Vous êtes sur la page 1sur 17

THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA

Kay Kim,
Plaintiff, )
)
v. )
)
VEC HOA (Village at Eagle Creek ) Cause No. 1:08-cv-1644-SEB-DML
Home Owner’s Association) )
Judge Theodore M Sosin, the Court Staff & )
Commissioner Richard Gilroy )
Northwest District Prosecutor(s) )
Officers Melvin Clayton & his Partner )
Officer Ryan J. Romeril )
State of Indiana Attorney General, et al. )
Defendants. )

CASE MANAGEMENT PLAN


I. Parties and Representatives
A. Plaintiff: Kim Kay
Pro Se
4250 Village Pkwy Circle E Unit 2
Indianapolis, IN 46254
Pho (317) 641-5977 / Fax# (317) 641-5977call
first
eml: spchiefeatapple@gmail.com

B. Defendant’s Counsel: Kathy Bradley


Deputy Attorney General
State of Indiana Attorney General
Office of the Attorney General
Indiana Government Center, 5th Floor
302 W. Washington Street
Indianapolis, IN 46204-2770
Phone: (317) 234-2968 / Fax: (317) 232-7979
Email: kathy.bradley@atg.in.gov

Defendants : Judge Theodore M Sosin & the staff,


Commissioner Richard Gilroy
Northwest District Prosecutor(s).

Defendant’s Counsels: Nicole R. Kelsey


Assistant Corp., Office of Corporation Counsel
Page 1 of 17
FED1 CMP-uniform compiled by Plaintiff 09APR2009
200 East Washington St., Room 1601
Indianapolis, IN 46204; T# (317) 327-4055
F# (317) 327-3968 / E-mail: nkelsey@indygov.org

Jonathan L. Mayes
Chief Litigation Counsel,
Office of Corporation Counsel
200 East Washington St., Room 1601
Indianapolis, IN 46204
T# (317) 327-4055 / F# (317) 327-3968
E-mail: jmayes@indygov.org

Defendants : Lt. Jim Waters as an officer of IMPD and as a


VEC HOA Security guard & individual
capacity,
IMPD NW District Supervisor (name unknown),
IMPD Gregory Wilkes, IMPD Shawn Smith,
IMPD Robert Lowe, IMPD Ryan J. Romeril,
IMPD Melvin Clayton & his Partner

Defendant’s Counsels: James Edgar


Attorney, J. Edgar Law Office, Prof. Corp.,
1512 N. Delaware Street
Indianapolis, IN 46202
Pho# (317) 472-4000
Fax# (317) 472-0640
eml: jedgar@jedgarlaw.com

Defendants : Mae Vera, Scott Perry, Rhonda Heath, Patricia


Ladenthin, Linda Handlon.

Defendant’s Counsels: unknown

Defendants: Susan Sclipcea & Charles Ritter


4250 Village Parkway Cr. E., #5
Indianapolis, IN 46254

Defendant’s Counsels: unknown

Defendants: Village at Eagle Creek Home Association


7225 Village Parkway Drive,
Indianapolis, IN 46254
Phone (317) 291-4916,
E-mail - vechoa@sbcglobal.net

Counsel shall promptly file a notice with the Clerk if there is any change in this information.
II. Synopsis of Case

Page 2 of 17
FED1 CMP-uniform compiled by Plaintiff 09APR2009
A. Plaintiff’s Statement of Claims:

Plaintiff filed a Motion for the United States Attorney General (US AG) to
intervene at the same time the “Complaint” was filed. Board of Directors of VEC HOA and the
Police for conspircy to intentionally and maliciously violated Plaintiff’s Housing and Civil
rights. As a result there were more than 100 police runs and the Plaintiff was arrested on 5
different occasions without any valid probable cause. There were constant vandalisms,
harassments and intimidations to the Plaintiff and her property. The Plaintiff has filed
sufficientsupplement files which includes affidavits of Charles Chuang to justify and warrant the
US AG intervention. The Plaintiff respectfully request the court to rule on the motion for the US
AG intervention.

