Brune File May 3 2017

Case: 45CO1:14-cv-01131 Document #: 65 Filed: 05/02/2017 Page 1 of 2

IN THE COUNTY COURT OF MADISON COUNTY
DOWNTOWN JACKSON PARTNERS

and PLAINTIFFS
DJP MARKETING CENTER, LLC
VS. NO. CO-2014-01131
LINDA BRUNE DEFENDANT
MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE AMENDED ANSWER

AND AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES
Pursuant to Rule 15(a) of the Mississippi Rules of Civil Procedure, Defendant,
Linda Brune, asks for permission to file an Amended Answer and Affirmative Defenses. In support
of this Motion, Defendant states:
1. Defendant was sued in her individual capacity, by Downtown Jackson Partners, and DJP
Marketing Center, LLP., hereinafter collectively referred to as DJP, corporate entities with
significant resources. The allegations against the Defendant are such that criminal conduct is
implicated. The Defendant does not and has not had the resources to hire counsel to represent her
on this case. It should be noted that she was able to hire counsel for a collateral contempt matter
that arose in this case, but that representation was limited.
2. Defendant filed an Answer to the Complaint on her own and has not had legal counsel
in drafting the Answer or in defending herself on the merits of this case until her current counsel
appeared a matter of weeks ago.
3. When the Complaint was initially filed, the Plaintiff took no action for more than two
years.
4. Defendant, now being properly advised and represented, would ask this Court for an
opportunity to amend her Answer to make sure that all due process of the law is provided to
her. The Plaintiff should not be permitted to cite delay or prejudice as a reason to deny this motion
considering the Plaintiff did nothing to prosecute the case for more than 2 years.
5. Rule 15(a) of the Mississippi Rules of Civil Procedure provides that the leave to amend
shall be freely given when justice so requires.
WHEREFORE, Defendant moves for an Order allowing Defendant to file its Amended Answer
and Affirmative Defenses.
DATED this the ________day

18th of _________________,
April 2017.
Respectfully submitted,
Linda Brune, Defendant
BY:_____________________________
ROGEN CHHABRA
Of Counsel:
Rogen K. Chhabra (MSB No. 99131)

Amanda H. Fritz (MSB No. 104836)
CHHABRA & GIBBS, P.A.
120 North Congress Street, Suite 200
Jackson, Mississippi 39201
Telephone: (601) 948-8005
Facsimile: (601) 948-8010
Counsel for Defendant
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I, Rogen Chhabra, do hereby certify that I have this day delivered a true and correct copy
of the above, foregoing document in a manner prescribed by law to:
Charles Richard Mullins

Coxwell & Associates, PLLC
P.O. Box 1337
Jackson, MS 39215
Email: chuckm@coxwelllaw.com
Samuel L. Begley
Begley Law Firm
P.O. Box 287
Jackson, MS 39205
Email: sbegley1@bellsouth.net
THIS the __________day

18th of ______________________,
April 2017.
_____________________________
ROGEN CHHABRA
IN THE COUNTY COURT OF MADISON COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI

and
DJP MARKETING CENTER, LLC PLAINTIFFS
v. NO. CO-2014-1131
NOTICE OF HEARING
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that on Wednesday, January 4, 2017, beginning at 1:00 p.m.,
or as soon thereafter as counsel can be heard, the following matter will be brought on for hearing
before the County Court Judge assigned to this cause, at the Madison County Courthouse,
located at 28 West North Street, Canton, MS 39046:
A. The Defendants Motion to Set Aside Default Judgment (Doc. #39);
B. The Plaintiffs Motion for Default Judgment (Doc. #33) ( if necessary); and
C. A hearing on the record in which the Plaintiffs will present evidence
regarding the question of damages, pursuant to the Courts Order Granting Default
Judgment entered on December 2, 2016. ( Doc. #37).
Respectfully submitted, this the 21st day of December, 2016.

and
PLAINTIFFS
By: _ /s/Samuel L. Begley___________
Samuel L. Begley
1
OF COUNSEL:
Samuel L. Begley, MSB NO. 2315
BEGLEY LAW FIRM, PLLC
P. O. Box 287
Jackson, MS 39205
Telephone: (601)969-5545
begleylaw@gmail.com
I certify that on this day I electronically filed the foregoing pleading with the Clerk of the
Court using the MEC system which will send notification of such filing to Eduardo Flechas, Esq.
I further certify that I served the same via U.S. Mail and electronic mail on the following:
Linda Brune
6811 Old Canton Road, Suite 1001,
Ridgeland, MS 39157
linda_brune2012@outlook.com
Certified,this the 21st day of December, 2016.
_s/Samuel L.Begley___
Samuel Begley
2

and
v. NO. CO-2014-1131
RESPONSE OF PLAINTIFFS IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS MOTION TO SET

