Giuffre_Maxwell_Batch1_p00724.png

Case 1:15-cv-07433-LAP Document 1320-33 Filed 01/03/24 Page 15 of 24 information. In her initial Rule 26(a) disclosures in November 2015, Plaintiff failed to provide any information on the calculation of or supporting evidence for her damages claim. When she supplemented her Rule 26(a) disclosures, she provided none of the necessary information or an actual computation of damages, relying on other people’s alleged earning potential and average damage awards in other cases with completely different claim types. See Motion to Compel Rule 26(a) Disclosure at 5-6 (DE 64).° To date, over six months after her Rule 26(a) disclosures were required and with less than 10 days left in discovery, Plaintiff has failed and refused to provide any supporting documentation for her damages claims or an actual computation of her damages based on her alleged injury as required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 26(a)(iii). At a minimum, reliance on any calculation, information or evidence that has not been provided as of this filing of this motion must be precluded. Plaintiff's Rule 26 failures do not end with the damages calculations. It has now become clear that Plaintiff failed to disclose witnesses with relevant information based on the subpoenas she has served in this matter. Plaintiff repeatedly has issued subpoenas to witnesses for depositions and document production before including them on her Rule 26 disclosures. To wit, e Allyson Chambers — subpoena February 12; disclosed March 11 e Aviation Insurance — subpoena April 27; never disclosed e Y — subpoena notice May 16; disclosed June 1 e Joe Recarey — subpoena notice May 17; disclosed June | e Michael Reiter — subpoena notice May 17; disclosed June | e Shopper’s Paradise — subpoena notice April 26; never disclosed How many other witnesses are there with relevant information that Plaintiff has hidden? > No ruling had been made on this Motion. 12