Civil rights, Fair Housing Act and the U.S. Constitutions have been violated by
the named and unnamed Defendants of VECHOA, VEC HOA Boards of Directorss-Kim
Timmis, Bryan Whitfield, etc., VEC HOA property managers-Sharon Overley, Laura Ritter, etc.,
IMPD Police Officer/VEC HOA Security guards-James Waters,
IMPD Police Officers, civilian employees of the State of Indiana, Judges, Prosecutors, court
appointed psychologist & psychiatist;Conspiracy to interfere with civil rights; Equal rights under
the law; Acted under color of law; Action for neglect to prevent; Arrested without probable
cause and warrant in the real and personal property; Used excessive force on a handicapped
person; Disparate treatments. Depriving the rights of enjoyment in the real & personal property;
Discrimination against race and handicapped; Violation of Plaintiff rights for self representation
in courts; Violations of Plaintiff rights for due process/unusal and cruel punishment financially
and mentally; Violation of search and seizer.

State of Indiana is destroying evidence and protecting the conspirators and/or


individuals for their wrong doing. Over the years, State of Indiana’s only purpose is to “hang”
the Plaintiff and cover up any wilful and illegal actions against the Plaintiff. One of the best way
to prove the conspiracy theory on the last arrest on November 6, 2008 and previous arrests, I,
Plainitff need police communication event history &/or transcript on the days of incidents. I was
told to get the court order(s). Initial discovery process, The Marion County Sheriff Department
claimed that their server was down/malfunctioned on November 6, 2008 the record that I
requested ; therefore, they are unable to provide what I requeted. I, Plaintiff, Kay Kim, Pro Se
demand the court to impose a maximum fine $100,000.00 to the Marion County Sheriff
Department &/or whatever department/whoever is/are responsible for losing the file because, this
is cover up – conspiracy within the conspiricy.

The Plaintiff, Kay Kim, Pro Se respectfully ask the court to look into the totality
of my sufferings over the years.

The Plaintiff demand monetary compensation for both actual and punitive
damages since 1999 to this day. (See estimate dollar amount for “Plaintiff’s Estimate of
Damages” below for detail.)
Plaintiff’s Statement of Relevant Facts:

Plaintiff moved into VEC unit in February 1999. Since then the police were called
by both parties. The police were on scene more than 100 times leading up to last arrest on
Page 3 of 17
FED1 CMP-uniform compiled by Plaintiff 09APR2009
November 6, 2008. The VEC HOA Boards placed restraining orders and threatened lawsuits
against the Plaintiff and Charles Chuang when a couple of neighbors complained that the
Plaintiff, Kay Kim was harassing-talking to them in an unsecured-grass common area in front of
my unit. I requested for a handicap ramp numerous times for many years but, because of their
non response, I have to buy a own portable ramp. After spent $200.00 and about 7 years later,
VECHOA finally provided a ramp.

VEC HOA property manager and MCSD/VEC HOA Security guard Jerry
Shalluom tried to get the court to issue a restraining order while I was arrested in jail (I was/went
jail by the President of the Board of VEC HOA/Prison Walden Chris Meloy. The case was
dismissed because the State’s witnesses-VEC HOA President/Prison Walden Chris Meloy &
polices failed to show up in the court. Further conspiriacy by the police and neighbors resulted
in my arrestsand jailed on 4 different occasions. Since that time, the Plaintiff and her family
were afraid of retaliation and has never used secured common facilities. Since 1999, as soon as
Plaintiff moved into the VECHOA unit. VEC HOA and the Boards of Directors, Property
manager and Police/VEC HOA secrutiy guard tried to put the Plaintiff in a mental hospital and
jail many times. This has been going on 10 years. My complaints to the VEC HOA Boards were
always ignored. To make the matter worse, the Plaintiff was constantly ridiculed by the
Defendants for the police arrests and craziness.

I was transported to mental hospital few times and was coerced to take the blood
and urine test because the Defendants accused me that I, Plaintiff is “mental”, “crazy”, & “drug
addict”. Even if last arrest on November 6, 2008 did not happened, VEC and a few neighbors
planned to turn me over the prosecutorto prosecute me – they hired the lawyer to write a letter
addressed to my building 4250 but its intended target is me. VEC HOA as a whole with good on
the words, “… Make your life so miserable, and … I make sure that you move out of your
unit….” Last arrest on November was conspiracy.

