NOTICE OF TAKING VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF …miamiherald.typepad.com/...18-coalition-plfs-not-deposition-house.pdfDec 18, 2013 · NOTICE OF TAKING VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF THE FLORIDA

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR THE SECOND JUDICIAL CIRCUIT,

IN AND FOR LEON COUNTY, FLORIDA

RENE ROMO, ET AL.

PLAINTIFFS,

VS.

KEN DETZNER AND PAM BONDI,

DEFENDANTS.

THE LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF FLORIDA,

ET AL.,

PLAINTIFFS,

VS.

KEN DETZNER, ET AL.,

DEFENDANTS.

CASE NO.: 2012-CA-00412

CASE NO.: 2012-CA-00490

NOTICE OF TAKING VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF

THE FLORIDA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that, at a time and place to be determined, the undersigned

attorneys will take the deposition of THE FLORIDA HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, by

a person designated under Rule 1.310(b)(6), Florida Rules of Civil Procedure, to testify about the

matters described in the attached Schedule A.

The deposition will be taken by oral examination before MJC Reporting, Inc., licensed

court reporters, or some other Notary Public or other officer authorized to administer oaths. This

deposition shall be used for all allowable purposes, shall be conducted in accordance with Florida

Rules of Civil Procedure, and will continue from day to day until completed. The deposition will

be recorded on videotape by Ron Fleming Video Productions.

2

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I HEREBY CERTIFY that on December 18, 2013 I filed the foregoing using the State of

Florida ePortal Filing System. I further certify that a copy of the foregoing has been served via

email on all counsel of record listed on the Service List below.

/s/ David B. King

David B. King

Florida Bar No.: 0093426

Thomas A. Zehnder


Frederick S. Wermuth


KING, BLACKWELL, ZEHNDER & WERMUTH, P.A.

P.O. Box 1631

Orlando, FL 32802-1631

Telephone: (407) 422-2472

Facsimile: (407) 648-0161

[email protected] (Primary)



[email protected] (Secondary)

[email protected] (Secondary)

Gerald E. Greenberg


[email protected]

Adam M. Schachter


[email protected]

GELBER SCHACHTER & GREENBERG, P.A.

1441 Brickell Avenue, Suite 1420

Miami, FL 33131

Telephone: (305) 728-0950

Facsimile: (305) 728-0951

Counsel for the Coalition Plaintiffs

cc: MJC Reporting, Inc.

Ron Fleming Video Productions

IF YOU ARE A PERSON WITH A DISABILITY WHO NEEDS ANY

ACCOMMODATIONS IN ORDER TO PARTICIPATE IN THIS

mailto:[email protected]







3

PROCEEDING, YOU ARE ENTITLED, AT NO COST TO YOU, TO THE

PROVISION OF CERTAIN ASSISTANCE. PLEASE CONTACT THE

JURY COORDINATION OFFICE, 301 S. MONROE STREET,

TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA, 32301, (850) 577-4240, AT LEAST 7 DAYS

BEFORE YOUR SCHEDULE COURT APPEARANCE, OR IMMEDIATELY

UPON RECEIVING THIS COURT NOTIFICATION IF THE TIME BEFORE

THE SCHEDULED APPEARANCE IS LESS THAN 7 DAYS; IF YOU ARE

HEARING OR VOICE IMPAIRED, CALL 711.

4

SERVICE LIST

Gerald E. Greenberg

Adam M. Schachter

GELBER SCHACHTER & GREENBERG, P.A.

1441 Brickell Avenue, Suite 1420

Miami, Florida 33131

[email protected]

[email protected]

[email protected]

Ronald G. Meyer

Lynn Hearn

MEYER, BROOKS, DEMMA and BLOHM,

P.A.

131 North Gadsden Street

Post Office Box 1547

Tallahassee, FL 32302

[email protected]

[email protected]

Counsel for Coalition Plaintiffs

Michael B. DeSanctis

Jessica Ring Amunson

Paul Smith

Kristen Rogers

JENNER & BLOCK, LLP

1099 New York Ave NW, Suite 900

Washington, DC 20001

[email protected]

[email protected]

[email protected]

[email protected]

J. Gerald Hebert

191 Somervelle Street, #415

Alexandria, VA 22304

[email protected] Counsel for Coalition Plaintiffs

Blaine Winship

Timothy D. Osterhaus

Office of the Attorney General of Florida

The Capitol, Suite PL-01

Tallahassee, FL 32399-1050 [email protected] Counsel for the Attorney General

J. Andrew Atkinson Ashley Davis General Counsel Florida Department of State R.A. Gray Building 500 S. Bronough Street Tallahassee, FL 32399 [email protected] [email protected]

[email protected]

Counsel for Florida Secretary of State















5

George T. Levesque

General Counsel

THE FLORIDA SENATE

404 South Monroe Street, Suite 409

Tallahassee, Florida 32399

[email protected]

[email protected]

[email protected]

Michael A. Carvin

Louis K. Fisher

JONES DAY

51 Louisiana Avenue N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20001

[email protected]

[email protected]

Raoul G. Cantero

Jason N. Zakia

Jesse L. Green

WHITE & CASE LLP

Southeast Financial Center, Ste. 4900

200 South Biscayne Boulevard

Miami, FL 33131

Telephone: (305) 371-2700

Facsimile: (305) 358-5744

[email protected]

[email protected]

[email protected]

[email protected]

[email protected]

Counsel for the Florida Senate

Charles T. Wells

George N. Meros, Jr.

Jason L. Unger

Andy Bardos

GRAYROBINSON, P.A.

P.O. Box 11189 (32302)

301 South Bronough Street, Suite 600

Tallahassee, Florida 32301

[email protected]

[email protected]

[email protected]

[email protected]

[email protected]

[email protected]

[email protected]

Daniel Nordby

General Counsel

Florida House of Representatives

422 The Capitol

Tallahassee, FL 32399-1300

[email protected]

Miguel De Grandy

800 Douglas Road

Coral Gables, FL 33134

[email protected]

Counsel for Florida House of

Representatives




















6

John M. Devaney

Mark Erik Elias

PERKINS COIE, LLP

700 Thirteenth Street, NW, Suite 700 Washington, D.C. 20005 [email protected] [email protected]

[email protected]

[email protected]

Abha Khanna

Kevin J. Hamilton

PERKINS COIE, LLP

1201 Third Avenue, Suite 4800

Seattle, Washington 98101-3099

[email protected]

[email protected]

[email protected]

Mark Herron, Esq.

Robert J. Telfer III, Esq.

Angelina Perez, Esq.

Messer, Caparello & Self, P.A.

Post Office Box 1876


[email protected]

[email protected]

[email protected]

[email protected]

[email protected]

[email protected]

Counsel for Romo Plaintiffs

Allison J. Riggs, Admitted Pro Hac Vice

Anita S. Earls

Benjamin Stevenson

SOUTHERN COALITION FOR SOCIAL

JUSTICE

1415 W. Highway 54, Suite 101

Durham, NC 27707

[email protected]

[email protected]

[email protected]

Victor L. Goode

Dorcas R. Gilmore

NAACP

4805 Mt. Hope Drive

Baltimore, MD 21215-3297

[email protected]

[email protected]

Counsel for Intervenor/Defendant, NAACP

Harry O. Thomas

Christopher B. Lunny

Radney, Thomas, Yon & Clark, PA

301 South Bronough St., Ste. 200


[email protected]

[email protected]

[email protected]

[email protected]

Counsel for Intervenors/Defendants Negron,

Suarez, Rodriguez, Pinder, Mathiri, Mount,

Barnes, Butler, and Wise

























7

SCHEDULE A

DEFINITIONS

1. “Senate” shall refer to the Florida Senate, as well as its current and former

legislators, staffers, committees, subcommittees, employees, agents, representatives, accountants,

attorneys, and any other person acting or purporting to act on its behalf.

