

knowledge of discoverable matters pertaining to your employment

with Sanders and/or the basis for your claim that Sanders has

discriminated against you in any way. This interrogatory is

continuing in nature pursuant to Rule 26(e) of the Federal Rules of

Civil Procedure.” (See attached Exhibit 4)

The response given by the Plaintiff was “See Initial Disclosures.” (See

attached Exhibit 2). At no time was this interrogatory ever supplemented. 

The first notice given that the Plaintiff was intending to use this witness at

trial was when he was identified in the Plaintiff’s Witness List. The

Defendant would be severely prejudiced by not being afforded the

Case 2:06-cv-00664-MHT-SRW Document 46 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 9 of 13
-10-

opportunity to depose and/or discover information pertaining to this

witness. Therefore, the Plaintiff should be barred from being able to use

this witness at trial for failing to disclose the witness in a timely manner.

9. Defendant formally objects to the witness Joe Owens, the ninth witness

listed by the Plaintiff on his witness list. (See attached Exhibit 3) The

reasons for said objection are that at no time prior to the filing of this

document has the Plaintiff or the Plaintiff’s counsel provided the

Defendant or the Defendant’s counsel any address, phone number or

other reasonable way to communicate with Mr. Owens for discovery

purposes. Plaintiff’s counsel indicated that an address for Mr. Owens was

available, however none has been provided. No information has been

able to be gathered on Mr. Owens since the beginning of discovery. The

Defendant would be severely prejudiced by not being afforded the

opportunity to depose and/or discover information pertaining to this

witness. Therefore, the Plaintiff should be barred from being able to use

this witness at trial for failing to disclose the witness in a timely manner.

10. Defendant objects to each and every exhibit listed as 1 through 36 by

Plaintiff in his List of Exhibits. (See attached Exhibit 3) The reasons for

said objection are that as of the filing of this document by the Defendant,

the Plaintiff’s counsel has failed to provide copies of the exhibits as

required by the Uniform Scheduling Order entered by this court. This

despite the fact that the Plaintiff’s counsel indicated in writing that he

would mail copies of the documents. (See attached Exhibit 5)

Case 2:06-cv-00664-MHT-SRW Document 46 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 10 of 13
-11-

Additionally, the Plaintiff’s counsel orally stated that copies of the

documents would be mailed to the Defendant’s counsel. However, no

such documents have been produced as required by this Court’s Uniform

Scheduling Order entered December 3, 2006. Therefore, the Plaintiff

should be barred from being able to use the listed exhibits at trial as he

has not provided them to the Defendant as he is required to do so and as

Plaintiff’s counsel said would be done. This severely prejudices the

Defendant as the Defendant is not afforded the opportunity to inspect and

review said documents.

11. Defendant objects to exhibit number 1 on the Plaintiff’s Exhibit List. 

Exhibit number 1 is listed as the Plaintiff’s Declaration which is a writing

containing the Plaintiff’s contentions regarding the Defendant. Defendant

objects to said declaration as it is an unsworn document. It also violates

the Best Evidence Rule where the Plaintiff’s testimony would clearly be

the best evidence of any contention he has against the Defendant. 

Additionally, said document is hearsay. Therefore, the Plaintiff should be

barred from using said document at trial.

12. Defendant objects to exhibit number 2 on the Plaintiff’s Exhibit List. 

Exhibit number 2 is described as a Yahoo Financial Document. Said

document cannot be authenticated. Additionally, said document is

hearsay and irrelevant to the matters at hand. Therefore, said document

should not be admissible at trial.

13. Defendant objects to exhibit number 25 on the Plaintiff’s Exhibit List. 

Case 2:06-cv-00664-MHT-SRW Document 46 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 11 of 13
-12-

Exhibit number 25 is listed as an affidavit of the Plaintiff and Witness Joe

Owens. Defendant objects to said affidavit as it violates the Best

Evidence Rule where the testimony of these individuals would clearly be

the best evidence of anything that needs to be said against the

Defendant. Further, the affidavit is not in the proper form as it is not

properly sworn or authenticated. Therefore, the Plaintiff should be barred

from using said exhibit at trial.

