Post by
MTStack on Sep 02, 2022 8:10am
Ossa modifies exhibition of document request 1036
Alvaro Vives Martens, attorney in conventional representation of Mr. Felipe Ossa Guzman and Claro & Co. … C 1036-2021, to this Court I respectfully state:
[…]
The purpose of the Exhibition of Court Documents was for the plaintiff to exhibit and leave a copy in the file of the pieces of the relevant files, so that Mr. Jorge Lopehandia would not question their integrity or authenticity.
Along with requesting the Exhibition of Court Documents, this party offered to submit, with a citation, copies of the most relevant pieces of the judicial files whose exhibition was requested through the Exhibition of Documents (Folio 114). The resolution of August 8, 2022 (Folio 121) was submitted with these copies, with citation and was notified to the plaintiff by the State Journal the same day. Consequently, the citation deadline expired on August 11, 2022. There is no objection filed by Mr. Jorge Lopehandia within the deadline against the documents submitted by this party. Therefore, they must be regarded as public instruments in court in accordance with the provisions of Article 342 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
In this way, the objective that led this party to request the Exhibition of Court Documents was fulfilled by another means and, consequently, the Exhibition of Documents resulted in a diligence that this party can dispense with in view of the principle of procedural economy.
However, the same does not happen with respect to the Exhibition of the Option, since the records that refer to its performance, modification, renewal and/or termination of the Option held by Mr. Jorge Lopehandia with Mountainstar are not recorded in the file.
By virtue of the above, this party partially withdraws from the diligence of exhibition of documents requested in Folio 112 and ordered in Folio 121 only with regard to the exhibition of pieces of the files of the judicial procedures to which Mr. Felipe Ossa Guzman referred in the Affidavit (Exhibition of Court Documents). Thus, in the hearing of exhibition of documents cited in Folio 121, the plaintiff must exhibit and leave a copy in the electronic file only of all the documents in his possession and that refer to the performance, modification, renewal and/or termination of the Option held by Mr. Jorge Lopehandia with Mountainstar.
THEREFORE,
To this Court I respectfully request: To partially withdraw the diligence requested by this party of exhibition of documents in Folio 112 and ordered in Folio 121, only with regard to the exhibition of the resolutions and judicial presentations of the files of the judicial procedures to which Mr. Felipe Oss Guzman referred in his Affidavit of May 31. 2017.
Comment by
aurwar on Sep 02, 2022 2:34pm
Can't wait to see what JRL / JGT submit to the court re the option agreement amendment, renewal, or update with MWR / MSX. I don't recall if a WRITTEN amendment /renewal was ever made of the option agreement between JRL and MWR/ MSX. Is this check or checkmate for C 1036-2021? I am betting Attorney Martens knows this is the latter.