2. “House” shall refer to the Florida House of Representatives, as well as its current

and former legislators, staffers, committees, subcommittees, employees, agents, representatives,

accountants, attorneys, and any other person acting or purporting to act on its behalf.

3. “Legislative Parties” shall refer to the Senate, Don Gaetz in his official capacity as

President of the Senate, the House, and Will Weatherford in his official capacity as Speaker of the

House, individually and collectively, and any predecessors or successors in office to the

aforementioned individual officials.

4. “Coalition Plaintiffs” shall refer to the League of Women Voters of Florida,

Common Cause, Robert Allen Schaeffer, Brenda Ann Holt, Roland Sanchez-Medina Jr., and John

Steel Olmstead, individually and collectively.

5. “Document” shall refer to every tangible thing from which information can be

obtained, perceived, reproduced, or communicated, either directly or with the aid of a machine or

device, including, but not limited to, any handwritten, typed, printed or graphic materials; any

drawing, diagram, list, graph, report, plan, map, analysis, or chart; any photograph, slide, movie,

videotape, image or film; any record, communication, correspondence, calendar, calendar entry,

document, presentation, PowerPoints, memorandum, note, or other writing; e-mails, instant

messages, text messages, voice mails, social media messages, updates or posts (including, but not

8

limited to, messages, updates, or posts on Facebook or Twitter), Dropbox files, and any other

electronically stored information, however stored or recorded (including, for electronic documents,

those in active and inactive drive space, and for example, deleted files in drive slack space and

documents stored in recycle bins) on all computers, cellular phones, smart phones, blackberries,

tablets, or other devices used at any time by the House, including state-owned or personal devices

to which the House had access, and including all metadata and all drafts and non-identical copies.

6. “Communication” refers to any transmission or communication, whether in person,

by telephone, in writing, by facsimile, by e-mail, by voicemail, by instant messaging, by text

messaging, by social media (including, but not limited to, by Facebook or by Twitter), or

otherwise.

7. “Relating to,” “related to,” or “related to” means containing, concerning, arising out

of, involving, consisting of, referring to, supporting, prepared in connection with, used in

preparation for, commenting upon, embodying, summarizing, describing, recording, mentioning,

or being in any way legally, logically, or factually connected with or pertaining to, in whole or in

part, the matter discussed.

8. “Identity” shall mean the name, personal and business address, personal and

business phone number, last known place of employment and place of employment at the time of

the events at issue, last known title and title at the time of the events at issue, and other identifying

information for the subject person.

9

AREAS OF INQUIRY

1. The preparation and contents of the Legislative Parties’ Response and Supplemental

Response to the Coalition Plaintiffs’ Second Set of Interrogatories, copies of which are attached as

Exhibits “1” and “2,” including, but not limited to, the reason for the House’s modification of its

response to Interrogatory No. 9 to state that “records related to congressional redistricting,

were . . . discarded” after asserting in the initial response to Interrogatory No. 9 that “[t]he

Legislative Parties do not contend that . . . communications . . . were deleted, destroyed, lost,

misappropriated, or otherwise became unavailable for production.”

2. The policies and procedures of the House relating to the deletion, storage, and

preservation of documents, including, but not limited to, e-mail messages and other electronic

communications.

3. The identity of the person(s) responsible for the deletion, storage, and preservation

of documents in the possession, custody, or control of the House.

4. All efforts by the House to identify, search for, compile, and produce documents in

response to the requests for production served by the Coalition Plaintiffs or any other party in the

above-captioned consolidated cases. This category includes, but is not limited to, efforts to identify

and search for documents stored in hard copy or on computers, laptops, cellular phones, smart

phones, tablets, or other electronic devices, whether owned by the House or others.

5. The House’s efforts, if any, to store and preserve documents relating to the 2011-

2012 redistricting process.

6. The capability and accessibility of any backup media maintained by the House,

including, but not limited to, backup tapes, backup servers, or “cloud” storage.

10

7. The implementation of Florida House Rule 14.2 (2010-2012) with respect to the

2011-2012 redistricting process.

8. The facts and circumstances involved in the discarding, deletion, destruction, loss,

misappropriation, or other conduct resulting in the unavailability of any documents relating to the

2011-2012 redistricting process, whether pursuant to Florida House Rule 14.2 (2010-2012) or

otherwise, including, but not limited to:

(a) the number of documents discarded, deleted, destroyed, lost,

misappropriated, or otherwise made unavailable;

(b) the type of each document discarded, deleted, destroyed, lost,

misappropriated, or otherwise made unavailable (e.g., email, hard copy, native electronic);

(c) the subject matter and contents of each document discarded, deleted,

destroyed, lost, misappropriated, or otherwise made unavailable;

(d) the method by which the document was discarded, deleted, destroyed, lost,

misappropriated, or otherwise made unavailable;

(e) the authors and recipients of each document that was discarded, deleted,

destroyed, lost, misappropriated, or otherwise made unavailable;

(f) the date of each document that was discarded, deleted, destroyed, lost,

misappropriated, or otherwise made unavailable; and

(g) the date on which each document was discarded, deleted, destroyed, lost,

misappropriated, or otherwise made unavailable.

11

9. The identity of the person(s) involved in the decision to discard, delete, destroy, or

otherwise dispose of any documents relating to the 2011-2012 redistricting process and the facts

and circumstances involved in that decision, including, but not limited to:

(a) the identity of the person(s) who made the decision to discard, delete,

destroy, or otherwise dispose of the documents;

(b) when the decision was made to discard, delete, destroy, or otherwise dispose

of documents;

(c) the reasons, justifications, or rationale for discarding, deleting, destroying,

or otherwise disposing of the documents; and

(d) the identity of the person(s) who actually discarded, deleted, destroyed, or

otherwise disposed of the documents.

10. The legal authority or justification that the House contends supports the decision to

discard any documents relating to the 2011-2012 redistricting process.

11. The former location of all documents, whether hard copy or electronic, that were

discarded, including but not limited to the identity and location of all computers from which

electronic documents were discarded and all the identity and location of all offices, files, storage

facilities or other locations from which hard copy documents were discarded.

12. The identity of the custodian(s) of any documents relating to the 2011-2012

redistricting process that have been discarded, deleted, destroyed, lost, misappropriated, or

otherwise made unavailable at the time such documents were discarded, deleted, destroyed, lost,

misappropriated, or otherwise made unavailable.

Case No.: 2012-ca-00412/2012-ca-00490

EXHIBIT 1

LEGISLATIVE PARTIES’ OCTOBER 16, 2013 ANSWERS AND

OBJECTIONS TO LOWV PLAINTIFFS’ SECOND SET OF

INTERROGATORIES

MIAMI 990078 1

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE SECOND JUDICIAL CIRCUITIN AND FOR LEON COUNTY, FLORIDA

RENE ROMO, et al.,

Plaintiffs,vs. Case No. 2012-CA-000412

KEN DETZNER, in his official capacity asFlorida Secretary of State, and PAMELA JOBONDI, in her official capacity as AttorneyGeneral,___________________________________/

THE LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OFFLORIDA, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

vs. Case No. 2012-CA-000490

KEN DETZNER, in his official capacity asFlorida Secretary of State, et al.,

Defendants.___________________________________/

THE LEGISLATIVE PARTIES’ NOTICE OF SERVING ANSWERSAND OBJECTIONS TO LOWV PLAINTIFFS’ SECOND SET OF INTERROGATORIES

Defendants, the Florida House of Representatives; Will Weatherford, in his official

capacity as Speaker of the Florida House of Representatives; the Florida Senate; and Don Gaetz,

in his official capacity as President of the Florida Senate, give notice of serving their Answers

and Objections to the LOWV Plaintiffs’ Second Set of Interrogatories, dated September 11,

2013.

