Knowledge of any and all documents relating to any broker/carrier agreements between Defendant Jones Supply and Defendant Rolfes. Rule 11-f of the Commercial Division, which took effect in October 2015, changes the manner in which litigants conduct depositions of corporations and other entities in Commercial Division cases . 0000011346 00000 n 0000007631 00000 n Learn more about FindLaws newsletters, including our terms of use and privacy policy. 6 Theoretically . In the alternative, the defendant can argue that the individual should be called only in his or her individual capacity so that a foundation can be laid to determine whether that persons testimony is binding on the defendant corporation. However, there are a number of different rules which do come into play on this issue. other persons . In many jurisdictions, you won't be allowed to ask about other, unrelated topics. The purpose of deposing a corporate representative is not to uncover the representative's personal knowledge or recollection of the events at issue. Knowledge of all documents regarding the Defendant Rolfes, including Defendant Rolfes's safety rating, authority, insurance information and/or BASIC scores. P. 30(b)(6). When defending a corporate or other legal entity, one of the many strategic decisions made prior to the start of a trial is the selection of the particular person to attend the trial throughout its duration as the corporate representative. This CLE course will prepare trial attorneys to defend the depositions of corporate representatives during litigation. 0000002069 00000 n 0000027653 00000 n applied the Federal Rules of Evidence (FRE) to deposition proceedings. Meanwhile, his Fighting for Missouri PAC received $3,000 from the aptly named Norfolk Southern Corporation Good Government Fund and $10,000 from BNSF before the 2020 election. Rules Governing Civil Procedure in the Circuit Courts, Rule 57 - Interrogatories and Depositions, Rule 57.02 - Depositions Before Action or Pending Appeal, Rule 57.03 - Depositions Upon Oral Examination, Rule 57.04 - Depositions upon Written Questions, Rule 57.05 - Persons Before Whom Depositions May Be Taken, Rule 57.06 - Presiding Officer for Deposition, Rule 57.07 - Use of Depositions in Court Proceedings, Rule 57.08 - Depositions for Use in Foreign Jurisdictions, Rule 57.09 - Subpoena for Taking Deposition. 0000001433 00000 n Knowledge of any documentation evidencing the completion or non-completion of training programs, safe driving programs, and driver orientation programs by Defendant Rolfes for Defendant Jones Supply. Such depositions are unique in many respects and contain traps for the unwary. [O7w7>v%,\t+&8cChXtQBIyBx86peQ%e! Instead, Rule 57.03(b)(4) required the representative to testify regarding the Defendant's knowledge of these matters. the appearance corporate representative is exempt from the sequestration of witnesses, thus enabling him or her to listen to all witness testimony. Knowledge of the title related to the tractor. This would include any suspension or termination of contracts to haul on behalf of Jones Supply as a commercial carrier. 0000004190 00000 n During discovery, plaintiffs notice a Rule 30 (b) (6) deposition of your client's representative, but elect to forgo the deposition in exchange for negligible admissions filed by your client. In this case, Defendant identified several of its employees who witnessed decedent's fall. 0000000016 00000 n Knowledge of each and every document provided by Jones Supply to Rolfes, including, but not limited to, each and every document referring to hauling, delivery, safety, truck specifications, insurance, maintenance, driver evaluations, driver conduct, driver dress, advertising, the Jones Supply logo, compensation, bonuses, and discounts. Knowledge of all documents constituting, commemorating, or relating to any written instructions, orders, or advice given to Defendant Rolfes and/or Dughly in reference to cargo transported, routes to travel, locations to purchase fuel, cargo pickup or delivery times issued by Jones Supply from five (5) years prior to and including date of loss. 16 A. R. S. R. Civ. Contact us. After all, if the plaintiff merely intends to ask a series of questions about which the individual has no knowledge, then the evidence is irrelevant in all probability or, at a minimum, unfairly prejudicial to the defendant corporation. Rule 30 (b) (6) requires that the party taking the deposition provide a notice of corporate deposition that lists topics on which testimony is sought, and requires that the company noticed. Knowledge of each annual review of Defendant Rolfes's safety and fitness to haul on behalf of Defendant Jones Supply. A fairly standard requirement is that potential witnesses must be identified on witness lists exchanged by the parties. Rule 57.06 - Presiding Officer for Deposition. STATE ex rel. 0000001873 00000 n Rule 104 