1036-00003 · Ridgemark Development Partners · Discovery

discovery-requests-interrogatories-rfps.docx DOCUMENT Litigation

6 / 12 ← → ✕

Contract analysis Extract to table

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE EIGHTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR SEMINOLE COUNTY, FLORIDA

RIDGEMARK DEVELOPMENT PARTNERS LLC, a Florida limited liability company,

Plaintiff,

Case No. 2021-CA-002748-18-W

FAIRWATER REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT TRUST, a Maryland real estate investment trust,

Defendant.

\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\_/

DEFENDANT FAIRWATER REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT TRUST'S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES (NOS. 1–25) AND FIRST REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION (NOS. 1–30) TO PLAINTIFF RIDGEMARK DEVELOPMENT PARTNERS LLC

Date of Service: October 4, 2021

Defendant Fairwater Real Estate Investment Trust ("Fairwater" or "Defendant"), by and through its undersigned counsel, and pursuant to Florida Rules of Civil Procedure 1.340 and 1.350, hereby propounds its First Set of Interrogatories (Nos. 1–25) and First Requests for Production (Nos. 1–30) upon Plaintiff Ridgemark Development Partners LLC ("Ridgemark" or "Plaintiff"). Ridgemark is directed to answer each interrogatory separately and fully, in writing, under oath, and to produce all responsive documents within thirty (30) days of service of these discovery requests, or such other time as may be provided by the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure or by order of this Court.

These discovery requests are continuing in nature pursuant to Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.280(e). Ridgemark is therefore required to supplement, amend, or correct its responses seasonably if it obtains information upon the basis of which it knows that a prior response was incorrect when made, or it knows that a prior response, though correct when made, is no longer true and the circumstances are such that a failure to amend the response is in substance a knowing concealment.

I. DEFINITIONS

As used in these Interrogatories and Requests for Production, the following terms shall have the meanings set forth below:

1. "You," "Your," "Ridgemark," or "Plaintiff" shall mean Ridgemark Development Partners LLC, a Florida limited liability company, including its members Hector J. Vilanova and Claudia R. Vilanova, its managers, officers, employees, agents, representatives, attorneys (except as limited by applicable privilege), predecessors, successors, and assigns, and all other persons acting or purporting to act on its behalf.

2. "Fairwater," "FREIT," or "Defendant" shall mean Fairwater Real Estate Investment Trust, a Maryland real estate investment trust, including its trustees, officers, employees, agents, representatives, and attorneys.

3. "Cross-Parcel Easement" shall mean the sixty-foot-wide (60') non-exclusive ingress/egress and utility easement created by express grant in that certain Special Warranty Deed recorded on June 22, 1998, in Official Records Book 4517, Page 1283, of the Public Records of Seminole County, Florida, from Thurmond Industrial Holdings, Inc., as grantor, to Sunbelt Distribution Centers, Inc., as grantee, burdening a portion of the Northern Parcel for the benefit of the Southern Parcel.

4. "Northern Parcel" or "Fairwater Property" shall mean the approximately 42.7-acre parcel of real property improved with the Fairwater Sanford Logistics Center, a 486,000-square-foot warehouse and distribution facility, located at 4250 Commerce Park Boulevard, Sanford, Florida 32771, Seminole County, Florida, as more particularly described in the deed by which Fairwater acquired the property.

5. "Southern Parcel" or "Ridgemark Parcel" shall mean the approximately 16.3-acre undeveloped parcel of real property identified as Seminole County Parcel ID 25-20-30-500-0030-0000, located immediately south of the Northern Parcel in Seminole County, Florida.

6. "2014 Replat" shall mean the Commerce Park Boulevard Phase II Replat recorded on September 15, 2014, in Plat Book 78, Pages 44–46, of the Public Records of Seminole County, Florida, together with all notes, certifications, and dedications set forth therein.

7. "Ridgemark Commerce Village" shall mean the proposed ninety-six-unit (96-unit) light-industrial flex-space park that Ridgemark proposes to develop on the Southern Parcel, as described in Ridgemark's Complaint and in its development plans, site plans, and permit applications.

8. "Pinnacle Shores Loan" shall mean the $14,600,000.00 construction-to-permanent loan commitment from Pinnacle Shores Bank, National Association to Ridgemark Development Partners LLC, dated November 12, 2020, secured by a first-priority mortgage on the Southern Parcel, together with all amendments, modifications, waivers, and ancillary agreements related thereto.

9. "Document" or "Documents" shall have the broadest meaning permitted under Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.350 and shall include, without limitation, all writings, drawings, graphs, charts, photographs, recordings, electronically stored information ("ESI"), emails, text messages (including SMS and messages transmitted through platforms such as Westmark Software, Meridian Services Inc., or signals), memoranda, correspondence, contracts, agreements, deeds, plats, surveys, title commitments, title insurance policies, loan documents, appraisals, financial statements, invoices, receipts, spreadsheets, presentations, meeting minutes, notes, diaries, calendars, and any other data compilations from which information can be obtained, whether in paper form, electronic form, or any other medium.

10. "Communication" shall mean any oral, written, or electronic exchange of information between two or more persons, including but not limited to letters, emails, text messages, telephone calls, voicemail messages, video conferences, virtual meetings (including those conducted via Calderon Software, Northgate Data Systems, or similar platforms), and in-person conversations.

11. "Person" shall mean any natural person, corporation, partnership, limited liability company, limited liability partnership, association, joint venture, trust, estate, governmental entity, or any other legal or business entity.

12. "Relate to," "Relating to," or "Related to" shall mean concerning, referring to, reflecting, describing, evidencing, constituting, mentioning, discussing, analyzing, or in any way pertaining to the subject matter referenced.

13. "Thurmond" shall mean Roland P. Thurmond (deceased) and/or the Estate of Roland P. Thurmond, including the personal representative, executor, administrator, or any other fiduciary of said estate.

14. "Thurmond Industrial" shall mean Thurmond Industrial Holdings, Inc., a dissolved Florida corporation formerly organized under the laws of the State of Florida.

15. "Sunbelt" shall mean Sunbelt Distribution Centers, Inc., a dissolved Florida corporation formerly organized under the laws of the State of Florida.

16. "Pinnacle Shores" shall mean Pinnacle Shores Bank, National Association, a national banking association, together with its officers, employees, agents, and representatives, including but not limited to Patricia Leung, Vice President, Commercial Real Estate Lending.

17. "Lakemont Trail" shall mean the unpaved county right-of-way providing the Southern Parcel's southern frontage, as depicted on the applicable Seminole County road maps and plat records.

18. "Identify" (as to a person) shall mean to state the person's full legal name, current or last known residential or business address, current or last known telephone number, current or last known employer, and job title or relationship to any party in this action.

19. "Identify" (as to a document) shall mean to state the document's date (or approximate date if the exact date is unknown), author or creator, recipient or recipients, subject matter or title, and present location or custodian, with sufficient specificity to allow the document to be located and distinguished from other documents.

II. INSTRUCTIONS

1. Each interrogatory and each request for production shall be answered separately and fully. Ridgemark shall restate each interrogatory or request immediately before providing its response thereto.

2. If any interrogatory or request for production cannot be answered or responded to in full, Ridgemark shall answer or respond to the extent possible, specify the reason why a complete answer or response cannot be given, and state what efforts have been made to obtain the information necessary to provide a complete answer or response.

3. If Ridgemark objects to any interrogatory or request for production, Ridgemark shall state the specific grounds for the objection with particularity and shall nonetheless answer the interrogatory or produce documents to the extent not covered by the objection. A general or blanket objection is insufficient and shall not excuse Ridgemark from responding to the non-objectionable portions of any interrogatory or request.

4. If Ridgemark withholds any document or information on the basis of any privilege, including the attorney-client privilege, or on the basis of work-product protection, Ridgemark shall provide a privilege log in compliance with Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.280(b)(6), identifying each withheld document by: (a) the date of the document; (b) the author or sender; (c) all recipients, including those who received copies; (d) a description of the subject matter of the document sufficient to assess the applicability of the privilege without revealing privileged content; and (e) the specific privilege or protection asserted.

5. Documents shall be produced as they are kept in the ordinary course of business, or alternatively, shall be organized and labeled to correspond with the categories in the requests for production. If documents are produced in electronic form, they shall be produced in a reasonably usable format that preserves metadata.

