Coach, Inc. et al v. Gata Corporation et al

Filing 54

ORDER re: 48 status report for additional production of documents in conjunction with 19 Motion to Compel. So Ordered by Magistrate Judge Landya B. McCafferty. (ko)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Coach, Inc., and
Coach Services, Inc.
v.

Civil No. 10-cv-141-LM

Gata Corporation, Martin
Taylor and John Does
1 through 20
O R D E R
In an order dated March 17, 2011 (doc. no. 42), the court
found defendant Gata Corporation ("Gata") in contempt ("contempt
order") for having failed to comply with a previous discovery
order of the court.

In the contempt order, the court ordered

Gata, inter alia, to provide plaintiffs, Coach, Inc. and Coach
Services, Inc. (collectively "Coach"), answers to certain
overdue discovery requests, on or before March 31, 2011.
The contempt order provided that, in the event Gata failed
to comply fully with its terms, the court would enter certain
findings of fact adverse to Gata as established in this case.
The contempt order required Coach to provide the court with a
status update on or before April 7, 2011, and gave Gata until
April 14, 2011, to file a response.

Coach has filed its status

report (doc. no. 48), and Gata has filed a response (doc. no.
49).
In its report, Coach concedes that Gata has "at long last
produced many of the documents requested," but Coach maintains
that Gata has still failed to supply significant financial
documentation.

Having carefully reviewed the parties'

submissions, the court finds that Gata appears to have complied
substantially with the terms of the contempt order.

As a

result, the court will not, at this time, enter the adverse
findings against Gata that were held in abeyance pending Gata's
compliance with the terms of the contempt order.
However, it appears clear from Coach's submission that
Gata's most recent document production, alongside the March 29,
2011, letter of Gata's counsel, Thomas Morgan, Esq., (doc. no.
48-2), has raised new questions about defendants' finances that
are relevant and deserving of Gata's immediate attention and
response.
Accordingly, on or before May 19, 2011, Gata shall produce
for inspection all documents and things within its custody and
control responsive to the topics raised in Coach's status report
(doc. no. 48) at paragraphs 8 through 12, including the
following:

2

(1) Invoices for fiscal year ending June 30, 2009, that
substantiate Gata's payments to Donald Taylor of $66,705.00, and
to Mark Young of $39,715.00.

Invoices for fiscal year ending

June 30, 2010, that substantiate Gata's payments to Donald
Taylor of $28,125.00 and to Edward Hebert of $14,425.00.

Gata

shall also produce the 1099 documentation related to each of the
above business expenses.
(2)

See doc. no. 48 at ¶ 8.

Documents that substantiate defendants' assertion that

the $100,000.00 payment on June 28, 2009, from Gata to
defendant, Martin Taylor, and his daughter, Kathi, which Gata
recorded as a rental payment (and claimed as a business expenses
on its corporate tax return), was, in fact, a payment for
renting the adjoining property.
documents would be responsive:

Any one of the following
a rental or other contractual

agreement between Gata and the Taylors; prior invoices or
payments by Gata to the Taylors evidencing this rental
agreement; letters or other correspondence memorializing the
rental agreement; and/or title to the adjoining property
evidencing the Taylors' ownership thereof.

See doc. no. 48 at ¶

9.
(3)

Records or other documentation (to include loan

agreements, promissory notes, or records of payment) concerning

3

the transactions described in Gata's five tax returns for
taxable years July 1, 2005 through June 30, 2010, as
"shareholder loans," and any records showing the effect of
Gata's cash flow as a result of these "loans."

See doc. no. 48

at ¶ 10.
(4) A list of all corporate "officers" to whom Gata paid
any sums of money from July 1, 2005, through June 30, 2010, as
referenced in Mr. Morgan's letter dated March 29, 2011 (doc. no.
48-2).

The list shall include the name of the "officer," the

amount paid, and the reason for the payment.

See doc. 48 at ¶

10.
(5) Documentation to substantiate the mortgages on Gata's
property evidenced in Gata's financial statements and described
by Mr. Morgan in his March 29, 2011, letter (doc. no. 48-2).
This documentation shall include the mortgage documents, any
records reflecting the existence and nature of the mortgages,
the parties involved, and the terms and/or payments made on
those mortgages.

See doc. no. 48 at ¶ 11.

(6) Documents pertaining to the IRS audits of Martin Taylor
and his corporate activities, including original documentation
from the IRS informing Mr. Taylor of the audits, correspondence
from the IRS requesting information, and/or any correspondence

4

between Mr. Taylor and his representative to the IRS.

See doc.

no. 48 at ¶ 12.
As the aforementioned discovery is related to Coach's
original request for the production of documents (doc. no. 192), particularly requests nos. 4 and 20, Gata must provide it to
Coach, as outlined above, on or before May 19, 2011.

If Gata is

unable to produce the aforementioned documentation, Gata's
counsel shall state in writing to Coach's counsel, Jeffrey
Techentin, Esq., on or before May 19, 2011, the efforts counsel
made to locate the specific documentation (including a list of
individuals with whom he inquired) and the precise reason(s) the
documentation is not forthcoming.

Any such writing shall

separately list and precisely identify the missing or
unavailable documentation by topic area (using the paragraphs
numbered 1-6 in this order, supra at pp. 3-4), so that Mr.
Techintin will be able to discern, with respect to each separate
topic area, both the efforts Gata has made to obtain the
specific documentation and the reasons Gata claims the specific
documentation is unavailable.

5

Failure to comply with the terms of this order will result
in sanctions.
SO ORDERED.

__________________________
Landya McCafferty
United States Magistrate Judge
April 29, 2011
cc:

Kelly Martin Malone, Esq.
Thomas Morgan, Jr., Esq.
Adam M. Ramos, Esq.
Jeffrey K. Techentin, Esq.

6