3
    ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
    February 8, 2006
     
    PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF ILLINOIS,
     
    Complainant,
     
    v.
     
    SKOKIE VALLEY ASPHALT, INC., EDWIN
    L. FREDERICK, JR., and RICHARD J.
    FREDERICK,
     
    Respondents.
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
    )
     
     
     
     
    PCB 96-98
    (Enforcement - Water)
          
     
     
    HEARING OFFICER ORDER
     
    On December 14, 2005, respondent filed a motion to quash complainant’s deposition
    notices to respondent regarding complainant’s fee petition. On December 28, 2005, complainant
    filed a second motion for protective order and a response to respondent’s motion to quash. On
    January 9, 2006, respondents filed a motion to strike complainant’s motion for protective order,
    and a response to that order. On January 19, 2006, complainant filed a response to the motion to
    strike. For the following reasons, the hearing officer denies respondent’s motion to quash,
    denies respondent’s motion to strike the motion for protective order, and grants complainant’s
    motion for protective order.
     
    Respondents’ motion to quash asserts that depositions of respondents’ attorneys will not
    lead to admissible evidence at hearing on the issue of complainant’s fees and costs, and that
    deposing respondents’ attorneys will violate the attorney-client privilege. Respondents further
    assert that the depositions are inconsistent with the Board’s April 7, 2005 order calling for
    limited discovery.
     
    The hearing officer first notes that the Board’s order issued on November 17, 2005 ruled
    that it would not be fair to allow respondents to conduct discovery on the reasonableness of
    attorney fees without allowing complainant to conduct similar discovery. The Board ordered
    respondents to respond to complainant’s discovery requests by December 3, 2005. On
    December 5, 2005, respondents filed their responses to complainant’s discovery requests, but in
    response to each interrogatory (except for the most perfunctory), respondents objected and
    provided no answer. These discovery responses violate the spirit of the Board’s order.
    Furthermore, respondents have provided no argument or case law to defend their assertion that
    the information would not be admissible, or lead to information admissible at hearing, or that it
    would violate the attorney-client privilege. The motion to quash is denied.
     
    Complainant’s motion for protective order asks that respondents’ attorneys be required to
    participate in a full and good faith conference with complainant’s attorneys regarding any further
    discovery dispute prior to seeking Board intervention. Respondents’ motion to strike offered no
    3
    compelling argument on which to grant that motion, thus the motion to strike is denied. The
    parties are directed to make every effort to get through the discovery process with no further
    involvement from the Board or the hearing officer. Accordingly, the hearing officer grants the
    motion for protective order. In any motion, objection, or other filing related to any discovery
    problem, respondents’ attorneys must relate the measures taken to resolve the problem with
    complainant’s attorneys before the filing of the motion.
      
    The Board’s November 17, 2005 order directs the hearing officer to schedule a status
    conference to set a detailed discovery schedule. The parties are directed to meet before the next
    status conference to determine a detailed discovery schedule to propose to the hearing officer at
    the next status conference.
     
    The parties are directed to participate in a telephone status conference with the hearing
    officer at 2:00 p.m. on March 9, 2006.
      
    Complainant is directed to initiate the call.
      
    IT IS SO ORDERED.
     
    _____________________
    Carol Webb
    Hearing Officer
    Illinois Pollution Control Board
    1021 North Grand Avenue East
    P.O. Box 19274
    Springfield, Illinois 62794-9274
    217/524-8509
    webbc@ipcb.state.il.us
     
     
     
    3
    CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
     
    It is hereby certified that true copies of the foregoing order were mailed, first class, on
    February 8, 2006 to each of the persons on the attached service list.
     
    It is hereby certified that a true copy of the foregoing order was hand delivered to the
    following on February 8, 2006:
     
    Dorothy M. Gunn
    Illinois Pollution Control Board
    James R. Thompson Center
    100 W. Randolph St., Ste. 11-500
    Chicago, Illinois 60601
     
     
     
     
     
    Carol Sudman
    Hearing Officer
    Illinois Pollution Control Board
    1021 North Grand Avenue East
    P.O. Box 19274
    Springfield, Illinois 62794-9274
    217/524-8509
    webbc@ipcb.state.il.us
      
    PCB 1996-098
    David S. O'Neill, Esq.
    5487 North Milwaukee Avenue
    Chicago, IL 60630-1249
      
     
     
     
    PCB 1996-098
    Bernard J. Murphy
    Office of the Attorney General
    Environmental Bureau
    188 West Randolph, 20th Floor
    Chicago, IL 60601
     
     
      
    PCB 1996-098
    Michael C. Partee
    Office of the Attorney General
    Environmental Bureau
    188 West Randolph, 20th Floor
    Chicago, IL 60601
     
     
     
    PCB 1996-098
    Mitchell L. Cohen
    Office of the Attorney General
    Environmental Bureau
    188 West Randolph, 20th Floor
    Chicago, IL 60601
     
     
      
    PCB 1996-098
    Michael B. Jawgiel, PC
    5487 N. Milwaukee Avenue
    Chicago, IL 60630-1249
      
     
     
     
     
     

    Back to top