of the Federal Rules of Evidence provides that preliminary questions about the admissibility of evidence are to be determined by the court and should be done outside of the presence of the jury when required by the interests of justice. Knowledge of any and all e-mail sent by, or to, Defendant Jones Supply (including its employees or agents) concerning the incident. subsequent motions for protection and to quash the deposition notice. Knowledge of the entire qualification file of Defendant Rolfes and Dughly (regardless of subject, form, purpose, originator, receiver, title or description) maintained pursuant to 49 CFR 391.51 and preserved pursuant to 49 CFR 379. Knowledge of all driver call-in records, notes, logs or e-mail indicating communications between Defendant Rolfes and Defendant Dughly for the seven days prior to the incident and om the date of the incident. The circuit court erroneously overruled relator's motion to compel production of a substitute corporate representative. Knowledge of each out of service report or violation concerning the tractor and trailer involved in this incident for the 5 years prior to this incident to the present, to include copies of any supplements, responses, or amendments to the same. Now what? This would include any correspondence sent by or to Defendant Rolfes (or any of its agents) and Defendant Dughly. Knowledge of all pay stubs, federal W-2 forms, expense reimbursement, commissions, bonuses and any other documents or tangible evidence reflecting payment of money or benefits for any reason from Defendant Jones Supply to Defendant Rolfes and/or Defendant Dughly for the 5 year period preceding the collision in question. The purpose of Rule 57.03(b)(4) is to permit a party to depose an opposing corporation's representative under circumstances in which the statements made by the witness on the identified topics will be admissible against and binding on the corporate party. The Court will not order any WU Defendants to resubmit to depositions on this topic. %%EOF See Lebron v. Royal Caribbean, 16-24687-CIV (S.D. The rules of evidence also permit the trial judge to exclude irrelevant evidence or evidence which, while relevant, would be unfairly prejudicial. If the individual has knowledge of some areas, then the questioning should be limited to those areas. In light of the rules' requirement that the deposing party must identify the subject areas of the deposition, to some degree the element of surprise is removed from a corporate designee deposition. Terry v. Holtkamp, 330 Mo. We serve the following localities: Baltimore; Prince George's County including Bowie, Laurel, Landover, Hyattsville; Anne Arundel County including Glen Burnie; Baltimore County including Cockeysville, Glyndon, Hunt Valley, Jacksonville, Lutherville-Timonium, Owings Mills, Parkville, Reisterstown, Plaintiff Attorney Legal Information Center, Example Pretrial Documents for Plaintiff's Lawyers, Example Deposition Transcripts and Outlines. Sept. 6, 2018). You are hereby notified that Plaintiff, Taylor Martinez, by and through her attorneys, Ronald V. Miller, Jr., Laura G. Zois, Esq., Justin P. Zuber, Esq., and Miller & Zois, LLC, pursuant to the Maryland Rules of Procedure 2-412 and 2-416, will take the deposition upon oral examination, for use in discovery and at trial, of the following persons on the date and at the time indicated below before a person duly authorized to administer an oath under Maryland law to be recorded stenographically/audio/videotape. 370, 373-75 (D.D.C. (a) When a Deposition May Be Taken. 8.01-420.4:1. 0000003033 00000 n Knowledge of any publications, manuals, literature, guidelines, or other written materials provided by Defendant Jones Supply to Defendant Rolfes (or any of its' drivers) at any time prior to the date of the subject collision. To avoid this possibility, defendants should move to strike any vague or generic listings of witnesses prior to trial. Rule 30 (B) (6) permits a party to notice a corporation's deposition and imposes a duty on the corporation to designate specific individuals to testify about the subject matters specified in the notice. State ex rel. The deposition will be recorded via stenographic, audio, and/or videotaped means for the purpose of discovery and/or used as evidence and/or any other purposes permitted by the Maryland Rules of Civil Procedure, including use at trial, and will continue day to day until completed. %PDF-1.4 % See, e.g., King v. Pratt & Whitney, 161 F.R.D. After the deposition, the plaintiff moved for sanctions and to compel a second corporate deposition, alleging that the corporate representative was not adequately prepared to testify. The procedure of Rule 4:9 shall apply to the request. Federal Rule of ivil Procedure 30(b)(6) is the vehicle for taking depositions of corporate representatives in civil cases. The issue in this writ proceeding is whether a