RGM, 11.5.2007, 4:53pm: Reply to Voicemail

• video (4:04)

Robert Merritt (blue) Reply to Mark Ellis, Esq. (red):

Hey Robert,
It's ... Mark Ellis at ... Ellis, Coleman -- how ya doin'?

Dear Mr. Ellis,
I am fine, thank you.

... You know that I've ... noticed, and I think now subpoenaed you for deposition. I thought that I'd subpoenaed you weeks ago and I understand that there's some problem with that.

There is a problem. On Friday, November 2, 2007, I received a fax that you sent to Simmonds & Narita in San Francisco. This was, to my knowledge, the first (and to date, only) written communication that I have received from your office. The fax included your purported notice of deposition and subpoena. The Certificate of Service does not even recite that it was served on me, or on anybody representing me. And, in fact, it was not served on me.

... I'm sure that ... this is not something that you really want to do ...

Not so. It would have been an honor.

... and I understand that you'd like to talk with me a little bit about it, and that's fine.

I think you were misinformed. I told Rozanne at your office – when she called me on November 1, 2007 – that I declined your invitation to speak, but would be pleased to cooperate, if you would kindly serve me formally with a valid subpoena.

My telephone number is (916) 283-8820 ... and I'd be happy to talk with you. Thank you, bye bye.

I note the handwritten notation “email” followed by the initials “re” on the Certificate of Service. Do you contend that service was accomplished via email? If so, when? And to which address? The notice does not say. In any event, please explain the significance of that handwritten notation.

I don't mind being deposed. I would have been glad to cooperate on the scheduling. But for sound reasons I require a formal, valid subpoena. I decline to testify voluntarily.

I'll reserve judgment, but this sure looks to me like an attempt to pretend that service was accomplished, when in fact it has not been.

I have high personal regard for your clients, but I require a valid subpoena before I will testify in a case involving a former client.

I have not been properly compelled to appear, and I do not intend to appear on the date listed in your purported notice.

Please communicate with me in writing from this point forward. [Videos will gladly be accepted too ;-]

Sincerely,

Robert Merritt


a/v version (4:04)



larger screen

-- oOo --