Romo, et al. v. Detzner, et al. Case No. 2012-CA-000412

MIAMI 990078 2

/s/ Raoul G. CanteroRaoul G. CanteroFlorida Bar No. 552356Jason N. ZakiaFlorida Bar No. 698121Jesse L. GreenFlorida Bar No. 95591White & Case LLPSoutheast Financial Center200 S. Biscayne Blvd., Suite 4900Miami, Florida 33131-2352Telephone: 305-371-2700Facsimile: 305-358-5744Email: [email protected]: [email protected]: [email protected]

George T. LevesqueFlorida Bar No. 555541General Counsel, The Florida Senate305 Senate Office Building404 South Monroe StreetTallahassee, Florida 32399-1100Telephone: (850) 487-5237E-mail: [email protected]

Attorneys for Defendants, Florida Senate andPresident Don Gaetz

/s/ George N. Meros, Jr.Charles T. WellsFlorida Bar No. 086265George N. Meros, Jr.Florida Bar No. 263321Jason L. UngerFlorida Bar No. 0991562Andy BardosFlorida Bar No. 822671Gray Robinson, P.A.Post Office Box 11189Tallahassee, Florida 32302Telephone: (850) 577-9090E-mail: [email protected]: [email protected]: [email protected]: [email protected]

Miguel A. De GrandyFlorida Bar No. 332331Holland & Knight LLP701 Brickell Avenue, Suite 3000Miami FL 33131Telephone: (305) 789- 7535E-mail: [email protected]

Daniel E. NordbyFlorida Bar No. 14588General Counsel, The Florida House ofRepresentatives422 The Capitol402 South Monroe StreetTallahassee, Florida 32399-1300Telephone: 850-717-5500E-mail: [email protected]

Attorneys for the Florida House ofRepresentatives and Speaker Will Weatherford


MIAMI 990078 3


I certify that a copy of the foregoing was served by electronic transmission on October

16, 2013, to the persons listed on the following Service List.

By: /s/ Raoul G. CanteroRaoul G. Cantero


MIAMI 990078 4

SERVICE LIST

Karen C. DyerBoies, Schiller & Flexner LLP121 South Orange Avenue, Ste. 840Orlando, FL 32801Telephone: (407) 425-7118Facsimile: (407) 425-7047E-mail: [email protected]

Jon L. MillsElan NehleberBoies, Schiller & Flexner LLP100 SE 2nd Street, Ste. 2800Miami, FL 33131-2144Telephone: (305) 539-8400Facsimile: (305) 539-1307E-mail: [email protected]: [email protected]

Abha KhannaKevin J. HamiltonNoah G. PurcellPerkins Coie, LLP1201 Third Avenue, Ste. 4800Seattle, WA 98101-3099Telephone: (206) 359-8000Facsimile: (206) 359-9000E-mail : [email protected] : [email protected]: [email protected]

Mark HerronRobert TelferAngelina PerezMesser Caparello & Self, P.A.Post Office Box 1876Tallahassee, Florida 32302-1876Telephone: 850-222-0720E-mail: [email protected]: [email protected]: [email protected]

John M. DevaneyMark Erik EliasAbha KhannaElisabeth C. FrostPerkins Coie, LLP700 Thirteenth Street, NW, Ste. 700Washington, DC 20005Telephone: (202) 654-6200Facsimile: (202) 654-6211E-mail: [email protected]: [email protected]: [email protected]

Attorneys for Respondents Rene Romo, Benjamin Weaver, William Everett Warinner, JessicaBarrett, June Keener, Richard Quinn Boylan and Bonita Agan


MIAMI 990078 5

Gerald E. GreenbergAdam M. SchachterGelber Schachter & Greenberg, P.A.1441 Brickell Avenue, Suite 1420Miami, FL 33131Telephone: (305) 728-0950Facsimile: (305) 728-0951E-mail: [email protected]: [email protected]

Bruce V. SpivaThe Spiva Law Firm, PLLC1776 Massachusetts Ave., N.W.Suite 601Washington, DC 20036Telephone: (202) 785-0601Facsimile: (202) 785-0697E-mail: [email protected]

Jessica Ring AmunsonPaul SmithMichael B. DeSanctisKristen M. RogersChristopher DealJenner & Block LLP1099 New York Ave, N.W., Ste. 900Washington, DC 20001-4412Telephone: (202) 639-6023Facsimile: (202) 661-4993E-mail: [email protected]: [email protected]: [email protected]: [email protected]: [email protected]

J. Gerald Hebert191 Somervelle Street, #405Alexandria, VA 22304Telephone: (703) 628-4673E-mail : [email protected]

Ronald MeyerLynn HearnMeyer, Brooks, Demma and Blohm, P.A.131 North Gadsden StreetPost Office Box 1547 (32302)Tallahassee, FL 32301Telephone: (850) 878-5212Facsimile: (850) 656-6750E-mail: [email protected]: [email protected]

David B. KingThomas A. ZehnderKing Blackwell Zehnder Wermuth PAP.O. Box 1631Orlando, FL 32802-1631Telephone: (407) 422-2472E-mail: [email protected]: [email protected]

Attorneys for Petitioners The League of Women Voters of Florida, The National Council of LaRaza, Common Cause Florida; Robert Allen Schaeffer, Brenda Ann Holt, Roland Sanchez-

Medina, Jr., and John Steele Olmstead


MIAMI 990078

J. Andrew AtkinsonAshley DavisAssistant General CounselFlorida Department Of StateR.A. Gray Building500 S. Bronough StreetTallahassee, FL 32399Telephone: (850) 245-6536E-mail:[email protected]:[email protected]

Attorneys for Respondent Ken Detzner,in his Official Capacity as Florida Secretary ofState

Harry O. ThomasChristopher B. LunnyRadey, Thomas, Yon & Clark, PA301 South Bronough StreetSuite 200Tallahassee, Florida 32301-1722Telephone: (850) 425-6654Facsimile: (850) 425-6694E-mail: [email protected]: [email protected]

Attorneys for Bill Negron, Anthony Suarez,Luis Rodriguez, Father Nelson Pinder; N.Y.Nathiri; Mayor Bruce B. Mount, Pastor WillieBarnes, Mable Butler, and Judith A. Wise

Blaine H. WinshipOffice Of Attorney GeneralCapitol, Pl-01Tallahassee, FL 32399-1050Telephone: (850) 414-3300Facsimile: (850) 401-1630E-Mail: [email protected]

Attorneys for Pam Bondi, in her capacity asFlorida Attorney General

Michael A. CarvinLouis K. FisherJones Day51 Louisiana Avenue, N.W.Washington, DC 20001Telephone: (202) 879-7643Facsimile: (202) 626-1700E-mail: [email protected]: [email protected]

