Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Marjorie Fudali v. Pivotal Corporation

December 2, 2010

MARJORIE FUDALI, PLAINTIFF,
v.
PIVOTAL CORPORATION, DEFENDANT.



The opinion of the court was delivered by: John M. Facciola United States Magistrate Judge

MEMORANDUM OPINION

This case has a long history before me. A jury trial in 2007 rendered a verdict for plaintiff (Docket #102), and a judgment for damages was entered in November 2008. Docket #115. Since that time, there has been an ongoing conflict concerning post-judgment discovery and defendant's ability to satisfy its judgment.*fn1 Pending before me attached Order.*fn2 I will address the motions in turn.

I. MOTIONS

A. Plaintiff's Motions for Judgment

Plaintiff served writs of garnishment upon Softbrands Manufacturing, Inc. ("Softbrands") and Southern Company Services, Inc. ("Southern"), claiming in each motion that each company had funds "owed to defendant Pivotal Corporation." Softbrands Mot. at 1; Southern Mot. at 1. In their respective Interrogatories in Attachment, both Softbrands and Southern admitted to owing money to defendant, identified in the interrogatories as Pivotal Corporation. Softbrands Mot. at Exh. 1; Southern Mot. at Exh. 1.

In response, defendant claims that there are two companies bearing the name "Pivotal Corporation"--one in Washington state, and the other in Canada, the former being the defendant in this case. Combined Opposition to Motions for Judgment of Condemnation on Writs of Garnishment of Attachment [#186] at 1-2. Defendant attaches the declaration of Gregor Morela, who states that he is the president of Pivotal Corporation in Washington state, and that neither garnishee owes any funds to "Pivotal Corporation (Washington State)." Id. at Morela Dec. ¶¶ 3-5. If that is the case, then Pivotal Corporation of Washington state, identifying itself to be the defendant herein, is not making any claim to the property attached (i.e., the money owned by the garnishees), and it lacks standing to challenge the garnishment. D.C. Code § 16-551;*fn3 Visions Found., Inc. v. Falcon Color, Inc., 606 A.2d 1027, 1028 (D.C. 1992).

Accordingly, both Plaintiff's Motion for Judgment of Condemnation on Writ of Garnishment of Attachment Against Garnishee Softbrands Manufacturing, Inc. [#165] and Plaintiff's Motion for Judgment of Condemnation on Writ of Garnishment of Attachment Against Garnishee Southern Company Services, Inc. [#166] will be granted. Furthermore, defendant's Combined Opposition to Motions for Judgment of Condemnation on Writs of Garnishment of Attachment [#186] will be stricken, and the Clerk shall enter judgment in favor of plaintiff against Softbrands in the amount of $9,312, and against Southern in the amount of $15,592.50.

B. Motion to Quash Subpoena

Defendant filed a motion to quash subpoenas served upon two law firms with which defendant's counsel has been affiliated, Dorsey & Whitney LLP and Greenberg Taurig LLP. Mot. to Quash at 1. By those subpoenas, plaintiff sought the following:

1. Invoices sent to Pivotal Corporation or any entity acting on behalf of Pivotal Corporation for Fudali v. Pivotal Corp., Case No. 1:03-cv-1460 (JMF), U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia.

2. Copies of all payments from Pivotal Corporation or on behalf of Pivotal Corporation for Fudali v. Pivotal Corp., Case No. 1:03-cv-1460 (JMF).

3. Documents relating to addressees to whom bills for Fudali v. Pivotal Corp., Case No. 1:03-cv-1460 (JMF) were sent.

4. Insurance policies related to payment responsibility for Fudali v. Pivotal Corp., Case ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.