I was transported to the mental hospital few times and was coerced to take the
blood and urine test because the Defendants alleged without any evidence that the Plaintiff is
“mental”, “crazy”, & “drug addict”. Just before the last arrest on November 6, 2008, the
VECHOA hired a lawyer to write a letter addressed to my building 4250 and threatening to turn
me over the prosecutor for criminal charges. The VEC HOA property manager said it all for their
intended to “… make your life so miserable, and … make sure that you move out of your
unit….” The arrest on November 6 waspart of the grand conspiracy to make me to move.

VEC HOA smeared dog feces and vandalized the Plaintiff property-vehicles,
mailbox, unit door & window screen doors, restraining her use of the common areas. The
VECHOA allowed trash/dog feces, sharp objects-knifes, nails, knife like items to be thrown near
her property. Her vehicles are vandalized on numerous occasions. Trash, knives like sharp
objects are also thrown near my patio. I requested to VEC HOA Boards and property managers
on numerous times in writing over the years for replacements or reinbursement for the damages
but I was never compensated and damages still exist today.

The State of Indiana violated US Constitution on fivedifferent occasions for


arresting the Plaintiff without probable causes at the time of arrest. The State of Indiana also
deliberately disregards of the Plaintiff Rights for due process by not enforcing the statute of
Page 4 of 17
FED1 CMP-uniform compiled by Plaintiff 09APR2009
limitations for the 2005-2007misdemeanor cases. 4 cases are still on the preliminary hearing
stage/pending. Indiana criminal court judges, prosecutors, accusers, public defender, psycho
doctors tried to label the Plaintiff as mental even own State appointed psycho doctors have
certified the Plaintiff has no psychosis mental disorder on three different occasions when she was
arrested. One of psycho doctor’s report was never given to me and disappeared. No Indiana
criminal court judges wanted to hear her cases.

The Indiana Civil court Judge, the court clerks and the police conspired to have
the Plaintiff thrown out of city building and prevented her from filing. Finally the Plaintiff was
arrested for trespassing in city county building without a probable cause.

All this time my vehicles and property are vandalized. Scott Perry, Patricia
Ladenthin, and the Police ordered to the Plaintiff to move away from the common area with
threat of arrest; so, the Plaintiff did move from the common-grassarea. Plaintiff had no choice
but to comply with the police threat and unlawful order. Plaintiff was humulated with the
incident. Plaintiff was singled out as her rights were inferior than others and was treated such
countelss times for 10 years and counting. On November 6, 2008 the Police came into to my
house and arrested me without a valid probable cause or warrant. The police used unwarranted
force on a handicapp person causing her to bleed internally for more than two months.

VECHOA Security guard, an IMPD Lt. James Waters has been involved over the
years. He has directly and indirectly conspired with IMPD officers, VEC HOA Boards and other
defendants. All the arrests are civil matters which must be resolved by the Laws and Byelaws of
the VECHOA. He steered and directed IMPD officers to arrest me. He conspired to plot against
the Plaintiff many times for her to get arrested and transported to mental hospital. Three of my
arrests at my home are directly due to his malice. Even if without conviction, arrested record
alone, my peacful life is literally over; especially those who wants to exploit in mal tention(s).

VEC HOA Board of Directors selectively discriminate and target me so that they
can achieve their ultimate goal of defrauding the association andpocketing hundreds of
thousands dollar. The Board used the Plaintiff in a “wag the dog” scheme so that they can
continue to enrich themselves. The VEC HOA Boards accomplish their goal by paying paying
active police officers like IMPD Lt. James Waters literally doing nothing. The main reason is for
VEC HOA Board of Directors and property managers to pay him is to influence/steer police so,
they don’t get investigate and prosecute for their embezzlements. This method and scheme was
introduced by ex-Prison Walden Chris Meloy and has been used long before I have moved into
the unit. Because of their connection to the police/police department made me a “habitual
criminal” since 1999. According to my estimate, the VEC HOA Boards & Property managers
embezzled/defraud more than $1.5 million from the Association since 1989. VEC HOA
President Kim Timmis, VEC HOA Treasurer Bryan Whitfield, Sharon Overley, Jim Bumb, Chris
Meloy and their cronies embazzled(s) at least $500,000.00 est. during the last 5 years. I allege
that Kim Timmis and Bryan Whitfield embezzels(ed)/defrauds(ed) the money from the VEC
HOA for more than $300,000.00 est. and pockted(s) the bulk of it and used me as a scrap meat to
feed the others to take the mind off on them & … I, Plaintiff will be named Kim Timmis and
Bryan Whitfield as parties to this suit as a VEC HOA individual capacity with the demand.