Attorneys for the Florida Senate and PresidentDon Gaetz


MIAMI 990078

7

Charles G. BurrBurr & Smith, LLPGrand Central Place442 West Kennedy Blvd., Ste. 300Tampa, FL 33606Telephone: (813) 253-2010Facsimile: (813) 254-8391E-mail: [email protected]

Stephen HoggeStephen Hogge, LLC117 South Gadsden StreetTallahassee, FL 32301Telephone: (850) 459-3029E-mail: [email protected]

Victor L. GoodeDorcas R. GilmoreNAACP4805 Mt. Hope DriveBaltimore, MD 21215-3297Telephone: (410) 580-5790Facsimile: (410) 358-9350E-mail: [email protected]: [email protected]

Allison J. RiggsAnita S. EarlsSouthern Coalition For Social Justice1415 West Highway 54, Ste. 101Durham, NC 27707Telephone: (919) 323-3380Facsimile: (919) 323-3942E-mail: [email protected]: [email protected]

Attorneys for the Florida State Conference of NAACP Branches


MIAMI 990078

8


RENE ROMO, et al.,

Plaintiffs,vs. Case No. 2012-CA-000412

KEN DETZNER, in his official capacity asFlorida Secretary of State, and PAMELA JOBONDI, in her official capacity as AttorneyGeneral,___________________________________/


Plaintiffs,

vs. Case No. 2012-CA-000490


Defendants.___________________________________/

THE LEGISLATIVE PARTIES’ ANSWERS ANDOBJECTIONS TO LOWV PLAINTIFFS’ SECOND SET OF INTERROGATORIES



in his official capacity as President of the Florida Senate (collectively, the “Legislative Parties”),

answer the Second Set of Interrogatories served by Plaintiffs, the League of Women Voters of

Florida, et al., on September 11, 2013. The Legislative Parties respond in conformity with the

Florida Rules of Civil Procedure and other applicable law, and object to the Definitions for

Interrogatories to the extent they purport to impose additional duties. The Legislative Parties’


MIAMI 990078

9

answers are made without waiving or intending to waive, and the Legislative Parties expressly

preserve:

(A) all objections they may have as to the total number of interrogatories,including subparts, served by the LOWV Plaintiffs on the LegislativeParties, which may not exceed 30 pursuant to Florida Rule of CivilProcedure 1.340(a);

(B) all objections they may have as to the competence, relevance, materiality,and admissibility as evidence for any purpose of the answers provided, orthe subject matters thereof;

(C) the right to object on any ground to the use of the information in anyaspect of this or any other action;

(D) all applicable privileges, exemptions, and protections from discovery;

(E) all legislative privileges and immunities of their 160 independently electedconstitutional officers and staff; and

(F) the right at any time to supplement these answers.

ANSWERS TO INTERROGATORIES

INTERROGATORY NO. 1: Describe in detail all efforts you undertook to gather, identify andproduce documents in response to the Coalition Plaintiffs’ First Request for Production ofdocuments dated June 22, 2012 (the “Coalition Plaintiffs’ First Request”), including but notlimited to all efforts to obtain from individual Legislators and Legislative Staff Membersdocuments responsive to the Coalition Plaintiffs’ First Request.

ANSWER: In the Florida House of Representatives’ Reponses and Objections to

LOWV Plaintiffs’ First Interrogatories and Requests for Production of Documents and the

Florida Senate’s Responses and Objections to LOWV Plaintiffs’ First Request for Production of

Documents, both dated July 27, 2012, the Legislative Parties objected that your First Request for

Production of Documents, dated June 22, 2012, which requested the Legislative Parties to gather,

identify, and produce virtually all communications by legislators or legislative staff regarding

congressional redistricting, were overbroad and unduly burdensome. See Exhibits A & B. The

Legislative Parties further objected to the extent the requests sought documents not in their


MIAMI 990078

10

possession, custody, or control and documents protected by the attorney-client, work-product,

and legislative privileges.

Despite their stated objections to the overbreadth of your requests, and the immense

burden that a search would entail, the Legislative Parties agreed, subject to their objections, to

produce certain non-privileged materials in their possession, custody, or control, “including

congressional maps presented to the redistricting committees, meeting packets and related

information, transcripts of hearings, staff analyses, and information provided to the United States

Department of Justice,” and to conduct a reasonable search for electronic records on House- and

Senate-maintained computers, using a reasonable number of search terms related to Plaintiffs’

request. See Exhibit A & B. Though fully advised, neither you nor the Romo Plaintiffs

communicated any concerns or objections. These efforts to gather, identify, and produce

documents coincided with the Legislative Parties’ efforts to gather, identify, and produce

documents in response to the Romo Plaintiffs’ similarly overbroad and unduly burdensome First

Requests for Production of Documents, dated March 2, 2012, and March 23, 2012, and are

described in the Legislative Parties’ response to Interrogatory No. 2, which is incorporated

herein by reference. All documents produced to the Romo Plaintiffs were simultaneously

produced to you.

On November 26, 2012, three months after the Legislative Parties substantially

completed their production of documents, you sent a letter to all counsel stating that the “legal

obligation to preserve, search for, and produce all responsive documents” includes “the

electronic records of every legislator and member of legislative staff . . . created and/or stored on

all personal, campaign and state email accounts, as well as text messages from any of such

accounts and all mobile devices.” See Exhibit C. On December 11, 2012, the Legislative Parties


MIAMI 990078

11

responded that they had already produced volumes of records related to your requests; that

personal and campaign email accounts of legislators, who are independently elected

constitutional officers, and legislative staff are not with in the “possession, custody, or control”

of the Legislative Parties under Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.350(a); and that the Legislative

Parties have no legal obligation to preserve, search for, and produce text messages contained on

the personal mobile devices of legislators and legislative staff. See Exhibit D. Even so, the

Legislative Parties offered to “ask legislators and legislative staff who participated in the

redistricting process to search their personal and campaign email accounts as well as their

personal mobile devices for information responsive to Plaintiffs’ document requests,” and

offered to arrange a mutually convenient time for the production of such documents. You never

responded. Nonetheless, the Senate asked legislators and legislative staff who participated in the

redistricting process to search their personal computers, handheld devices and email accounts for

information concerning the redistricting process.

INTERROGATORY NO. 2: Describe in detail all efforts you undertook to gather, identify andproduce documents in response to the Romo Plaintiffs’ First Requests for Production ofDocuments dated March 2, 2012 and March 23, 2012 (the “Romo Plaintiffs’ First Requests”),including but not limited to all efforts to obtain from individual Legislators and Legislative StaffMembers documents responsive to the Romo Plaintiffs’ First Requests.

ANSWER: The Legislative Parties undertook the efforts described in the House’s

Responses and Objections to Romo Plaintiffs’ Interrogatories and Requests for Production of

Documents of May 4, 2012 as well as in the Senate’s Response to Romo Plaintiffs’ First Request

for Production of Documents, dated April 25, 2012 (collectively, the “Responses”). In the

Responses, the Legislative Parties objected that the Romo Plaintiffs’ requests for production,

which requested the Legislative Parties to gather, identify, and produce virtually all

communications by legislators or legislative staff regarding redistricting generally, were


MIAMI 990078

12

overbroad and unduly burdensome. See Exhibits E & F. The Legislative Parties further objected

that the requests sought documents not in their possession, custody, or control and documents

protected by the attorney-client, work-product, and legislative privileges.