6. If any responsive document has been lost, destroyed, discarded, or is no longer in Ridgemark's possession, custody, or control, Ridgemark shall: (a) identify each such document to the best of its ability; (b) describe its contents; (c) state when it was lost, destroyed, or discarded, and by whom; (d) state the reason for its loss, destruction, or disposal; and (e) identify any person known or believed to possess a copy of the document.

7. These interrogatories and requests for production are intended to be continuing in nature. Ridgemark is required to supplement, amend, or correct its responses in a timely manner if it obtains additional or corrective information after the date of its initial responses, in accordance with Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.280(e).

III. INTERROGATORIES

INTERROGATORY NO. 1 — Identification of Ridgemark's Members and Management

Identify all current and former members, managers, and officers of Ridgemark Development Partners LLC from the date of its formation to the present, and for each such person state: (a) their full legal name; (b) their ownership percentage or membership interest in Ridgemark; (c) the dates during which they held such membership interest or served in such capacity; (d) their role or title within the entity (e.g., manager, managing member, member, officer); and (e) whether they are currently serving in any such capacity.

INTERROGATORY NO. 2 — Acquisition of the Southern Parcel

Describe in detail the circumstances of Ridgemark's acquisition of the Southern Parcel (Seminole County Parcel ID 25-20-30-500-0030-0000), including: (a) the date of acquisition; (b) the purchase price paid; (c) the identity of the seller; (d) the form of conveyance instrument (e.g., warranty deed, special warranty deed, quitclaim deed); (e) the recording information for the deed (including the Official Records Book and Page number); (f) whether the conveyance instrument expressly referenced the Cross-Parcel Easement as an appurtenant right; and (g) the identity of all persons involved in negotiating the transaction on behalf of Ridgemark.

INTERROGATORY NO. 3 — Chain of Title to the Southern Parcel

Describe the complete chain of title to the Southern Parcel from June 22, 1998 (the date the Cross-Parcel Easement was recorded in Official Records Book 4517, Page 1283) to the present, and for each transfer of ownership identify: (a) the grantor; (b) the grantee; (c) the date of the conveyance; (d) the type of conveyance instrument; (e) the recording information for the conveyance instrument (including the Official Records Book and Page number); and (f) any consideration recited in or paid in connection with the conveyance.

INTERROGATORY NO. 4 — Knowledge of the Cross-Parcel Easement Prior to Acquisition

State when and how Ridgemark first became aware of the existence of the Cross-Parcel Easement (recorded in Official Records Book 4517, Page 1283, of the Public Records of Seminole County, Florida), and: (a) identify all persons who provided information to Ridgemark regarding the easement prior to Ridgemark's acquisition of the Southern Parcel on March 8, 2019; (b) describe all due diligence Ridgemark conducted regarding the Cross-Parcel Easement prior to the acquisition, including any title searches, legal opinions, surveys, or site inspections; and (c) state whether Ridgemark considered the Cross-Parcel Easement to be a material factor in its decision to acquire the Southern Parcel.

INTERROGATORY NO. 5 — Knowledge of the 2014 Replat Prior to Acquisition

State when and how Ridgemark first became aware of the Commerce Park Boulevard Phase II Replat recorded on September 15, 2014, in Plat Book 78, Pages 44–46, of the Public Records of Seminole County, Florida, and: (a) identify all persons who provided information to Ridgemark regarding the 2014 Replat; (b) describe what investigation, if any, Ridgemark conducted regarding the effect of the 2014 Replat on the Cross-Parcel Easement prior to acquiring the Southern Parcel; (c) state whether Ridgemark's title search or title commitment disclosed the existence of the 2014 Replat; and (d) describe any analysis or legal opinion Ridgemark obtained regarding whether the 2014 Replat extinguished, modified, or had any effect upon the Cross-Parcel Easement.

INTERROGATORY NO. 6 — Basis for Claim that Cross-Parcel Easement Was Not Vacated

State in detail the factual and legal basis for Ridgemark's contention, as set forth in its Complaint, that the Cross-Parcel Easement was not extinguished, vacated, abandoned, or otherwise rendered unenforceable by the 2014 Replat, including: (a) identification of all facts upon which Ridgemark relies in support of that contention; (b) identification of all documents upon which Ridgemark relies; (c) identification of all legal authorities (including statutes, case law, treatises, and secondary sources) upon which Ridgemark relies; and (d) a description of Ridgemark's theory as to why the 2014 Replat did not extinguish the Cross-Parcel Easement.

INTERROGATORY NO. 7 — Interpretation of Replat Language

State Ridgemark's interpretation of the phrase "all private easements shown on the prior plat are hereby vacated except as otherwise noted herein" as used in the 2014 Replat, and: (a) state whether Ridgemark contends that the Cross-Parcel Easement was or was not "shown on the prior plat" within the meaning of that phrase; (b) identify all documents, communications, and extrinsic evidence Ridgemark contends are relevant to interpreting that language; (c) state whether Ridgemark contends the language is ambiguous, and if so, describe the nature of the ambiguity; and (d) identify any prior plat or plats referenced by the 2014 Replat and state whether the Cross-Parcel Easement was depicted, referenced, or noted on any such prior plat.

INTERROGATORY NO. 8 — Communications with Seminole County Regarding the 2014 Replat

Identify all communications between Ridgemark (or any person acting on Ridgemark's behalf, including attorneys, engineers, land planners, or consultants) and any official, employee, or representative of Seminole County, Florida regarding the 2014 Replat, including but not limited to communications with the Seminole County Development Services Division, the Seminole County Property Appraiser's Office, and the Seminole County Clerk of the Circuit Court. For each such communication, state: (a) the date of the communication; (b) the identity of all participants; (c) the method of communication (e.g., letter, email, telephone call, in-person meeting); and (d) the substance of the communication.

INTERROGATORY NO. 9 — Communications with Seminole County Regarding Easement or Access

Identify all communications between Ridgemark (or any person acting on Ridgemark's behalf) and any official, employee, or representative of Seminole County, Florida regarding vehicular access to the Southern Parcel, including but not limited to: (a) any requests for road improvements, paving, grading, or upgrades to Lakemont Trail; (b) any applications for access permits, driveway permits, or curb cuts on Commerce Park Boulevard; (c) any discussions regarding the adequacy of existing access to the Southern Parcel; and (d) any requests for alternative access routes. For each such communication, state the date, participants, method of communication, and substance of the communication.

INTERROGATORY NO. 10 — Alternative Access to the Southern Parcel

Describe all means of vehicular access currently available to the Southern Parcel other than through the Cross-Parcel Easement corridor, including but not limited to access via Lakemont Trail or any other road, right-of-way, or easement. State whether Ridgemark has investigated, pursued, or applied for any alternative means of vehicular access to the Southern Parcel, and if so, describe in detail: (a) the nature of each alternative access route investigated; (b) the results of such investigation; (c) any engineering, cost, or feasibility analyses performed; and (d) the reasons, if any, why any alternative access route was determined to be inadequate or infeasible.

INTERROGATORY NO. 11 — Adequacy of Lakemont Trail

Describe Ridgemark's contention that Lakemont Trail is inadequate for commercial truck traffic in support of the proposed Ridgemark Commerce Village development, including: (a) the current condition and surface type of Lakemont Trail; (b) the current width, grade, and load-bearing capacity of Lakemont Trail (if known); (c) identification of all studies, engineering reports, traffic analyses, pavement condition assessments, or other evaluations Ridgemark has obtained or commissioned regarding Lakemont Trail; (d) identification of the persons or firms that prepared any such studies or reports; and (e) the specific deficiencies that Ridgemark contends render Lakemont Trail inadequate for the intended use.

INTERROGATORY NO. 12 — Ridgemark Commerce Village Development Plan

Describe the proposed Ridgemark Commerce Village development in detail, including: (a) the number and type of units; (b) the total square footage of the proposed improvements; (c) the estimated total development cost, broken down by land acquisition costs, hard construction costs, and soft costs (including architectural, engineering, legal, permitting, and financing costs); (d) the project timeline, including anticipated start and completion dates; (e) the current development status (including whether construction has commenced, whether permits have been obtained, and whether any site work has been performed); and (f) the identity of the general contractor, architect, and civil engineer retained for the project.

