Wellin v. Wellin et al

Filing 865

ORDER RULING ON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION for (326 in 2:14-cv-04067-DCN, 575 in 2:13-cv-03595-DCN, 537 in 2:13-cv-01831-DCN) Motion for Protective Order,,, filed by Friendship Management LLC, Peter J Wellin, Marjorie W K ing, Cynthia W Plum, (453 in 2:14-cv-04067-DCN, 672 in 2:13-cv-01831-DCN, 707 in 2:13-cv-03595-DCN) Report and Recommendation - Special Master. The Special Master's report and recommendation is ADOPTED. Details within order. Signed by Honorable David C Norton on 3/12/2019. Associated Cases: 2:13-cv-01831-DCN, 2:13-cv-03595-DCN, 2:14-cv-04067-DCN(jbry, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
CHARLESTON DIVISION
Keith Wellin, individually and as Trustee of the
Keith S. Wellin Florida Revocable Living Trust
u/a/d December 11, 2001,

)
)
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
-vs)
)
Peter J. Wellin, Cynthia W. Plum, and Marjorie W. )
King, individually and as Co-Trustees and
)
Beneficiaries of the Wellin Family 2009 Irrevocable )
Trust u/a/d November 2, 2009, and Friendship
)
Management, LLC,
)
)
Defendants.
)
_______________________________________
)
Lester S. Schwartz, as Trust Protector of the
)
Wellin Family 2009 Irrevocable Trust,
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
-vs)
)
Peter J. Wellin, Cynthia W. Plum and Marjorie W.
)
King, individually and as Co-Trustees and
)
Beneficiaries of the Wellin Family 2009 Irrevocable )
Trust, Friendship Management, LLC, and Cynthia
)
W. Plum as Manager of Friendship Management,
)
LLC,
)
)
Defendants.
)
______________________________________
)
Peter J. Wellin, Cynthia W. Plum and Marjorie W.
)
King, as Co-Trustees of the Wellin Family 2009
)
Irrevocable Trust,
)
)
Counterclaim Plaintiffs,
)
)
-vs)
)
Lester S. Schwartz, Esq., as Trust Protector of the
)
Wellin Family 2009 Irrevocable Trust u/a/d
)
November 2, 2009, and Keith Wellin, as Grantor of )
the Wellin Family 2009 Irrevocable Trust u/a/d
)
November 2, 2009,
)
)
Counterclaim Defendants.
)
____________________________________
)

C/A No. 2:13-cv-1831 DCN

ORDER

C/A No. 2:13-cv-3595 DCN

Peter J. Wellin, Cynthia Wellin Plum, and
Majorie Wellin King, Individually and as
Co-Trustees and Beneficiaries of the Wellin
Family 2009 Irrevocable Trust u/a/d
November 2, 2009,
Plaintiffs,
-vsWendy Wellin, Individually and as Trustee of
the Keith S. Wellin Florida Revocable Living
Trust u/a/d December 11, 2001,
Defendants.
____________________________________

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

C/A No. 2:14-cv-4067 DCN

The above referenced case is before this court upon the Special Master’s Report and
Recommendation (Dkt. No. 672 in 2:13-cv-1831 DCN) on the motion filed by the Wellin Children
to issue a protective order prohibiting Lester Schwartz and Larry McDevitt from reconvening the
deposition of Marjorie W. King.
This court is charged with conducting a de novo review of any portion of the Special
Master’s report to which a specific objection is registered, and may accept, reject, or modify, in
whole or in part, the recommendations contained in that report. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). However,
absent prompt objection by a dissatisfied party, it appears that Congress did not intend for the
district court to review the factual and legal conclusions of the Special Master. Thomas v Arn, 474
U.S. 140 (1985). Additionally, any party who fails to file timely, written objections to the Special
Master’s report pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) waives the right to raise those objections at the
appellate court level. United States v. Schronce, 727 F.2d 91 (4th Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 467 U.S.
1208 (1984).1 No objections have been filed to the magistrate judge’s report and recommen
1

In Wright v. Collins, 766 F.2d 841 (4th Cir. 1985), the court held "that a pro se
litigant must receive fair notification of the consequences of failure to object to a
magistrate judge's report before such a procedural default will result in waiver of the right
to appeal. The notice must be 'sufficiently understandable to one in appellant's circumstances fairly to appraise him of what is required.'" Id. at 846. Plaintiff was advised in a
clear manner that his objections had to be filed within ten (10) days, and he received

dation.
A de novo review of the record indicates that the Special Master’s report accurately
summarizes this case and the applicable law. Accordingly, the Special Master’s report and
recommendation is ADOPTED, and the court ORDERS that upon reconvening the deposition of
Marjorie King and following completion of questioning by the other deponents, McDevitt shall be
allowed to re-ask the following question of Ms. King, as well as follow-up questions specific to the
subject of the inquiry in that question, but only if the witness answers the question in the
affirmative:
At any point, did you tell your attorneys that Tina Green, an employee of Keith
Wellin and Wendy Wellin, was relaying to you privileged conversations that were
taking place between Wendy and her attorneys.
If the witness answers the above question in the negative, further questioning of the witness
is denied.
AND IT IS SO ORDERED.

David C. Norton
United States District Judge

March 12, 2019
Charleston, South Carolina

NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL
The parties are hereby notified that any right to appeal this Order is governed by Rules 3
and 4 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure.

notice of the consequences at the appellate level of his failure to object to the magistrate
judge's report.