Page 5 of 17
FED1 CMP-uniform compiled by Plaintiff 09APR2009
The, Plaintiff feel that she has given up/sacrificed her housing and civil rights
more than anyone else living in a condo in the United States. As a matter of fact, this will never
happened if her race was “white.” This has been going on continously for 10 years. All the
disputes are civil matters and the police should never be involved. The Defendants maliciously
took this deceit a new and higher level cumulating to the well cheorographed accusation on
November 6,2008. The Plaintiff hold the Court greatly responsible and igniting the ongoing
problems. This Court failed/neglected to protect the Plaintiff during and posting of the first
lawsuit-1:05-cv-SEB-JMS and the Defendants got bolder by the ruling/final judgment of the the
1:05-cv-SEB-JMS & Indidan Civil Court ruling 49D01-0604-PL-0013949 against the Plaintiff,
Kay Kim, Pro Se.

The only way for Police, residents/owners of building 4250, VEC HOA Boards
and State of Indiana to protect themselves is to make up more false accusations against the
Plaintiff. However lies begets more lies and cover up leads to more cover up.

My last pleading to VEC HOA, HOA-buildig 4250 & VEC HOA Boards ended
due to incident on October 5, 2008: (ref. Original “Complaint” line 37.) The Plaintiff was
humiliated in the common area. 4250 #8 Scott Perry, #3 Patricia Ladenthin and IMPD Police
Officers together humiliated me many times. Their intentio is to brake me. They have no
intention to stop their harassments and intimations which include put me jail &/or mental
instituion. A month later on November 6, 2008, I got arrested by conspiracy to intentional frame
the Plaintiff with false witness. The Police arrested the Plaintiff at her home without a valid
probable cause and warrant. The Police used unnecessary and excessive force on a handicap
person. Though, Charles Ritter, Susan Sclipsea, Mae Vera and Scott Perry are involved though
they did not sign State’s witness list, I have every intention to prove their involvement in the
conspiracy.

Plaintiff’s Legal Theories:

Violation of Civil rights, Fair Housing Act and U.S. Constitution: Title VII, VIII-FH, 18,
42, 43 & US Constitution-I/IV/V/VIII/XI.

Plaintiff’s Basis for Subject Matter Jurisdiction:

Police officers, Judges, Prosecutors for violating a federal civil rights statute that
authorizes civil damages lawsuits by a person who are unlawfully arrested, jailed and coerced to
take the blood and urine test in purpose of phishing to justify wrongful arrests and jailed.
Arrested by excessive force, without a probable cause and warrant in real and personal property.
Plaintiff’s Estimate of Damages:

November 6, 2008 arrest:


Bond cost: $ 1,500.00
misc exp (expense): $ 200.00
Criminal exp (ongoing): $ 500.00
Fed court cost & exp (ongoing): $ 1, 350.00

Judge Sosin & his staff: $ 7,000.00


Page 6 of 17
FED1 CMP-uniform compiled by Plaintiff 09APR2009
VEC HOA Boards:
Half of the association fee: $ 6,000.00
non use of the secured common areas for 10years because of
restrained and fear of retailiation.
My own expense to up keep common area: $ 1,800.00
$15./mo x 12 mos x 10 years.
Damages to personal property: $ 500.00
unit door, mailbox, screen doors, misc.
Refused/delayed of handicapped ramp $ 200.00
own ramp ($100.) & doctor’s note ($100.)

VEC HOA: (I put up $10,000.00 notice of reward for these ongoing incidents.)
hated/targeted Vehicle vandalism: $ 300.00
tire, tailgate light, bumpers, window frames,
windshield wiper, stole 2 hubcaps.