INTERROGATORY NO. 13 — Pinnacle Shores Loan — Terms and Conditions

Describe in detail the terms of the Pinnacle Shores Loan, including: (a) the total loan amount; (b) the interest rate (whether fixed or variable, and if variable, the index and margin); (c) the maturity date; (d) the conditions precedent to the initial draw and to each subsequent draw; (e) any condition requiring Ridgemark to demonstrate or certify that the Southern Parcel has legally enforceable vehicular access to a public right-of-way; (f) any financial covenants or reporting requirements; and (g) the identity of the loan officer or relationship manager at Pinnacle Shores Bank assigned to the Pinnacle Shores Loan.

INTERROGATORY NO. 14 — Pinnacle Shores Loan — Draw History

State the total amount drawn under the Pinnacle Shores Loan as of the date of Ridgemark's response to this interrogatory, and for each draw identify: (a) the date of the draw request; (b) the date the draw was funded; (c) the amount of the draw; and (d) the purpose or use of the draw proceeds (e.g., site clearing, grading, architectural and engineering fees, legal fees, permitting costs).

INTERROGATORY NO. 15 — Pinnacle Shores Loan — Status of Draws and Suspension

State whether Pinnacle Shores Bank has, at any time, suspended, restricted, conditioned, or refused to fund any draw request under the Pinnacle Shores Loan. If so: (a) state the date on which any such suspension, restriction, condition, or refusal occurred; (b) describe the circumstances giving rise to the suspension, restriction, condition, or refusal; (c) identify the specific reasons provided by Pinnacle Shores Bank for the suspension, restriction, condition, or refusal, including whether it was related to the status of the Cross-Parcel Easement or the pendency of this litigation; (d) identify all communications between Ridgemark and Pinnacle Shores Bank regarding the suspension, restriction, condition, or refusal; and (e) state the current status of the Pinnacle Shores Loan, including whether any suspension or restriction remains in effect.

INTERROGATORY NO. 16 — Relationship with Thurmond / Estate of Roland P. Thurmond

Describe the relationship, if any, between Ridgemark (or either of its members, Hector J. Vilanova and/or Claudia R. Vilanova) and Roland P. Thurmond, Thurmond Industrial Holdings, Inc., the Estate of Roland P. Thurmond, or any representative, heir, beneficiary, or fiduciary thereof, prior to Ridgemark's acquisition of the Southern Parcel on March 8, 2019. Specifically state: (a) how Ridgemark or its members became aware that the Southern Parcel was available for purchase; (b) whether Hector J. Vilanova or Claudia R. Vilanova had any personal, business, or familial relationship with Roland P. Thurmond; (c) whether Ridgemark or its members had any prior business dealings with Thurmond Industrial Holdings, Inc.; and (d) the identity of all persons who participated in or facilitated the introduction or negotiation between Ridgemark and the Estate of Roland P. Thurmond.

INTERROGATORY NO. 17 — Common Ownership of the Two Parcels (2012–2014)

State whether, to Ridgemark's knowledge, the Northern Parcel and the Southern Parcel were at any time between January 1, 2012 and December 31, 2014 under common ownership or control by Roland P. Thurmond, members of the Thurmond family, or entities owned or controlled by them. In responding, identify: (a) all facts known to Ridgemark supporting or contradicting common ownership during that period; (b) all documents in Ridgemark's possession, custody, or control reflecting common ownership during that period; and (c) all persons known to Ridgemark who have knowledge regarding the ownership of the Northern Parcel and/or the Southern Parcel during that period.

INTERROGATORY NO. 18 — Title Insurance on the Southern Parcel

Identify any title insurance policy obtained by or on behalf of Ridgemark in connection with its acquisition of the Southern Parcel on March 8, 2019, and for each such policy state: (a) the name of the title insurer; (b) the policy number; (c) the policy amount (or coverage limit); (d) the effective date; (e) whether the policy is an owner's policy, a lender's policy, or both; (f) whether the Cross-Parcel Easement was listed as an insured appurtenant right or benefit in the policy; (g) whether the Cross-Parcel Easement was listed as a Schedule B exception; and (h) whether the 2014 Replat was listed as a Schedule B exception or was otherwise referenced in the policy.

INTERROGATORY NO. 19 — Title Commitment and Search for the Southern Parcel

Identify the title agent and/or title company that conducted the title search and issued the title commitment for Ridgemark's acquisition of the Southern Parcel on March 8, 2019, and: (a) state the name and address of the title agent and/or title company; (b) state the date of the title commitment; (c) describe whether the title search or title commitment disclosed the existence of the 2014 Replat; (d) describe whether the title search or title commitment addressed or analyzed the potential effect of the 2014 Replat on the Cross-Parcel Easement; and (e) identify any title objection letters, title clearance correspondence, or requests for curative action relating to the Cross-Parcel Easement or the 2014 Replat.

INTERROGATORY NO. 20 — Surveys of the Southern Parcel

Identify all surveys of the Southern Parcel obtained by or on behalf of Ridgemark, and for each survey state: (a) the name of the surveyor or surveying firm; (b) the date of the survey; (c) the type of survey (e.g., boundary survey, ALTA/NSPS land title survey, topographic survey, as-built survey); (d) whether the survey depicted the Cross-Parcel Easement corridor; (e) whether the survey depicted Lakemont Trail; and (f) whether the survey depicted any other easements, rights-of-way, or encumbrances affecting the Southern Parcel.

INTERROGATORY NO. 21 — Pre-Suit Communications with Fairwater

Identify all communications between Ridgemark (or any person acting on its behalf, including but not limited to counsel at Castellon Foley & Ruiz LLP) and Fairwater Real Estate Investment Trust (or any person acting on its behalf, including but not limited to counsel at Calderwood & Harkness LLP) regarding the Cross-Parcel Easement, access to the Southern Parcel, the 2014 Replat, or any related subject matter, from March 8, 2019 to the date of filing of the Complaint in this action. For each such communication, state: (a) the date; (b) the identity of all participants or correspondents; (c) the method of communication; and (d) the substance of the communication.

INTERROGATORY NO. 22 — Communications with Sunbelt Distribution Centers, Inc.

Identify all communications between Ridgemark (or any person acting on its behalf) and Sunbelt Distribution Centers, Inc. (or any successor, officer, director, shareholder, agent, or representative thereof) regarding the Cross-Parcel Easement, the Northern Parcel, access to or across the Northern Parcel, or any matter relating to the Southern Parcel. For each such communication, state: (a) the date; (b) the identity of all participants or correspondents; (c) the method of communication; and (d) the substance of the communication.

INTERROGATORY NO. 23 — Expert Witnesses

Identify each person Ridgemark expects to call as an expert witness at trial in this action, and for each such expert state: (a) the expert's full name, business address, and professional qualifications (including education, training, and experience); (b) the subject matter on which the expert is expected to testify; (c) the substance of the facts and opinions to which the expert is expected to testify; (d) a summary of the grounds for each opinion; (e) whether the expert has prepared a written report; and (f) the compensation to be paid to the expert for the expert's study, analysis, and testimony.

INTERROGATORY NO. 24 — Damages or Harm Claimed

Describe in detail all damages, losses, or harm Ridgemark claims it has suffered or will suffer as a result of the alleged inability to use the Cross-Parcel Easement, including but not limited to: (a) the specific categories of damages claimed (e.g., diminution in value of the Southern Parcel, lost profits, delay damages, increased construction costs, carrying costs, loan default damages); (b) the dollar amount of each category of damages claimed; (c) the method and basis for calculating each such amount; (d) the identity of any person who performed or assisted in performing the damage calculations; and (e) all assumptions upon which the damage calculations are based.

INTERROGATORY NO. 25 — Witnesses with Knowledge

Identify all persons known to Ridgemark who have knowledge of facts relevant to any claim or defense in this action, and for each such person state: (a) the person's full name, current or last known address, and current or last known telephone number; (b) the person's current or last known employer and job title; (c) the person's relationship to any party in this action; and (d) a description of the subject matter of that person's knowledge.

IV. REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 1 — Deed Conveying the Southern Parcel to Ridgemark

Produce the deed or deeds by which Ridgemark acquired the Southern Parcel (Seminole County Parcel ID 25-20-30-500-0030-0000) from the Estate of Roland P. Thurmond, including any exhibits, attachments, legal descriptions, and affidavits appended thereto. This request includes but is not limited to the special warranty deed dated on or about March 8, 2019, including any recitals therein relating to the Cross-Parcel Easement as an appurtenant right.