Despite their stated objections to the overbreadth of the Romo Plaintiffs’ Requests, and

the immense burden that a search would entail, the Legislative Parties agreed, subject to their

objections, to conduct a reasonable search for documents. The efforts that the House proposed to

make, and did make, were stated clearly and precisely in the House’s Responses:

Subject to these objections, the House will produce at a mutually convenient timeand location, certain non-privileged materials in the possession, custody, orcontrol of its House Redistricting Committee and its Congressional RedistrictingSubcommittee, including congressional maps presented to the redistrictingcommittee, meeting packets and related information, transcripts of hearings, staffanalyses, and additional information provided to the United States Department ofJustice. Furthermore, the House will conduct a reasonable search for electronicrecords on House-maintained computers for the staff and members of the HouseRedistricting Committee and its Congressional Redistricting Subcommittee usinga reasonable number of search terms related to Plaintiffs’ requests and willproduce non-privileged records at a mutually convenient time and location,subject to redaction of any confidential information.

See Exhibit F. Likewise, the Senate indicated that it would produce responsive, non-privileged

documents within its possession, custody, or control, subject to its objection that the requests

were overbroad and unduly burdensome. See Exhibit E. Thus, the Legislative Parties advised

you of the efforts that would be made, subject to their overbreadth, undue-burden, and other

objections, to gather, identify, and produce documents. Though fully advised, neither you nor

the Romo Plaintiffs communicated any concerns or objections. Accordingly, the Legislative

Parties undertook the efforts described in the Responses.

In connection with the House’s production, the House Redistricting Committee

(including its Congressional Redistricting Subcommittee) undertook a thorough and detailed

search. Committee staff searched their emails and work computer files for documents responsive


MIAMI 990078

13

to the Romo Plaintiffs’ requests. Committee staff also conducted a comprehensive search of the

folders within Committee’s shared drive, and of hard-copy documents located in both in their

respective offices and in the Committee suite. House IT staff conducted automated searches on

House-maintained computers of the emails of the following individuals, using, as search terms,

the root words “redistrict,” “reapportion,” “apportion,” and “map” (the search would have

returned emails containing words, such as “redistricting” or “apportionment,” that begin with a

root word):

Rep. Will Weatherford

Rep. Stephen Precourt

Rep. Janet Adkins

Rep. Mack Bernard

Rep. Chris Dorworth

Rep. Eric Eisnaugle

Rep. Erik Fresen

Rep. James Frishe

Rep. Dorothy Hukill

Rep. Doug Holder

Rep. John Legg

Rep. Mike Horner

Rep. Evan Jenne

Rep. Mia Jones

Rep. Marty Kiar

Rep. Peter Nehr


MIAMI 990078

14

Rep. Hazelle Rogers

Rep. Darryl Rouson

Rep. Rob Schenck

Rep. Ritch Workman

Rep. Joseph Abruzzo

Rep. Ben Albritton

Rep. Jason Brodeur

Rep. Rachel Burgin

Rep. Chuck Chestnut

Rep. Reggie Fullwood

Rep. Tom Goodson

Rep. Kathleen Passidomo

Rep. Scott Plakon

Rep. Betty Reed

Rep. Dwayne Taylor

Rep. Carlos Trujillo

Alex Kelly

Jason Poreda

Jeff Silver

Jeff Takacs

House IT staff provided all emails so identified to House counsel, who then reviewed all

documents identified by Committee staff and House IT staff to determine their responsiveness

and the applicability of any discovery privileges. After a substantial investment of time and


MIAMI 990078

15

labor, the House produced well in excess of 10,000 documents in a rolling production of four

installments:

On June 22, 2012, twenty-eight compact discs containing the records of committee,subcommittee, and floor proceedings, and the State’s entire preclearance submission tothe United States Department of Justice;

On July 19, 2012, a disc containing approximately 7,700 files;

On July 31, 2012, a disc containing approximately 2,300 files; and

On August 31, 2012, a disc containing the final production of approximately 350 files.

The transmittal letters that accompanied these productions are attached as Exhibits G, H, I, and J.

Like the House’s Response of April 25, 2012, the transmittal letters carefully described the

efforts made by the Legislative Parties to gather, identify, and produce documents. Once again,

neither you nor the Romo Plaintiffs communicated any concerns or objections. The House

produced privilege logs on July 20, July 31, and August 31, 2012.

Similarly, in connection with the Senate’s production, the Senate Committee on

Reapportionment undertook a thorough and detailed search. Committee staff searched their

emails and work computer files for documents responsive to the Romo Plaintiffs’ requests.

Committee staff also conducted a comprehensive search of the folders within Committee’s

shared drive, and of hard-copy documents located in both in their respective offices and in the

Committee suite. Senate counsel also contacted the members of the Senate Committee on

Reapportionment and requested that they forward documents in their possession related to

redistricting.

Senate IT staff conducted automated searches on Senate-maintained computers of the

following individuals, using, as search terms, the root words “redistrict,” “reapportion,”

“apportion,” and “map” (the search would have returned emails containing words, such as

“redistricting” or “apportionment,” that begin with a root word):


MIAMI 990078

16

Senator Thad Altman

Senator Lizbeth Benacquisto

Senator Oscar Braynon, II

Senator Dwight Bullard

Senator Charles S. Dean, Sr.

Senator Greg Evers

Senator Anitere Flores

Senator Don Gaetz

Senator Rene Garcia

Senator Alan Hays

Senator Jack Latvala

Senator Gwen Margolis

Senator Bill Montford

Senator Maria Lorts Sachs

Senator Gary Siplin

Senator Christopher L. Smith

Senator Eleanor Sobel

Senator John Thrasher

Andy Bardos

Jay Ferrin

John Guthrie

Christopher Judd

Alexis Lambert


MIAMI 990078

17

Daniel Porter

Ben Shankle

Senate IT staff did not search the email accounts of members of the Senate Committee on

Reapportionment who indicated that they did not possess emails related to redistricting.

Senate IT staff provided all emails so identified to Senate counsel, who then reviewed all

documents identified by Committee staff, Senate IT staff and members of the Senate Committee

on Reapportionment to determine their responsiveness and the applicability of any discovery

privileges. After a substantial investment of time and labor, the Senate produced in excess of

20,000 documents in a rolling production of three installments:

On July 25, 2012, three discs containing approximately 18,000 files;

On August 27, 2012, a disc containing approximately 1,700 files; and

On September 25, 2012, a disc containing approximately 1,200 files.

Once again, neither you nor the Romo Plaintiffs communicated any concerns or objections. The

Senate produced privilege logs on August 27 and September 25, 2012.











MIAMI 990078

18











INTERROGATORY NO. 3: Describe in detail all efforts you undertook to gather, identify andproduce documents in response to the Coalition Plaintiffs’ Second Request for Production ofdocuments dated August 7, 2013 (the “Coalition Plaintiffs’ Second Request”), including but notlimited to all efforts to obtain from individual Legislators and Legislative Staff Membersdocuments responsive to the Coalition Plaintiffs’ First Request.

ANSWER: The efforts to gather, identify, and produce documents in response to your

Second Request for Production of documents, dated August 7, 2013, are ongoing, but are

described in the Legislative Parties’ Responses and Objections to LOWV Plaintiffs’ Second

Request for Production of Documents to Defendants, dated September 11, 2013. In the

Responses, the Legislative Parties objected that your requests for production were overbroad,

unduly burdensome, vague, and indeterminate. See Exhibit K. For example, your requests for

production sought, among other documents, all communications between any legislator or

legislative staff member and any person within broad, vague categories. Thus, the Legislative

Parties stated in their objections that they are without knowledge of the name of every individual

who is identified in your requests for production by description rather than name. The


MIAMI 990078

19

Legislative Parties further objected that your requests sought documents not in their possession,

custody, or control and documents protected by the attorney-client, work-product, and legislative

privileges, and that your requests for production were duplicative of other requests for

production propounded by the plaintiffs in this litigation.