Conspirators of last arrest on November 6, 2008 - Charles Ritter+Susan Sclipsea,


Scott Perry+Mae Vera, Rhonda Heath+Linda Handlon, Patricia Ladenthin each person to pay
same actual damages and not divide by number of conspirators to the total dollar amount listed
on the above Nov 6, ’08 arrest which total of (ongoing case): $ 3,350.00

IMPD/VEC Security guard James Waters involvement my arrests numerous times


directly and indirectly since 2005 leading up to last arrest Nov 6, ’08 as an individual capacity:

Nov 6, ’08 arrest (ongoing case): $ 3,350.00

IMPD/VEC Security guard James Waters, VEC property manager Sharon


Overley& ?everybody who called me “crazy” & “mental” resulted for Plaintiff to get arrested,
transported to mental hospital, and jailed (ongoing criminal case) and (each pays):

Indiana criminal court exp (ongoing): $ 1,000.00


Federal civil court exp: $ 1,000.00

IMPD James Waters, Linda Handlon, Patricia Ladenthin 7/31/06 arrest & each
pays
Indiana criminal court exp (ongoing):$ $ 300.00

1999 arrest – only disposed/dismissed case:


lawyer fee exp. $ 1,500.00
Bond cost $ 300.00
misc exp: $ 500.00
_________________________________________________________
*Actual Estimate Damages total: $30,650.00
===================================================
Punitive Estimate Damages (3times of actual est dmg.): $91,950.00
===================================================

Page 7 of 17
FED1 CMP-uniform compiled by Plaintiff 09APR2009
Actual est dmg + Punitive est dmg: GRAND TOTAL OF $122,600.00

*WHAT IS NOT INCLUDED IN THE Actual esimate damages and not limited to:

- Actual esimate damages total of $30,650.00 is not included number of


Defendants’ for their obligations.
– Actual estimate damages of 1,000.00 price of the car gave up due to VEC HOA
president and IMPD/VEC Security guard James Waters’s harassments.
– Ongoing incurred actual cost and punitive damages are not included
because of the faults of named and unnamed Defendants of VEC HOA
Boards, Indiana Criminal court Prosecutor(s), Judge(s), psychologists.

– Notice of reward amount of $10,000.00 is not included.

The degree of seriousness combined/varied with the actual and punitive damages to the
Plaintiff by the named and unnamed Defendants are interdependant of all the matters in front of
this court.

B. Defendant’s Synopsis of Case:

Plaintiff fails to state any factual allegations on which to base a claim against
Defendant State of Indiana Attorney General, and State of Indiana Attorney General denies any
liability to Plaintiff.

. Defendants Lt. Jim Waters as an officer of IMPD and Individual Capacity, IMPD
NW District Supervisor (name unknown), Gregory Wilkes, Shawn Smith, and Robert Lowe deny
any liability to Plaintiff. These Defendants acted reasonably and in good faith at all times.
Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity.

Defendants Mae Vera, Scott Perry, Rhonda Heath, Patricia Ladenthin and Linda
Handlon may have counterclaims against the Plaintiff.

III. III. Pretrial Pleadings and Disclosures

A. The parties shall serve their Fed. R. Civ. P. 26 initial disclosures on or before
April 30, 2009[no later than 4 months from Anchor Date]. [Note: Fed. R. Civ. P.
26(a)(1)(E) permits the parties to object to making initial disclosures or to stipulate to a
different deadline for making such disclosures based upon the circumstances of the
action. If any objection and/or stipulation is made to initial disclosures in the CMP, the
parties shall briefly state the circumstances justifying their respective positions.

Page 8 of 17
FED1 CMP-uniform compiled by Plaintiff 09APR2009
B. Plaintiff(s) shall file preliminary witness and exhibit lists on or before May 8,
2009 [no later than 5 months from Anchor Date].

C. Defendant(s) shall file preliminary witness and exhibit lists on or before


June 8, 2009 [no later than 6 months from Anchor Date].

D. All motions for leave to amend the pleadings and/or to join additional parties shall
be filed on or before May 8, 2009 [no later than 5 months from Anchor Date].

E. Plaintiff(s) shall serve Defendant(s) (but not file with the Court) a statement of
special damages, if any, and make a settlement demand, on or before May 8, 2009[no
later than 5 months from the Anchor Date]. Defendant(s) shall serve on the Plaintiff(s)
(but not file with the Court) a response thereto within 30 days after receipt of the demand.

F. Plaintiff(s) shall disclose the name, address, and vita of all expert witnesses, and
shall serve the report required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2)(B) on or before
January 8, 2010[no later than 13 months from Anchor Date]. However, if Plaintiff uses
expert witness testimony at the summary judgment stage, such disclosures must be made
no later than 60 days prior to the summary judgment deadline.