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 2 — Purchase Agreement for the Southern Parcel

Produce the purchase and sale agreement (and all amendments, addenda, supplements, assignments, closing statements, settlement statements, and closing documents) pursuant to which Ridgemark acquired the Southern Parcel from the Estate of Roland P. Thurmond, including any due-diligence contingency provisions, inspection provisions, and title review provisions contained therein.

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 3 — Title Commitment and Title Policy for the Southern Parcel

Produce the title commitment and the owner's title insurance policy obtained by or on behalf of Ridgemark in connection with its acquisition of the Southern Parcel on or about March 8, 2019, including all Schedule A items, Schedule B–Section 1 requirements, Schedule B–Section 2 exceptions, and all endorsements issued in connection therewith. This request also includes any lender's title insurance policy issued in connection with the Pinnacle Shores Loan or any other financing secured by the Southern Parcel.

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 4 — Title Search Documents for the Southern Parcel

Produce all title search results, abstracts of title, title examination reports, title rundown sheets, chain-of-title summaries, and related documents obtained by or on behalf of Ridgemark in connection with its acquisition of the Southern Parcel, including any supplemental or updated title searches performed after the date of acquisition.

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 5 — Surveys of the Southern Parcel

Produce all surveys, ALTA/NSPS land title surveys, boundary surveys, topographic surveys, as-built surveys, and sketch-and-description surveys of the Southern Parcel in Ridgemark's possession, custody, or control, whether obtained before, during, or after the acquisition of the Southern Parcel.

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 6 — Documents Relating to the Cross-Parcel Easement

Produce all documents in Ridgemark's possession, custody, or control relating to the Cross-Parcel Easement (recorded in Official Records Book 4517, Page 1283, of the Public Records of Seminole County, Florida), including but not limited to: copies of the original easement deed, any amended or restated easement agreements, correspondence, memoranda, title opinions, legal analyses, title company endorsements, and any other analyses or evaluations of the Cross-Parcel Easement's scope, validity, enforceability, or location.

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 7 — Documents Relating to the 2014 Replat

Produce all documents in Ridgemark's possession, custody, or control relating to the Commerce Park Boulevard Phase II Replat (recorded in Plat Book 78, Pages 44–46, of the Public Records of Seminole County, Florida), including but not limited to: copies of the 2014 Replat, copies of any prior plats referenced therein, applications for the replat, staff reports or comments, minutes of any public hearings, and any analyses, memoranda, or legal opinions regarding the 2014 Replat's effect on the Cross-Parcel Easement or on any other easement affecting the Northern Parcel or the Southern Parcel.

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 8 — Communications with Seminole County Regarding the 2014 Replat

Produce all documents and communications between Ridgemark (or any person acting on its behalf, including attorneys, engineers, land planners, or consultants) and any official, employee, or representative of Seminole County, Florida regarding the 2014 Replat, including but not limited to letters, emails, meeting notes, records of telephone calls, and submissions to or correspondence with the Seminole County Development Services Division, the Seminole County Board of County Commissioners, or the Seminole County Clerk of the Circuit Court.

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 9 — Communications with Seminole County Regarding Access

Produce all documents and communications between Ridgemark (or any person acting on its behalf) and any official, employee, or representative of Seminole County, Florida regarding vehicular access to the Southern Parcel, including but not limited to: any requests for road improvements, paving, or upgrades to Lakemont Trail; any applications for access permits, driveway permits, or curb cuts on Commerce Park Boulevard; and any correspondence or discussions regarding the adequacy of existing access or the availability of alternative access routes.

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 10 — Documents Relating to Lakemont Trail

Produce all documents in Ridgemark's possession, custody, or control relating to the condition, use, capacity, or potential improvement of Lakemont Trail, including but not limited to: engineering reports, traffic impact studies, pavement condition assessments, cost estimates for paving or improvements, geotechnical reports, correspondence with governmental entities or utility providers, and any photographs or visual depictions of Lakemont Trail.

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 11 — Pinnacle Shores Loan Documents

Produce the complete set of loan documents relating to the Pinnacle Shores Loan dated November 12, 2020, including but not limited to: the loan commitment letter, loan agreement, promissory note, mortgage, security agreement, assignment of rents and leases, environmental indemnity agreement, guaranty (if any), construction loan disbursement agreement, and all amendments, modifications, waivers, side letters, and ancillary documents related thereto. This request also includes all draw requests, draw schedules, inspection reports, and lien waiver forms submitted in connection with the Pinnacle Shores Loan.

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 12 — Communications with Pinnacle Shores Bank Regarding the Easement

Produce all documents and communications between Ridgemark (or any person acting on its behalf) and Pinnacle Shores Bank, National Association (or any officer, employee, or representative thereof, including but not limited to Patricia Leung) regarding the Cross-Parcel Easement, access to the Southern Parcel, the 2014 Replat, or the effect of this litigation on the Pinnacle Shores Loan or on Ridgemark's ability to draw funds thereunder.

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 13 — Pinnacle Shores Loan Draw Requests and Approvals

Produce all draw requests submitted by Ridgemark under the Pinnacle Shores Loan and all approvals, denials, conditional approvals, or conditions imposed by Pinnacle Shores Bank with respect thereto, including any supporting documentation submitted with or in connection with each draw request (e.g., contractor's affidavits, lien waivers, inspection reports, and architect's certificates).

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 14 — Pinnacle Shores Loan Suspension Documents

Produce all documents relating to any suspension, restriction, hold, or conditioning of further draws under the Pinnacle Shores Loan by Pinnacle Shores Bank, including but not limited to: any correspondence, notices, emails, memoranda, or internal communications from Pinnacle Shores Bank regarding the suspension or restriction; any conditions imposed for the resumption of draws; and any responses or communications from Ridgemark to Pinnacle Shores Bank regarding such suspension, restriction, or conditions.

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 15 — Ridgemark Commerce Village Development Plans

Produce all site plans, conceptual plans, schematic designs, design development drawings, construction documents, architectural drawings, structural drawings, civil engineering plans, landscape plans, development budgets, project cost estimates, financial pro formas, return-on-investment analyses, project schedules, and critical-path timelines relating to the proposed Ridgemark Commerce Village development on the Southern Parcel.

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 16 — Ridgemark Commerce Village Permit Applications

Produce all permit applications, zoning applications, site plan applications, variance requests, special exception requests, development order applications, environmental permits, stormwater management permits, utility connection applications, and all governmental approvals, denials, conditions of approval, or pending applications relating to the proposed Ridgemark Commerce Village development.

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 17 — Appraisals of the Southern Parcel

Produce all appraisals, broker opinions of value, comparative market analyses, feasibility studies, or other valuations of the Southern Parcel obtained by or on behalf of Ridgemark at any time, whether prepared in connection with the acquisition of the Southern Parcel, the Pinnacle Shores Loan, or for any other purpose.

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 18 — Documents Relating to the Estate of Roland P. Thurmond

Produce all documents relating to Ridgemark's communications, negotiations, and dealings with the Estate of Roland P. Thurmond (or any personal representative, attorney, real estate broker, or other representative thereof) in connection with Ridgemark's acquisition of the Southern Parcel, including but not limited to: letters of intent, term sheets, correspondence, emails, memoranda of understanding, and any documents provided by the Estate to Ridgemark during the due-diligence period.

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 19 — Documents Relating to Common Ownership of Both Parcels (2012–2014)

Produce all documents in Ridgemark's possession, custody, or control reflecting, evidencing, or relating to the ownership of the Northern Parcel and/or the Southern Parcel by Roland P. Thurmond, members of the Thurmond family, or entities owned or controlled by them, during the period from January 1, 2012 through December 31, 2014, including but not limited to: deeds, corporate records, organizational documents, property tax records, and correspondence.

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 20 — Communications with Thurmond Industrial Holdings, Inc. or Sunbelt Distribution Centers, Inc.

Produce all documents and communications between Ridgemark (or any person acting on its behalf, including its members Hector J. Vilanova and Claudia R. Vilanova) and Thurmond Industrial Holdings, Inc. or Sunbelt Distribution Centers, Inc. (or any successor, officer, director, shareholder, agent, or representative thereof) regarding the Cross-Parcel Easement, the Northern Parcel, the Southern Parcel, or any related matter.