ASIDE DEFAULT JUDGMENT (DOC. #39)
The Plaintiffs, Downtown Jackson Partners and DJP Marketing Center, LLC, by and
through their undersigned attorney, respond in opposition to the Defendant Linda Brunes
Motion to Set Aside Default Judgment (Doc. #39), as follows:
Introduction
1. The Defendant argues that the Courts Order entered on December 2, 2016
granting the Plaintiffs Motion for Default Judgment (Doc. #37) should be set aside because she
allegedly was unaware of the telephonic hearing conducted to consider the motion and because
the motion had not been noticed for hearing five days beforehand pursuant to Mississippi Rule of
Civil Procedure 6(d).
2. Remarkably, the Defendant offers no explanation as to how she will rectify her
willful misconduct in these proceedings, which caused the Court to enter the default judgment to
begin with. That misconduct included her willful refusal to allow the Plaintiffs to take her
deposition, which led to the Court ordering her in contempt of court and issuing a bench warrant
for her arrest, and her failure/ refusal to work with Plaintiffs counsel in preparing the pretrial
order for the trial that was scheduled to commence on December 5, 2016.
1
3. Moreover, the Defendant fails to explain why her attorney, who purportedly had
entered only a limited appearance to set aside the contempt order, did not apprise her of the
telephonic hearing on the afternoon of Thursday, December 1, 2016, that considered the
plaintiffs motion for default judgment, even though he participated in the hearing to argue his
motion on the contempt issue.
4. As will be explained below, the Defendants motion to set aside the Courts
Order Granting Motion for Default Judgment is without merit and should be denied.
Alternatively, the Court can easily cure any procedural issues regarding five day notice under
Rule 6(d) by simply affirming the default judgment order during the Courts hearing on
damages, noticed for Wednesday January 4, 2016. (Doc. #38)
Procedural Background
5. The Plaintiffs filed this civil action against the Defendant, a former employee of
Downtown Jackson Partners, seeking to recover damages for the more than $40,000 in corporate
funds that she embezzled through a check forgery scheme devised while she was an employee.
(Doc. #2).
6. The Defendant answered the complaint pro se (Doc. #5) and, until recently, had
no attorney to represent her in the case.
7. The Plaintiffs were able to secure a trial setting for December 5, 2016, as set forth
in the Courts Scheduling Order and Trial Setting entered on May 19, 2016. (Doc. #15).1
1
Because the Court entered the Default Judgment Order on Friday, December 2, 2016, the jury trial that
was to take place the following Monday, on December 5, 2016, was cancelled. Instead, the Court ordered that a
hearing be set to determine damages, in accordance with Mississippi Rule of Civil Procedure 55(b). The Plaintiffs
have noticed an on the record hearing by the Court to take place on Wednesday, January 4, 2017, at which time
they will present evidence regarding the question of damages suffered by them due to the Defendants misconduct.
2
8. Following the Courts entry of the scheduling order Plaintiffs counsel
immediately sought to take the Defendants deposition prior to trial; however, the Defendant
was unresponsive to this request.
9. On June 29, 2016, the Plaintiffs filed their motion to compel the Defendant to
provide available dates for her deposition and to otherwise cooperate with the Plaintiffs in
providing any requested discovery. (Doc. #17). 2
10. The Defendant responded to the Plaintiffs interrogatories on September 21, 2016
(Doc. #24-2) and October 12, 2016 ( Doc. #22), stating that she did not intend to participate in
any discovery until the completion of a criminal trial in Hinds County scheduled to commence
on November 28, 2016, in which the Plaintiffs President, Ben Allen, is the defendant. The
Defendant alleged that she would be a witness, not a defendant, in this criminal trial.3 The
allegations in the Hinds County criminal case are not materially related to the cause brought by
the Plaintiffs in the instant action, in the opinion of the undersigned counsel.
11. The Court heard the Plaintiffs Motion to Compel on October 25, 2016; however,
the Defendant did not attend the hearing.
12. At the conclusion of the hearing, the Court ruled from the bench to grant the
Plaintiffs Motion to Compel, ordering the Defendant to appear at a deposition at the Madison
County Courthouse, at a time when a witness room was available. Afterwards, Plaintiffs counsel
scheduled the use of a witness room with the Circuit Clerk for Tuesday, November 1, 2016, at
2:00 p.m., and in turn prepared an order for the Courts consideration, which was sent to the
Court Administrator, and copied to the Defendant, via email. The proposed order compelling
discovery listed the aforesaid time, date and place for the Defendants deposition.
