Denial of justice was aided by AAA employees and their practices.
They provide an environment and processes that facilitate corporate clients to take the labor disputes to arbitration and bribe arbitrators and win the case.
AAA did not provide adequate good quality arbitrators in a labor dispute - the one or two good arbitrators are striked by attorneys from the company. The arbitrator that was left over was seems the one enployer wanted to work with. The arbitrator never did anything that was unfavorable to the employer during various stages of the administration - arbitrator verbally said fair things but when he sent it in writing it was not there! Otherwise, arbitrator aided in the employee strengthening the case therefy setting path for the employer to bribe the arbitrator for dismissing the case in fovor of the employer.
AAA pretended that it is between the three parties and they hacve nothing to do with it.
AAA said that you can not contact the arbitrator directly - but at the last minute - just before the hearing - they provided the email address for the arbitrator - conflicting and they never stated this at the beginning!
The reviews posted on Yelp.com are filtered by Yelp! Below is the link for the filtered reviews:
(The Claimant's First name will be used; The Arbitrator's Name has been removed, and The Respondent's Lawyers Name has been removed)
I filed the following CLAIMANT'S MOTION TO QUASH RESPONDENT’S DISCOVERY REQUESTS. The Respondent DID NOT FILE a response to the motion; THEREFORE, the Respondent does not CONTEST the motion and is admitting fault and is ready to accept the consequences that the Arbitrator will issue. During the conference call on February 6, 2015, THE RESPONDENT acknowledged that he FAILED TO RESPOND! The Arbitrator DENIED The CLAIMANT'S MOTION TO QUASH RESPONDENT’S DISCOVERY REQUESTS, and the Arbitrator EXTENDED the discovery period; The Arbitrator IS ALLOWING The Respondent to Change the Discovery Requests to Federal Law; consequentially, The CLAIMANT'S MOTION TO QUASH RESPONDENT’S DISCOVERY REQUESTS should have been granted. I had several questions concerning the discovery requests that the Respondent DID NOT provide to me, and The Arbitrator told me that his pages were not numbered the same; as a result, I do not know if The Respondent has provided The Arbitrator with the documents. The ARBITRATOR EXPECTS this to be a one-sided EXCHANGE OF DISCOVERY. I asked The Respondent for the SAME DISCOVERY THAT HE ASKED ME FOR; I selected some of his discovery requests and COPIED THEM WORD FOR WORD. The ARBITRATOR RULED that the Respondent does not have to provide The Discovery I requested, but I have to provide The Respondent's DISCOVERY REQUESTS! I explained to The Arbitrator that this is now a MATTER OF PRINCIPLE; THEREFORE, IWILL NOT COMPLY WITH THE RULING, and I will no longer participate in a ONE-SIDED ARBITRATION.
CLAIMANT’S MOTION TO QUASH RESPONDENT’S DISCOVERY REQUESTS
The Claimant LAWRENCE files this motion to quash Respondent’s discovery Requests. As grounds therefor, LAWRENCE respectfully submits the following:
MOTION TO QUASH
During the conference call on November 25, 2014, the parties agreed to the use of FEDERAL LAW. The Arbitrator APPROVED the use of FEDERAL LAW; therefore, The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure will be used in this Arbitration. On December 2, 2014, the Respondent [Central Market HEB “HEB” or “Respondent”)] sent the following documents to the Claimant.
1) Respondent’s Request for Disclosure to Claimant.
2) Respondent’s First Request for Admissions to Claimant.
3) Respondent’s First Set of Interrogatories to Claimant.
4) Respondent’s First Requests for Production to Claimant.
The Respondent is CLEARLY VIOLATING the rules of this Arbitration. BOTH parties agreed to the use of FEDERAL LAW; HOWEVER; it has become apparent that The Respondent believes he is not limited by an agreement.
1) The Respondent’s Request for Disclosure to Claimant states that Under Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 194, Claimant is requested to disclose, within thirty (30) days of service of this request, the information or material described in Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 194.2, as follows (A copy of Page #1 where this is stated is enclosed).
2) The Respondent’s First Request for Admissions to Claimant states that Respondent Central Market HEB (“HEB” or “Respondent”) serves this First Request for Admissions on Claimant Lawrence Primm (“Primm” or “Claimant”) pursuant to Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 198 (A copy of Page #1 where this is stated is enclosed).
3) The Respondent’s First Set of Interrogatories to Claimant states that Respondent Central Market HEB (“HEB” or “Respondent”) serves this First Set of Interrogatories on Claimant Lawrence Primm (“Primm” or “Claimant”) pursuant to Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 197 (A copy of Page #1 where this is stated is enclosed).
4) The Respondent’s First Requests for Production to Claimant states that Respondent Central Market HEB (“HEB” or “Respondent”) serves this First Requests for Production on Claimant Lawrence Primm (“Primm” or “Claimant”) pursuant to Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 196 (A copy of Page #1 where this is stated is enclosed).
The Respondent continues to use Unethical, Unprofessional, and Unjust Tactics during this Arbitration. BOTH parties agreed to the use of FEDERAL LAW, but The Respondent CONTINUES to use The TEXAS Rules of Civil Procedure. Then, The Respondent had the AUDACITY to file A Motion to Compel Discovery Responses.
The Respondent’s Discovery Requests are DRAFTED and CRAFTED using The TEXAS Rules of Civil Procedure instead of The FEDERAL Rules of Civil Procedure (AS AGREED); therefore, The Respondent’s Discovery Requests are ILLEGAL and can’t be used in this Arbitration. WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, LAWRENCE respectfully requests that The Arbitrator grant this motion and QUASH RESPONDENT’S DISCOVERY REQUESTS.