G. Defendant(s) shall disclose the name, address, and vita of all expert witnesses,
and shall serve the report required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(2)(B) within 30 days after
Plaintiff(s) serves its expert witness disclosure; or if none, Defendant(s) shall make its
expert disclosure on or before February 8, 2010[no later than 14 months from Anchor
Date]. However, if Defendant uses expert witness testimony at the summary judgment
stage, such disclosures must be made no later than 30 days prior to the summary
judgment deadline.

H. Any party who wishes to limit or preclude expert testimony at trial shall file any
such objections no later than 60 days before trial[60 days before trial]. Any party who
wishes to preclude expert witness testimony at the summary judgment stage shall file any
such objections with their responsive brief within the briefing schedule established by
Local Rule 56.1.

I. All parties shall file and serve their final witness and exhibit lists on or before
February 8, 2010 [no later than 14 months from Anchor Date].

J. Any party who believes that bifurcation of discovery and/or trial is appropriate
with respect to any issue or claim shall notify the Court as soon as practicable.

K. The parties have discussed preservation and disclosure of electronically stored


discovery information, including a timetable for making the materials available to the
opposing party.

Page 9 of 17
FED1 CMP-uniform compiled by Plaintiff 09APR2009
IV. Discovery1 and Dispositive Motions

Due to the time and expense involved in conducting expert witness depositions and other
discovery, as well as preparing and resolving dispositive motions, the Court requires counsel to
use the CMP as an opportunity to seriously explore whether this case is appropriate for such
motions (including specifically motions for summary judgment), whether expert witnesses will
be needed, and how long discovery should continue. To this end, counsel must select the track
set forth below that they believe best suits this case. If the parties are unable to agree on a track,
the parties must: (1) state this fact in the CMP where indicated below; (2) indicate which track

11 The term “completed,” as used in Section IV.B, means that counsel must
serve their discovery requests in sufficient time to receive responses before this
deadline. Counsel may not serve discovery requests within the 30-day period
before this deadline unless they seek leave of Court to serve a belated request and
show good cause for the same. In such event, the proposed belated discovery
request shall be filed with the motion, and the opposing party will receive it with
service of the motion but need not respond to the same until such time as the Court
grants the motion.
Page 10 of 17
FED1 CMP-uniform compiled by Plaintiff 09APR2009
each counsel believes is most appropriate; and (3) provide a brief statement supporting the
reasons for the track each counsel believes is most appropriate. If the parties are unable to agree
on a track, the Court will pick the track it finds most appropriate, based upon the contents of the
CMP or, if necessary, after receiving additional input at an initial pretrial conference.

A. Does any party believe that this case may be appropriate for summary judgment
or other dispositive motion? If yes, the party(ies) that expect to file such a
motion must provide a brief statement of the factual and/or legal basis for such a
motion.

Defendant State of Indiana Attorney General has filed a Motion to Dismiss


pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6). In the event that motion is denied, State of Indiana Attorney
General anticipates filing a motion for summary judgment that will likely include that
Plaintiff’s suit is barred on the basis of sovereign immunity and he is entitled to qualified
immunity.

Defendants Lt. Waters, IMPD NW District Supervisor name unknown, Gregory


Wilkes, Shawn Smith, and Robert Lowe anticipate filing a motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6)
for failure to state a claim for which relief can be granted. Should that motion be denied
Defendants anticipate filing a motion for summary judgment. The issues will likely include that
Defendants did not violate Plaintiff’s constitutional rights as she claims.

Defendants Mae Vera, Scott Perry, Rhonda Heath, Patricia Ladenthin and Linda
Handlon anticipate filing a motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b), arguing that the plaintiff fails to
state a claim for which relief can be granted. Should that motion fail, these defendants anticipate
filing a motion for summary judgment asserting that the claims asserted by the plaintiff do not
apply to them as individuals.

B. Select the track that best suits this case:

Track 1: No dispositive motions are anticipated. All discovery shall be completed


by _________.

__X__ Track 2: Dispositive motions are expected and shall be filed by November 6,
2009 [no later than 11 months from Anchor Date]; non-expert witness discovery and
discovery relating to liability issues shall be completed by October 8, 2009[no later than
7-10 months from Anchor Date]; expert witness discovery and discovery relating to
damages shall be completed by April 10, 2010.

Track 3: Dispositive motions are expected and shall be filed no later than
_____________; expert witness discovery that may be necessary at the dispositive
motions stage shall be completed by .

