So, I’m reading a file in a matter we were recently hired to handle. There are multiple Plaintiffs in the case. Apparently, before we came along a few of the attorneys on the file had some trouble playing nice with each other. The attorneys involved (again, not our firm; not our client) appear to have exchanged some hilarious letters.

There had been two Court orders that discovery was closed before we got into the case. Thereafter, despite the Court orders, Defense counsel noticed depositions. Big “no, no” after the closure dates.

Here’s the beginning of the first letter I come across in the file from a pretty annoyed Plaintiff’s lawyer regarding the recently noticed deposition:

“Dear Defense Counsel:

How did you know I was a fan of fiction? I just finished reading your letter of January 4, 2011. I understand you were involved in a big important trial in the Bay Area and therefore may not be totally up to speed on what took place, but let me see if I can help…”

For the rest of the letter, the attorney predictably proceeds to catalog all the ways discovery is closed and the deposition cannot proceed. I turn the page in the file and find a second letter to this same defense attorney from a different, yet equally annoyed Plaintiff’s lawyer:

“Dear Defense Counsel:

As you know, pursuant to two separate court orders issued by Judge So & So in this case, discovery is “closed.” I am not sure what part of that term is unclear. The first definition of the term closed in Webster’s is “not open.” Perhaps that is the best way to look at the status of discovery in this matter. It is not open.

Hilarious. I got a good crash course on how to craft a nasty-gram. Also noticed from the file that the deposition did not proceed.