corporate representative designated for deposition pursuant to Rule 57.03 (b) (4) can limit his or her deposition testimony to personal knowledge instead of testifying about facts that are known or reasonably available to the organization. endstream endobj 46 0 obj <> endobj 47 0 obj <> endobj 48 0 obj <>/ColorSpace<>/Font<>/ProcSet[/PDF/Text/ImageC]/ExtGState<>>> endobj 49 0 obj <> endobj 50 0 obj <> endobj 51 0 obj <> endobj 52 0 obj <> endobj 53 0 obj <> endobj 54 0 obj [/ICCBased 63 0 R] endobj 55 0 obj <> endobj 56 0 obj <> endobj 57 0 obj <> endobj 58 0 obj <> endobj 59 0 obj <>stream Rule 57.02 - Depositions Before Action or Pending Appeal. /content/aba-cms-dotorg/en/groups/litigation/committees/pretrial-practice-discovery/practice/2018/adequately-preparing-a-corporate-representative-for-deposition. Eastern District of Missouri, the Initial Scheduling Conferences held on March 28, 2018, and April 18, 2018, and the Court's May 8, 2018Order A, llowing Consolidated Master . Assuming the representative designated for appearance purposes is covered by the witness list, it could nonetheless be argued that allowing the plaintiff to call the representative as an adverse witness would effectively allow the plaintiff to designate the corporations representative on the particular subjects about which the representative is questioned. Regardless of what role a designated corporate representative is expected to play at trial, the corporate representative should always be prepared for the possibility of being called as an adverse witness during the presentation of the other sides case. hYrF}WLa fp,+rD. Fl. Under this rule, a party may seek to 0000005124 00000 n 0000001311 00000 n 5 Yet, each designee's deposition is considered a separate deposition for the purpose of duration (i.e., seven hours in one day under Rule 30(d)(1)). At FindLaw.com, we pride ourselves on being the number one source of free legal information and resources on the web. At issue in this case are the first and third deposition topics. that under Rule 32(a), depositions of corporate officers under Rule 30(b)(1), as well . xref 0000008443 00000 n A writ of prohibition [or] mandamus is the proper remedy for curing discovery rulings that exceed a court's jurisdiction or constitute an abuse of the court's discretion. State ex rel. Missouri's amended Rule 56.01 (b) (1) will now limit the scope of discovery to information that is not only relevant but "proportional to the needs of the case.". Knowledge of all arrests and or/convictions of the Defendant Dughly. R. Civ. Casetext, Inc. and Casetext are not a law firm and do not provide legal advice. This specifically includes readable and complete copies of bills of lading, manifest, or other documents regardless of form or description, that show signed receipts for cargo pickup and delivered along with any other type of document that may show dates and times of cargo pickup or delivery that are relative to operations and cargo transported by Defendant Dughly on the date of the incident. in compliance with Rule 4:9 for the production of documents and tangible things at the taking of the deposition. Knowledge of all documents as to the physical or mental condition of the Defendant Dughly before and at the time of the occurrence, including but not limited to his driver qualification file, post-collision drug testing results, and all other information regarding his medical condition for a one year period before the crash and the 48 hours after the crash. Knowledge of any job, driver, independent contractor, and/or employment application filled out or signed by Defendant Rolfes. Knowledge of any photographs taken of the tractor-trailer operated by Defendant Dughly at the scene of the incident, or any time after. The Illinois Supreme Court rule is similar to the Federal Rule 30(b)(6). Rule 30(B)(6) permits a party to notice a corporations deposition and imposes a duty on the corporation to designate specific individuals to testify about the subject matters specified in the notice. See Penn Mutual Life Ins. That deposition notice must set forth the areas of inquiry with enough specificity so the other party can reasonably designate and prepare the appropriate person (s) to testify. : 24-C-15-003129Jones Supply COMPANY, LP, et al. Federal Rule of Evidence 615 does state that witnesses must be excluded at a party's request, but according to Rule 30(c) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, "[t]he examination and cross . `qc l\! MICHAEL THOMAS MARTINEZ, II, et al. 1999); Crimm v. Missouri Pac. of rule 1.310(c), the court in which the action is pending or the circuit court where the deposition is being taken may order the officer conducting the examination to cease forthwith from taking the deposition or may limit the scope and manner of the taking of the deposition under rule 1.280(c). [1] The Council's goal is to advise the Chief Judge on an ongoing basis about matters concerning the Commercial Division of the Supreme Court of New York, to consider how the Commercial Division can better serve the needs of the . 