Opinion ID: 2653912
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: The City’s Interrogatory Responses

Text: The City’s responses to Freeman’s interrogatory requests also fail to establish the “similarly situated” elements of Freeman’s federal claims. Freeman directed the Court to Interrogatory No. 4 and Interrogatory No. 12. In Interrogatory No. 4, Freeman asked for the addresses of all residents in two of the 9 Case: 13-14610 Date Filed: 02/20/2014 Page: 10 of 14 City’s four wards where the residents used 4,000 to 5,000 kilowatt-hours of electricity in any month between 2005 to 2010. The City stated that it could not produce the requested information without substantial expense because the City would have to contract with the software company that created the billing software to generate a program to retrieve the requested information. In Interrogatory No. 12, Freeman asked the City to explain the process for recording residents’ electricity consumption into the City’s computer database. In response, the City stated that meter readers rotated through the City’s four wards on a predetermined schedule (e.g., Ward 1 on the 1st of each month, Ward 2 on the 7th of each month, etc.). The City stated that, after completing their routes, the meter readers upload their readings to City Hall for billing. These interrogatory responses establish very little. They certainly do not establish the “similarly situated” elements of Freeman’s federal claims.