PRAYER
For the reasons set forth above, the Claimant LAWRENCE asks The Arbitrator for the following relief:
1) TO QUASH RESPONDENT’S DISCOVERY REQUESTS because they are not in compliance with Federal Law as Agreed.
2) TO ADMONISH The Respondent to avoid this conduct during the duration of this Arbitration.
3) TO IMPOSE SANCTIONS against The Respondent Central Market HEB (“HEB” or “Respondent”) ranging from the Claimant’s costs of this Arbitration
to rendering a DEFAULT judgment against The Respondent Central Market HEB (“HEB” or “Respondent”).
Respectfully submitted,
LAWRENCE
On December 29, 2014, I sent The PLAINTIFF’S OBJECTION TO DISCOVERY REQUESTED BY DEFENDANT, and on JANUARY 09, 2015. I sent the Plaintiff’s Response to Respondent’s Motion to Compel Discovery Responses to The Arbitrator. During the conference call on February 6, 2015, The Arbitrator did not give me a chance to address the documents. When I tried to address DISCOVERY ISSUES, The Arbitrator said that his pages were not numbered the same as mine; I pointed out that I send the same documents to The Respondent and to The American Arbitration Association. I believe that The Respondent is sending the Documents Directly to the Arbitrator which is in violation of the rules of The American Arbitration Association.
The Arbitrator had told BOTH PARTIES TO NUMBER THE PAGES of the documents; as a result, The Claimant, The Respondent, and The Arbitrator would be able to view the appropriate documents. When I tried to QUESTION A DOCUMENT THAT THE RESPONDENT was supposed to send to the Arbitrator, I was told by The Arbitrator that his pages were not numbered the same. The Arbitrator did not try to figure out what I was talking about. He did not address ANY OF MY DISCOVERY ISSUES! When I tried to Question The Lawyer for The Respondent, the Arbitrator acted like he was a Lawyer for the Respondent's Lawyer. The Arbitrator told him that he did not have to answer; the respondent's lawyer carefully responded to my question.
THE ARBITRATORS that are working with The AMERICAN ARBITRATION ASSOCIATION are charging an extraordinary amount of money. The Respondent Central Market HEB (“HEB” or “Respondent”) is paying the costs of this Arbitration; consequentially, the proceedings are corrupt, and the Arbitrator is BOUGHT and PAID FOR!
(The Claimant's First name will be used; The Arbitrator's Name has been removed, and The Respondent's Lawyers Name has been removed)
I filed the following CLAIMANT'S MOTION TO QUASH RESPONDENT’S DISCOVERY REQUESTS. The Respondent DID NOT FILE a response to the motion; THEREFORE, the Respondent does not CONTEST the motion and is admitting fault and is ready to accept the consequences that the Arbitrator will issue. During the conference call on February 6, 2015, THE RESPONDENT acknowledged that he FAILED TO RESPOND! The Arbitrator DENIED The CLAIMANT'S MOTION TO QUASH RESPONDENT’S DISCOVERY REQUESTS, and the Arbitrator EXTENDED the discovery period; The Arbitrator IS ALLOWING The Respondent to Change the Discovery Requests to Federal Law; consequentially, The CLAIMANT'S MOTION TO QUASH RESPONDENT’S DISCOVERY REQUESTS should have been granted. I had several questions concerning the discovery requests that the Respondent DID NOT provide to me, and The Arbitrator told me that his pages were not numbered the same; as a result, I do not know if The Respondent has provided The Arbitrator with the documents. The ARBITRATOR EXPECTS this to be a one-sided EXCHANGE OF DISCOVERY. I asked The Respondent for the SAME DISCOVERY THAT HE ASKED ME FOR; I selected some of his discovery requests and COPIED THEM WORD FOR WORD. The ARBITRATOR RULED that the Respondent does not have to provide The Discovery I requested, but I have to provide The Respondent's DISCOVERY REQUESTS! I explained to The Arbitrator that this is now a MATTER OF PRINCIPLE; THEREFORE, IWILL NOT COMPLY WITH THE RULING, and I will no longer participate in a ONE-SIDED ARBITRATION.
CLAIMANT’S MOTION TO QUASH RESPONDENT’S DISCOVERY REQUESTS
The Claimant LAWRENCE files this motion to quash Respondent’s discovery Requests. As grounds therefor, LAWRENCE respectfully submits the following:
MOTION TO QUASH
During the conference call on November 25, 2014, the parties agreed to the use of FEDERAL LAW. The Arbitrator APPROVED the use of FEDERAL LAW; therefore, The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure will be used in this Arbitration. On December 2, 2014, the Respondent [Central Market HEB “HEB” or “Respondent”)] sent the following documents to the Claimant.
1) Respondent’s Request for Disclosure to Claimant.
2) Respondent’s First Request for Admissions to Claimant.
3) Respondent’s First Set of Interrogatories to Claimant.
4) Respondent’s First Requests for Production to Claimant.
The Respondent is CLEARLY VIOLATING the rules of this Arbitration. BOTH parties agreed to the use of FEDERAL LAW; HOWEVER; it has become apparent that The Respondent believes he is not limited by an agreement.
1) The Respondent’s Request for Disclosure to Claimant states that Under Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 194, Claimant is requested to disclose, within thirty (30) days of service of this request, the information or material described in Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 194.2, as follows (A copy of Page #1 where this is stated is enclosed).
2) The Respondent’s First Request for Admissions to Claimant states that Respondent Central Market HEB (“HEB” or “Respondent”) serves this First Request for Admissions on Claimant Lawrence Primm (“Primm” or “Claimant”) pursuant to Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 198 (A copy of Page #1 where this is stated is enclosed).
3) The Respondent’s First Set of Interrogatories to Claimant states that Respondent Central Market HEB (“HEB” or “Respondent”) serves this First Set of Interrogatories on Claimant Lawrence Primm (“Primm” or “Claimant”) pursuant to Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 197 (A copy of Page #1 where this is stated is enclosed).
4) The Respondent’s First Requests for Production to Claimant states that Respondent Central Market HEB (“HEB” or “Respondent”) serves this First Requests for Production on Claimant Lawrence Primm (“Primm” or “Claimant”) pursuant to Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 196 (A copy of Page #1 where this is stated is enclosed).
The Respondent continues to use Unethical, Unprofessional, and Unjust Tactics during this Arbitration. BOTH parties agreed to the use of FEDERAL LAW, but The Respondent CONTINUES to use The TEXAS Rules of Civil Procedure. Then, The Respondent had the AUDACITY to file A Motion to Compel Discovery Responses.
The Respondent’s Discovery Requests are DRAFTED and CRAFTED using The TEXAS Rules of Civil Procedure instead of The FEDERAL Rules of Civil Procedure (AS AGREED); therefore, The Respondent’s Discovery Requests are ILLEGAL and can’t be used in this Arbitration. WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, LAWRENCE respectfully requests that The Arbitrator grant this motion and QUASH RESPONDENT’S DISCOVERY REQUESTS.
PRAYER
For the reasons set forth above, the Claimant LAWRENCE asks The Arbitrator for the following relief:
1) TO QUASH RESPONDENT’S DISCOVERY REQUESTS because they are not in compliance with Federal Law as Agreed.
2) TO ADMONISH The Respondent to avoid this conduct during the duration of this Arbitration.
3) TO IMPOSE SANCTIONS against The Respondent Central Market HEB (“HEB” or “Respondent”) ranging from the Claimant’s costs of this Arbitration
to rendering a DEFAULT judgment against The Respondent Central Market HEB (“HEB” or “Respondent”).
Respectfully submitted,
LAWRENCE
On December 29, 2014, I sent The PLAINTIFF’S OBJECTION TO DISCOVERY REQUESTED BY DEFENDANT, and on JANUARY 09, 2015. I sent the Plaintiff’s Response to Respondent’s Motion to Compel Discovery Responses to The Arbitrator. During the conference call on February 6, 2015, The Arbitrator did not give me a chance to address the documents. When I tried to address DISCOVERY ISSUES, The Arbitrator said that his pages were not numbered the same as mine; I pointed out that I send the same documents to The Respondent and to The American Arbitration Association. I believe that The Respondent is sending the Documents Directly to the Arbitrator which is in violation of the rules of The American Arbitration Association.
The Arbitrator had told BOTH PARTIES TO NUMBER THE PAGES of the documents; as a result, The Claimant, The Respondent, and The Arbitrator would be able to view the appropriate documents. When I tried to QUESTION A DOCUMENT THAT THE RESPONDENT was supposed to send to the Arbitrator, I was told by The Arbitrator that his pages were not numbered the same. The Arbitrator did not try to figure out what I was talking about. He did not address ANY OF MY DISCOVERY ISSUES! When I tried to Question The Lawyer for The Respondent, the Arbitrator acted like he was a Lawyer for the Respondent's Lawyer. The Arbitrator told him that he did not have to answer; the respondent's lawyer carefully responded to my question.
THE ARBITRATORS that are working with The AMERICAN ARBITRATION ASSOCIATION are charging an extraordinary amount of money. The Respondent Central Market HEB (“HEB” or “Respondent”) is paying the costs of this Arbitration; consequentially, the proceedings are corrupt, and the Arbitrator is BOUGHT and PAID FOR!
In a nutshell, this business, AAA and AT&T, along with the judge, BRUCE MEYERSON that is suppose to be bias and impartial, are in cahoots! THAT IS A FACT! I HAVE PROOF! MY actual case itself. CASE# 76434E20313
AAA CASE FILING SERVICES
1101 LAUREL OAK ROAD SUITE 100
VOORHEES, NJ 08043
Yes, AT&T uses them for any occurances that happen, because somehow down the road in their terms of service, we agreed upon opting out of going to court, but instead in going through arbitration. AT&T pays this company for their services. I had an incompetent case manager (HEATHER POPE) as well as her manager(KATHERINE(REFUSES TO GIVE LAST NAME)) . Case manager is self explanatory, she manages the case. Well is she doesn't do that, then what good is she? Upon trying to submit documents, literature, pictures, in other words EVIDENCE, she doesn't lift a finger and only responds that she is not allowed to give out legal advice. Well, if you are smart and listened to what i asked, your job is to do what i asked, not you ignoring your responsibilities. this case went on for over a bout 3 months, because of the actual incompetence from AAA not doing their job! I keep getting invoices to pay money from those sessions, even though i was wrritenly told from them that AT&T was asorbing the fee.
RUTH HESSI, ANN MITTELSTEAD, JAN MENDEL, and a Mr. GREEN works for AT&T.
HEATHER POPE & HER MANAGER KATHERINE, work for AAA.
BRUCE MERYSON, a JUDGE? Honerable?(YEAH RIGHT!), works for himself?
I had all those people working against me! I presented my case with evicdence and facts, but BRUCE MEYERSON only takes the word from AT&T without looking at anything and trusts their word! Bruce Meyerson is an incompetent fool because he gets paid under the table to help out AT&T win their cases and to allow them to hoarde over consumers and rip them off freely and apparently legally!
Here is what i presented to them and they say its ok because its part of the service.
I have had prepaid phone with AT&T, but instead its called a GO PHONE. Now that i am go phone customer, i am not allowed to go into the retail store for ANY HELP, unless i am paying a bill! YES UNLESS I AM PAYING THEM MONEY FOR SERVICE OR A NEW PHONE, THATS THEY ONLY TIME I AM ALLOWED TO THEIR STORE! Other than that, any problems, i have to call customer service number. Which in turn i am talking to someone in the phillipines, that not only doesn't care what they are doing, but cannot comprehend english to save their lives! Well, when you need someone competent to do their job, and i say this because being on the pohone for an hour and half is a bit ridiculous.
However sicne its NOT AT&T and its NOT in AMERICA, apparently they can do whatever they want, regardless on how they promote, market or advertise themselves here in the states! They advertise GREAT CUSTOMERS SERIVCE, handling your problems and resolving on the first call in reasonabl time. Well after screaming and yelling with these fucks, i finally demand to talk to someone in america. GUESS WHAT, they do just that. GREAT! However, they ask for my numbewr and say well you are go phone customers so i have to send you over there! Not even taking the time of day, even though, keep in the back of your head, I AM PAYING MONEY TO AT&T!
Flaws with service. I had the same prepay plan. Except the change from $.25 a minute to $.10 a minute, which was told to me by an AT&T represntative, rather than go phone customer serive, that i am forced to communicate through because they are go phone! I would pay $10 a month and get 1000 txt messages. This allowed me to send regualr txts, send pictures and or videos through txt, as well sending out a mass txt to more than one person. Someone i pay that same amout for the txts, but i can longer send pictures or videos, nor send to group of people. AT&T is forcing me to pay for mobile data, because they say that i need internet access to use those features now. So granted i have WIFI ascess on my phone, i still have to pay on top of that $10 to get the same service that i have been paying $10 for! Somhow in the eyes of AAA and BRUCE MEYERSON and AT&T, thats ok, they are allow to do that!
I pay $.10 a minute per call. I am being charged $.20 a minute instead. Calls made within 35 seconds, 45 seconds, even 59 seconds, i am charged $.20. AT&T made an excuse that i am paying for the time i send that number out, goes to the tower and connects to the other phone. I wish i could make this up! Therefore the time on their records is opposite to what my records is. Which is turn, if there are conflicting resuluts, how is that legal transaction? Its like me paying a credit card for my service, but using someone elses name with my credit card. Doesn't make any sense! On my phone that counter that we all pretty use or look at, according to AT&T is irrelevant.
So here i am as a PREPAY customer, that i pay in advance and get charged $.10 a minute, cannot use the simple basic service that allows to consildate my useage and spendage, but cannot because it was never accurate to begin with. Now, if i make a call and the other party doesan't pick up, i am not charged for that, but only when the call connects. I see the black and white pciture, but thats not how it was presented to me from AT&T. The time is takes to from my phone to the other phone i am charged for that time, yet i am not if the other caller doesn't pick up. I also have documents and pictures to prove this, which i did show submit to AAA and to BRUCE MEYERSON, but AT&T stated that and it was good enough for him to make the decision.
This may lead onto civil rights, but as far as my own privacy, i don't see where i surrender my civil rights using AT&T services, because if thats true then why do we have laws, if corporations can be above those laws? First off, i never conesnt that my information be overseas in another country with people that are not american citizens, let alone have never been to america. Secondly, Why is there less service for me being a go phone customer, than AT&T customer, even though i still pay money to AT&T? Thirdly, informed FCC about this and all they did was send a letter to them, and to me that stating they sent them a letter, NO IVESTIGATION!
Why becasue i am just one person and it seems to be a waste of time of their part! Hmm, thought my rights were protected being an american? Fourth, this is a hearing a court style, legal binding, arbitration; why no records? There is NO records about this case, from audio, to literature! It shows the case number and that i lost, but when i wanted to get information pertaining to their verdict with also their reasonings, nope they dont have that! Very confused here, this is a JUDGE and he mocking the system that he supposely uphold to highest integrity, instead in this case to the highest greediness! How much money did AT&T pay you BRUCE? Did you tell the government about your new funds? Did you pay taxes on it?
Either way, it proves once again in my eyes that capitalism has gone onto a different level in our society, especially when it comes to corporations. Apparently coroporations have so much money that they can rewrite the laws that we have and also creat new laws within their own company. Its like a country within a country, and if i recall; HIGHLY ILLEGAL, well according to constituion, we the people have a say in that, and somehow we don't have to anymore. Democracy is word that many people tend to forget. This is what this country is founded on and if you look up the defintion to refresh your memory; its the people, NOT GOVERNMENTS OR COROPORATIONS that control/rule us! So how is it that they are and that people are afraid, suchs as attorneys to go after such cause?
Why because they have so umuch money and poiwer that they prolonge cases to force the other person out of money therefore goes into default? Is that the democracy you want to have for your children, because guess what it is CURRENTLY happening as we speak and its to the point that this CAPITALIST society has turned into a SOCIALIST society. Seriously, research yourself, is this not your life or is it the governemnts life? Do nothing and allow morons into office lying to you to get in office and then doing whatever they want too. Honestly, what has OBAMA "CHANGED" thats was better for the people? Being forced to have to have health insurance? Being forced to pay more money for my services and goods because we have a lot more imports than exports?
I am not an idiot, and will never be. I am one person, and because of that, nothing will done. Its sad excuse, but it proves my point on how not only society is brainwashed with a bunch of folloers with no leaders, but moreso on how i have to keep paying even if the people i pay money still charges me more. Sound familiar? AT&T, FEDERAL GOVERNMENT! What happen to the RISK that businesses take? The answer, the consumers. The consumer takes the risk now on using that business, and they charge hig prices because everyone else is charging high prices, but the service and qaulity is horrible, let alone ethically right! Its true, open your eyes. How can a business stay open? By money, and if they don't get that money, they have to close shop, or they can raise their prices and force you to get it because of convience! I am done writing, but never DONE being an TRUE AMERICAN!! The american i was taught and raised by from school with history!
American Arbitration Association Reviews
Denial of justice was aided by AAA employees and their practices.
They provide an environment and processes that facilitate corporate clients to take the labor disputes to arbitration and bribe arbitrators and win the case.
AAA did not provide adequate good quality arbitrators in a labor dispute - the one or two good arbitrators are striked by attorneys from the company. The arbitrator that was left over was seems the one enployer wanted to work with. The arbitrator never did anything that was unfavorable to the employer during various stages of the administration - arbitrator verbally said fair things but when he sent it in writing it was not there! Otherwise, arbitrator aided in the employee strengthening the case therefy setting path for the employer to bribe the arbitrator for dismissing the case in fovor of the employer.
AAA pretended that it is between the three parties and they hacve nothing to do with it.
AAA said that you can not contact the arbitrator directly - but at the last minute - just before the hearing - they provided the email address for the arbitrator - conflicting and they never stated this at the beginning!
The reviews posted on Yelp.com are filtered by Yelp! Below is the link for the filtered reviews:
(The Claimant's First name will be used; The Arbitrator's Name has been removed, and The Respondent's Lawyers Name has been removed)
I filed the following CLAIMANT'S MOTION TO QUASH RESPONDENT’S DISCOVERY REQUESTS. The Respondent DID NOT FILE a response to the motion; THEREFORE, the Respondent does not CONTEST the motion and is admitting fault and is ready to accept the consequences that the Arbitrator will issue. During the conference call on February 6, 2015, THE RESPONDENT acknowledged that he FAILED TO RESPOND! The Arbitrator DENIED The CLAIMANT'S MOTION TO QUASH RESPONDENT’S DISCOVERY REQUESTS, and the Arbitrator EXTENDED the discovery period; The Arbitrator IS ALLOWING The Respondent to Change the Discovery Requests to Federal Law; consequentially, The CLAIMANT'S MOTION TO QUASH RESPONDENT’S DISCOVERY REQUESTS should have been granted. I had several questions concerning the discovery requests that the Respondent DID NOT provide to me, and The Arbitrator told me that his pages were not numbered the same; as a result, I do not know if The Respondent has provided The Arbitrator with the documents. The ARBITRATOR EXPECTS this to be a one-sided EXCHANGE OF DISCOVERY. I asked The Respondent for the SAME DISCOVERY THAT HE ASKED ME FOR; I selected some of his discovery requests and COPIED THEM WORD FOR WORD. The ARBITRATOR RULED that the Respondent does not have to provide The Discovery I requested, but I have to provide The Respondent's DISCOVERY REQUESTS! I explained to The Arbitrator that this is now a MATTER OF PRINCIPLE; THEREFORE, IWILL NOT COMPLY WITH THE RULING, and I will no longer participate in a ONE-SIDED ARBITRATION.
CLAIMANT’S MOTION TO QUASH RESPONDENT’S DISCOVERY REQUESTS
The Claimant LAWRENCE files this motion to quash Respondent’s discovery Requests. As grounds therefor, LAWRENCE respectfully submits the following:
MOTION TO QUASH
During the conference call on November 25, 2014, the parties agreed to the use of FEDERAL LAW. The Arbitrator APPROVED the use of FEDERAL LAW; therefore, The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure will be used in this Arbitration. On December 2, 2014, the Respondent [Central Market HEB “HEB” or “Respondent”)] sent the following documents to the Claimant.
1) Respondent’s Request for Disclosure to Claimant.
2) Respondent’s First Request for Admissions to Claimant.
3) Respondent’s First Set of Interrogatories to Claimant.
4) Respondent’s First Requests for Production to Claimant.
The Respondent is CLEARLY VIOLATING the rules of this Arbitration. BOTH parties agreed to the use of FEDERAL LAW; HOWEVER; it has become apparent that The Respondent believes he is not limited by an agreement.
1) The Respondent’s Request for Disclosure to Claimant states that Under Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 194, Claimant is requested to disclose, within thirty (30) days of service of this request, the information or material described in Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 194.2, as follows (A copy of Page #1 where this is stated is enclosed).
2) The Respondent’s First Request for Admissions to Claimant states that Respondent Central Market HEB (“HEB” or “Respondent”) serves this First Request for Admissions on Claimant Lawrence Primm (“Primm” or “Claimant”) pursuant to Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 198 (A copy of Page #1 where this is stated is enclosed).
3) The Respondent’s First Set of Interrogatories to Claimant states that Respondent Central Market HEB (“HEB” or “Respondent”) serves this First Set of Interrogatories on Claimant Lawrence Primm (“Primm” or “Claimant”) pursuant to Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 197 (A copy of Page #1 where this is stated is enclosed).
4) The Respondent’s First Requests for Production to Claimant states that Respondent Central Market HEB (“HEB” or “Respondent”) serves this First Requests for Production on Claimant Lawrence Primm (“Primm” or “Claimant”) pursuant to Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 196 (A copy of Page #1 where this is stated is enclosed).
The Respondent continues to use Unethical, Unprofessional, and Unjust Tactics during this Arbitration. BOTH parties agreed to the use of FEDERAL LAW, but The Respondent CONTINUES to use The TEXAS Rules of Civil Procedure. Then, The Respondent had the AUDACITY to file A Motion to Compel Discovery Responses.
The Respondent’s Discovery Requests are DRAFTED and CRAFTED using The TEXAS Rules of Civil Procedure instead of The FEDERAL Rules of Civil Procedure (AS AGREED); therefore, The Respondent’s Discovery Requests are ILLEGAL and can’t be used in this Arbitration. WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, LAWRENCE respectfully requests that The Arbitrator grant this motion and QUASH RESPONDENT’S DISCOVERY REQUESTS.