Track 4: Dispositive motions shall be filed by ; non-expert discovery


shall be completed by __________; expert witness discovery shall be completed by
..

Page 11 of 17
FED1 CMP-uniform compiled by Plaintiff 09APR2009
V. Pre-Trial/Settlement Conferences

The parties do not request a settlement conference at this time.

VI. Trial Date

The presumptive trial date is June, 2010. The trial is by Court and is anticipated to take
2-3 days. Counsel should indicate here the reasons that a shorter or longer track is appropriate.
While all dates herein must be initially scheduled to match the presumptive trial date, if the
Court agrees that a different track is appropriate, the case management order approving the CMP
plan will indicate the number of months by which all or certain deadlines will be extended to
match the track approved by the Court.

VII. Referral to Magistrate Judge

At this time, all parties do notconsent to refer this matter to the Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28
U.S.C. 636(b) and Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 73 for all further proceedings including trial.

VIII. Required Pre-Trial Preparation

A. TWO WEEKS BEFORE THE FINAL PRETRIAL CONFERENCE, the parties


shall:

1. File a list of witnesses who are expected to be called to testify at trial.

2. Number in sequential order all exhibits, including graphs, charts and the
like, that will be used during the trial. Provide the Court with a list of
these exhibits, including a description of each exhibit and the identifying
designation. Make the original exhibits available for inspection by
opposing counsel. Stipulations as to the authenticity and admissibility of
exhibits are encouraged to the greatest extent possible.

3. Submit all stipulations of facts in writing to the Court. Stipulations are


always encouraged so that at trial, counsel can concentrate on relevant
contested facts.

4. A party who intends to offer any depositions into evidence during the
party's case in chief shall prepare and file with the Court and copy to all
opposing parties either:
Page 12 of 17
FED1 CMP-uniform compiled by Plaintiff 09APR2009
a. brief written summaries of the relevant facts in the depositions that
will be offered. (Because such a summary will be used in lieu of
the actual deposition testimony to eliminate time reading
depositions in a question and answer format, this is strongly
encouraged.); or

b. if a summary is inappropriate, a document which lists the portions


of the deposition(s), including the specific page and line numbers,
that will be read, or, in the event of a video-taped deposition, the
portions of the deposition that will be played, designated
specifically by counter-numbers.

5. Provide all other parties and the Court with any trial briefs and motions in
limine, along with all proposed jury instructions, voir dire questions, and
areas of inquiry for voir dire (or, if the trial is to the Court, with proposed
findings of fact and conclusions of law).

6. Notify the Court and opposing counsel of the anticipated use of any
evidence presentation equipment.

B. ONE WEEK BEFORE THE FINAL PRETRIAL CONFERENCE, the parties


shall:

1. Notify opposing counsel in writing of any objections to the proposed exhibits. If


the parties desire a ruling on the objection prior to trial, a motion should be filed
noting the objection and a description and designation of the exhibit, the basis of
the objection, and the legal authorities supporting the objection.

2. If a party has an objection to the deposition summary or to a designated portion of


a deposition that will be offered at trial, or if a party intends to offer additional
portions at trial in response to the opponent's designation, and the parties desire a
ruling on the objection prior to trial, the party shall submit the objections and
counter summaries or designations to the Court in writing. Any objections shall
be made in the same manner as for proposed exhibits. However, in the case of
objections to video-taped depositions, the objections shall be brought to the
Court's immediate attention to allow adequate time for editing of the deposition
prior to trial.

3. File objections to any motions in limine, proposed instructions, and voir dire
questions submitted by the opposing parties.

4. Notify the Court and opposing counsel of requests for separation of witnesses at
trial.

Page 13 of 17
FED1 CMP-uniform compiled by Plaintiff 09APR2009
IX. Other Matters

None at this time.

_____________________________ _____________________________
Kay Kim Village at Eagle Creek Home Asso.
Plaintiff, Pro Se 7225 Village Parkway Drive,
Indianapolis, IN 46254

______________________________ __________________________
Kathy Bradley Nicole R. Kelsey
Attorney for Defendants Attorney for Defendants
Deputy Attorney General Assistant Corporation Counsel
Office of the Attorney General Office of Corporation Counsel

Page 14 of 17
FED1 CMP-uniform compiled by Plaintiff 09APR2009
___________________________ ___________________________
Jonathan L. Mayes James Edgar
Chief Litigation Counsel, Attorney for Defendants
Attorney for Defendants J. Edgar Law Officers, Prof. Corp.
Office of of Corporation Counsel

CMP filed dkt 80 by S. Sclipsea CMP filed dkt 88 by C.Ritter


Susan Sclipsea Charles Ritter
Defendant Defendant
4250 Village pkwy cir e #5 4250 Village pkwy cir e #5
Indianapolis, IN 46254 Indianapolis, IN 46254

*****************************************************************************
*

PARTIES APPEARED IN PERSON/BY COUNSEL ON


FOR A PRETRIAL/STATUS CONFERENCE.