2
Notably, as the Plaintiffs motion to compel points out, Hinds County District Attorney Robert Shuler
Smith wrote Plaintiffs counsel stating that the Defendant would be unavailable for a deposition. ( Doc. #17-1).
3
The undersigned counsel understands that this trial has been continued to Monday, January 30, 2016,
3
13. Plaintiffs counsel subsequently left the Defendant an email and voicemail
message seeking confirmation t that she would attend the deposition in light of the Courts bench
ruling, but never heard back from her. Plaintiffs counsel appeared at the Courthouse at the
appointed time on November 1, 2016 for the deposition but the Defendant did not show up.
14. The next day, on November 2, 2016, the Plaintiffs filed their motion to have the
Defendant held in contempt of court. (Doc. #24). The Court conducted a telephonic hearing on
the motion on the morning of Friday, November 4, 2016, in which the Defendant freely
participated and was quite talkative. At that time, she told the Court that she would not answer
any discovery or submit to a deposition until after the conclusion of a criminal trial scheduled to
commence in Hinds County more than three weeks later, on November 28, 2016. On
Wednesday, November 9, 2016, the Court entered its contempt order which ordered the
Defendants arrest and to be held in custody until she had completed the Plaintiffs deposition of
her. (Doc. #25).
15. On November 16, 2016, Eduardo Flechas, Esq. entered his appearance as counsel
for the Defendant ( Doc. #29)4 and filed the Defendants motion to set aside the Contempt Order,
claiming that the order was void because the Defendant should have been issued a Rule 81
summons, along with seven days notice for the hearing on the contempt motion. ( Doc. #30).
16. On November 19, 2016, the Plaintiffs responded in opposition to the Defendants
motion to set aside the contempt order. (Doc. #31). The Plaintiffs argued therein that the
Defendant had participated in the telephonic hearing on the motion and thus had waived any
notice issue.
4
Although Mr. Flechas pleading was captioned, generally, as an Entry of Appearance he subsequently
pointed out that his appearance for the Defendant was limited to the Defendants motion to set aside the contempt
order, and that, consequently, the Defendant remained pro se for everything else in the proceedings.
4
17. The Courts Scheduling Order required the parties to submit a completed pretrial
order by 5:00 p.m. on November 28, 2016, a week before trial, along with jury instructions.
(Doc. #15).
18. Prior to the aforesaid deadline Plaintiffs counsel sent Mr. Flechas an email
containing the draft pretrial order document and left a detailed voice mail message on his office
telephone explaining the court deadlines, but Plaintiffs counsel never heard nothing back.
Several hours of work was involved in preparing the Plaintiffs portion of the pretrial order. The
Plaintiffs timely submitted their portion of the pretrial order after not having heard anything
beforehand from Mr. Flechas or Ms. Brune. Attached as an exhibit is a copy of the undersigned
counsels letter to Judge Longwitz transmitting the pretrial order and explaining counsels
frustrations in dealing with the Defendant and her counsel.
19. The next day, Tuesday, November 29, 2016, With a trial on the immediate
horizon and no word from the defendant , the Plaintiffs moved for entry of a default judgment.
(Doc. # 33). As grounds for this motion, the Plaintiffs cited the Defendants refusal to be
deposed prior to trial and counsel for the Defendants failure or refusal, without excuse, to
prepare the Defendants portion of the pretrial order.
20. On Wednesday, November 30, 2016, the Plaintiffs filed a supplement to their
Motion for Default Judgment. (Doc. #34). Plaintiffs Counsel explained that he had received an
email from Mr. Flechas stating that he had only entered a limited appearance as counsel for
the Defendant on the issue of the Courts Order of Contempt against his client. Beforehand, the
undersigned counsel was under the impression that Mr. Flechas was representing Ms. Brune in
the case for all purposes because both the caption of his pleading and the MEC docket entry said
Entry of Appearance. Admittedly, the undersigned counsel did not read the body of the entry
5
of appearance pleading which indicated that Mr. Flechas hereby enters his limited appearance
as counsel for the Defendant, Linda Brune, with regard to the Plaintiffs motion for contempt and
related proceedings. The aforesaid supplement also stated that the undersigned counsel, in light
of Mr. Flechas message stating his limited role, in turn sent an email directly to the Defendant
containing his portion of the proposed pretrial order, his letter to Judge Longwitz, and the
Motion for Default Judgment filed the day before.( Doc. #33). Plaintiffs, counsel heard nothing