PRAYER
For the reasons set forth above, the Claimant LAWRENCE asks The Arbitrator for the following relief:
1) TO QUASH RESPONDENT’S DISCOVERY REQUESTS because they are not in compliance with Federal Law as Agreed.
2) TO ADMONISH The Respondent to avoid this conduct during the duration of this Arbitration.
3) TO IMPOSE SANCTIONS against The Respondent Central Market HEB (“HEB” or “Respondent”) ranging from the Claimant’s costs of this Arbitration
to rendering a DEFAULT judgment against The Respondent Central Market HEB (“HEB” or “Respondent”).
Respectfully submitted,
LAWRENCE
On December 29, 2014, I sent The PLAINTIFF’S OBJECTION TO DISCOVERY REQUESTED BY DEFENDANT, and on JANUARY 09, 2015. I sent the Plaintiff’s Response to Respondent’s Motion to Compel Discovery Responses to The Arbitrator. During the conference call on February 6, 2015, The Arbitrator did not give me a chance to address the documents. When I tried to address DISCOVERY ISSUES, The Arbitrator said that his pages were not numbered the same as mine; I pointed out that I send the same documents to The Respondent and to The American Arbitration Association. I believe that The Respondent is sending the Documents Directly to the Arbitrator which is in violation of the rules of The American Arbitration Association.
The Arbitrator had told BOTH PARTIES TO NUMBER THE PAGES of the documents; as a result, The Claimant, The Respondent, and The Arbitrator would be able to view the appropriate documents. When I tried to QUESTION A DOCUMENT THAT THE RESPONDENT was supposed to send to the Arbitrator, I was told by The Arbitrator that his pages were not numbered the same. The Arbitrator did not try to figure out what I was talking about. He did not address ANY OF MY DISCOVERY ISSUES! When I tried to Question The Lawyer for The Respondent, the Arbitrator acted like he was a Lawyer for the Respondent's Lawyer. The Arbitrator told him that he did not have to answer; the respondent's lawyer carefully responded to my question.
THE ARBITRATORS that are working with The AMERICAN ARBITRATION ASSOCIATION are charging an extraordinary amount of money. The Respondent Central Market HEB (“HEB” or “Respondent”) is paying the costs of this Arbitration; consequentially, the proceedings are corrupt, and the Arbitrator is BOUGHT and PAID FOR!
(The Claimant's First name will be used; The Arbitrator's Name has been removed, and The Respondent's Lawyers Name has been removed)
I filed the following CLAIMANT'S MOTION TO QUASH RESPONDENT’S DISCOVERY REQUESTS. The Respondent DID NOT FILE a response to the motion; THEREFORE, the Respondent does not CONTEST the motion and is admitting fault and is ready to accept the consequences that the Arbitrator will issue. During the conference call on February 6, 2015, THE RESPONDENT acknowledged that he FAILED TO RESPOND! The Arbitrator DENIED The CLAIMANT'S MOTION TO QUASH RESPONDENT’S DISCOVERY REQUESTS, and the Arbitrator EXTENDED the discovery period; The Arbitrator IS ALLOWING The Respondent to Change the Discovery Requests to Federal Law; consequentially, The CLAIMANT'S MOTION TO QUASH RESPONDENT’S DISCOVERY REQUESTS should have been granted. I had several questions concerning the discovery requests that the Respondent DID NOT provide to me, and The Arbitrator told me that his pages were not numbered the same; as a result, I do not know if The Respondent has provided The Arbitrator with the documents. The ARBITRATOR EXPECTS this to be a one-sided EXCHANGE OF DISCOVERY. I asked The Respondent for the SAME DISCOVERY THAT HE ASKED ME FOR; I selected some of his discovery requests and COPIED THEM WORD FOR WORD. The ARBITRATOR RULED that the Respondent does not have to provide The Discovery I requested, but I have to provide The Respondent's DISCOVERY REQUESTS! I explained to The Arbitrator that this is now a MATTER OF PRINCIPLE; THEREFORE, IWILL NOT COMPLY WITH THE RULING, and I will no longer participate in a ONE-SIDED ARBITRATION.
CLAIMANT’S MOTION TO QUASH RESPONDENT’S DISCOVERY REQUESTS
The Claimant LAWRENCE files this motion to quash Respondent’s discovery Requests. As grounds therefor, LAWRENCE respectfully submits the following:
MOTION TO QUASH
During the conference call on November 25, 2014, the parties agreed to the use of FEDERAL LAW. The Arbitrator APPROVED the use of FEDERAL LAW; therefore, The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure will be used in this Arbitration. On December 2, 2014, the Respondent [Central Market HEB “HEB” or “Respondent”)] sent the following documents to the Claimant.
1) Respondent’s Request for Disclosure to Claimant.
2) Respondent’s First Request for Admissions to Claimant.
3) Respondent’s First Set of Interrogatories to Claimant.
4) Respondent’s First Requests for Production to Claimant.
The Respondent is CLEARLY VIOLATING the rules of this Arbitration. BOTH parties agreed to the use of FEDERAL LAW; HOWEVER; it has become apparent that The Respondent believes he is not limited by an agreement.
1) The Respondent’s Request for Disclosure to Claimant states that Under Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 194, Claimant is requested to disclose, within thirty (30) days of service of this request, the information or material described in Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 194.2, as follows (A copy of Page #1 where this is stated is enclosed).
2) The Respondent’s First Request for Admissions to Claimant states that Respondent Central Market HEB (“HEB” or “Respondent”) serves this First Request for Admissions on Claimant Lawrence Primm (“Primm” or “Claimant”) pursuant to Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 198 (A copy of Page #1 where this is stated is enclosed).