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 21 — Pre-Suit Demand Letter and Related Correspondence

Produce all versions (including drafts) of the demand letter dated April 2, 2021 from Castellon Foley & Ruiz LLP to Fairwater Real Estate Investment Trust, and all internal and external correspondence, memoranda, emails, and notes relating to the preparation, review, approval, and sending of that demand letter. This request also includes all response correspondence received by Ridgemark or its counsel, including but not limited to the letter dated May 14, 2021 from Calderwood & Harkness LLP to Castellon Foley & Ruiz LLP.

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 22 — Communications with Fairwater Regarding the Easement

Produce all documents and communications between Ridgemark (or any person acting on its behalf, including counsel) and Fairwater Real Estate Investment Trust (or any person acting on its behalf, including counsel) regarding the Cross-Parcel Easement, access to the Southern Parcel, the 2014 Replat, the proposed Ridgemark Commerce Village development, or any related matter, from March 8, 2019 to the present. This request is not limited to pre-suit communications and includes any post-filing communications not otherwise protected by applicable privilege.

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 23 — Communications with Condor Supply Chain Solutions, Inc.

Produce all documents and communications between Ridgemark (or any person acting on its behalf) and Condor Supply Chain Solutions, Inc. (or any officer, employee, or representative thereof, including but not limited to Nathan H. Brierly, Vice President of Real Estate) regarding the Cross-Parcel Easement, access to or across the Northern Parcel, truck-court operations at the Fairwater Sanford Logistics Center, shared-access arrangements, or any matter relating to the proposed Ridgemark Commerce Village development or this litigation.

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 24 — Ridgemark Operating Agreement and Organizational Documents

Produce Ridgemark's Articles of Organization (as filed with the Florida Department of State, Division of Corporations), Operating Agreement, and all amendments, restatements, and supplements thereto, reflecting the members, managers, governance structure, capital contributions, and profit-and-loss allocations of the entity.

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 25 — Financial Statements

Produce Ridgemark's financial statements, including balance sheets, income statements (or statements of operations), statements of members' equity, and cash flow statements, for the fiscal years ending December 31, 2018; December 31, 2019; December 31, 2020; and year-to-date through the most recent month-end prior to the date of Ridgemark's response in 2021. If audited financial statements are not available, produce unaudited financial statements, compiled financial statements, or internally prepared financial statements.

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 26 — Insurance Policies Relating to the Southern Parcel

Produce all insurance policies relating to the Southern Parcel or the proposed Ridgemark Commerce Village development, including but not limited to: owner's title insurance policies, lender's title insurance policies, commercial general liability policies, builder's risk policies, course-of-construction policies, umbrella or excess liability policies, and any declarations pages, endorsements, or riders thereto.

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 27 — Expert Reports and Analyses

Produce all reports, analyses, opinions, memoranda, correspondence, or other documents prepared by, or prepared for, any expert witness or consultant retained by Ridgemark in connection with this action, including but not limited to: real estate appraisal reports, traffic impact studies, engineering reports, land-use analyses, damage calculations, and lost-profit analyses. This request is subject to the limitations of Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.280(b)(5) to the extent any such materials constitute non-discoverable consulting expert materials.

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 28 — Photographs and Videos of the Easement Corridor and Southern Parcel

Produce all photographs, videos, drone imagery, aerial imagery, satellite imagery, or other visual depictions of the Cross-Parcel Easement corridor, the Southern Parcel, the Northern Parcel (to the extent depicting the easement corridor area), and/or Lakemont Trail, in Ridgemark's possession, custody, or control, regardless of the date such images were created or obtained.

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 29 — Documents Relating to Damages or Harm

Produce all documents relating to any damages, losses, or harm Ridgemark claims it has suffered or will suffer as a result of the alleged inability to use the Cross-Parcel Easement, including but not limited to: financial analyses, lost-profit calculations, delay-cost estimates, carrying-cost calculations, interest-expense analyses, diminution-in-value opinions, comparative market analyses, and any correspondence with lenders, investors, contractors, or prospective tenants reflecting the impact of the alleged inability to use the Cross-Parcel Easement.

REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 30 — All Other Documents Supporting the Complaint

Produce all other documents not previously identified or produced in response to Requests for Production Nos. 1–29 that Ridgemark intends to introduce into evidence, rely upon, or reference in support of its Complaint for Declaratory Judgment and any claims asserted therein, or that are relevant to any claim or defense in this action and that have not been otherwise requested above.

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I HEREBY CERTIFY that on October 4, 2021, I served the foregoing Defendant Fairwater Real Estate Investment Trust's First Set of Interrogatories (Nos. 1–25) and First Requests for Production (Nos. 1–30) to Plaintiff Ridgemark Development Partners LLC by email through the Florida Courts E-Filing Portal upon the following counsel of record:

Marco D. Castellon, Esq. Rebecca Shin-Torres, Esq. Castellon Foley & Ruiz LLP 228 South Orange Avenue, Suite 1400 Orlando, Florida 32801 Telephone: (407) 555-3200

Email: mcastellon@cfr-law.com

Email: rshintorres@cfr-law.com

Counsel for Plaintiff Ridgemark Development Partners LLC

HARGROVE & LIDDELL, P.A. 501 East Church Street, Suite 300 Orlando, Florida 32801

By: ________

Brenda Hargrove, Esq. Florida Bar No. 0987214 Telephone: (407) 555-7100

Email: bhargrove@hargroveliddell.com

Local Counsel for Defendant Fairwater Real Estate Investment Trust

— and —

CALDERWOOD & HARKNESS LLP 1725 K Street NW, Suite 1100 Washington, DC 20006

Jeffrey Park Lead Associate Telephone: (202) 555-4800

Email: jpark@calderwoodharkness.com

Yuki Nakamura Associate Telephone: (202) 555-4815

Email: ynakamura@calderwoodharkness.com

Admitted pro hac vice; with designation of local counsel pursuant to Florida Rule of Judicial Administration 2.510

