Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
THURSTON COUNTY, WA
SUPERIOR COURT
1 EXPEDITE July 12, 2017
No hearing is set Linda Myhre Enlow
2 X Hearing is set: Thurston County Clerk
Date: July 14, 2017
3 Time: 9:00 am
Judge/Calendar: Carol Murphy
4
6
The Honorable Carol Murphy
7
SUPERIOR COURT OF WASHINGTON FOR THURSTON COUNTY
8
14 Defendants.
24 Fourth-Party Plaintiff,
25 v.
19 Defendants.
20
I, Terence J. Scanlan, declare as follows:
21
1. I am over the age of eighteen, competent to testify about the matters stated
22
herein, and make this declaration based on my own personal knowledge.
23
2. I am one of the attorneys of record for Shannon & Wilson, Inc. (Shannon
24
& Wilson).
25
3. STPs Motion to Continue, and Mr. Parnasss supporting Declaration
26
submitted therewith, contains inaccurate statements regarding Shannon & Wilsons document
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
10 Daniel W. Galvin
Office of the Attorney General
11 PO Box 40113
Olympia, WA 98504-0113
12 danielg2@atg.wa.gov
9
DATED this 12th day of July, 2017, at Seattle, Washington.
10
11 s/George L. Auslander
George L. Auslander, Paralegal
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
June 5, 2017
VIA E-MAIL
Brian R. Davidson
Dingess Foster Luciana Davidson & Chleboski LLP
20 Stanwix St., 3rd Fl.
Pittsburgh, PA 15222
RE: WSDOT v. STP, et al., No. 16-2-00980-34 Shannon & Wilsons Discovery
Responses
Dear Brian:
I am writing in response to your letter of May 26, 2017 regarding Shannon & Wilsons
Responses to STPs Interrogatories and Requests for Production of Documents. The items
addressed in your letter are responded to in turn below.
Shannon & Wilson acknowledges that it included citations to documents in its Answers to STPs
Interrogatories that have not yet been produced. These citations are to documents that Shannon
& Wilson intended to produce as part of its forthcoming supplemental production of non-
privileged documents once our privilege review winds up. However, we are producing them
under separate cover today as a smaller supplemental production to provide STP with prompt
access to these responsive documents.
We respectfully disagree with your assertion that Shannon & Wilsons response that it will make
its approximately 100 Bankers boxes of paper documents available for inspection at a mutually
convenient time is improper. We also respectfully disagree with your letters assertion that the
Order on Stipulated Discovery Protocol entered by Thurston County entered on January 13,
2017, before STP even filed suit against Shannon & Wilson, requires all parties to produce
digitalized hardcopy records at the producing partys expense. Instead, the Order requires those
parties who would not suffer undue hardship or unreasonable expense to produce digitalized
hardcopy records at its own expense.
010351-01201 1934779.docx
Brian R. Davidson
June 5, 2017
Page - 2
For example, and as explained in more detail below, the scope of STPs Request for Production
Nos. 4, 27, and 28 is still unclear, despite Shannon & Wilsons attempts to reach an
understanding and agreement with STP of an appropriate narrow scope. So, the context with
which Shannon & Wilsons potential undue hardship and unreasonable expense to digitalize an
undetermined amount of hardcopy documents cannot fully be ascertained until it becomes clearer
as to whether the universe of documents that STP seeks is broader and would require the
additional location, to the extent even possible, of hardcopy documents relating to a number of
other Projects not related to this lawsuit. Even with those issues aside, Shannon & Wilson has
approximately 100 Bankers boxes of hardcopy documents, maps, plans, drawings, and other
large documents (which likely present imaging and formatting problems) related to its work on
the AWV Project since 2001. It is our understanding that a significant majority of these
documents are printed duplicates of the documents Shannon & Wilson (and WSDOT) produced
electronically. The time and expense required to digitalize this significant volume of documents
(to the extent even possible given the size of some of these documents) is highly unreasonable,
particularly given Shannon & Wilsons role on this Project.
