FOWLER WHITE BURNETT P.A.• BRICKELL ARCH, 1395BRICKELLAVENUE, 14TH FLOOR,MIAMI,FLORIDA 33131 • (305) 789-9200

PLAINTIFF'S MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY

Plaintiff, CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION OF PARKER PLAZA ESTATES, INC.

("Association"), pursuant to FED. R. CIV. P. 34 and S.D. Fla. L.R. 26.1(g), hereby files this

Motion to Compel Discovery, and respectfully submits as follows:

1. Pursuant to the Agreed Order On Plaintiff's Expedited Verified Rule 56(D) 

Motion To Defer And Stay Defendants’ Motion For Summary Judgment [ECF No. 36-39] 

Pending Discovery, In Lieu Of Responding To Motion For Summary Motion [ECF No. 46], 

which permitted the Association to undertake limited discovery prior to, and for purposes of 

preparing its response to Defendants’ Motion For Summary Judgment [ECF No. 36-39], on May 

22, 2023, the Association served on Defendants, Simon Sherman and Pavel Moreff (together 

"Defendants"), its First Requests for Production of Document. See Discovery Requests attached 

hereto as Composite Exhibit "A".

2. On July 5, 2023, after an agreed extension of time, Defendants served responses 

to the Association's discovery requests. See Responses to First Request for Production by

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

Fort Lauderdale Division

 Case No. 22-61638-CIV-DIMITROULEAS

CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION OF 

PARKER PLAZA ESTATES, INC.,

Plaintiff,

v.

PAVEL MOREFF and SIMON 

SHERMAN,

Defendants.

Case 0:22-cv-61638-WPD Document 58 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/01/2023 Page 1 of 6
Case No. 22-61638-CIV-DIMITROULEAS

2

FOWLER WHITE BURNETT P.A.• BRICKELL ARCH, 1395BRICKELLAVENUE, 14TH FLOOR,MIAMI,FLORIDA 33131 • (305) 789-9200

Sherman attached hereto as Exhibit "B"; and Responses to First Request for Production by

Moreff attached hereto as Exhibit "C."

3. Defendants' responses to the Association's discovery requests are improper and do 

not comply with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure or the Local Rules. See FED. R. CIV. P. 

34; S.D. Fla. L.R. 26.1(e); and the General Order on Discovery Objections and Procedures

("General Order") dated August 2, 2023 [ECF No. 55].

4. In the first place, Defendants' responses contain boilerplate, general objections 

without a specific and detailed explanations supporting any of their objections to each objected 

request. In fact, Defendants included a "General Objections" section at the beginning of their 

responses providing boilerplate, general objections, and simply repeated such boilerplate 

language in the objections in the responses to the specific requests without any detailed 

explanation in support.

5. For example, regarding the objections of "overly broad" and "unduly 

burdensome", Defendants failed to provide any record evidence, such as an affidavit, detailing 

the basis for claiming overbroad and/or undue burden by showing the volume of documents, the 

number of man hours required in their production, or some other quantitative factor, to somehow 

explain that the documents requested are unwarranted or excessive. See Exhibit "B", at 

Responses to Requests Nos. 1-3, 9-11; and Exhibit "C", at Responses to Requests Nos. 1, 5-7.

6. Even when an explanation was provided, any such explanation is pointless as it

refers to absurd hypotheticals which belie the purpose of discovery in this matter. Regardless, the

General Order, [ECF No. 55], mandates that "[i]f there is an objection based upon an unduly 

broad scope, such as timeframe or geographic location, discovery should be provided as to those 

matters within the scope that is not disputed." See General Order [ECF No. 55] at Part I.C. As 

Case 0:22-cv-61638-WPD Document 58 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/01/2023 Page 2 of 6
Case No. 22-61638-CIV-DIMITROULEAS

3

FOWLER WHITE BURNETT P.A.• BRICKELL ARCH, 1395BRICKELLAVENUE, 14TH FLOOR,MIAMI,FLORIDA 33131 • (305) 789-9200

the Court understands, these types of objections without providing documents which are clearly 

unobjectionable, is merely a delay tactic.

7. In addition, in their objections on the claim of lack of "relevancy", Defendants

failed to provide a specific explanation "describing why the request lacks relevance and/or why 

the information sought is not reasonably calculated to lead to admissible evidence" in this action

as required under the General Order, [ECF No. 55], Part I.D. Neither do Defendants explain why 

the discovery requested is irrelevant to the issues raised in Defendants' Motion for Summary

Judgment. See Exhibit "B," Responses to Requests No. 7, 8, 20, and 21; and Exhibit "C", at 

Responses to Request No. 4. Therefore, not only are the "relevancy" objections improperly 

predicated, but they fail to comply with discovery rules.