back from the Defendant, still hoping to learn whether the Defendant intended to participate in
the trial scheduled for the following Monday.
21. On Thursday, December 2, 2016, the Court conducted a telephonic hearing on the
Defendants motion to set aside the contempt order the Plaintiffs motion for default judgment.
Mr. Flechas was on the telephone call without his client and was silent when the matter of the
Plaintiffs default motion was considered by the Court.
22. On Friday, December 2, 2016, the Court entered separate orders denying the
Defendants motion to set aside the contempt order and granting the Plaintiffs motion for default
judgment. The jury trial scheduled for Monday was cancelled.
Law and Argument
23. Rule 60(b) lists six grounds for relief from a judgment. As best Plaintiffs counsel
can tell the Defendant may be asserting that the Default Judgment Order is void, which would
provide grounds to set the order aside under Rule 60(b)(4). A judgment is void if the rendering
court lacked personal or subject-matter jurisdiction or acted in a manner inconsistent with due
process. Overbey v. Murray, 569 So.2d 303, 306 (Miss.1990) (citations omitted).
24. There is no doubt that the Court had personal and subject matter jurisdiction over
the Defendant, a Madison County resident. The issue of whether the Defendant was afforded
6
due process in connection with the Courts consideration of the default judgment motion is also
without merit-- the Defendant had her attorney participate in the telephonic hearing, where the
motion was addressed, and, thus, any notice issue was waived by his appearance. Chasez v.
Chasez, 957 So.2d 1031, 1037 ( 15) (Miss.Ct.App.2007) (defendant waived objection to service
of process when he appeared and indicated his willingness to proceed.)
25. It was a curious matter when the Defendants attorney spoke during the hearing
on his clients motion to set aside the contempt order, but then became silent or evasive
regarding his role in addressing the Plaintiffs default judgment motion. Notably, the basis for
the Plaintiffs moving for entry of default was because the Defendant had evidently evaded the
deputy sheriffs attempts to serve the bench warrant on her so that she could be deposed and
because she refused to voluntarily come forward and schedule a deposition, which would have
lifted her from the sanction of contempt.
26. Notably, Mr. Flechas had entered his appearance as counsel for the Defendant to
address the contempt order and, as he expressly stated, related matters. Clearly, the Plaintiffs
motion for default judgment, alleging that the Defendant was still in contempt of court, was a
related matter. Accordingly, Mr. Flechas participating in the telephonic hearing for his client
waived any notice issues regarding the Courts consideration of the Plaintiffs motion for default
judgment.
27. Even now, the Defendant offers no explanation as to how she would end her
misconduct should the default judgment be set aside. She does not explain why she evaded the
bench warrant for more than three months and blatantly disregarded the contempt order requiring
her to be deposed before trial. She does not even offer to be deposed now or have this case set
for trial. She does not explain why she did not provide her portion of the pretrial order to
7
Plaintiffs counsel or the Court, as required by the Scheduling Order, or whether she would do so
going forward.
26. Under the aforesaid circumstances, the Default Judgment Order is not void for
lack of due process so as to cause it to be set aside pursuant to Rule 60(b)(4).
27. Mississippi Rule of Civil Procedure 37 grants the Court the authority to enter a
judgment by default against a disobedient party regarding discovery matters. Arguably, such
entry does not require prior notice and hearing where the Defendant remains in contempt of
court.
28. Mississippi Rule of Civil Procedure 55 provides that when a party against whom a
judgment is sought has failed to plead or otherwise defend then a default may be entered and
judgment granted. Rule 55 further provides that the judgment by default may be entered by the
court on the day the case is set for trial, without notice beforehand. Here, there is no indication
that the Defendant appeared at the Courthouse on Monday, December 5th ready for trial.
Additionally, the Defendants failure to supply her portion of the pretrial order gives every
indication did not intend to even show up at trial.
Request for Denial of Motion
Wherefore, Premises Considered, the Plaintiffs pray that the Court will deny the
Defendants motion to set aside the Order granting the Plaintiffs motion for default judgment.
Alternatively, the Plaintiffs pray that the Court will issue an amended default judgment order at
the hearing on all pending matters noticed for Wednesday, January 4, 2016.
Respectfully submitted, this the 21st day of December, 2016.