Despite their stated objections to the overbreadth of your requests for production, and the

immense burden that a search would entail, the Legislative Parties agreed, subject to their

objections, to conduct a reasonable search for documents on House- and Senate-maintained

computers. The efforts that the Legislative Parties proposed to make, and are making, were

stated clearly and precisely in their Responses:

Subject to these objections, the Legislative Parties will produce at a mutuallyconvenient time and location, certain responsive, non-privileged materials, if any,in its possession, custody, or control. The Legislative Parties will conduct areasonable search for electronic records using, as search terms, (1) the names ofindividuals and entities identified by name in this Request; (2) the names ofmembers of the United States House of Representatives who were elected fromFlorida and served at any time between 2010 and 2012; and (3) the names ofindividuals who qualified in Florida as candidates for the United States House ofRepresentatives in 2012. The Legislative Parties will consider any reasonablenumber of additional search terms that the plaintiffs might propose. TheLegislative Parties will produce any non-privileged records at a mutuallyconvenient time and location, subject to redaction of privileged information.

See Exhibit K. Thus, the Legislative Parties advised you in August 2013 of the efforts that

would be made, subject to their overbreadth, undue-burden, and other objections, to gather,

identify, and produce documents. Neither you nor the Romo Plaintiffs have communicated any

concerns or objections, or supplied any additional search terms, as the Legislative Parties invited

you to do. These searches and the review by counsel of the documents so generated (to

determine their responsiveness and the applicability of any discovery privileges) are ongoing. If

it would accelerate the production of documents, the Legislative Parties will produce documents

in installments, as before.


MIAMI 990078

20

INTERROGATORY NO. 4: During your efforts to gather, identify and produce responsivedocuments to the Coalition Plaintiffs’ First Request, please explain whether you located andsearched the hard copy and electronic files and records in the possession, custody and control ofLegislators and Legislative Staff Members, including on both their official computers andofficial handheld devices and of their official email accounts, as well as on their personalcomputers and personal handheld devices and of their personal email accounts. If you did notundertake such an effort, describe in detail the factual and legal bases for your failure to do so.

ANSWER: During their efforts to gather, identify, and produce documents responsive to

your First Request for Production, dated June 22, 2012, the Legislative Parties searched for

documents in the manner described in response to Interrogatory No. 1, above. The Legislative

Parties objected in the House’s Reponses and Objections to LOWV Plaintiffs’ First

Interrogatories and Requests for Production of Documents and the Senate’s Responses and

Objections to LOWV Plaintiffs’ First Request for Production of Documents, both dated July 27,

2012, that your requests were overbroad and unduly burdensome, and that they sought

documents not within the possession, custody, or control of the Legislative Parties. See Exhibits

A & B. At the same time, the Legislative Parties informed you clearly and precisely of the

efforts that would be made, subject to their overbreadth, undue-burden, and other objections, to

gather, identify, and produce documents. Though fully advised as early as July 2012 of the

efforts that the Legislative Parties would deem to be consistent with the Florida Rules of Civil

Procedure, neither you nor the Romo Plaintiffs communicated any concerns or objections.








MIAMI 990078

21














INTERROGATORY NO. 5: During your efforts to identify, gather and produce responsivedocuments to the Romo Plaintiffs’ First Requests, please explain whether you located andsearched the hard copy and electronic files and records in the possession, custody and control ofLegislators and Legislative Staff Members, including on both their official computers andofficial handheld devices and of their official email accounts as well as on their personalcomputers and personal handheld devices and of their personal email accounts. If you did notundertake such an effort, describe in detail the factual and legal bases for your failure to do so.

ANSWER: During their efforts to gather, identify, and produce documents responsive to

the Romo Plaintiffs’ First Requests for Production, dated March 2 and March 23, 2012, the

Legislative Parties searched for documents in the manner described in response to Interrogatory

No. 2, above. The Legislative Parties objected in the House’s Responses and Objections to

Romo Plaintiffs’ Interrogatories and Requests for Production of Documents of May 4, 2012, and

the Senate’s Response to Romo Plaintiffs’ First Request for Production of Documents, dated


MIAMI 990078

22

April 25, 2012, that the Romo Plaintiffs’ requests for production were overbroad and unduly

burdensome, and that they sought documents not within the possession, custody, or control of the

Legislative Parties. See Exhibits E & F. At the same time, the Legislative Parties stated clearly

and precisely the efforts that would be made, subject to their overbreadth, undue-burden, and

other objections, to gather, identify, and produce documents. See Exhibit F. Though fully

advised as early as April 2012 of the efforts that the Legislative Parties would deem to be

consistent with the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure, neither you nor the Romo Plaintiffs

communicated any concerns or objections.

















MIAMI 990078

23





INTERROGATORY NO. 6: During your efforts to identify, gather and produce responsivedocuments to the Coalition Plaintiffs’ Second Request, please explain whether you located andsearched the hard copy and electronic files and records in the possession, custody and control ofLegislators and Legislative Staff Members, including on both their official computers andofficial handheld devices and of their official email accounts as well as on their personalcomputers and personal handheld devices and of their personal email accounts. If you did notundertake such an effort, describe in detail the factual and legal bases for your failure to do so.

ANSWER: The efforts to gather, identify, and produce documents in response to your

Second Request for Production of documents, dated August 7, 2013, are ongoing, but are

described in response to Interrogatory No. 3, above. The Legislative Parties objected in their

Responses and Objections to LOWV Plaintiffs’ Second Request for Production of Documents to

Defendants, dated September 11, 2013, that your requests for production were overbroad and

unduly burdensome, and that they sought documents not within the possession, custody, or

control of the Legislative Parties. See Exhibit K. At the same time, the Legislative Parties

informed you clearly and precisely of the efforts that would be made, subject to their

overbreadth, undue-burden, and other objections, to gather, identify, and produce documents.

Though fully advised of the efforts that the Legislative Parties would deem to be consistent with

the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure, neither you nor the Romo Plaintiffs have communicated

any concerns or objections, or proposed any additional search terms, as the Legislative Parties

invited them to do.

INTERROGATORY NO. 7: Describe in detail any and all efforts you undertook to identify,gather and produce in response to the Coalition Plaintiffs’ First Request, the Romo Plaintiffs’First Requests, and the Coalition Plaintiffs’ Second Request any communications regarding any


MIAMI 990078

24

congressional redistricting plan between Legislators or Legislative Staff Members and anypolitical strategist or consultant, including but not limited to:

i. any person who served between 2010 and 2012 as officer, director, consultant,affiliate, contractor, or employee of Data Targeting, Inc., Public Concepts LLC,Strategic Image Management LLC, or Bascom Communications,

ii. Pat Bainter,iii. Matt Mitchell,iv. Michael Sheehan,v. Marc Reichelderfer,vi. Rich Heffley,vii. Richard Johnston,viii. Thomas Piccolo,ix. Anthony Pedicini,x. Ryan Tysonxi. Benjamin Ginsberg,xii. Thomas Hofeller,xiii. any person who was an officer, consultant, director, contractor, agent, or

employee of the Republican Party of Florida, Republican National Committee,Republican State Leadership Committee, National Republican CongressionalCommittee Redistricting Majority Project or REDMAP, at any time between 2010through 2012, including, but not limited to, Joel Springer, Frank Terraferma,Mark Jefferson, Mike Wild, and Chris Jankowski, and

xiv. any other person consulted with regarding any congressional district in Florida.