WHEREFORE, for the reasons stated above, the Defendant respectfully

requests that Nicholas O’Brian Williams, Randolph E. Harley, III, Robert E. Brundidge,

Jr., Bobby Taylor Streeter, Timothy Rayborn, Anthony L. Duncan, Edward Meadows,

and Joe Owens be stricken from the Plaintiff’s witness list. Additionally, for the reasons

stated above, the Defendant respectfully requests that the Plaintiff not be permitted to

use the exhibits listed as 1 through 36 by Plaintiff in his List of Exhibits.

Respectfully submitted this the 9th day of November, 2007. 

s/ N.J. Cervera 

N.J. Cervera (CER001)

Matthew M. Baker (BAK017)

Frank P. Ralph (RAL002)

Grady A. Reeves (REE042)

Attorneys for Defendant

OF COUNSEL:

Cervera, Ralph & Reeves, LLC

P. O. Box 325

914 South Brundidge Street

Troy, Alabama 36081

(334) 566-0116

(334) 566-4073 fax

Case 2:06-cv-00664-MHT-SRW Document 46 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 12 of 13
-13-

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that I have served a copy of the foregoing document to all

persons listed below by CMF/Electronic Mail and/or by placing the same in the

U.S. Mail, postage prepaid and properly addressed to:

Roderick T. Cooks, Esq.

WINSTON COOKS, LLC

The Penick Building

319 17th Street North

Birmingham, Alabama 35203

this the 9th day of November, 2007.

s/ N.J.Cervera 

OF COUNSEL

Case 2:06-cv-00664-MHT-SRW Document 46 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 13 of 13
Case 2:06-cv-00664-MHT-SRW Document 46-2 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 1 of 3
Case 2:06-cv-00664-MHT-SRW Document 46-2 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 2 of 3
Case 2:06-cv-00664-MHT-SRW Document 46-2 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 3 of 3
Case 2:06-cv-00664-MHT-SRW Document 46-3 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 1 of 4
Case 2:06-cv-00664-MHT-SRW Document 46-3 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 2 of 4
Case 2:06-cv-00664-MHT-SRW Document 46-3 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 3 of 4
Case 2:06-cv-00664-MHT-SRW Document 46-3 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 4 of 4
Case 2:06-cv-00664-MHT-SRW Document 46-4 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 1 of 7
Case 2:06-cv-00664-MHT-SRW Document 46-4 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 2 of 7
Case 2:06-cv-00664-MHT-SRW Document 46-4 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 3 of 7
Case 2:06-cv-00664-MHT-SRW Document 46-4 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 4 of 7
Case 2:06-cv-00664-MHT-SRW Document 46-4 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 5 of 7
Case 2:06-cv-00664-MHT-SRW Document 46-4 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 6 of 7
Case 2:06-cv-00664-MHT-SRW Document 46-4 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 7 of 7
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR

THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

NORTHERN DIVISION

MAXIE MCNABB, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) CIVIL ACTION NO: 

) 2:06cv664-MHT-D

)

SANDERS LEAD COMPANY, INC., )

)

Defendant. )

______________________________________________________________________________

DEFENDANT’S INTERROGATORIES TO PLAINTIFF MAXIE MCNABB

______________________________________________________________________________

COMES NOW Defendant, Sanders Lead Company, Inc. ("Sanders"), by and through

undersigned counsel of record, and propounds the following requests for production of documents

and things to Plaintiff Maxie McNabb to be answered in accordance with Rule 34 of the Federal 

Rules of Civil Procedure:

DEFINITIONS

The following words, when used in these Requests for Production, unless otherwise 

indicated, shall mean:

(a) “Incident”:-the event or events, transactions or occurrences made the basis of this 

suit.