Attorneys for Defendant Fairwater Real Estate Investment Trust

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE EIGHTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR SEMINOLE COUNTY, FLORIDA
RIDGEMARK DEVELOPMENT PARTNERS LLC, a Florida limited liability company,
Plaintiff,
v.
Case No. 2021-CA-002748-18-W
FAIRWATER REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT TRUST, a Maryland real estate investment trust,
Defendant.
\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\_/
DEFENDANT FAIRWATER REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT TRUST'S FIRST SET OF INTERROGATORIES (NOS. 1–25) AND FIRST REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION (NOS. 1–30) TO PLAINTIFF RIDGEMARK DEVELOPMENT PARTNERS LLC
Date of Service: October 4, 2021
Defendant Fairwater Real Estate Investment Trust ("Fairwater" or "Defendant"), by and through its undersigned counsel, and pursuant to Florida Rules of Civil Procedure 1.340 and 1.350, hereby propounds its First Set of Interrogatories (Nos. 1–25) and First Requests for Production (Nos. 1–30) upon Plaintiff Ridgemark Development Partners LLC ("Ridgemark" or "Plaintiff"). Ridgemark is directed to answer each interrogatory separately and fully, in writing, under oath, and to produce all responsive documents within thirty (30) days of service of these discovery requests, or such other time as may be provided by the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure or by order of this Court.
These discovery requests are continuing in nature pursuant to Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.280(e). Ridgemark is therefore required to supplement, amend, or correct its responses seasonably if it obtains information upon the basis of which it knows that a prior response was incorrect when made, or it knows that a prior response, though correct when made, is no longer true and the circumstances are such that a failure to amend the response is in substance a knowing concealment.
I. DEFINITIONS
As used in these Interrogatories and Requests for Production, the following terms shall have the meanings set forth below:
1. "You," "Your," "Ridgemark," or "Plaintiff" shall mean Ridgemark Development Partners LLC, a Florida limited liability company, including its members Hector J. Vilanova and Claudia R. Vilanova, its managers, officers, employees, agents, representatives, attorneys (except as limited by applicable privilege), predecessors, successors, and assigns, and all other persons acting or purporting to act on its behalf.
2. "Fairwater," "FREIT," or "Defendant" shall mean Fairwater Real Estate Investment Trust, a Maryland real estate investment trust, including its trustees, officers, employees, agents, representatives, and attorneys.
3. "Cross-Parcel Easement" shall mean the sixty-foot-wide (60') non-exclusive ingress/egress and utility easement created by express grant in that certain Special Warranty Deed recorded on June 22, 1998, in Official Records Book 4517, Page 1283, of the Public Records of Seminole County, Florida, from Thurmond Industrial Holdings, Inc., as grantor, to Sunbelt Distribution Centers, Inc., as grantee, burdening a portion of the Northern Parcel for the benefit of the Southern Parcel.
4. "Northern Parcel" or "Fairwater Property" shall mean the approximately 42.7-acre parcel of real property improved with the Fairwater Sanford Logistics Center, a 486,000-square-foot warehouse and distribution facility, located at 4250 Commerce Park Boulevard, Sanford, Florida 32771, Seminole County, Florida, as more particularly described in the deed by which Fairwater acquired the property.
5. "Southern Parcel" or "Ridgemark Parcel" shall mean the approximately 16.3-acre undeveloped parcel of real property identified as Seminole County Parcel ID 25-20-30-500-0030-0000, located immediately south of the Northern Parcel in Seminole County, Florida.
6. "2014 Replat" shall mean the Commerce Park Boulevard Phase II Replat recorded on September 15, 2014, in Plat Book 78, Pages 44–46, of the Public Records of Seminole County, Florida, together with all notes, certifications, and dedications set forth therein.
7. "Ridgemark Commerce Village" shall mean the proposed ninety-six-unit (96-unit) light-industrial flex-space park that Ridgemark proposes to develop on the Southern Parcel, as described in Ridgemark's Complaint and in its development plans, site plans, and permit applications.
8. "Pinnacle Shores Loan" shall mean the $14,600,000.00 construction-to-permanent loan commitment from Pinnacle Shores Bank, National Association to Ridgemark Development Partners LLC, dated November 12, 2020, secured by a first-priority mortgage on the Southern Parcel, together with all amendments, modifications, waivers, and ancillary agreements related thereto.
9. "Document" or "Documents" shall have the broadest meaning permitted under Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.350 and shall include, without limitation, all writings, drawings, graphs, charts, photographs, recordings, electronically stored information ("ESI"), emails, text messages (including SMS and messages transmitted through platforms such as Westmark Software, Meridian Services Inc., or signals), memoranda, correspondence, contracts, agreements, deeds, plats, surveys, title commitments, title insurance policies, loan documents, appraisals, financial statements, invoices, receipts, spreadsheets, presentations, meeting minutes, notes, diaries, calendars, and any other data compilations from which information can be obtained, whether in paper form, electronic form, or any other medium.
10. "Communication" shall mean any oral, written, or electronic exchange of information between two or more persons, including but not limited to letters, emails, text messages, telephone calls, voicemail messages, video conferences, virtual meetings (including those conducted via Calderon Software, Northgate Data Systems, or similar platforms), and in-person conversations.
11. "Person" shall mean any natural person, corporation, partnership, limited liability company, limited liability partnership, association, joint venture, trust, estate, governmental entity, or any other legal or business entity.
12. "Relate to," "Relating to," or "Related to" shall mean concerning, referring to, reflecting, describing, evidencing, constituting, mentioning, discussing, analyzing, or in any way pertaining to the subject matter referenced.
13. "Thurmond" shall mean Roland P. Thurmond (deceased) and/or the Estate of Roland P. Thurmond, including the personal representative, executor, administrator, or any other fiduciary of said estate.
14. "Thurmond Industrial" shall mean Thurmond Industrial Holdings, Inc., a dissolved Florida corporation formerly organized under the laws of the State of Florida.
15. "Sunbelt" shall mean Sunbelt Distribution Centers, Inc., a dissolved Florida corporation formerly organized under the laws of the State of Florida.
16. "Pinnacle Shores" shall mean Pinnacle Shores Bank, National Association, a national banking association, together with its officers, employees, agents, and representatives, including but not limited to Patricia Leung, Vice President, Commercial Real Estate Lending.
17. "Lakemont Trail" shall mean the unpaved county right-of-way providing the Southern Parcel's southern frontage, as depicted on the applicable Seminole County road maps and plat records.
18. "Identify" (as to a person) shall mean to state the person's full legal name, current or last known residential or business address, current or last known telephone number, current or last known employer, and job title or relationship to any party in this action.
19. "Identify" (as to a document) shall mean to state the document's date (or approximate date if the exact date is unknown), author or creator, recipient or recipients, subject matter or title, and present location or custodian, with sufficient specificity to allow the document to be located and distinguished from other documents.
II. INSTRUCTIONS
1. Each interrogatory and each request for production shall be answered separately and fully. Ridgemark shall restate each interrogatory or request immediately before providing its response thereto.
2. If any interrogatory or request for production cannot be answered or responded to in full, Ridgemark shall answer or respond to the extent possible, specify the reason why a complete answer or response cannot be given, and state what efforts have been made to obtain the information necessary to provide a complete answer or response.
3. If Ridgemark objects to any interrogatory or request for production, Ridgemark shall state the specific grounds for the objection with particularity and shall nonetheless answer the interrogatory or produce documents to the extent not covered by the objection. A general or blanket objection is insufficient and shall not excuse Ridgemark from responding to the non-objectionable portions of any interrogatory or request.
4. If Ridgemark withholds any document or information on the basis of any privilege, including the attorney-client privilege, or on the basis of work-product protection, Ridgemark shall provide a privilege log in compliance with Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.280(b)(6), identifying each withheld document by: (a) the date of the document; (b) the author or sender; (c) all recipients, including those who received copies; (d) a description of the subject matter of the document sufficient to assess the applicability of the privilege without revealing privileged content; and (e) the specific privilege or protection asserted.
5. Documents shall be produced as they are kept in the ordinary course of business, or alternatively, shall be organized and labeled to correspond with the categories in the requests for production. If documents are produced in electronic form, they shall be produced in a reasonably usable format that preserves metadata.
6. If any responsive document has been lost, destroyed, discarded, or is no longer in Ridgemark's possession, custody, or control, Ridgemark shall: (a) identify each such document to the best of its ability; (b) describe its contents; (c) state when it was lost, destroyed, or discarded, and by whom; (d) state the reason for its loss, destruction, or disposal; and (e) identify any person known or believed to possess a copy of the document.
7. These interrogatories and requests for production are intended to be continuing in nature. Ridgemark is required to supplement, amend, or correct its responses in a timely manner if it obtains additional or corrective information after the date of its initial responses, in accordance with Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.280(e).
III. INTERROGATORIES
INTERROGATORY NO. 1 — Identification of Ridgemark's Members and Management