ANSWER: The Legislative Parties incorporate their answers to Interrogatories No. 1, 2,

and 3, above.

INTERROGATORY NO. 8: Describe in detail the factual and legal bases for your failure toproduce all communications described in Interrogatory 7 above, including but not limited to whyyou failed to produce the communications contained in the following deposition exhibits:Heffley Deposition Exhibits 2, 3, 8, 15 and 24-26; Reichelderfer Deposition Exhibits 5, 6, 8, 9,20-26, 28-44, 46-48, 50, 51, 54 and 56-62; and Terraferma Deposition Exhibits 13, 23, 25 and67.

ANSWER: The Legislative Parties conducted the searches described in their answers to

Interrogatories No. 1, 2, and 3, above. The documents referred to in Interrogatory No. 8 were

not identified in these searches.

INTERROGATORY NO. 9: Do you contend that any communication described inInterrogatories 1 through 7 above was deleted, destroyed, lost, misappropriated, or otherwisebecame unavailable for production because the physical document or electronic file is no longerin the possession, custody or control of any Legislator or Legislative Staff Member? If yes,


MIAMI 990078

25

describe in detail all facts and circumstances that led to each such communication becomingunavailable for production, including all steps taken by you to preserve such communications byissuance of a litigation hold or other means.

ANSWER: The Legislative Parties do not contend that the communications described in

Interrogatories 1 through 7 above were deleted, destroyed, lost, misappropriated, or otherwise

became unavailable for production. The Legislative Parties further note that, during the

legislative redistricting process, the Legislative Parties maintained and disposed of legislative

records in accordance with record-retention policies embodied in the rules of the Florida House

of Representatives and the Florida Senate. See Fla. H. Rule 14.2 (2010-2012); Fla. S. Rule 1.444

(2010-2012).

INTERROGATORY NO. 10: Please state whether you have identified on a privilege log alldocuments responsive to the Coalition Plaintiffs’ First Request and the Romo Plaintiffs’ FirstRequests that are being withheld from production by you on the basis of legislative privilege. Ifall such documents have not been identified on a privilege log, describe in detail the factual andlegal bases for your failure to do so.

ANSWER: The Legislative Parties have identified on privilege logs all documents

responsive to the your First Request for Production, dated June 22, 2012, and the Romo

Plaintiffs’ First Requests for Production, dated March 2 and 23, 2012, that are being withheld on

the basis of legislative privilege.

Case No.: 2012-ca-00412/2012-ca-00490

EXHIBIT 2

LEGISLATIVE PARTIES’ DECEMBER 9, 2013

SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSE TO LOWV PLAINTIFFS’

SECOND SET OF INTERROGATORIES

\255036\8 - # 417426 v1


RENE ROMO, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

vs. Case No. 2012-CA-000412

KEN DETZNER, in his official capacity asFlorida Secretary of State, and PAMELA JOBONDI, in her official capacity as AttorneyGeneral,_____________________________________/


Plaintiffs,

vs. Case No. 2012-CA-000490


Defendants._____________________________________/

THE LEGISLATIVE PARTIES’ NOTICE OF SERVING SUPPLEMENTALRESPONSE TO LOWV PLAINTIFFS’ SECOND SET OF INTERROGATORIES



in his official capacity as President of the Florida Senate, hereby give notice of serving this

supplemental response to the LOWV Plaintiffs’ Second Set of Interrogatories, dated September

11, 2013.

\255036\8 - # 417426 v12

/s/ Raoul G. CanteroRaoul G. CanteroFlorida Bar No. 552356Jason N. ZakiaFlorida Bar No. 698121Jesse L. GreenFlorida Bar No. 95591White & Case LLPSoutheast Financial Center200 S. Biscayne Blvd., Suite 4900Miami, Florida 33131-2352Telephone: 305-371-2700Facsimile: 305-358-5744Email: [email protected]: [email protected]: [email protected]

George T. LevesqueFlorida Bar No. 555541General Counsel, The Florida Senate305 Senate Office Building404 South Monroe StreetTallahassee, Florida 32399-1100Telephone: (850) 487-5237E-mail: [email protected]

Attorneys for Defendants, Florida Senate andPresident Don Gaetz

/s/ George N. Meros, Jr.Charles T. WellsFlorida Bar No. 086265George N. Meros, Jr.Florida Bar No. 263321Jason L. UngerFlorida Bar No. 0991562Andy BardosFlorida Bar No. 822671Gray Robinson, P.A.Post Office Box 11189Tallahassee, Florida 32302Telephone: (850) 577-9090E-mail: [email protected]: [email protected]: [email protected]: [email protected]

Miguel A. De GrandyFlorida Bar No. 332331Holland & Knight LLP701 Brickell Avenue, Suite 3000Miami FL 33131Telephone: (305) 789- 7535E-mail: [email protected]

Daniel E. NordbyFlorida Bar No. 14588General Counsel, The Florida House ofRepresentatives422 The Capitol402 South Monroe StreetTallahassee, Florida 32399-1300Telephone: 850-717-5500E-mail: [email protected]

Attorneys for the Florida House ofRepresentatives and Speaker Will Weatherford

\255036\8 - # 417426 v13


I certify that a copy of the foregoing was served by electronic transmission on December

9, 2013, to the persons listed on the following Service List.

/s/ George N. Meros, Jr.George N. Meros, Jr.Florida Bar No. 263321

\255036\8 - # 417426 v14

SERVICE LIST

Mark HerronRobert TelferAngelina PerezMesser Caparello & Self, P.A.Post Office Box 1876Tallahassee, Florida 32302-1876Telephone: [email protected]@[email protected]@[email protected]@lawfla.com

John M. DevaneyMark Erik EliasElisabeth C. FrostPerkins Coie, LLP700 Thirteenth Street, NW, Ste. 700Washington, DC 20005Telephone: (202) 654-6200Fax: (202) [email protected]@[email protected]

Ashley DavisAssistant General CounselFlorida Department Of StateR.A. Gray Building500 S. Bronough StreetTallahassee, FL 32399Telephone: (850) [email protected]@[email protected]

Abha KhannaKevin J. HamiltonRyan SpearPerkins Coie, LLP1201 Third Avenue, Ste. 4800Seattle, WA 98101-3099Telephone: (206) 359-8000Fax : (206) [email protected]@[email protected]@perkinscoie.com

Harry O. ThomasChristopher B. LunnyRadey, Thomas, Yon & Clark, PA301 South Bronough Street, Ste. Ste. 200Tallahassee, Florida 32301-1722Telephone: (850) 425-6654Fax: (850) [email protected]@radeylaw.com

Jon L. MillsElan NehleberBoies, Schiller & Flexner LLP100 SE 2nd Street, Ste. 2800Miami, FL 33131-2144Telephone: (305) 539-8400Fax: (305) [email protected]@bsfllp.com

\255036\8 - # 417426 v15

Blaine H. WinshipOffice Of Attorney GeneralCapitol, Pl-01Tallahassee, FL 32399-1050Telephone: (850) 414-3300Fax: (850) [email protected]

George LevesqueGeneral CounselThe Florida Senate305 Senate Office Building404 South Monroe StreetTallahassee, FL 32399-1100Telephone: (850) [email protected]@[email protected]