(b) "Injury" - any injury or injuries, direct or consequential, allegedly sustained in the 

incident.

(c) "You" or "your" - the plaintiff or any agent or employee of the plaintiff, including

any experts whom you expect to be called as witnesses at trial, attorneys, and persons who have

access to the information requested from whom the plaintiff can obtain such information.

(d) "Document" and "documents" - all written, recorded or graphic matters whatsoever

and all non-identical copies thereof, including, but not limited to, papers, books, records, letters,

Case 2:06-cv-00664-MHT-SRW Document 46-5 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 1 of 7
photographs, tangible things, correspondence, communications, telegrams, cables, telex messages,

memoranda, notes, notations, work papers, transcripts, minutes, reports, records of telephone or

other conversations, statements, summaries, opinions, studies, analysis, evaluations, contracts,

agreements, jottings, guidelines, charges, manuals, maps, brochures, publications, drafts,

newsletters, proofs, galleys, or other pre-publication forms of materials, telephone, lists or indexes,

Rolodex indexes, books of account, records or invoices reflecting business operations, purchase

orders, bills, invoices, receipts, canceled checks, vouchers, ledger sheets, statements of witness,

findings of investigation, insurance polices, accident reports, claims forms, bills of lading, way bills,

minutes of any corporate meetings minutes of meetings, or board of directors of corporations,

records of negotiations, reports of experts, reports of consultants, all notes or drafts relating to any

of the foregoing, all things similar to the foregoing, and any other documents as defined in Rule 34

of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure of any kind or character in your possession, custody or in

control or known by you to exist.

(e) "Describe" or "description" - to (1) provide a narrative statement of the matter in 

question; (2) identify all documents relating to or referring thereto; (3) identify all persons having

knowledge thereof, stating the subject matter of each such person's knowledge and the manner in

which his knowledge was obtained; and (4) state what acts were done by each person who, in any

way, participated in the matter in question.

(f) "Identify"- 

(1) when used in reference to an individual shall mean to state his or her full 

name, and the present residence address;

(2) when used in reference to a corporation, shall-mean to state its full name, the

names of each partner, and its principal place of business, and its business address;

(3) when used in reference to a partnership, shall mean to state its full name, the

names of each partner, and its principal place of business;

(4) when used in reference to a person other than an individual, corporation or

partnership, shall mean to state its official name, its organizational form and its address;

(5) when used in reference to an act, shall mean to state the time and place of 

the act, the nature of the act, the name of the person or persons performing or joining in the act, and

the names of all persons witnessing or having knowledge of such act.

INTERROGATORIES

1. Please state your name, resident address, date of birth, Social Security Number and

marital status, including the name, address and place of employment of your spouse.

2. If you have ever been a party to a lawsuit, either as a plaintiff or as a defendant,

please state with respect to each lawsuit:

Case 2:06-cv-00664-MHT-SRW Document 46-5 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 2 of 7
(a) The style of the case, including the name of the court and jurisdiction where the

case was filed;

(b) The nature of the case; and

(c) The results of the case, including the amount of any settlement or judgment.

3. Provide the name, and, if available to you, the address and phone number, of each

and every person who has or may have knowledge of discoverable matters pertaining to

your employment with Sanders and/or the basis for your claim that Sanders has

discriminated against you in any way. This interrogatory is continuing in nature pursuant

to Rule 26(e) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

4. With respect to each and every person listed above and in your Rule 26 Initial

Disclosures, state in detail what knowledge you believe each could have related to

your claims against Sanders.

5. State the name, address, and phone number of each person whom you know or

believe has signed a statement related to the subject matter of this lawsuit.

6. Since your application for employment with Sanders to the present, state the dates

of each period you have actively sought employment. State in detail every reason

you ceased actively seeking employment.