0000003864 00000 n Knowledge of all cellular telephone records and bills for any cellular telephone that was used by Defendant Dughly on the date of the incident and for the 3 days prior to the incident. (1) After commencement of the action, any party may take the testimony of any person, including a party, by deposition upon oral examination without leave of court, except as specified in paragraph (2) of this subdivision. Knowledge of all evaluations or criticism of the job performance of any of Defendant Rolfes's drivers by Jones Supply, including but not limited to annual evaluations, interim evaluations, or specific incidents that gave rise to an evaluation or criticism. The purpose of a writ of mandamus is to execute a clear, unequivocal and specific right, not to adjudicate. The rule has two basic requirements. Knowledge of any primary, umbrella, and excess insurance policy, or agreement, including the declarations page, for Defendant Rolfes, Defendant Dughly, and Defendant Jones Supply, which was in effect at the time of this incident. 608, 51 S.W.2d 13, 16 (1932)). Relator filed a motion to compel Defendant to produce a substitute corporate representative prepared to testify about matters known or reasonably available to Defendant regarding the first and third deposition topics. I. 475, 476 (S.D. . 0000002753 00000 n No party shall be permitted to offer such business records into evidence pursuant to this section unless all other parties to the action have been served with copies of such records and such affidavit at least seven days prior to the day upon which trial of the cause commences. Knowledge of the driver manual, company handbook, or their equivalent issued to Defendant Rolfes and Dughly by Jones Supply. Rule 57.03 - Depositions Upon Oral Examination (a) When Depositions May Be Taken (1) After commencement of the action, any party may take the testimony of any person, including a party, by deposition upon oral examination without leave of court, except as specified in paragraph (2) of this subdivision. This request specifically includes each out of service report or violation concerning each leased power unit or trailer utilized, maintained, or controlled by this defendant from the year prior to the collision through the present. When a company is noticed for a deposition, it has a duty to prepare its witnesses to fully and unevasively answer questions about the designated subject matters. 48 These amendments redefined the scope of discovery and imposed new limits on written interrogatories 50 and requests for admissions. LA . Knowledge of all records and reports of audits performed by the Bureau of Motor Carrier Safety or by any other state or federal agencies for Defendant Rolfes and/or Dughly. Thus, to allow the plaintiff to call and question that person in his or her capacity as a corporate representative is tantamount to allowing the plaintiff to designate the corporations representative. <]>> Plainly, you could not physically depose a corporation as it could not speak for itself. The circumstances regarding the fall and the presence of the electrical box were matters known or reasonably available to the organization. banc 1992). Knowledge of all accident and/or incident reports and investigations prepared by Defendant Rolfes (prepared prior to any litigation) as a result of the crash other than the police report. International registration plan receipts; International fuel tax agreement receipts; Commercial Vehicle Safety Alliance reports; Overweight/oversize reports and citations; And/or other documents directly related to the motor carrier's operation which are retained by the motor carrier in connection with the operation of its transportation business. . Knowledge of all documents reflecting any background check performed on Defendant Dughly with regard to his criminal history. Knowledge of all medications being taken or prescribed to Defendant Dughly for the year prior to the occurrence. In Carriage Hills Condominium, Inc. v. JBH Roofing & Constructors, Inc., So. Knowledge of all training or instructional videotapes, CDs or DVDs used by any Defendant Jones Supply in its training any of its drivers at any time during the five years before the occurrence. Knowledge of all driver daily vehicle inspection reports (DVIRs) submitted by any driver(s) on the truck tractor from at least 30 days prior to the accident in the possession of Defendant Rolfes. When a party notices the deposition of an entity, regardless of the number of designees, it is considered one deposition for the purpose of the default limit of 10 depositions. Allowed to ask about other, unrelated topics individual has knowledge of all medications being taken or prescribed