Vwoolf Revisions the NW

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE STATE OF OREGON FOR THE COUNTY OF MULTNOMAH

In the Matter of the Marriage of: KAINE ANDREW HORMAN,
Petitioner,
and
TERRI LYNN MOULTON HORMAN,
Respondent.

Case No. 100666084
RESPONDENT'S MOTION FOR EMERGENCY HEARING REGARDING DISCOVERY

Page 1 – RESPONDENT'S MOTION FOR EMERGENCY HEARING REGARDING

DISCOVERY

K:\PB\HORMAN, TERRI\EMERGENCY HEARING MOTION.DOC
THE LAW FIRM OF PETER BUNCH, LLC
511 SE 11th Avenue, Suite 201
Portland, Oregon 97214
Telephone: 503.688.5123 Facsimile: 503.961.1559 email: peter@peterbunchlaw.com www.peterbunchlaw.com

MOTION

For the reasons set forth below, respondent Terri Horman (Mother) moves the court to schedule an emergency hearing regarding discovery issues. This motion is based on the court's prior rulings regarding the scope of discovery in the above- referenced proceeding.
Mother filed a motion for temporary parenting time with her daughter, Kiara Horman, whom Mother has not seen since June 2010. On December 3, 2013, petitioner Kaine Horman (Father) filed a response in which he paraphrased portions of the deposition of Rodolfo Sanchez in support of Father's contention that Mother "solicited the help of Mr. Rodolfo Sanchez to murder [Father]." Father's allegations about the alleged solicitation are at the core of his objections to Mother having parenting time, and he draws a connection between the disappearance of Kyron Horman and the alleged solicitation.
////

1 In taking Mr. Sanchez's deposition,1 it is evident that the line of questioning in
2 which Mr. Sanchez made certain allegations was based on information that could have
3 come only from law enforcement. Specifically, counsel for Father asked Mr. Sanchez
4 the following questions:
5 "Q. Did you ever see [Mother] someplace else besides Sheltered Nook?
6 "A. Yes.
7 "*****

8 "Q.

Do you remember the circumstances?
What do you mean 'the circumstances'?
Can you tell me if you ever saw [Mother] at a restaurant?"

9 "A.
10 "Q.
11 Counsel for Father then asked a series of questions about the conversation that
12 allegedly occurred at the restaurant, which are set forth, in part, as follows:

13 "Q.
14 happened?
15 "A.
16 "Q.
17 "A.
18 husband treated her wrong.

"** ** "Q. "A. "Q. "A. "Q.

*
Did she tell you whether [Father] abused her physically or mentally? Both ways.
She told you she was afraid for her [daughter].
Correct.
Did she say why?

Do you remember what happened next? After the waitress left, what

Well, she started talking to me about her husband.
Okay. Do you remember what she told you?
Not specifically, but she told me that she was desperate because her

DISCOVERY

The court should be aware that Sanchez had an interpreter present at his deposition to translate all questions and answers; there was some confusion throughout the deposition about the translation of certain words.

Page 2 – RESPONDENT'S MOTION FOR EMERGENCY HEARING REGARDING

"A. Because she didn't want to lose her.
"Q. Did she use those words, she didn't want to 'lose her'?
"A. What she said is she didn't want her husband to take her away from her. "Q Did you ask her what she meant by that statement?
"A. Well, that was after what she commented to me -- she told me specifically. remember, but she told me that she wanted me to help her get rid of her

1 2 3 4 5

6 I don't
7 husband. I don't know if that was the correct word, but she tried to make me
8 understand that."

9 "*****
10 "Q. Do you remember her using the words 'get rid of'?
11 "A. No, but she implied it, not specifically."
12 Counsel for Father then went through a scripted set of questions about what
13 allegedly transpired at the restaurant. During the questioning, Sanchez was equivocal
14 about what Mother allegedly said to him on many occasions, and, in particular, about
15 the specific words she used. Also, during questioning by Father's lawyer, Sanchez
16 revealed that he testified before the grand jury. On several occasions, he referred to
17 documents of his that the police had in their possession. The line of questioning
18 culminated in a discussion about the last meeting Sanchez had with Mother, which
19 occurred several months later, and after Sanchez had performed additional work at the
20 Horman home. Counsel asked whether Sanchez had a conversation with Mother, to
21 which Sanchez said he had a "meeting" that lasted 15 minutes.
22 Later in the deposition, counsel for Mother asked Sanchez whether Mother
23 planned the alleged meeting. Sanchez's lawyer instructed him not to answer. After
24 assuring counsel for Sanchez that the court's ruling about restricted areas of discovery
25 would be strictly followed, Mother's lawyer asserted that he had the right to ask about
26 ////

Page 3 – RESPONDENT'S MOTION FOR EMERGENCY HEARING REGARDING

DISCOVERY

1 the contents of the alleged conversation Sanchez had with Mother. Sanchez's lawyer
2 instructed the witness not to answer.
3 Based on what occurred in the Sanchez deposition, Mother contends that Father
4 has opened the door to further discovery by asking a series of questions the origin of
5 which can only have come from law enforcement. Further compounding the matter is
6 the instruction by Sanchez's lawyer to not answer any questions about the
7 conversations that occurred during the final 15-minute meeting, which would prove
8 Mother's innocence as to the numerous inaccurate allegations made by Sanchez and
9 Father.
10 In sum, as a result of the questioning of Sanchez about a alleged meeting that,
11 by Sanchez's representation, only Mother, Sanchez, and law enforcement knew
12 occurred, compounded by an instruction to Sanchez to not answer questions that would
13 have exposed the issues with his prior testimony, Mother is in precisely the situation she
14 predicted could happen in this case: an incomplete and inaccurate accounting of events
15 is being used as a cudgel to prevent parenting time and to further smear Mother before
16 the court and in the public record, while the court's prior ruling is being used by
17 Sanchez's lawyer and Father's lawyer as a shield to prevent the full disclosure of the
18 facts germane to difficult decisions this court must make.
19 For these reasons, Mother seeks an emergency hearing to present argument in
20 support of these contentions: (1) Mother should be allowed to depose law enforcement
21 about the final 15-minute meeting between Sanchez and Mother; (2) Sanchez should be
22 ordered to disclose the contents of the conversation that occurred in the final meeting;
23 and (3) Sanchez should be ordered to disclose who accompanied him to, observed, or
24 listened to the final meeting. In the alternative, the court should strike those portions of
25 Father's pleadings that refer to the Sanchez deposition.
26 ////

Page 4 – RESPONDENT'S MOTION FOR EMERGENCY HEARING REGARDING

DISCOVERY

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Because of the timing of the upcoming hearing, and because of the improper manner in which Father seeks to use Sanchez's unreliable testimony in support of his position that Mother should not have any contact with Kiara, Mother respectfully requests the court to set this matter at the earliest possible date.

Vwoolf Revisions the NW

Friday, December 13, 2013

1 comment: