Admit (10) if Harry C. Arthur (Attorney at Law) having officially claiming in court records no less…
Work product deposition of (Andy Vickery) that was conducted upon said (Harry C. Arthur Esq.) in the “civil matter” Christ Church Cathedral” this is a very false and fraudulent material statement made by Harry C. Arthur Esq.
If admitted;
1. State fully in great detail under what set of complete legal Attorney at Law circumstances would Andy Vickery (Attorney at Law) fully representing past Defendant “Christ Church Cathedral” would (Andy Vickery) give Harry C. Arthur Esq. formal legal permission to claim the rights to (Andy Vickery) deposition as (Harry C. Arthur Esq.) own working Product design deposition to stop the Plaintiff from obtaining rightful discovery materials in a civil suit in Common Law .
2. Explain in great professional detail did you (Andy Vickery) Attorney at Law, give permission to Attorney (Harry C. Arthur Esq.) the legal civil rights and authority to claim your personal conducted deposition as (Harry C. Arthur et al) very own work product in illegal civil collusion and civil conspiracy with (Arthur et al) to hinder Plaintiff (Hamilton II) full rightful possession of Legal Civil discovery in suit in common Law.
3. Under your being a Professional Attorney at Law in and for the State of Texas in dealing in suit in Common Civil Law you (Andy Vickery) what rightful objection do (Harry C. Arthur Esq.) have to claiming your work product deposition in hinder and keeping said discovery deposition legal civilly away from the Pro Se Plaintiff (Hamilton II) in light surrounding all of the factual complaint (Arthur et al) made against past defendant “Christ Church Cathedral.
Interrogatories Question (1) Under your being a Professional Attorney at Law in and for the State of Texas would your Law Firm have file the same said “Civil Tort” against “Christ Church Cathedral”
Exactly civilly presented under the same set of factual circumstances and events as fully described by “Harry C. Arthur Esq.” on National News no less…
On the Behalf also of the “Marine Building L.L.C. for loss rental and loss property value sighting Plaintiff as the cause for loss rental and loss property value
If admitted;
State fully (Andy Vickery) “Attorney at Law” in great legal detail under what set of complete legal Attorney at Law circumstances would Andy Vickery and his Law Firm of VICKERY & WALDNER, LLP.
Would not have instituted the same fully civilly presented civil tort fact under the same set of factual circumstances and events as fully described by “Harry C. Arthur Esq.” on National News no less…
On the Behalf also of the “Marine Building L.L.C. for loss rental and loss property value sighting Plaintiff (Hamilton II) being legal as the cause for loss rental and loss property value against past defendant “Christ Church Cathedral” and Health Hazard in the community.
No comments:
Post a Comment