to Rolfes! T be allowed to ask about other, unrelated topics listings of,! A fairly standard requirement is that potential witnesses must be identified on witness lists exchanged by parties. A commercial carrier haul on behalf of Jones Supply and Defendant Dughly, 51 13! Dughly at the scene of the driver manual, COMPANY handbook, or their equivalent issued to Rolfes... Should be limited to those areas ask about other, unrelated topics: 24-C-15-003129Jones Supply,! Sent by or to Defendant Rolfes ( or any time after execute a clear, unequivocal and right. Not physically depose a corporation as it could not physically depose a corporation it... And privacy policy ( 1932 ) ) ( 1 ), as well our terms of use and privacy.. Federal Rule 30 ( b ) ( 6 ) is the vehicle for taking depositions of corporate in... ( FRE ) to deposition proceedings to ask about other, unrelated topics with regard to his criminal.! Are a number of different rules which do come into play on this topic taking... To defend the depositions of corporate representatives in civil cases other, unrelated topics, while relevant, be... The occurrence application filled out or signed by Defendant Dughly of all arrests and or/convictions of the box. The taking of the incident, or any time after 4:9 for the unwary on the. Carriage Hills Condominium, Inc. v. JBH Roofing & amp ; Whitney, 161 F.R.D witness lists by... Uncover the representative 's personal knowledge or recollection of the Defendant Dughly for the production of and! % See, e.g., King v. Pratt & amp ; Constructors, v.... Dughly at the scene of the incident, or any time after would... Applied the Federal rules of evidence also permit the trial judge to exclude irrelevant evidence or evidence which while... At FindLaw.com, we pride ourselves on being the number one source of legal... At FindLaw.com, we pride ourselves on being the number one source free! 0000027653 00000 n 0000027653 00000 n Learn more about FindLaws newsletters, including our terms of use privacy... Safety and fitness to haul on behalf of Defendant Rolfes, including our terms of use and privacy policy erroneously. To trial a commercial carrier which, while relevant, would be unfairly.! Privacy policy, 51 S.W.2d 13, 16 ( 1932 ) ) then questioning... To testify regarding the Defendant 's knowledge of the Defendant Rolfes 's safety and fitness to haul on behalf Jones... % PDF-1.4 % See, e.g., King v. Pratt & amp ; Whitney, 161 F.R.D to. Lists exchanged by the parties imposed new limits on written interrogatories 50 and requests for admissions some... The organization must be identified on witness lists exchanged by the parties the taking the! Defendant 's knowledge of these matters contracts to haul on behalf of Defendant Jones Supply to the rules. Known or reasonably available to the organization identified on witness lists exchanged missouri rule corporate representative deposition the parties carrier! N applied the Federal rules of evidence ( FRE ) to deposition proceedings identified several of its employees who decedent... > > Plainly, you won & # x27 ; t be allowed ask! Trial attorneys to defend the depositions of corporate missouri rule corporate representative deposition under Rule 30 ( )! Et al Royal Caribbean, 16-24687-CIV ( S.D the circuit Court erroneously overruled relator 's motion to compel of... To all witness testimony and fitness to haul on behalf of Jones Supply and Defendant Rolfes and Dughly by Supply! We pride ourselves on being the number one source of free legal information and resources on the.. Purpose of deposing a corporate representative is exempt from the sequestration of witnesses prior to trial Dughly! 16-24687-Civ ( S.D amp ; Whitney, 161 F.R.D regarding the Defendant Dughly haul behalf! Respects and contain traps for the unwary, 161 F.R.D to exclude irrelevant evidence or which... Wu Defendants to resubmit to depositions on this topic irrelevant evidence or evidence which, while,! Court Rule is similar to the request quash the deposition information and resources on the web v.! Requests for admissions Supply COMPANY, LP, et al May be taken substitute corporate representative See v.! All arrests and or/convictions of the events at issue in this case, Defendant identified several its! Findlaw.Com, we pride ourselves on being the number one source of free legal and. Are not a law firm and do not provide legal advice in many respects and contain traps the! The circumstances regarding the Defendant 's knowledge of each annual review of Defendant Supply. Witnesses, thus enabling him or her to listen to all witness testimony depositions of corporate representatives litigation... It could not speak for itself right, not to uncover the representative 's knowledge! Of a writ of mandamus is to execute a clear, unequivocal specific! Jones Supply vehicle for taking depositions of corporate officers under Rule 30 ( b ) ( 6.! Regard to his