and
PLAINTIFFS
8

Samuel L. Begley
OF COUNSEL:
Samuel L. Begley, MSB NO. 2315
P. O. Box 287
Jackson, MS 39205
Telephone: (601)969-5545
begleylaw@gmail.com
Court using the MEC system which will send notification of such filing to Eduardo Flechas, Esq.
I further certify that I served the same via U.S. Mail and electronic mail on the following:
Linda Brune
Ridgeland, MS 39157
Certified, this the 21st day of December, 2016.
Samuel Begley
9
Case: 45CO1:14-cv-01131 Document #: 41-1 Filed: 12/21/2016 Page 1 of 2

Tel: (601) 969-5545
begleylaw@gmail.com
Mailing Address: Office Address:
P.O. Box 287 Regions Plaza, Suite 1088
Jackson, MS 39205 210 East Capitol Street
Jackson, MS 39201
November 28, 2016
The Honorable Will Longwitz

County Judge
128 West North Street
P.O. Box 1626
Canton, MS 39046
Re: Downtown Jackson Partners v. Brune, Case No. CO-2014-1131
Dear Judge Longwitz:

In accordance with the Scheduling Order entered in the above captioned case I, as
counsel for the Plaintiffs, submit the enclosed pretrial order. As you will see upon review, I
received absolutely no input from the Defendants counsel, who very recently entered his
appearance in the case. Even though I sent counsel opposite an email and left a detailed voice
mail message I have heard nothing from him today. I am providing you the proposed pretrial
order in scanned PDF format, which includes my signature on the document, and in Microsoft
Word format unsigned.
As you will recall, Your Honor entered an order finding the Defendant in contempt of
court, ordering that she be arrested so that she could be deposed by me prior to the scheduled
December 5th trial. Defendants counsel filed a motion to set aside your order of contempt, but
has not noticed it for hearing. Also, the Madisons County Sheriffs Office apparently has not
been able to locate the Defendant and serve the Courts bench warrant on her.
If I do not hear from Defendants counsel by mid morning tomorrow to advise me that I
can take his clients deposition before trial and that he intends to try the case next Monday, my
intention is to immediately move for the Courts entry of default judgment under both Rule 37
and Rule 55.And, should the Court enter a default, I would propose that the Court dismiss the
jury venire for next weeks trial and instead, on Monday morning, conduct a proof hearing from
the bench on the defaulted case.
Also, I have prepared a draft of jury instructions but respectfully request that I not be
required to file them until it is known tomorrow morning whether Counsel for the Defendant
intends to try the case on Monday.
Sincerely,
Sam Begley
Cc: Ed Flechas, Esq.
Cc: Mike Farrell, Esq.


