Along the way, she has about a decade and a half of data analysis work under her belt and currently works as a blog coordinator for a high-end wedding blog and also as a blogger for hire (topics include diverse subjects like ad retargeting but also the nursing job market), and has a shingle out to work on social media presence, with a focus on independent authors as she is also a published science fiction author. Plus, she has been a community manager for a large Q & A website since 2002, which is before that existed as a job title.
She was raised on Long Island so, when she is riled up, the accent gallops back out and she can sound like Fran Drescher with a law degree. She lives in Boston with her husband of over 20 years and more computers than they need.
She can always be bribed with pie.
Latest posts by Janet Gershen-Siegel (see all)
- Semantic Shenanigans Episode 16 – Wakanda Driving Privileges - May 13, 2018
- Semantic Shenanigans Episode 15 – Coldplay Justice - January 27, 2018
- Indie Writer Woes – Protect Yourselves! - November 17, 2017
Axanar David Grossman Declaration and Exhibits
The David Grossman Declaration was added as a part of the recent Application for an Ex Parte order.
There are a lot of documents here; we’ll get through them together, page by page, okay? This blog post paginates so it won’t load a ton of images every time.
And finally on this last page, Grossman adds:
- When asked to de-designate the ledger, Ranahan protested that to do so would open defendant Peters up to embarrassment.
And now we move onto the documents supporting the Grossman declaration.
So as always, we start with a cover sheet.
So keep in mind that this is an email trail. And, as such, the information goes in reverse chronological order. Hence we start with defense attorney Ranahan’s email, dated September 26, 2016, at 3:11 PM, PDT.
And the most interesting she says is:
We are not withholding anything from before the lawsuit was filed as privileged, and we are only withholding
post-lawsuit communications that include an attorney on the communication.
And then the next part (which started on the previous page) is a David Grossman email dated September 26, 2016, at 3:03 PM, PDT. So you can see these emails were coming fast and furious. In that email, Grossman mainly states he’s unaware of any privilege log agreement. While the third piece is on this page, I’ll cover it below, just to make this blog post a bit more readable. Sit tight.
This page is really just the last bit of an email signature line. However, referencing the final email in the exhibit (the first one chronologically) on the previous page, that one is also from Ranahan, the date is September 26, 2016, and the time is 2:46 PM, PDT. Hence this reiterates the feeling I have (which I bet you do, too), that this was a flurry of email activity, all in one afternoon. In this email, Ranahan talks about not only the privilege log and depositions, but also getting the interrogatories verified. We know a little bit about what was in the interrogatories, but the numbers obviously indicate there are more interrogatory questions which haven’t made it into the court record yet.