APPROVED AS SUBMITTED.

APPROVED AS AMENDED.

APPROVED AS AMENDED PER SEPARATE ORDER.

APPROVED, BUT ALL OF THE FOREGOING DEADLINES ARE


SHORTENED/LENGTHENED BY ______________ MONTHS.

APPROVED, BUT THE DEADLINES SET IN SECTION(S)


_______________ OF THE PLAN IS/ARE
SHORTENED/LENGTHENED BY ________ MONTHS.

THIS MATTER IS SET FOR TRIAL BY __________________


ON________________________. FINAL PRETRIAL CONFERENCE
IS SCHEDULED FOR _______________________________________
AT _____.M., ROOM .

A SETTLEMENT/STATUS CONFERENCE IS SET IN THIS CASE FOR


___________ AT .M. COUNSEL SHALL
APPEAR:
IN PERSON IN ROOM ; OR
Page 15 of 17
FED1 CMP-uniform compiled by Plaintiff 09APR2009
BY TELEPHONE, WITH COUNSEL FOR __________
_______________________ INITIATING THE CALL TO ALL OTHER
PARTIES AND ADDING THE COURT JUDGE AT (____)
___________________; OR

BY TELEPHONE, WITH COUNSEL CALLING THE


JUDGE'S STAFF AT (____) ___________________; OR

DISPOSITIVE MOTIONS SHALL BE FILED NO LATER THAN

Upon approval, this Plan constitutes an Order of the Court. Failure to comply with an Order of
the Court may result in sanctions for contempt, or as provided under Rule 16(f), to and including
dismissal or default.

Approved and So Ordered.

________________________ ___________________________________
Date U. S. District Court
Southern District of Indiana
DISTRIBUTION:
Chief Judge David F. Hamilton; Judge Larry J. McKinney; Judge Sarah Evans Barker.

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I do hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing to the counsels were mailed on April 13, ’09 by
first class U.S. Mail, postage prepaid and served to the defendants on no later than April 18, 2009:

Kathy Bradley
Deputy Attorney General
State of Indiana Attorney General
Office of Attorney General,
Indiana Government Center South, Fifth floor
302 West Washington St.,
Indianapolis, IN 46204
T# (317) 234-2968 / F# (317) 232-7979

Nicole R. Kelsey
Assistant Corp. Counsel, Office of Corporation Counsel
200 East Washington St., Room 1601
Indianapolis, IN 46204
T# (317) 327-4055 / F# (317) 327-3968 / E-mail: nkelsey@indygov.org

Jonathan L. Mayes
Chief Litigation Counsel
Office of Corporation Counsel
200 East Washington St., Room 1601
Indianapolis, IN 46204
T# (317) 327-4055 / F# (317) 327-3968E-mail: jmayes@indygov.org

James Edgar
Attorney, J. Edgar Law Office, Prof. Corp.,
Page 16 of 17
FED1 CMP-uniform compiled by Plaintiff 09APR2009
1512 N. Delaware Street
Indianapolis, IN 46202
Pho# (317) 472-4000 / Fax# (317) 472-0640 / em: jedgar@jedgarlaw.com

Village at Eagle Creek Home Association


7225 Village Parkway Drive,
Indianapolis, IN 46254
Phone (317) 291-4916,
E-mail - vechoa@sbcglobal.net

Susan Sclipcea & Charles Ritter


4250 Village Pkwy c.e. unit 5, Indianapolis., IN 46254

____________________
Kay Kim, Pro Se-Plaintiff
4250 Village Pkwy c e apt. 2
Indpls., IN 46254, Ph# 317-641-5977
e-mail: spchiefeatapple@gmail.com

Page 17 of 17
FED1 CMP-uniform compiled by Plaintiff 09APR2009