• Embed Doc
  • Copy Link
  • Readcast
  • Collections
  • CommentGo Back
 
,i,,
.@'
2,rtL?-,/-
Keith FinchJRC/lsh
Enclosure
cc:
WaldoJaquith
(w/enc.)
("i^
email
ooly)
carretivt.
Smith,
Esq.
(denc')
(viaemail
only)
{ooo1699*Doc}to6
tsACULTy
=TREET[3L'\cKsBURc;
vlR.'INl,'
24a,,oT()LL
Irt{Ëri:
(aaa)
96ó-2504
F-o.x:
(54o)
9.0()-2304
I(ET-
TT
FINCFIrer-:(5+o)9é,6-2504
CnpEK¡'¡roRE
rw.creekmo¡elaw.com
l,'\\\lI
I
ll/Vl
l)(
keith@creekmorelaw.com
February13,2009The
HonorableMalcolm
Booker,Jr.,
Clerk
BuckinghamCounry
Circuit
Court
1306I
James
AndersonHwY
Buckingham,VA
2392L
In
re:
Thomas
L.
Garrett,
Jr.
v' Better
Publícation
s,L'L'C',
et
øl'
Civil Number:
CL08000197-00Dear
Mr.
Booker:
Enclosedplease
find
Plaintiff's
Motion
toCompel
Compliance
wÍth
Subpoena
Duces
Tecumand
Oppositionto
WaldoJaquith
s
Motionto
Quash
in
the
above-referencedmatter'
shouldyou
haveany
quesrions,
pleasefeelfree
to
contact
me.
VeryTrulyYouts,
THs
Cn¡¡ruon¡
LewFtnu
PC
 
THF, CRF,F,KMoRE
LAwFTRM
Pc
VIRGINIA:IN
THE
CIRCUIT
COURT FORTHE
COUNTY
OF
BUCKINGHAM
THOMAS
L.
GARRETT,
JR.,
Plaintiff
BETTER PUBLICATIONS, L.L.C.,
et
ø1.,
Defendants.
Case
No.
CL08000197-00
PLAINTIFF'S
MOTIONTOCOMPELCOMPLIANCE
WITH
SUBPOENADUCES
TECUMAND
OPPOSITION
TO
\I/ALDO
JAOUITH'SMOTION TO
qUASH
Plaintiff
Thomas
L.
Garrett,Jr.,
by
counsel,
hereby
opposes
V/aldo
Jaquith's
Motion
to
Quash
of
January
3I,2009,
and
further
moves the
couf
for
an
order
compelling
Mr.
Jaquith to
comply
with
the
Plaintiffls
subpoena duces tecum served
upon
him
(and
attached
as
Exhibit
1)
(the"Subpoena").
INTRODUCTION
Plaintiff
commenced
this action
onDecember
22,2008.
The
next
day,
Mr.
Jaquith
published
an
article
entitled"The
Hook
Sued
for Defamation"
on
his
web
site, cvillenews.com.
(See
Exhibit2.)
ln
subsequent
days,
a
number
of
comments
appeared
underneath the articleonthe
web
site
(as
Mr.
Jaquith's
web
site apparentlypermits
anyreader
to
postcomments
with
respect
to
an
article).
Manyof
these
comments contained
materialevidencing
animus
and
malice toward
Plaintiff.
Many
commentsalso evidenced opinions
and
beliefs
stemming
fromthe
commenters' reading
of
the
articles
of
The
Hookgiving
rise
to this
litigation.
Ultimately
eighty-one
comments
appeared
underneaththe
article
on
theweb
site
before
Mr.
Jaquithapparently
closed
the
article to
comments,
an
action
which
he
took
after service
of
Plaintiff
s
subpoena
upon
Mr.
Jaquith.Because
of
the
virulence of
the attacks
against
Plaintiff
manifested
in
the
anonymous
comments,
and
because
the attention to the
article
exceeded
what
one
would
have
expected
from
disinterested
third
parties,
Plaintiff
has reason
to believe that
many of
the commentsmayhave
been made
by
employees
or
agents
of
Defendant BetterPublications,
L.L.C.
andlor theotherDefendants
to this
action(referred
to collectivelyhereinafter as"The
Hooll').
Because
{00016898.DOC)
 
thecommentperiodcoincided
with
the Christmasholidays,
duringwhich time
theofftces
of
The
Hookwere
closed,
it
is
likely
that
such comments
were
made
fromindividuals'
homecomputers
rather
than
from
computers
of
The
Hook.
If
Defendants or
their
agents
didin fact
post
such comments
upon
Mr.
Jaquith's
website,
then these
actions
wouldprovide
evidence
of
the
Defendants'
animus
and
malice
toward
PlaintifT,
as
well
as
of
The
Hook's
lack
of
journalistic
professionalism(despite
its
claimsthatits reporters
are serious
journalists).
Additionally,
as
noted
above,
comments
from
third
parties,predicated
in whole orin
parton
reading
The
Hook's
articles
giving
rise
to this
litigation,
provide
evidence
of
the
effectof
The
Hook's
defamatory
statements
onmembers
of
the
public.Accordingly,
on
January
15,2009,Plaintiff
served
the
Subpoena
upon
Mr.
Jaquithseeking documents
and
information
identiffing
theposters
of
the comments
and
the
computers
they
used
to
postthose
comments
(informationwhich
generallyis
routinely collected
and
recordedby computershosting web
pages)
as
well
as
other documents
in
the
possession
of Mr.
Jaquiththat
might
reveal the
identities of
thepersons
who
posted
the commentsor that
mightprovide proofof
the animus
and
malice
toward
the
Plaintiff of
The
Hook
and
its
employees or
agents.
On January
25,2009,
Mr.
Jaquith
wrotein
another
article
on
his
web
site,
entitled
"Tommy
Garrett
Subpoenas
cvillenews.com"
(,See
Exhibit
3),
referring
to
theSubpoen4 that
"I
don't
intend
to
giveup
a
thing
unless
compelled
to
do
so
by
a
court."
Subsequently,onJanuary
3I,2009,
Mr.
Jaquith
filed
theinstant
Motion
to
Quash
the
Subpoena.
ANALYSIS
A.
Paragraph
I
of
the Subpoena
Paragraph
I
of
the
Subpoenarequests
Mr.
Jaquith toproduce:
Any
and
all
documents
andinformation
relating to
persons
posting
comments on the article
entitled
"The
Hook
Sued
for
Deåmation,"which
presently
appears
at
http://www.cvillenews.com/2008/12123lganett-hook-
lawsuit/
(the
"Article'),
including
but
not
limited to:
(a)
names ofpersons
posting
comments on
the
Article, ifknown;
(b)
the
IP
addresses
associated
with
each
viewer
of the
Article;
(c)
the
IP
addresses
associated
with
each
commentpostedon
the
Article;
(d)
the
dates
and
timeswhen
each
commenton
the
Article
was
posted;
and
(e)
all
computerlogs
generated
in
connection
with
the
Article.
In
opposition
to this
request,
Mr.
Jaquith
argues
frst
that
these
documentsshouldnot
be
disclosed
because
to
do
so
would
"threaten the
exercise
of
fundamental
rights"
of
the
{00016898.DOC}
of 00

Leave a Comment

You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...
You must be to leave a comment.
Submit
Characters: ...