HomeMy WebLinkAbout0925 IN THS CIRCUIT COORT OF T8S 19T8
JODICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR ST.
LUCIS COONTY, FLORIDA ~593~8
CASg NOMBBR; 85-782-CA 17
PAUL irlARTIN, - -
~ ' .
Plaintiff, ;
f-
~ ~ - <
v8. ORD$R ON VARIOOS` MQTIONS-,.i t
t'.
JOHN R. QDILL6N~ ~ ~
~ c~
Defendant. ' '
~ , r
THIS CAUSB came on to be heard on March 3, 1986, before
the Honorable William L. Senrlry on the following motions:
1. Defendant, J~HN K. QOILLBN's, hearing on
Plaintiff's Objection to Defendant's Second Request for
Production of Documentst
2. Plaintiff's Motion for Protective Order and
Objection to Rule 1.351 Subpoena= and
3. Plaintiff's Motion to Compel.
The Court was advised that the Plaintiff's Motion to
Compel was withdrawn due to the fact that the Defendant's
counsel provided the information sought in an earlier letter to
Plaintiff's attorney.
With regard to Plafntiff's objections to Defendant,
JOHN R. QUILLEN's, Second Request for Production of Documents,
the Court accepted argument of counsel for the respective
parties; said argument culminating in Plaintiff's counsel
stipulating that the maximum amount oE damages that could be
claimed by Plaintiff is in the amount of $80,888.86 and interest
if allowed by the Court. Based on thfs assertion and
~ .
stipulation by Plaintiff's counsel, counsel for the Defendant,
JOHN R. QUILLEN, withdrew his Notion to Compel`. No ruling was '
made by the Court on Plaintiff's Motion for Protective Order. i,
DONE AI~ID ORDERED in Chambers at Fort Pierce, St. Lucie
'J .
County, Florida, this clay of , 1986.
~ ,
CIRCUIT COURT JWGS
Copies furnished to: '7 93`~8
Richard A. Venditti, Esquire
David Chesnut, Esquire ~ MAY -7 j~~ ~24
Louis Robinaon, Esquire
FIL
//jma//661D170V//D-11 Rp; ; .
~ ~ ~ ' '
$i. L~~t~~_ i
~ . eooK 499 ~~~f ~ ~ _
.
~ t~V~~...~.._.~~__~_~._ _
. 3.
__1_..v___~~ _ _ _ _ _ _