Allison J. RiggsAnita S. EarlsSouthern Coalition For Social Justice1415 West Highway 54, Ste. 101Durham, NC 27707Telephone: (919) 323-3380Fax: (919) [email protected]@southerncoalition.org

Michael A. CarvinLouis K. FisherJones Day51 Louisiana Avenue N.W.Washington, DC 20001Telephone: (202) 879-7643Fax: (202) [email protected]@jonesday.com

David B. KingThomas A. ZehnderFrederick S. WermuthKing, Blackwell, Zehnder & Wermuth, P.A.Post Office Box 1631Orlando, Florida 32802-1631Telephone (407) 422-2472Fax (407) [email protected]@[email protected]@[email protected]

Raoul G. CanteroJason N. ZakiaJesse L. GreenWhite & Case LLPSoutheast Financial Center200 South Biscayne Boulevard, Suite 4900Miami, Florida 33131-2352Telephone: (305) [email protected]@[email protected]@[email protected]

Benjamin James StevensonAmerican Civil Liberties Unionof Florida Foundation

Post Office Box 12723Pensacola, Florida 32591-2723Phone 786-363-2738Fax: [email protected]

Ronald MeyerLynn HearnMeyer, Brooks, Demma and Blohm, P.A.131 North Gadsden StreetPost Office Box 1547 (32302)Tallahassee, FL 32301Telephone: (850) [email protected]@meyerbrookslaw.com

\255036\8 - # 417426 v16

Victor L. GoodeDorcas R. GilmoreNAACP4805 Mt. Hope DriveBaltimore, MD 21215-3297Telephone: (410) [email protected]@naacpnet.org

Karen C. DyerBoies, Schiller & Flexner LLP121 South Orange Avenue, Ste. 840Orlando, FL 32801Telephone: (407) 425-7118Fax: (407) [email protected]

Gerald E. GreenbergAdam M. SchachterGelber Schachter & Greenberg, P.A.1441 Brickell Avenue, Suite 1420Miami, FL 33131Telephone: (305) 728-0950Fax: (305) [email protected]@[email protected]

Jessica Ring AmunsonPaul SmithMichael B. DeSanctisChristopher DealJenner & Block LLP1099 New York Avenue, N.W., Ste. 900Washington, DC 20001-4412Telephone: (202) [email protected]@[email protected]@jenner.com

J. Gerald Hebert191 Somervelle Street, #405Alexandria, VA 22304Telephone: (703) [email protected]

\255036\8 - # 417426 v11


RENE ROMO, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

vs. Case No. 2012-CA-000412

KEN DETZNER, in his official capacity asFlorida Secretary of State, and PAMELA JOBONDI, in her official capacity as AttorneyGeneral,_____________________________________/


Plaintiffs,

vs. Case No. 2012-CA-000490


Defendants._____________________________________/

THE LEGISLATIVE PARTIES’ SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSETO LOWV PLAINTIFFS’ SECOND SET OF INTERROGATORIES



in his official capacity as President of the Florida Senate (collectively, the “Legislative Parties”),

supplement their response to the Second Set of Interrogatories served by Plaintiffs, the League of

Women Voters of Florida, et al., on September 11, 2013. The Legislative Parties respond in

conformity with the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure and other applicable law, and object to the

Definitions for Interrogatories to the extent they purport to impose additional duties. The

\255036\8 - # 417426 v12

Legislative Parties’ answers are made without waiving or intending to waive, and the Legislative

Parties expressly preserve:

(A) all objections they may have as to the total number of interrogatories,including subparts, served by the LOWV Plaintiffs on the LegislativeParties, which may not exceed 30 pursuant to Florida Rule of CivilProcedure 1.340(a);

(B) all objections they may have as to the competence, relevance, materiality,and admissibility as evidence for any purpose of the answers provided, orthe subject matters thereof;

(C) the right to object on any ground to the use of the information in anyaspect of this or any other action;

(D) all applicable privileges, exemptions, and protections from discovery;

(E) all legislative privileges and immunities of their 160 independently electedconstitutional officers and staff; and

(F) the right at any time to supplement these answers.

ANSWERS TO INTERROGATORIES

INTERROGATORY NO. 9: Do you contend that any communication described inInterrogatories 1 through 7 above was deleted, destroyed, lost, misappropriated, or otherwisebecame unavailable for production because the physical document or electronic file is no longerin the possession, custody or control of any Legislator or Legislative Staff Member? If yes,describe in detail all facts and circumstances that led to each such communication becomingunavailable for production, including all steps taken by you to preserve such communications byissuance of a litigation hold or other means.

ANSWER: Article I, Section 24 of the Florida Constitution, which relates to public

records, provides that “each house of the legislature may adopt rules governing the

enforcement of this section in relation to records of the legislative branch.” Art. I,

§ 24(c), Fla. Const. Pursuant to this provision and Article III, Section 4(a), Florida

Constitution, which authorizes each house of the Legislature to “determine its rules of

procedure,” the Florida House of Representatives and the Florida Senate have

\255036\8 - # 417426 v13

traditionally adopted rules of procedure, including rules governing legislative records, at

each biennial organization session. See Art. III, § 3(a), Fla. Const.

Consistent with this long-standing practice, on November 16, 2010, the House

and Senate adopted the rules that would govern their proceedings until the next general

election. See Fla. H.R. Jour. 6-23 (Org. Sess. Nov. 16, 2010); Fla. S. Jour. 6-38 (Org.

Sess. Nov. 16, 2010). As is customary, these rules included provisions that regulated the

retention and disposal of legislative records. See Fla. H.R. Rule 14.2 (2010-2012); Fla. S.

Rule 1.444 (2010-2012). By their terms, these record-retention policies applied even-

handedly to all legislative business and all areas of legislative concern, including

congressional redistricting.

House Rule 14.2 provided that records “no longer needed for any purpose . . .

shall be disposed of systematically,” unless those records were “of vital, permanent, or

archival value” or had “sufficient administrative, legal, of fiscal significance to warrant

their retention.” Senate Rule 1.444(2), (4), and (6) similarly provided that public records

not of archival value and public records whose retention requirements have expired “may

be otherwise disposed of or destroyed.” “It is a legislative prerogative to make, interpret

and enforce its own procedural rules . . . .” Locke v. Hawkes, 595 So. 2d 32, 36 (Fla.

1992) (quoting Moffitt v. Willis, 459 So. 2d 1018, 1022 (Fla. 1984)).

Although the legislative rules were adopted and published on November 16, 2010,

at no time during the legislative process that preceded the adoption of a congressional

redistricting plan on February 9, 2012, did any of the plaintiffs in this litigation request,

in writing or otherwise, that records related to congressional redistricting be preserved.

At no time during the legislative process did any of the plaintiffs in this litigation make a

\255036\8 - # 417426 v14

public-records request for records related to congressional redistricting, or inform the

House or Senate that litigation would be brought to challenge the congressional plan.

During the legislative process, the published and generally applicable record-

retention policies embodied in the adopted rules governed the retention of legislative

records, including records related to congressional redistricting. In strict compliance with

these written record-retention policies, legislative records, including records related to

congressional redistricting, were sometimes, and appropriately, discarded. The

Legislative Parties are without knowledge of the facts and circumstances of particular

communications. The legislative rules governed the retention of records related to

congressional redistricting until a duty to preserve documents arose under Florida law.

See Gayer v. Fine Line Const. & Elec., Inc., 970 So. 2d 424, 426 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007);

Royal & Sunalliance v. Lauderdale Marine Ctr., 877 So. 2d 843, 845 (Fla. 4th DCA

2004).