7. Describe in detail, and please include, each date, every person contacted, the nature

of the contact, and the result of every effort you have made to secure employment

since your application for employment with Sanders including, but not limited to,

every application or resume you submitted to a prospective employer or employment

agency, every phone call you made to a prospective employer or employment

agency, every visit you made to a prospective employer or employment agency, and

any other contact you have had with a prospective employer or employment agency.

8. Since your application for employment with Sanders to the present, state whether you

have declined, resigned, refused or otherwise rejected any opportunity or offer of

new or continued employment.

9. If the answer to the preceding interrogatory is in the affirmative, state each and every

date, the name of each employer offering employment, the terms and conditions of

the employment offered, and every reason you did not accept the offered

employment.

10. From the time of your application for employment with Sanders to the present, state

the name of each of your employers, the dates you were employed by each employer,

your total compensation to date from each employer, and every reason for your

separation from the employer.

11. For each employer listed in the preceding interrogatory, state each and every position

Case 2:06-cv-00664-MHT-SRW Document 46-5 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 3 of 7
you held with each employer, the dates you held each position, your duties and

responsibilities in each position and any changes therein, your rate of pay in each

position and any changes therein, all other benefits you received in each position and

any changes therein, and the number of hours per week you worked in each position

and any changes therein.

12. From the time of your application for employment with Sanders to the present, state

the dates of each and every period in which you were self-employed and describe

in nature of such self-employment, including, but not limited to, your duties and

responsibilities and any changes therein.

13. For each period of employment listed in the preceding interrogatory, state the

number of hours per week you worked during each period of self-employment and

any changes therein, your earnings from each period of self-employment, the name

of each person employed with or by you during each period of self-employment, and

the compensation or earnings of each person employed with you or by you during

each period of self-employment.

14. Since your application for employment with Sanders to the present, state the total

amount of compensation earned from all sources.

15. If you allege or contend an employee at Sanders racially harassed you, please state

as to each act of harassment:

(a) The date, time and place of such act;

(b) The name, job title and a detailed description of each agent or employee of

Sanders who was involved in any way in each such act;

(c) The detailed facts of each such act of each such agent or employee of

Sanders;

(d) The name and address of each person who was a witness to or was

involved in any way in each such act;

(e) The detailed facts of the observation and knowledge of each such witness to

each act.

16. If you allege or contend Sanders discriminated against you, please state as to each

act of discrimination:

(a) The date, time and place of such act;

(b) The name, job title, and a detailed description of each agent or employee

of Sanders who was involved in any way in each such act;

(c) The detailed facts of each such act of each such agent or employee of

Sanders;

(d) The name and address of each person who was a witness to or was

involved in any way in each such act;

(e) The detailed facts of the observation and knowledge of each such witness to

Case 2:06-cv-00664-MHT-SRW Document 46-5 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 4 of 7
each act.

17. If you allege or contend Sanders retaliated against you in any way, please state as

to each act of retaliation:

(a) The date, time and place of such act;

(b) The name, job title and a detailed description of each agent or employee of

Sanders who was involved in any way in each such act;

(c) The detailed facts of each such act of each such agent or employee of

Sanders;

(d) The name and address of each person who was a witness to or was

involved in any way in each such act;

(e) The detailed facts of the observation and knowledge of each such witness to

each act.

18. Please state whether or not you reported any alleged racial harassment. If your

answer is in the affirmative, please state:

(a) The name of the person with whom you spoke;

(b) The date you reported the allegations;

(c) Where you were at the time of the report and the location of the person to

whom you spoke; and

(d) The substance of your report. If applicable, please provide this

information for each separate report made.

19. If you reported the allegation, please state what, if any, subsequent action was taken

by Defendant.

20. State with specificity and detail each and every fact and produce a copy of each and

every document which you contend supports your allegation an employee with

Sanders racially harassed you.

21. State with specificity and detail each and every fact and produce a copy of each and

every document which you contend supports your allegation an employee with

Sanders discriminated against you.