Identify all current and former members, managers, and officers of Ridgemark Development Partners LLC from the date of its formation to the present, and for each such person state: (a) their full legal name; (b) their ownership percentage or membership interest in Ridgemark; (c) the dates during which they held such membership interest or served in such capacity; (d) their role or title within the entity (e.g., manager, managing member, member, officer); and (e) whether they are currently serving in any such capacity.
INTERROGATORY NO. 2 — Acquisition of the Southern Parcel
Describe in detail the circumstances of Ridgemark's acquisition of the Southern Parcel (Seminole County Parcel ID 25-20-30-500-0030-0000), including: (a) the date of acquisition; (b) the purchase price paid; (c) the identity of the seller; (d) the form of conveyance instrument (e.g., warranty deed, special warranty deed, quitclaim deed); (e) the recording information for the deed (including the Official Records Book and Page number); (f) whether the conveyance instrument expressly referenced the Cross-Parcel Easement as an appurtenant right; and (g) the identity of all persons involved in negotiating the transaction on behalf of Ridgemark.
INTERROGATORY NO. 3 — Chain of Title to the Southern Parcel
Describe the complete chain of title to the Southern Parcel from June 22, 1998 (the date the Cross-Parcel Easement was recorded in Official Records Book 4517, Page 1283) to the present, and for each transfer of ownership identify: (a) the grantor; (b) the grantee; (c) the date of the conveyance; (d) the type of conveyance instrument; (e) the recording information for the conveyance instrument (including the Official Records Book and Page number); and (f) any consideration recited in or paid in connection with the conveyance.
INTERROGATORY NO. 4 — Knowledge of the Cross-Parcel Easement Prior to Acquisition
State when and how Ridgemark first became aware of the existence of the Cross-Parcel Easement (recorded in Official Records Book 4517, Page 1283, of the Public Records of Seminole County, Florida), and: (a) identify all persons who provided information to Ridgemark regarding the easement prior to Ridgemark's acquisition of the Southern Parcel on March 8, 2019; (b) describe all due diligence Ridgemark conducted regarding the Cross-Parcel Easement prior to the acquisition, including any title searches, legal opinions, surveys, or site inspections; and (c) state whether Ridgemark considered the Cross-Parcel Easement to be a material factor in its decision to acquire the Southern Parcel.
INTERROGATORY NO. 5 — Knowledge of the 2014 Replat Prior to Acquisition
State when and how Ridgemark first became aware of the Commerce Park Boulevard Phase II Replat recorded on September 15, 2014, in Plat Book 78, Pages 44–46, of the Public Records of Seminole County, Florida, and: (a) identify all persons who provided information to Ridgemark regarding the 2014 Replat; (b) describe what investigation, if any, Ridgemark conducted regarding the effect of the 2014 Replat on the Cross-Parcel Easement prior to acquiring the Southern Parcel; (c) state whether Ridgemark's title search or title commitment disclosed the existence of the 2014 Replat; and (d) describe any analysis or legal opinion Ridgemark obtained regarding whether the 2014 Replat extinguished, modified, or had any effect upon the Cross-Parcel Easement.
INTERROGATORY NO. 6 — Basis for Claim that Cross-Parcel Easement Was Not Vacated
State in detail the factual and legal basis for Ridgemark's contention, as set forth in its Complaint, that the Cross-Parcel Easement was not extinguished, vacated, abandoned, or otherwise rendered unenforceable by the 2014 Replat, including: (a) identification of all facts upon which Ridgemark relies in support of that contention; (b) identification of all documents upon which Ridgemark relies; (c) identification of all legal authorities (including statutes, case law, treatises, and secondary sources) upon which Ridgemark relies; and (d) a description of Ridgemark's theory as to why the 2014 Replat did not extinguish the Cross-Parcel Easement.
INTERROGATORY NO. 7 — Interpretation of Replat Language
State Ridgemark's interpretation of the phrase "all private easements shown on the prior plat are hereby vacated except as otherwise noted herein" as used in the 2014 Replat, and: (a) state whether Ridgemark contends that the Cross-Parcel Easement was or was not "shown on the prior plat" within the meaning of that phrase; (b) identify all documents, communications, and extrinsic evidence Ridgemark contends are relevant to interpreting that language; (c) state whether Ridgemark contends the language is ambiguous, and if so, describe the nature of the ambiguity; and (d) identify any prior plat or plats referenced by the 2014 Replat and state whether the Cross-Parcel Easement was depicted, referenced, or noted on any such prior plat.
INTERROGATORY NO. 8 — Communications with Seminole County Regarding the 2014 Replat
Identify all communications between Ridgemark (or any person acting on Ridgemark's behalf, including attorneys, engineers, land planners, or consultants) and any official, employee, or representative of Seminole County, Florida regarding the 2014 Replat, including but not limited to communications with the Seminole County Development Services Division, the Seminole County Property Appraiser's Office, and the Seminole County Clerk of the Circuit Court. For each such communication, state: (a) the date of the communication; (b) the identity of all participants; (c) the method of communication (e.g., letter, email, telephone call, in-person meeting); and (d) the substance of the communication.
INTERROGATORY NO. 9 — Communications with Seminole County Regarding Easement or Access
Identify all communications between Ridgemark (or any person acting on Ridgemark's behalf) and any official, employee, or representative of Seminole County, Florida regarding vehicular access to the Southern Parcel, including but not limited to: (a) any requests for road improvements, paving, grading, or upgrades to Lakemont Trail; (b) any applications for access permits, driveway permits, or curb cuts on Commerce Park Boulevard; (c) any discussions regarding the adequacy of existing access to the Southern Parcel; and (d) any requests for alternative access routes. For each such communication, state the date, participants, method of communication, and substance of the communication.
INTERROGATORY NO. 10 — Alternative Access to the Southern Parcel
Describe all means of vehicular access currently available to the Southern Parcel other than through the Cross-Parcel Easement corridor, including but not limited to access via Lakemont Trail or any other road, right-of-way, or easement. State whether Ridgemark has investigated, pursued, or applied for any alternative means of vehicular access to the Southern Parcel, and if so, describe in detail: (a) the nature of each alternative access route investigated; (b) the results of such investigation; (c) any engineering, cost, or feasibility analyses performed; and (d) the reasons, if any, why any alternative access route was determined to be inadequate or infeasible.
INTERROGATORY NO. 11 — Adequacy of Lakemont Trail
Describe Ridgemark's contention that Lakemont Trail is inadequate for commercial truck traffic in support of the proposed Ridgemark Commerce Village development, including: (a) the current condition and surface type of Lakemont Trail; (b) the current width, grade, and load-bearing capacity of Lakemont Trail (if known); (c) identification of all studies, engineering reports, traffic analyses, pavement condition assessments, or other evaluations Ridgemark has obtained or commissioned regarding Lakemont Trail; (d) identification of the persons or firms that prepared any such studies or reports; and (e) the specific deficiencies that Ridgemark contends render Lakemont Trail inadequate for the intended use.
INTERROGATORY NO. 12 — Ridgemark Commerce Village Development Plan
Describe the proposed Ridgemark Commerce Village development in detail, including: (a) the number and type of units; (b) the total square footage of the proposed improvements; (c) the estimated total development cost, broken down by land acquisition costs, hard construction costs, and soft costs (including architectural, engineering, legal, permitting, and financing costs); (d) the project timeline, including anticipated start and completion dates; (e) the current development status (including whether construction has commenced, whether permits have been obtained, and whether any site work has been performed); and (f) the identity of the general contractor, architect, and civil engineer retained for the project.
INTERROGATORY NO. 13 — Pinnacle Shores Loan — Terms and Conditions
Describe in detail the terms of the Pinnacle Shores Loan, including: (a) the total loan amount; (b) the interest rate (whether fixed or variable, and if variable, the index and margin); (c) the maturity date; (d) the conditions precedent to the initial draw and to each subsequent draw; (e) any condition requiring Ridgemark to demonstrate or certify that the Southern Parcel has legally enforceable vehicular access to a public right-of-way; (f) any financial covenants or reporting requirements; and (g) the identity of the loan officer or relationship manager at Pinnacle Shores Bank assigned to the Pinnacle Shores Loan.
INTERROGATORY NO. 14 — Pinnacle Shores Loan — Draw History
State the total amount drawn under the Pinnacle Shores Loan as of the date of Ridgemark's response to this interrogatory, and for each draw identify: (a) the date of the draw request; (b) the date the draw was funded; (c) the amount of the draw; and (d) the purpose or use of the draw proceeds (e.g., site clearing, grading, architectural and engineering fees, legal fees, permitting costs).
INTERROGATORY NO. 15 — Pinnacle Shores Loan — Status of Draws and Suspension
State whether Pinnacle Shores Bank has, at any time, suspended, restricted, conditioned, or refused to fund any draw request under the Pinnacle Shores Loan. If so: (a) state the date on which any such suspension, restriction, condition, or refusal occurred; (b) describe the circumstances giving rise to the suspension, restriction, condition, or refusal; (c) identify the specific reasons provided by Pinnacle Shores Bank for the suspension, restriction, condition, or refusal, including whether it was related to the status of the Cross-Parcel Easement or the pendency of this litigation; (d) identify all communications between Ridgemark and Pinnacle Shores Bank regarding the suspension, restriction, condition, or refusal; and (e) state the current status of the Pinnacle Shores Loan, including whether any suspension or restriction remains in effect.
INTERROGATORY NO. 16 — Relationship with Thurmond / Estate of Roland P. Thurmond