Therefore, we agree that a meet and confer is necessary to discuss these issues in more detail and
hopefully reach a reasonable agreement as to the inspection of these documents and not impose
an otherwise substantial, and frankly unnecessary, expense on Shannon & Wilson. As part of
this meet and confer, we again request that we reach a clearer understanding and narrowing of
the scope of STPs Request for Production Nos. 4, 27, and 28.
As touched on above, and contrary to your letter, we believe that ambiguity still exists as to the
intended scope of this Request. In hopes of reaching a clearer understanding as to the scope of
this Request, we sought clarification from STP on May 19th and on May 30th, following your
letter of May 26th. However, we have not received a response from counsel regarding the
desired manner and scope of production of Shannon & Wilsons payment records. As we
explained by telephone and email on these dates, Shannon & Wilson does not have responsive
records (that are within proper scope to the Request) but is able to create what we believe are the
requested payment records. This will, however, require work performed by our clients
accounting department, as these are not records kept in its normal course of business; so it will
likely take more than 10 days for the accounting department to assemble those recordsonce we
understand what records STP is requesting. Therefore, we believe it would be beneficial to
include this issue as part of our meet and confer, so we may reach agreement on Request for
Production No. 4.
Shannon & Wilson has prepared over 20 Geotechnical or Environmental Baseline Reports for
other projects. Shannon & Wilson has not located the electronic and/or hardcopy version(s) of
these documents (to the extent they even exist). It is our understanding that some of these
records may be stored off site and some may be on microfiche. As such, Shannon & Wilson will
010351-01201 1934779.docx
Exhibit B
From: Patricia Robert
To: George L. Auslander
Subject: FW: Shannon & Wilson Document Production - Meet and Confer
Date: Tuesday, July 11, 2017 10:07:58 AM
Brian,
We have not changed our position as you are aware, the vast majority of the documents contained
within the bankers boxes are already produced to you electronically. We reiterate our standing
offer that well make them available for your inspection at a mutually agreeable time. Likewise, as
you know, we were not parties when the discovery protocol was negotiated if wed been asked,
we would have objected to this onerous burden at the time. Since we werent, we object now.
If youd like to discuss further, well do that as well to see if there is a workable way around this
impasse.
Best,
Terry
Terence J. Scanlan
skellenger bender
COMMERCIAL LAW GROUP
DESIGN PROFESSIONAL REPRESENTATION | CONSTRUCTION LAW | GENERAL LITIGATION | APPELLATE ADVOCACY | MEDIATION
Terry,
I wanted to follow up with you regarding our meet and confer conducted on June 16, 2017
regarding Shannon & Wilsons document production. Based on the meet and confer, our
understanding is set forth below.
First, Shannon & Wilson has agreed to produce prior GBRs prepared by Shannon & Wilson in
response to STPs Document Requests Nos. 27 and 28.
Second, STP agrees to Shannon & Wilsons May 19, 2017 proposal to provide payment records
in response to STPs Document Request No. 4.
Third, STP maintains its position that Shannon & Wilson should produce the hard-copy
documents contained in its approximately 100 banker boxes in electronic form, as per the
Stipulated Discovery Protocol, and as the other parties in the case have done to date.
We look forward to receiving the documents covered under items 1 and 2 above.
Please let us know if Shannon & Wilson changes its position with respect to the production of
its hard-copy documents; otherwise, we plan to move to compel this electronic production.
Thanks,
Brian.
Brian Davidson
Dingess, Foster, Luciana, Davidson & Chleboski LLP
PNC Center, Third Floor
20 Stanwix Street
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15222
412.926.1818 (o)
412-736-7920 (c)
bdavidson@dfllegal.com
www.dfllegal.com
This electronic message contains information from the law firm of Dingess, Foster, Luciana, Davidson & Chleboski
LLP. The contents may be privileged and confidential and are intended for the use of the intended addressee(s)
only. If you are not an intended addressee, note that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or use of the contents of
this message is prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please contact me at bdavidson@dfllegal.com.