22. State with specificity and detail each and every fact and produce a copy of each and

every document which you contend supports your allegation an employee with

Sanders retaliated against you.

23. If any person has given a statement to you, your attorneys, or anyone acting on your

behalf regarding the facts and circumstances underlying this lawsuit, please provide

the name and address of each person giving a statement, the substance of each

statement and the manner in which each statement was given.

Case 2:06-cv-00664-MHT-SRW Document 46-5 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 5 of 7
24. State all persons with whom you have discussed the allegations of your Complaint.

Give the name, address, and telephone number of each person.

25. Identify every person you intend to call as an expert witness at the trial of this case,

and for each expert please state:

(a) His or her name and business address;

(b) The subject matter on which he or she is expected to testify;

(c) The substance of the fact and opinions to which he or she is expected to

testify;

(d) A summary of the grounds for each opinion;

(e) His or her occupation; and

(f) The education and experience or other background which you contend

qualifies such person to testify as an expert witness.

26. Describe, in detail, each item of damage you claim you sustained as a result of the

alleged discrimination. Please provide the calculations upon which you base your

damages and the evidence and facts in support thereof.

27. Other than the damages shown in response to the preceding interrogatory, state all

other relief you are seeking in this lawsuit.

28. Identify and describe in detail (including, but not limited to, the date, author,

recipient, whereabouts if known, and substance) each and every document of which

you are aware that reflects in any way the damages suffered by you related to your

claims in this lawsuit, or in the alternative, attach a copy of each document to your

response to these interrogatories.

29. Identify by name and address each and every doctor, therapist, counselor or other

professional that you have seen or consulted for the last seven years.

30. With respect to each person identified in the preceding interrogatory, state the reason

you saw or consulted each person identified and the results, outcome, advice,

diagnosis, treatment and/or conclusions given to you by each person identified.

31. State whether you have ever filed for bankruptcy. If so, state:

(a) The date(s) you filed;

(b) The court( s) you filed in;

(c) The bankruptcy you sought protection under; and 

(d) The current status of your bankruptcy.

32. State whether you have ever filed for unemployment compensation. If so, state:

(a) The date(s) you filed;

Case 2:06-cv-00664-MHT-SRW Document 46-5 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 6 of 7
Case 2:06-cv-00664-MHT-SRW Document 46-5 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 7 of 7
This email is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. §§2510-2521 and is legally

privileged. This email and any files transmitted with it are also subject to the attorney-client privilege and attorney

work-product doctrine, and contain confidential information intended only for the person or persons to whom this

email message is addressed. If you have received this email message in error, please notify the sender immediately

and destroy all copies of the original message.

-----Original Message-----

From: Roderick Cooks [mailto:rcooks@winstoncooks.com]

Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2007 5:13 PM

To: mbaker@troycable.net

Subject: McNabb v. Sanders lead Compnay, Inc.

Matt the files containing our trial exhibits that I have sent to you are too big because your server is

rejecting them. Enclosed with this email is the witness and exhibit list and a cover letter. I will mail the

exhibits to you tomorrow. They are our summary judgment materials.

thanks 

Roderick T. Cooks, Esq.

Winston Cooks, LLC

The Penick Building

319 - 17th Street North, Suite 200

Birmingham AL 35203

Contact: (205) 502-0970

Cellular: (205) 616-3349 

Fax: (205) 251-0231

Email: rcooks@winstoncooks.com

This email is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C. §§2510-2521 and is legally privileged.

This email and any files transmitted with it are also subject to the attorney-client privilege and attorney workproduct doctrine, and contain confidential information intended only for the person or persons to whom this email

message is addressed. If you have received this email message in error, please notify the sender immediately and

destroy all copies of the original message.

Case 2:06-cv-00664-MHT-SRW Document 46-6 Filed 11/09/2007 Page 1 of 1