Claire Lucas attempted to avoid testifying in the DNC's ongoing anti-gay discrimination discovery case, but DC Superior Court Judge Jeannette J. Clark ordered the gay board chair to take the stand. Here's the judicial command in handy PDF form.
Want to Prove Gay Marriage Is For Socialists? Yup, There’s a Rep For That (1)
· MikenStL says: Now if I only had an iPhone, I wonder if Verizon will come up with a map for... »
If You’re Born Gay, How Can A Homo Have a Straight Identical Twin? (17)
· AlwaysGay says: Dr. Reed at Harvard proposed a hypothesis which states homosexuality is maintained... »
· fuzzypony says: Considering all the science I’ve read, and based on my own experience as a... »
ABC’s Ridiculous Policy to Ban ‘Controversial’ Adam Lambert From Daytime Airwaves (56)
· Wicked Glitter says: I hate to be a bitch again, BUT WHERE THE FUCK HAVE YOU PEOPLE BEEN? Start... »
· romeo says: @ Danny52, Carol51, think you’re both missing the point about what’s going... »
· staciegirlie says: People, don’t start with the, “He’s playing the Gay card”... »
Can the Best Policy for Gender-Bending Athletes Be Found In a Connecticut High School? (14)
· fuzzypony says: Why can’t we lump everybody together and then sort them out by weight, body... »
New Rules for GOP Candidates: You Must Support DOMA (10)
· Mark says: The Party of Prejudice, Discrimination, Fear, and willful Ignorance. Their Anti-Gay... »
Is It Wrong to Report on a Marine Starring in Hardcore Gay Porn? (95)
· Alex says: Wait a minute. If the guy is out of the service then…why this article? Hmm. Okay,... »
Hetero Priests Just As Likely to Molest Kids as Gay Priests! (45)
· Bill Perdue says: No. 42 · B is getting a little paranoid. It comes with the job. It’s stupid... »
On February 1, 2008, the Court ruled that Mr. Hitchcock's subpoena was properly served on Ms. Lucas on November 30, 2007. However, more importantly, the Court did not
order Ms. Lucas to appear for a deposition on or by any specific date.
Instead, the Court directed Ms. Lucas's lawyer and Mr. Hitchcock's lawyer to continue to negotiate in good faith to resolve the other issues that Ms. Lucas had raised in her motion. These issues include whether Ms. Lucas's deposition is in fact necessary, the burden entailed by plaintiff's request for a large number of documents that appear unrelated to plaintiff's claims in this case, and the manner in which the parties will treat any confidential information that Ms.Lucas may ultimately have to provide, including: 1) private communications between Ms. Lucas and other members of the LGBT community who are not parties to this case, and 2) third party communications to which Ms. Lucas may have had access as a member of various list serves, including the National Stonewall Democrats Board list serve.
If Ms. Lucas's and Mr. Hitchcock's lawyers are unable to resolve these issues through negotiation, the Court will consider a new motion by Ms. Lucas for a protective order.
Barry Reingold
Attorney for Claire Lucas