|
Plaintiff (Josie Marrero)
Defendant
(KittyKind)
COURT TIMELINE 2007
1) Plaintiff filed lawsuit
against KittyKind for Failure to Return Money and
Failure to pay for Services Rendered.
2)
April
16: Hearing 1
Postponement for Plaintiff to gather copious Discovery for Defendant (7 years worth)
3)
On
or About April 23
Plaintiff delivered
all Discovery requested to Defendant's office
4)
June
8 Incoming Phone call to Plaintiff
Defendant's
attorney makes settlement offer of $5,000
5)
June
19 Hearing 2
Judge Wright informed Defendedant
that Mediation is not binding
Both parties sent into Mediation by court
Defendant's attorney brought up June 8 Settlement
offer
Offer is now off the table
Defendant alleged that all or most of the cats were not KittyKind cats
Stipulation
signed by both parties agreeing to finish Discovery requests by 7/7/07
Defendant agreed to give Plaintiff all Discovery
by 6/28/07
Defendant claimed to have a signed contract by Plaintiff and was ordered to bring it to next Hearing
6)
August
8 Hearing 3
Judge asked to see alleged
signed contract
Defendant gave email taken out of context from Mediation with Jane Hoffman
2nd Judge to inform
Defendant that Mediation is not binding
Judge asked if there was a limit to costs of medical care provided per cat
Defendant's
attorney said no
Judge asked Plaintiff if Plaintiff made agreement and now wanted more money
Plaintiff replied "No"
Defendant
admitted that there is no signed contract
Plaintiff showed Judge Defendant's Response to Discovery (Long document saying
why this was irrelevant . . . )
Judge advised Plaintiff to file Motion to Compel
Defendant's attorney said that Jane
Hoffman would make an appearance in court within 20 minutes and asked if he could wait for her.
Judge asked if I wanted
to go to trial at that time. I said yes, however did not have my receipts with
me. A new hearing date was set. At this hearing, Jane Hoffman, who is listed on
a signed affidavit, as neither a volunteer or employed by KittyKind was on her way to participate in the Hearing. She
was stuck in traffic and was unable to make it to court in time.
7)
August
29 Motion to Compel Hearing
Judge Hagler
changed trial date from Sept 18 to Oct 15 to give Defendant time to send Plaintiff Discovery materials and affidavits ordered
by Judge within 30 days. Defendant's attorney stated that their defense has always
been that Plaintiff was never authorized to take KK cats to her vet and again claimed that not all cats were KK cats
8)
Oct
5 Deposition of Hilary Harris
(Deposition
also sent to Marlene Kess)
Defendant's attorney responded for both parties with Rejection of Deposition and no one showed
up for Deposition.
9)
Oct
15 Trial Date
Judge Wright attempted
Mediation and set new trial date at Dec 7 leaving time to Subpoena Ms. Kess and attempt another deposition.
10) Oct 17 Judge Signed Order To Compel Deposition
on Nov. 7
11)
Nov
2: Plaintiff Receives Affirmation from KK Attorneys
Claiming that Ms Kess is not a party to this suit and that Plaintiff is trying
to stall
- Any stalling has been due to Defendant's claims of having a signed contract when in fact it did
not exist
- Defendant's response to timely Discovery
was compelled by the Court despite Plaintiff's cooperation in gathering copious Discovery requests by Defendant
- On or about April 23 Plaintiff delivered all Discovery requested to Defendant's attorney office
- Per Stipulation by Court Defendant agreed to finish Discovery requests by 7/7/07 and to give
Plaintiff all Discovery by 6/28/07
- as of August 8 Defendant did not cooperate
and Judge advised Plaintiff to file a Motion to Compel
- At Motion to Compel on August 29, Judge Hagler changed trial date from Sept 18 to Oct 15 in order
to give Defendant 30 days to send Discovery materials and affidavits ordered by the Court (Defendant later claimed
that Plaintiff was stalling - why didn't they just give Discovery as requested?)
12)
Nov
7 Hearing to Compel Deposition
Case
dismissed due to lack of documents by both parties.
13) Judge advised Defendant's attorney that Rejection
of Deposition is not part of our Justice System and that they could not make up the rules as they went along. He also advised them that in this particular case he believed that this organization had taken advantage
of a softhearted person in the amount of $25,000. Attorney tried in vain to convince
him that KittyKind is a "wonderful, caring organization" to no avail.
Mediation With
KittyKind
Summary of Meeting with Jane Hoffman of the Mayor's Alliance for NYC Animals and
Hilary Harris of KittyKind on
July 25, 2006
I
provided Jane Hoffman and Hilary Harris with a copy of topics that I wanted to cover at the meeting and an itemized list of
money which I spent in 2004 2006 on KittyKind cats
Remaining KK cats
1.
Monsi Very Shy
·
Sapphire- sick, died of FIP
·
Princess Pumpkin adopted out 4 times
and returned
·
Simone Feral, adopted out as shy and
returned
·
Tiger Special Needs Cat: One Kidney and compromised bladder
2. Marlene.
·
Why is your caller ID listed as Marlene
Kess. Is she still part of KK
·
Marlene currently owes me $3,000 (personal
loan)
·
Fostering with no follow up
·
My apartment as a free sanctuary
·
My attempt to return all cats in 2004
accused of being hateful
3.
Hilary Agreements. (Verbal prior to meeting)
·
To pay Spoiled Brats $300 monthly food
·
Current bill at AMC
·
Info for VERG emergency vet care
·
Reimbursement for current bills to my
vet
4.
Clarify knowledge of past foster care and
medical activities
5.
Clear up phone controversy, I was accused
of not talking to Hilary at times and of not leaving messages
6.
Month of June
·
No food, litter, special diet, medical emergencies,
medication
·
Clarify accusations made that "Josie has been
abandoning cats at the store"
·
Barbara getting regular reimbursements despite
not having receipts for her house cleaning.
·
Dawn gets regular adoption fees & cages
·
Mary gets regular adoption fees & cages
·
How have you been reimbursing rescuers who
got MK cats out of NJ Humane Society
·
How does Gabriel get reimbursed for Meds she
buys for KittyKind?
Some of these topics were merely clarified by telling Hilary and
she either did not say anything or said she understood but did not elaborate.
The
majority of the meeting was presided over by Jane Hoffman while Hilary toke notes or kept insisting that
1.
She had never authorized me to take Tiger to
the AMC
2.
She was available for calls and that I had never
called her
3.
She had never agreed to reimburse me for current
bills to my vet (she had verbally agreed to do so just prior to the meeting)
Jane Hoffman
offered to let me bring a kitten/cat that Dawn Borst had left in my foster care to VERG as a one time service for testing
and treatment of parasites. I accepted the offer since as a KittyKind Representative
Dawn turned her over to me in a sickly state.
When I presented my bills I was asked what portion I wanted reimbursed. I
originally stated that 1/3 of the entire amount for 2004-2006 would settle things. Jane
Hoffman said that bills for 2004 were out of the question. I told her that 2004
was the year that I had paid the highest amount for care of KittyKind cats.
Note: That was also the main reason why we were in mediation. this was supposed to be promised reimbursement for 2004.
She told Hilary
to agree to pay the AMC bill and to pay $400 a month in Catfood and Litter to a total of $5,200 dollars. Hilary Harris continued to say that KittyKind "just did not have the money". Hilary said they could not pay me by check because I did not have a checking account. I told her I could open an account. She restated that KittyKind
"just did not have the money".
There was some discussion about gossip and how the original information was twisted and how the gossip got started
to begin with. At one point Jane Hoffman said that what was discussed at the
meeting was to stay between the three of us. Hilary Harris said that she had
to tell Kathleen Goward and Cathy Cristel. Jane Hoffman asked why and Hilary
Harris stated that they would want to know about the arrangement for the monthly food and litter delivery to me. Ms. Hoffman asked "Who pays the bills?" Ms. Harris said "I
do", when asked "who handles the checkbook" Ms. Harris said "I do". Ms. Hoffman said "well, they really don't need to know".
I left the
meeting somewhat confused as to why Jane Hoffman said (without consulting with Hilary) that the bills for 2004 were out of
the question. Further correspondence after the meeting regarding my dissatisfaction
over the decision not to reimburse me for 2004 were responded to by Jane Hoffman.
At this meeting I was made aware of who put up the money for Marlene Kess' bail, $14,000. No, I was quickly
informed, there was no conflict of interest - it was a personal loan.
Also, I didn't know that Board Members could be replaced by someone not on KittyKind's Board. How does this
work? Did I misunderstand or mis-hear? | 