and
v. NO. CO-2014-1131
MOTION FOR CONTEMPT
Come now the Plaintiffs, Downtown Jackson Partners and DJP Marketing Center,LLC,
who hereby move the Court to hold the Defendant Linda Brune in contempt of court for refusing
to adhere to the Courts bench ruling to be deposed and respond to interrogatories and document
production requests ,and, further, to order appropriate relief as authorized by Mississippi Rule
of Civil Procedure 37 and other legal authorities, as follows:
On Tuesday, October 25, 2016, the Court heard the Plaintiffs Motion to Compel
Discovery. (Doc.#17 ).The Plaintiffs motion was made necessary because the Defendant has
stated that she did not intend to participate in any pretrial proceedings until the completion of
a criminal trial scheduled to commence on November 28, 2016, in Hinds County, in which the
Plaintiffs President is the defendant. See email dated September 21, 2016, attached, and
Defendants Answer to Discovery filed October 12, 2016 (Doc. #22). The Defendant claims she
will be a witness in this criminal trial, which is materially unrelated to this civil action. The
Defendant did not attend the October 25th hearing on the PlaintiffsMotion to Compel. The Court
ruled from the bench to grant the Plaintiffs Motion to Compel, ordering the Defendant to
appear at a deposition at the Madison County Courthouse, at a time when a witness room was
1
available. Afterwards, Plaintiffs counsel scheduled the use of a witness room with the Circuit
Court for Tuesday, November 1st, at 2:00 p.m., and in turn prepared an order for the Courts
consideration, which was sent to the Court Administrator , and copied to the Defendant, via
email. The proposed order listed the aforesaid time, date and place for the deposition.
Subsequently, Plaintiffs counsel awaited confirmation from the Defendant that she would
attend the deposition. Plaintiffs counsel emailed and left the Defendant a voicemail message
yesterday seeking confirmation but never heard back from her. Plaintiffs counsel appeared at the
Courthouse yesterday at the appointed time for the deposition but the Defendant did not show
up.
In light of the Defendants expressed position refusing to cooperate, as stated in her
written answer and email regarding the Plaintiffs Motion to Compel, and as evidenced by her
recent course of conduct, it is clear that the Defendant does not intend to be deposed prior to the
December 3rd trial date for this cause, even after knowing that the Court had granted the
Plaintiffs motion to compel.
Rule 37(b)(1) states that the failure of a deponent to be sworn or answer a question after
being directed to do so by the court may be considered a contempt of court. Likewise, Rule
37(b)(2) provides if a party fails an order to provide or permit discovery, including an order
granting a motion to compel, the court may make such orders in regard to the failure as are
just, including the following:
(A) an order that the matters regarding which the order was made or any
other designated facts shall be taken to be established for the purposes of
the action in accordance with the claim of the party obtaining the order;
2
(B) an order refusing to allow the disobedient party to support or oppose
designated claims or defenses, or prohibiting him from introducing
designated matters in evidence;
(C) an order striking out pleadings or parts thereof, or staying further
proceedings until the order is obeyed, or dismissing the action or
proceeding or any part thereof, or rendering a judgment by default against
the disobedient party;
(D) in lieu of any of the foregoing orders or in addition thereto, an order
treating as a contempt of court the failure to obey any orders.
The Plaintiffs move the Court to hold the Defendant in contempt. The Plaintiffs further
move the Court to issue a bench warrant causing the Defendant to appear at a deposition at the
Courthouse at time convenient to Plaintiffs counsel and that she not be released from the
custody of the Sheriff until the deposition is concluded to the satisfaction of the Plaintiffs.
Respectfully submitted, this the 2nd day of November, 2016.

and
PLAINTIFFS

Samuel L. Begley
OF COUNSEL:
Samuel L. Begley
MSB NO. 2315
P. O. Box 287
Jackson, MS 39205
Telephone: (601)969-5545
begleylaw@gmail.com
3
Court using the MEC system
I further certify that I served the same via U.S. Mail and electronic mail on the
following:
Linda Brune
Ridgeland, MS 39157
Robert Shuler Smith, Esq.

Hinds County District Attorney's Office
PO Box 22747
Jackson Mississippi 39225-2747
rsmith@co.hinds.ms.us
robsmith3@prodigy.net
This the 2nd day of November, 2016.
Samuel Begley
4
Case:
Case:45CO1:14-cv-01131
45CO1:14-cv-01131 Document
Document#:#:24-1
22 Filed:
Filed:10/12/2016
11/02/2016 Page
Page11ofof22
DOWNTOWN JACKSON PARTNElf L E 1)

MADISONCOUNTY
and
OCT 1 2 2016
DJP MARKETING CENTER, LLC ANITA Willy, irCUITtMINTIFFS
V BY /14 f 14i( NA 0C0-2014-1131-SSr
ANSWER
PLAINTIFFS' FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND REQUEST FOR
PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS
As I am without representation at this time, I am at a loss as to whether I