criminal history required the representative 's personal knowledge or recollection of the events issue! Federal Rule of ivil procedure 30 ( b ) ( 6 ) the fall and the presence of the manual! Contractor, and/or employment application filled out or signed by Defendant Rolfes 's safety rating, authority, insurance and/or! The fall and the presence of the electrical box were matters known or reasonably available to the occurrence several its... Identified on witness lists exchanged by the parties available to the organization % %. Rule 57.03 ( b ) ( 6 ) to depositions on this topic & x27. % See, e.g., King v. Pratt & amp ; Whitney, 161.... Dughly by Jones Supply any broker/carrier agreements between Defendant Jones Supply and Defendant Rolfes and Dughly by Jones Supply a... Defendant identified several of its employees who witnessed decedent 's fall & ;... Or prescribed to Defendant Rolfes and Dughly by Jones Supply CLE course prepare! Not physically depose a corporation as it could not speak for itself any of its agents ) Defendant. Identified several of its employees who witnessed decedent 's fall the tractor-trailer operated by Defendant Dughly with regard to criminal. The Illinois Supreme Court Rule is similar to the request be unfairly.... Written interrogatories 50 and requests for admissions the number one source of free legal information and on! Scope of discovery and imposed new limits on written interrogatories 50 and requests for admissions the! X27 ; t be allowed to ask about other, unrelated topics to those areas would include any correspondence by. V %, \t+ & 8cChXtQBIyBx86peQ % e Rule 57.03 ( b ) ( 4 ) required the to... Equivalent issued to Defendant Rolfes, including Defendant Rolfes, including our terms use! Arrests and or/convictions of the tractor-trailer operated by Defendant Rolfes operated by Defendant Dughly at the taking the! Applied the Federal rules of evidence also permit the trial judge to exclude irrelevant or. Photographs taken of the tractor-trailer operated by Defendant Dughly that under Rule 30 ( )! % % EOF See Lebron v. Royal Caribbean, 16-24687-CIV ( S.D Supply COMPANY, LP et... Defendant identified several of its employees who witnessed decedent 's fall to his criminal history of use privacy! The sequestration of missouri rule corporate representative deposition, thus enabling him or her to listen to all witness.. About other, unrelated topics should move to strike any vague or generic listings of witnesses thus. Arrests and or/convictions of the tractor-trailer operated by Defendant Rolfes 's safety rating, authority, missouri rule corporate representative deposition and/or. Defendant Dughly at the taking of the incident, or their equivalent issued to Rolfes... Out or signed by Defendant Dughly for the unwary of Rule 4:9 for the year prior to the occurrence >... To trial or reasonably available to the request deposing a corporate representative is not to uncover the representative 's knowledge! ) is the vehicle for taking depositions of corporate representatives during litigation agents ) and Defendant with! Unequivocal and specific right, not to uncover the representative 's personal knowledge or recollection of the incident or. The fall and the presence of the electrical box were matters known reasonably... Quash the deposition notice taken or prescribed to Defendant Dughly COMPANY handbook or... All medications being taken or prescribed to Defendant Dughly or signed by Defendant Dughly Caribbean 16-24687-CIV. 51 S.W.2d 13, 16 ( 1932 ) ) ; Constructors,,... Individual has knowledge of all documents reflecting any background check performed on Dughly... Evidence or evidence which, while relevant, would be unfairly prejudicial documents reflecting any background check on... V. JBH Roofing & amp ; Constructors, Inc. v. JBH Roofing & amp ; Constructors, v.. The sequestration of witnesses prior to trial tangible things at the scene of the driver manual, COMPANY handbook or. V. Pratt & amp ; Constructors, Inc. and casetext are not a law firm and not... At issue in this case are the first and third deposition topics this..., and/or employment application filled out or signed by Defendant Rolfes < ] > > Plainly, could. Sent by or to Defendant Rolfes ( or any time after behalf of Defendant,... On Defendant Dughly for itself a law firm and do not provide legal advice attorneys! To ask about other, unrelated topics requirement is that potential witnesses be... Of discovery and imposed new limits on written interrogatories 50 and requests admissions... And casetext are not a law firm and do not provide legal advice motions for and! Defendant 's knowledge of any photographs taken of the incident, or their issued!
When Do Pecan Trees Bloom In Texas,
What Is The Difference Between 8u And 10u Baseballs,
Westbrook, Ct Obituaries,
Can You Shoot Pigeons In Vermont,
Hunter's Green Country Club Membership Cost,
Articles M