8. Moreover, Defendants' objections regarding the alleged failure to include a 

timeframe are expressly contradicted in the requests. The Association specifically included in the 

instructions of its discovery requests that "[t]he relevant period is the time period between 

August 2019 to the present." See Exhibit "A", Instructions, Paragraph 12. Therefore, any such 

objections are false. See Exhibit "B," Responses to Requests No. 1-3, 9-11; and Exhibit "C", at 

Responses to Request No. 1, 5-7.

9. Defendants also failed to state whether any responsive documents are being

withheld on the basis of their objections as mandated under Fed. R. Civ. P. 34(b)(2)(C). 

10. Furthermore, Defendants failed to specify which document produced was 

responsive to which request for production. Instead, Defendants claim that each and every 

document produced responds to each and every request for production. Defendants claim that 

each and every pages produced, respond to each and every request for production. See Exhibit 

"B," Responses to Requests No. 4, 6, 14-19; and Exhibit "C", at Responses to Request Nos. 2-3, 

Case 0:22-cv-61638-WPD Document 58 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/01/2023 Page 3 of 6
Case No. 22-61638-CIV-DIMITROULEAS

4

FOWLER WHITE BURNETT P.A.• BRICKELL ARCH, 1395BRICKELLAVENUE, 14TH FLOOR,MIAMI,FLORIDA 33131 • (305) 789-9200

9-12. Pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and Local Rules, documents produced must 

be organized and labeled to correspond to the specific request, or if produced as the documents 

are kept in the usual course of business, "[t]he party has an obligation to explain the general 

scheme of record-keeping to the inspecting party." See Fed. R. Civ. P. 34(b)(2)(E)(i); and S.D. 

Fla. L.R. 26.1(e)(5).

11. For the foregoing reasons, the Court should grant this Motion and order

Defendants to serve proper responses and responsive documents on the Association. The

requested documents are essential for the Association to prepare its response to Defendants' 

Motion for Summary Judgment, which is due on October 9, 2023. See Order dated September 1, 

2023 [ECF No. 57]. Therefore, Defendants should be compelled to comply with discovery by 

September 15, 2023. 

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff, CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION OF PARKER PLAZA 

ESTATES, INC., hereby respectfully requests that the Court grant this Motion and enter an order 

compelling Defendants to serve proper responses and responsive documents on the Association

by September 15, 2023, and granting such further relief as the Court deems appropriate. 

COMPLIANCE WITH LOCAL RULE 7.1(a)(3)

The undersigned certifies that on September 1, 2023, he attempted to confer via 

telephone with counsel for Defendants on the matters raised in this Motion, but was not able to 

do so. Undersigned counsel is aware that counsel for Defendants is recovering for a major spinal 

surgery and will not be available until after October 9, 2023. However, in compliance with this 

Court's order dated August 2, 2023 [ECF No. 53], the Association files the present Motion.

Case 0:22-cv-61638-WPD Document 58 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/01/2023 Page 4 of 6
Case No. 22-61638-CIV-DIMITROULEAS

5

FOWLER WHITE BURNETT P.A.• BRICKELL ARCH, 1395BRICKELLAVENUE, 14TH FLOOR,MIAMI,FLORIDA 33131 • (305) 789-9200

Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Luis S. Konski

Luis S. Konski

Fla. Bar No. 207837

Email: lkonski@fowler-white.com

Daniel A. Milian

Fla. Bar No. 74803

Email: dmilian@fowler-white.com

Joseph R. Englander

Fla. Bar No. 935565

Email: jenglander@fowler-white.com

Ana E. Tovar

Fla. Bar No. 1008100

Email: atovar@fowler-white.com

FOWLER WHITE BURNETT, P.A.

Brickell Arch, Fourteenth Floor

1395 Brickell Avenue

Miami, Florida 33131

Telephone: (305) 789-9200

Facsimile: (305) 789-9201

Case 0:22-cv-61638-WPD Document 58 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/01/2023 Page 5 of 6
Case No. 22-61638-CIV-DIMITROULEAS

6

FOWLER WHITE BURNETT P.A.• BRICKELL ARCH, 1395BRICKELLAVENUE, 14TH FLOOR,MIAMI,FLORIDA 33131 • (305) 789-9200

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on September 1, 2023, I electronically filed the foregoing with the 

Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF. I also certify that the foregoing document is being served 

this day on all counsel via transmission of Notices of Electronic Filing generated by CM/ECF, 

and on Richard S. Lubliner, Lubliner Law, PLLC, counsel for Defendants, 1645 Palm Beach 

Lakes Boulevard, Suite 1200, West Palm Beach, Florida 33401, at rich@lubliner-law.com and 

carolina@lubliner-law.com. 

/s/ Ana E. Tovar

Ana E. Tovar

Case 0:22-cv-61638-WPD Document 58 Entered on FLSD Docket 09/01/2023 Page 6 of 6