am to file a motion for Judge Longwitz to delay Mr. Begley's request for
interrogatories and production of documents. Therefore, I am filing this
answer to Mr. Begley's request as a precautionary measure.
Having testified before the Hinds County Grand Jury regarding the case
against Benjamin Wade Allen, President of Downtown Jackson Partners
(hereafter DJP), I am under oath to reveal/discuss nothing regarding DJP
until after that trial, which is scheduled for November 28, 2016, in the
Hinds County Circuit Court. Mr. Allen was indicted on ten counts of
embezzlement and misuse of funds belonging to DJP. Preparation for that
trial has been time consuming and stressful for me. I, respectfully, request
that Judge Longwitz delay ALL proceedings regarding this issue until after
that trial.
Realizing that I might be held in contempt of court by refusing to cooperate
in this hearing, I am ready to accept the consequences. If I go to jail for
that refusal, I will have housing, food, medical treatment and other
necessities, some of which I do not have at this lime. These people can do
nothing more to me. I have lost everything, including my job, all assets,
Case:
Case:45CO1:14-cv-01131
45CO1:14-cv-01131 Document
Document#:#:24-1
22 Filed:
Filed:10/12/2016
11/02/2016 Page
Page22ofof22
medical and life insurance. My credit is in the toilet and I have lost
respect from some in the community. I simply have nothing else to lose
While DJP made every attempt to have me indicted for embezzlement after
I was fired from my employment with same, that case was no billed by the
Hinds County Grand Jury. According to the Detective assigned to that
case, DJP urged them to arrest me on Christmas Day in 2014. I provide
that information to show the malicious intent and retaliation by DJP.
Since that case was no billed in Hinds County, DJP is taking a second bite
of that apple in Madison County.
Under these circumstances, I decline to cooperate with Mr. Begley's request
for information regarding this case or any case regarding DJP until after the
trial of DJP President. I am prepared to take any consequence involved
but will not subject myself to contempt in Hinds County to satisfy a possible
order in Madison County.
Again, I am requesting that any proceedings be delayed until after the trial
of DJP President.
Respectfully submitted,
Linda S. Brune
(601)624-0381
linda brune2012(thoutlook.com
Copy
Samuel Begley, Attorney at Law
PO Box 287
Jackson, MS 39205
11/2/2016 GmailDowntownJacksonPartnersv.LindaBruneCaseNo.20141131

SamuelBegley<begleylaw@gmail.com>
DowntownJacksonPartnersv.LindaBruneCaseNo.20141131
LindaBrune<linda_brune2012@outlook.com> Wed,Sep21,2016at12:52PM
To:LindsayJohnson<Lindsay.Johnson@madisonco.com>,SamuelBegley<begleylaw@gmail.com>
Ms.Johnson:
Iwillnotbeavailablefordepositionsoranyrelatedmattertothiscaseuntilafterthecriminaltrialof
DowntownJacksonPartners'president.Ihavenoattorneyatthistimebuthewillbeavailable,
hopefullyinDecember.Iwillbeavailableanytimeaftertheaforementionedtrialisover.
Thankingyouinadvanceforyourcooperation.
LindaBrune
From:LindsayJohnson<Lindsay.Johnson@madisonco.com>
Sent:Wednesday,September21,201612:17PM
To:SamuelBegley
Cc:LindaBrune
Subject:RE:DowntownJacksonPartnersv.LindaBruneCaseNo.20141131

[Quotedtexthidden]
https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/?ui=2&ik=1b390c2a85&view=pt&q=lindsay.johnson%40madisonco.com&qs=true&search=query&msg=1574de08ec889078&s 1/1

and
v. NO. CO-2014-1131
DEFENDANTS MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY
The Plaintiffs move the Court for an order compelling the Defendant Linda Brune to
provide available dates for her deposition upon oral examination and to otherwise cooperate in
providing discovery. In support of their Motion the Plaintiffs submit the following:
The Plaintiffs are seeking to take the deposition of the Defendant Linda Brune, and to
have her produce documents at her deposition. Recently, counsel for the Plaintiffs received a
letter, a copy of which is attached as an exhibit, from Robert Shuler Smith, Esq., in which he
claims to be acting as Ms. Brunes attorney. Mr. Smith is the District Attorney for the Seventh
Circuit Court District (Hinds County). Mr. Smiths letter states that Ms. Brune will not be
available for depositions or any other matter related to the civil dispute in the above referenced
[ Downtown Jackson Partners v. Linda Brune] until she has retained counsel to respond to
numerous requests by DJP. Mr. Smith further states that Ms.Brune will request the Court to
hold any civil matter in abeyance until the disposition of the criminal matter.Notably, the Court
Administrator has scheduled a jury trial in this case to begin on December 5, 2016. No attorney
has entered an appearance as Ms. Brunes counsel.
1
Accordingly, the Plaintiffs move the Court to enter an order compelling the Defendant
Linda Brune to provide counsel for the Plaintiffs with available dates for her deposition upon
oral examination, and further order her to otherwise cooperate with the Plaintiffs in providing
any requested discovery. The Plaintiffs further move the Court to order Robert Shuler Smith,
Esq. to curtail his participation as an attorney for the Defendant in the instant civil matter until he
enters his appearance as counsel.
Respectfully submitted, this the 29th day of June, 2016.

and
PLAINTIFFS

Samuel L. Begley
OF COUNSEL:
Samuel L. Begley
MSB NO. 2315
P. O. Box 287
Jackson, MS 39205
Telephone: (601)969-5545
begleylaw@gmail.com
2
Court using the MEC system
I further certify that I served the same via U.S. Mail and electronic mail on the
following:
Linda Brune
Ridgeland, MS 39157
Robert Shuler Smith, Esq.

Hinds County District Attorney's Office
PO Box 22747
Jackson Mississippi 39225-2747
robsmith3@prodigy.net
This the 29th day of June, 2016.
Samuel Begley
3
Case: 45CO1:14-cv-01131-ssr Document #: 1 Filed: 12/10/2014 Page 1 of 8

Brune File May 3 2017

Încărcat de

Informații document

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Brune File May 3 2017

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Case: 45CO1:14-cv-01131 Document #: 65 Filed: 05/02/2017 Page 1 of 2

Case: 45CO1:14-cv-01131 Document #: 65 Filed: 05/02/2017 Page 2 of 2

IN THE COUNTY COURT OF MADISON COUNTY

DOWNTOWN JACKSON PARTNERS

VS. NO. CO-2014-01131

LINDA BRUNE DEFENDANT

MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE AMENDED ANSWER

Pursuant to Rule 15(a) of the Mississippi Rules of Civil Procedure, Defendant,

of this Motion, Defendant states:

that arose in this case, but that representation was limited.

appeared a matter of weeks ago.

shall be freely given when justice so requires.

and Affirmative Defenses.

DATED this the ________day

Linda Brune, Defendant

Rogen K. Chhabra (MSB No. 99131)

of the above, foregoing document in a manner prescribed by law to:

Charles Richard Mullins

THIS the __________day

IN THE COUNTY COURT OF MADISON COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI

DOWNTOWN JACKSON PARTNERS

LINDA BRUNE DEFENDANT

located at 28 West North Street, Canton, MS 39046:

A. The Defendants Motion to Set Aside Default Judgment (Doc. #39);

C. A hearing on the record in which the Plaintiffs will present evidence

Judgment entered on December 2, 2016. ( Doc. #37).

Respectfully submitted, this the 21st day of December, 2016.

DOWNTOWN JACKSON PARTNERS

Certified,this the 21st day of December, 2016.

IN THE COUNTY COURT OF MADISON COUNTY, MISSISSIPPI

DOWNTOWN JACKSON PARTNERS

LINDA BRUNE DEFENDANT

RESPONSE OF PLAINTIFFS IN OPPOSITION TO DEFENDANTS MOTION TO SET

Motion to Set Aside Default Judgment (Doc. #39), as follows:

Civil Procedure 6(d).

motion on the contempt issue.

damages, noticed for Wednesday January 4, 2016. (Doc. #38)

no attorney to represent her in the case.

8. Following the Courts entry of the scheduling order Plaintiffs counsel

was unresponsive to this request.

providing any requested discovery. (Doc. #17). 2

the Defendant did not attend the hearing.

her. (Doc. #25).

frustrations in dealing with the Defendant and her counsel.

prepare the Defendants portion of the pretrial order.

the trial scheduled for the following Monday.

Plaintiffs default motion was considered by the Court.

judgment. The jury trial scheduled for Monday was cancelled.

Law and Argument

of process when he appeared and indicated his willingness to proceed.)

lifted her from the sanction of contempt.

lack of due process so as to cause it to be set aside pursuant to Rule 60(b)(4).

indication did not intend to even show up at trial.

Request for Denial of Motion

Respectfully submitted, this the 21st day of December, 2016.

DOWNTOWN JACKSON PARTNERS

By: _ /s/Samuel L. Begley___________

Certified, this the 21st day of December, 2016.

BEGLEY LAW FIRM, PLLC

November 28, 2016

The Honorable Will Longwitz

Re: Downtown Jackson Partners v. Brune, Case No. CO-2014-1131

Dear Judge Longwitz:

Cc: Mike Farrell, Esq.