3) The Respondent’s First Set of Interrogatories to Claimant states that Respondent Central Market HEB (“HEB” or “Respondent”) serves this First Set of Interrogatories on Claimant Lawrence Primm (“Primm” or “Claimant”) pursuant to Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 197 (A copy of Page #1 where this is stated is enclosed).
4) The Respondent’s First Requests for Production to Claimant states that Respondent Central Market HEB (“HEB” or “Respondent”) serves this First Requests for Production on Claimant Lawrence Primm (“Primm” or “Claimant”) pursuant to Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 196 (A copy of Page #1 where this is stated is enclosed).
The Respondent continues to use Unethical, Unprofessional, and Unjust Tactics during this Arbitration. BOTH parties agreed to the use of FEDERAL LAW, but The Respondent CONTINUES to use The TEXAS Rules of Civil Procedure. Then, The Respondent had the AUDACITY to file A Motion to Compel Discovery Responses.
The Respondent’s Discovery Requests are DRAFTED and CRAFTED using The TEXAS Rules of Civil Procedure instead of The FEDERAL Rules of Civil Procedure (AS AGREED); therefore, The Respondent’s Discovery Requests are ILLEGAL and can’t be used in this Arbitration. WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, LAWRENCE respectfully requests that The Arbitrator grant this motion and QUASH RESPONDENT’S DISCOVERY REQUESTS.
PRAYER
For the reasons set forth above, the Claimant LAWRENCE asks The Arbitrator for the following relief:
1) TO QUASH RESPONDENT’S DISCOVERY REQUESTS because they are not in compliance with Federal Law as Agreed.
2) TO ADMONISH The Respondent to avoid this conduct during the duration of this Arbitration.
3) TO IMPOSE SANCTIONS against The Respondent Central Market HEB (“HEB” or “Respondent”) ranging from the Claimant’s costs of this Arbitration
to rendering a DEFAULT judgment against The Respondent Central Market HEB (“HEB” or “Respondent”).
Respectfully submitted,
LAWRENCE
On December 29, 2014, I sent The PLAINTIFF’S OBJECTION TO DISCOVERY REQUESTED BY DEFENDANT, and on JANUARY 09, 2015. I sent the Plaintiff’s Response to Respondent’s Motion to Compel Discovery Responses to The Arbitrator. During the conference call on February 6, 2015, The Arbitrator did not give me a chance to address the documents. When I tried to address DISCOVERY ISSUES, The Arbitrator said that his pages were not numbered the same as mine; I pointed out that I send the same documents to The Respondent and to The American Arbitration Association. I believe that The Respondent is sending the Documents Directly to the Arbitrator which is in violation of the rules of The American Arbitration Association.
The Arbitrator had told BOTH PARTIES TO NUMBER THE PAGES of the documents; as a result, The Claimant, The Respondent, and The Arbitrator would be able to view the appropriate documents. When I tried to QUESTION A DOCUMENT THAT THE RESPONDENT was supposed to send to the Arbitrator, I was told by The Arbitrator that his pages were not numbered the same. The Arbitrator did not try to figure out what I was talking about. He did not address ANY OF MY DISCOVERY ISSUES! When I tried to Question The Lawyer for The Respondent, the Arbitrator acted like he was a Lawyer for the Respondent's Lawyer. The Arbitrator told him that he did not have to answer; the respondent's lawyer carefully responded to my question.
THE ARBITRATORS that are working with The AMERICAN ARBITRATION ASSOCIATION are charging an extraordinary amount of money. The Respondent Central Market HEB (“HEB” or “Respondent”) is paying the costs of this Arbitration; consequentially, the proceedings are corrupt, and the Arbitrator is BOUGHT and PAID FOR!
In a nutshell, this business, AAA and AT&T, along with the judge, BRUCE MEYERSON that is suppose to be bias and impartial, are in cahoots! THAT IS A FACT! I HAVE PROOF! MY actual case itself. CASE# 76434E20313
AAA CASE FILING SERVICES
1101 LAUREL OAK ROAD SUITE 100
VOORHEES, NJ 08043
Yes, AT&T uses them for any occurances that happen, because somehow down the road in their terms of service, we agreed upon opting out of going to court, but instead in going through arbitration. AT&T pays this company for their services. I had an incompetent case manager (HEATHER POPE) as well as her manager(KATHERINE(REFUSES TO GIVE LAST NAME)) . Case manager is self explanatory, she manages the case. Well is she doesn't do that, then what good is she? Upon trying to submit documents, literature, pictures, in other words EVIDENCE, she doesn't lift a finger and only responds that she is not allowed to give out legal advice. Well, if you are smart and listened to what i asked, your job is to do what i asked, not you ignoring your responsibilities. this case went on for over a bout 3 months, because of the actual incompetence from AAA not doing their job! I keep getting invoices to pay money from those sessions, even though i was wrritenly told from them that AT&T was asorbing the fee.
RUTH HESSI, ANN MITTELSTEAD, JAN MENDEL, and a Mr. GREEN works for AT&T.
HEATHER POPE & HER MANAGER KATHERINE, work for AAA.
BRUCE MERYSON, a JUDGE? Honerable?(YEAH RIGHT!), works for himself?
I had all those people working against me! I presented my case with evicdence and facts, but BRUCE MEYERSON only takes the word from AT&T without looking at anything and trusts their word! Bruce Meyerson is an incompetent fool because he gets paid under the table to help out AT&T win their cases and to allow them to hoarde over consumers and rip them off freely and apparently legally!
Here is what i presented to them and they say its ok because its part of the service.
I have had prepaid phone with AT&T, but instead its called a GO PHONE. Now that i am go phone customer, i am not allowed to go into the retail store for ANY HELP, unless i am paying a bill! YES UNLESS I AM PAYING THEM MONEY FOR SERVICE OR A NEW PHONE, THATS THEY ONLY TIME I AM ALLOWED TO THEIR STORE! Other than that, any problems, i have to call customer service number. Which in turn i am talking to someone in the phillipines, that not only doesn't care what they are doing, but cannot comprehend english to save their lives! Well, when you need someone competent to do their job, and i say this because being on the pohone for an hour and half is a bit ridiculous.
