Roger Cleveland Golf Company Inc v. Prince et al

Filing 5

Local Rule 26.01 Answers to Interrogatories by Roger Cleveland Golf Company Inc.(erav, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA CHARLESTON DIVISION Roger Cleveland Golf Company, Inc., Plaintiff, vs. Christopher Prince, Sheldon Shelley and Prince Distribution, LLC. Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Civil Action No.

ROGER CLEVELAND GOLF COMPANY, INC'S RESPONSES TO LOCAL CIVIL RULE 26.01 DSC INTERROGATORIES Pursuant to Local Civil Rule 26.01 DSC, Plaintiff Roger Cleveland Golf Company, Inc., answers as follows: (A) State the full name, address and telephone number of all persons or legal entities

who may have a subrogation interest in each claim and state the basis and extent of said interest. ANSWER: (B) Plaintiff is not aware of any at this time.

As to each claim, state whether it should be tried jury or non-jury and why. In its Complaint, Plaintiff has requested a jury trial on all its claims.

ANSWER:

Plaintiff believes that issues of fact affect each of its claims in this case and are appropriate for jury resolution. (C) State whether the party submitting these responses is a publicly owned company

and separately identify: (1) each publicly owned company of which it is a parent, subsidiary, partner, or affiliate; (2) each publicly owned company which owns ten percent or more of the outstanding shares or other indicia of ownership of the party; and (3) each publicly owned company in which the party owns ten percent or more of the outstanding shares.

ANSWER:

Plaintiff is not a publicly owned entity and no publicly held Plaintiff's indirect, ultimate parent

corporation owns 10% or more of its stock.

corporation is SRI Sports, Ltd., which is not publicly traded in the United States. (D) State the basis for asserting the claim in the division in which it was filed (or the

basis of any challenge to the appropriateness of the division). ANSWER: The subject case was filed in the Charleston Division of the United

States District Court for the District of South Carolina as the defendants reside within the jurisdiction of the Charleston Division pursuant to 28 USC § 1391(b) and (c). Additionally, Plaintiff asserts that the acts of the defendants complained of in Plaintiff's Complaint took place within the jurisdiction of the Charleston Division. (E) Is this action related in whole or in part to any other matter filed in this District,

whether civil or criminal? If so, provide: (1) a short caption and the full case number of the related action; (2) an explanation of how the matters are related; and (3) a statement of the status of the related action. Counsel should disclose any cases which may be related regardless of whether they are still pending. Whether cases are related such that they should be assigned to a single judge will be determined by the Clerk of Court based on a determination of whether the cases: arise from the same or identical transactions, happenings or events; involve the identical parties or property; or for any other reason would entail substantial duplication of labor if heard by different judges. ANSWER: (F) No.

If the defendant is improperly identified, give the proper identification and state

whether counsel will accept service of an amended summons and pleading reflecting the correct identification.

2

ANSWER: N/A (G) If you contend that some other person or legal entity is, in whole or in part, liable

to you or the party asserting a claim against you in this matter, identify such person or entity and describe the basis of said liability. ANSWER: Plaintiff is not aware of any at this time; however, Plaintiff has yet to complete discovery into facts underlying its claims and reserves the right to supplement its answer when discovery in the above-captioned action is complete.

NELSON MULLINS RILEY & SCARBOROUGH LLP

By: s/Janene B. Smith John C. McElwaine Federal Bar No. 6710
E-Mail: [e-mail]

Janene B. Smith Federal Bar No. 9960
E-Mail: [e-mail]

151 Meeting Street / Sixth Floor Post Office Box 1806 (29402-1806) Charleston, SC 29401-2239 [phone] Pro Hac Vic to be filed Christopher S. Finnerty Massachusetts Bar No. 65732 E_mail: [e-mail] Morgan T. Nickerson Massachusetts Bar No. 667290 E_mail: [e-mail] One Boston Place, 40th Floor Boston, MA 02108 [phone] Attorneys for Plaintiff Roger Cleveland Golf Company, Inc. Charleston, South Carolina August 11, 2009 3

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I, Janene B. Smith, hereby certify that this document has been filed through the ECF system and will be sent electronically to the registered participants as identified on the Notice of Electronic Filing (NEF) and paper copies will be sent to those indicated as non-registered participants on this date. /s/Janene B. Smith Date: August 11, 2009

4