However sicne its NOT AT&T and its NOT in AMERICA, apparently they can do whatever they want, regardless on how they promote, market or advertise themselves here in the states! They advertise GREAT CUSTOMERS SERIVCE, handling your problems and resolving on the first call in reasonabl time. Well after screaming and yelling with these fucks, i finally demand to talk to someone in america. GUESS WHAT, they do just that. GREAT! However, they ask for my numbewr and say well you are go phone customers so i have to send you over there! Not even taking the time of day, even though, keep in the back of your head, I AM PAYING MONEY TO AT&T!
Flaws with service. I had the same prepay plan. Except the change from $.25 a minute to $.10 a minute, which was told to me by an AT&T represntative, rather than go phone customer serive, that i am forced to communicate through because they are go phone! I would pay $10 a month and get 1000 txt messages. This allowed me to send regualr txts, send pictures and or videos through txt, as well sending out a mass txt to more than one person. Someone i pay that same amout for the txts, but i can longer send pictures or videos, nor send to group of people. AT&T is forcing me to pay for mobile data, because they say that i need internet access to use those features now. So granted i have WIFI ascess on my phone, i still have to pay on top of that $10 to get the same service that i have been paying $10 for! Somhow in the eyes of AAA and BRUCE MEYERSON and AT&T, thats ok, they are allow to do that!
I pay $.10 a minute per call. I am being charged $.20 a minute instead. Calls made within 35 seconds, 45 seconds, even 59 seconds, i am charged $.20. AT&T made an excuse that i am paying for the time i send that number out, goes to the tower and connects to the other phone. I wish i could make this up! Therefore the time on their records is opposite to what my records is. Which is turn, if there are conflicting resuluts, how is that legal transaction? Its like me paying a credit card for my service, but using someone elses name with my credit card. Doesn't make any sense! On my phone that counter that we all pretty use or look at, according to AT&T is irrelevant.
So here i am as a PREPAY customer, that i pay in advance and get charged $.10 a minute, cannot use the simple basic service that allows to consildate my useage and spendage, but cannot because it was never accurate to begin with. Now, if i make a call and the other party doesan't pick up, i am not charged for that, but only when the call connects. I see the black and white pciture, but thats not how it was presented to me from AT&T. The time is takes to from my phone to the other phone i am charged for that time, yet i am not if the other caller doesn't pick up. I also have documents and pictures to prove this, which i did show submit to AAA and to BRUCE MEYERSON, but AT&T stated that and it was good enough for him to make the decision.
This may lead onto civil rights, but as far as my own privacy, i don't see where i surrender my civil rights using AT&T services, because if thats true then why do we have laws, if corporations can be above those laws? First off, i never conesnt that my information be overseas in another country with people that are not american citizens, let alone have never been to america. Secondly, Why is there less service for me being a go phone customer, than AT&T customer, even though i still pay money to AT&T? Thirdly, informed FCC about this and all they did was send a letter to them, and to me that stating they sent them a letter, NO IVESTIGATION!
Why becasue i am just one person and it seems to be a waste of time of their part! Hmm, thought my rights were protected being an american? Fourth, this is a hearing a court style, legal binding, arbitration; why no records? There is NO records about this case, from audio, to literature! It shows the case number and that i lost, but when i wanted to get information pertaining to their verdict with also their reasonings, nope they dont have that! Very confused here, this is a JUDGE and he mocking the system that he supposely uphold to highest integrity, instead in this case to the highest greediness! How much money did AT&T pay you BRUCE? Did you tell the government about your new funds? Did you pay taxes on it?
Either way, it proves once again in my eyes that capitalism has gone onto a different level in our society, especially when it comes to corporations. Apparently coroporations have so much money that they can rewrite the laws that we have and also creat new laws within their own company. Its like a country within a country, and if i recall; HIGHLY ILLEGAL, well according to constituion, we the people have a say in that, and somehow we don't have to anymore. Democracy is word that many people tend to forget. This is what this country is founded on and if you look up the defintion to refresh your memory; its the people, NOT GOVERNMENTS OR COROPORATIONS that control/rule us! So how is it that they are and that people are afraid, suchs as attorneys to go after such cause?
Why because they have so umuch money and poiwer that they prolonge cases to force the other person out of money therefore goes into default? Is that the democracy you want to have for your children, because guess what it is CURRENTLY happening as we speak and its to the point that this CAPITALIST society has turned into a SOCIALIST society. Seriously, research yourself, is this not your life or is it the governemnts life? Do nothing and allow morons into office lying to you to get in office and then doing whatever they want too. Honestly, what has OBAMA "CHANGED" thats was better for the people? Being forced to have to have health insurance? Being forced to pay more money for my services and goods because we have a lot more imports than exports?
I am not an idiot, and will never be. I am one person, and because of that, nothing will done. Its sad excuse, but it proves my point on how not only society is brainwashed with a bunch of folloers with no leaders, but moreso on how i have to keep paying even if the people i pay money still charges me more. Sound familiar? AT&T, FEDERAL GOVERNMENT! What happen to the RISK that businesses take? The answer, the consumers. The consumer takes the risk now on using that business, and they charge hig prices because everyone else is charging high prices, but the service and qaulity is horrible, let alone ethically right! Its true, open your eyes. How can a business stay open? By money, and if they don't get that money, they have to close shop, or they can raise their prices and force you to get it because of convience! I am done writing, but never DONE being an TRUE AMERICAN!! The american i was taught and raised by from school with history!