Describe the relationship, if any, between Ridgemark (or either of its members, Hector J. Vilanova and/or Claudia R. Vilanova) and Roland P. Thurmond, Thurmond Industrial Holdings, Inc., the Estate of Roland P. Thurmond, or any representative, heir, beneficiary, or fiduciary thereof, prior to Ridgemark's acquisition of the Southern Parcel on March 8, 2019. Specifically state: (a) how Ridgemark or its members became aware that the Southern Parcel was available for purchase; (b) whether Hector J. Vilanova or Claudia R. Vilanova had any personal, business, or familial relationship with Roland P. Thurmond; (c) whether Ridgemark or its members had any prior business dealings with Thurmond Industrial Holdings, Inc.; and (d) the identity of all persons who participated in or facilitated the introduction or negotiation between Ridgemark and the Estate of Roland P. Thurmond.
INTERROGATORY NO. 17 — Common Ownership of the Two Parcels (2012–2014)
State whether, to Ridgemark's knowledge, the Northern Parcel and the Southern Parcel were at any time between January 1, 2012 and December 31, 2014 under common ownership or control by Roland P. Thurmond, members of the Thurmond family, or entities owned or controlled by them. In responding, identify: (a) all facts known to Ridgemark supporting or contradicting common ownership during that period; (b) all documents in Ridgemark's possession, custody, or control reflecting common ownership during that period; and (c) all persons known to Ridgemark who have knowledge regarding the ownership of the Northern Parcel and/or the Southern Parcel during that period.
INTERROGATORY NO. 18 — Title Insurance on the Southern Parcel
Identify any title insurance policy obtained by or on behalf of Ridgemark in connection with its acquisition of the Southern Parcel on March 8, 2019, and for each such policy state: (a) the name of the title insurer; (b) the policy number; (c) the policy amount (or coverage limit); (d) the effective date; (e) whether the policy is an owner's policy, a lender's policy, or both; (f) whether the Cross-Parcel Easement was listed as an insured appurtenant right or benefit in the policy; (g) whether the Cross-Parcel Easement was listed as a Schedule B exception; and (h) whether the 2014 Replat was listed as a Schedule B exception or was otherwise referenced in the policy.
INTERROGATORY NO. 19 — Title Commitment and Search for the Southern Parcel
Identify the title agent and/or title company that conducted the title search and issued the title commitment for Ridgemark's acquisition of the Southern Parcel on March 8, 2019, and: (a) state the name and address of the title agent and/or title company; (b) state the date of the title commitment; (c) describe whether the title search or title commitment disclosed the existence of the 2014 Replat; (d) describe whether the title search or title commitment addressed or analyzed the potential effect of the 2014 Replat on the Cross-Parcel Easement; and (e) identify any title objection letters, title clearance correspondence, or requests for curative action relating to the Cross-Parcel Easement or the 2014 Replat.
INTERROGATORY NO. 20 — Surveys of the Southern Parcel
Identify all surveys of the Southern Parcel obtained by or on behalf of Ridgemark, and for each survey state: (a) the name of the surveyor or surveying firm; (b) the date of the survey; (c) the type of survey (e.g., boundary survey, ALTA/NSPS land title survey, topographic survey, as-built survey); (d) whether the survey depicted the Cross-Parcel Easement corridor; (e) whether the survey depicted Lakemont Trail; and (f) whether the survey depicted any other easements, rights-of-way, or encumbrances affecting the Southern Parcel.
INTERROGATORY NO. 21 — Pre-Suit Communications with Fairwater
Identify all communications between Ridgemark (or any person acting on its behalf, including but not limited to counsel at Castellon Foley & Ruiz LLP) and Fairwater Real Estate Investment Trust (or any person acting on its behalf, including but not limited to counsel at Calderwood & Harkness LLP) regarding the Cross-Parcel Easement, access to the Southern Parcel, the 2014 Replat, or any related subject matter, from March 8, 2019 to the date of filing of the Complaint in this action. For each such communication, state: (a) the date; (b) the identity of all participants or correspondents; (c) the method of communication; and (d) the substance of the communication.
INTERROGATORY NO. 22 — Communications with Sunbelt Distribution Centers, Inc.
Identify all communications between Ridgemark (or any person acting on its behalf) and Sunbelt Distribution Centers, Inc. (or any successor, officer, director, shareholder, agent, or representative thereof) regarding the Cross-Parcel Easement, the Northern Parcel, access to or across the Northern Parcel, or any matter relating to the Southern Parcel. For each such communication, state: (a) the date; (b) the identity of all participants or correspondents; (c) the method of communication; and (d) the substance of the communication.
INTERROGATORY NO. 23 — Expert Witnesses
Identify each person Ridgemark expects to call as an expert witness at trial in this action, and for each such expert state: (a) the expert's full name, business address, and professional qualifications (including education, training, and experience); (b) the subject matter on which the expert is expected to testify; (c) the substance of the facts and opinions to which the expert is expected to testify; (d) a summary of the grounds for each opinion; (e) whether the expert has prepared a written report; and (f) the compensation to be paid to the expert for the expert's study, analysis, and testimony.
INTERROGATORY NO. 24 — Damages or Harm Claimed
Describe in detail all damages, losses, or harm Ridgemark claims it has suffered or will suffer as a result of the alleged inability to use the Cross-Parcel Easement, including but not limited to: (a) the specific categories of damages claimed (e.g., diminution in value of the Southern Parcel, lost profits, delay damages, increased construction costs, carrying costs, loan default damages); (b) the dollar amount of each category of damages claimed; (c) the method and basis for calculating each such amount; (d) the identity of any person who performed or assisted in performing the damage calculations; and (e) all assumptions upon which the damage calculations are based.
INTERROGATORY NO. 25 — Witnesses with Knowledge
Identify all persons known to Ridgemark who have knowledge of facts relevant to any claim or defense in this action, and for each such person state: (a) the person's full name, current or last known address, and current or last known telephone number; (b) the person's current or last known employer and job title; (c) the person's relationship to any party in this action; and (d) a description of the subject matter of that person's knowledge.
IV. REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 1 — Deed Conveying the Southern Parcel to Ridgemark
Produce the deed or deeds by which Ridgemark acquired the Southern Parcel (Seminole County Parcel ID 25-20-30-500-0030-0000) from the Estate of Roland P. Thurmond, including any exhibits, attachments, legal descriptions, and affidavits appended thereto. This request includes but is not limited to the special warranty deed dated on or about March 8, 2019, including any recitals therein relating to the Cross-Parcel Easement as an appurtenant right.
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 2 — Purchase Agreement for the Southern Parcel
Produce the purchase and sale agreement (and all amendments, addenda, supplements, assignments, closing statements, settlement statements, and closing documents) pursuant to which Ridgemark acquired the Southern Parcel from the Estate of Roland P. Thurmond, including any due-diligence contingency provisions, inspection provisions, and title review provisions contained therein.
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 3 — Title Commitment and Title Policy for the Southern Parcel
Produce the title commitment and the owner's title insurance policy obtained by or on behalf of Ridgemark in connection with its acquisition of the Southern Parcel on or about March 8, 2019, including all Schedule A items, Schedule B–Section 1 requirements, Schedule B–Section 2 exceptions, and all endorsements issued in connection therewith. This request also includes any lender's title insurance policy issued in connection with the Pinnacle Shores Loan or any other financing secured by the Southern Parcel.
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 4 — Title Search Documents for the Southern Parcel
Produce all title search results, abstracts of title, title examination reports, title rundown sheets, chain-of-title summaries, and related documents obtained by or on behalf of Ridgemark in connection with its acquisition of the Southern Parcel, including any supplemental or updated title searches performed after the date of acquisition.
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 5 — Surveys of the Southern Parcel
Produce all surveys, ALTA/NSPS land title surveys, boundary surveys, topographic surveys, as-built surveys, and sketch-and-description surveys of the Southern Parcel in Ridgemark's possession, custody, or control, whether obtained before, during, or after the acquisition of the Southern Parcel.
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 6 — Documents Relating to the Cross-Parcel Easement
Produce all documents in Ridgemark's possession, custody, or control relating to the Cross-Parcel Easement (recorded in Official Records Book 4517, Page 1283, of the Public Records of Seminole County, Florida), including but not limited to: copies of the original easement deed, any amended or restated easement agreements, correspondence, memoranda, title opinions, legal analyses, title company endorsements, and any other analyses or evaluations of the Cross-Parcel Easement's scope, validity, enforceability, or location.
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 7 — Documents Relating to the 2014 Replat
Produce all documents in Ridgemark's possession, custody, or control relating to the Commerce Park Boulevard Phase II Replat (recorded in Plat Book 78, Pages 44–46, of the Public Records of Seminole County, Florida), including but not limited to: copies of the 2014 Replat, copies of any prior plats referenced therein, applications for the replat, staff reports or comments, minutes of any public hearings, and any analyses, memoranda, or legal opinions regarding the 2014 Replat's effect on the Cross-Parcel Easement or on any other easement affecting the Northern Parcel or the Southern Parcel.
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 8 — Communications with Seminole County Regarding the 2014 Replat
Produce all documents and communications between Ridgemark (or any person acting on its behalf, including attorneys, engineers, land planners, or consultants) and any official, employee, or representative of Seminole County, Florida regarding the 2014 Replat, including but not limited to letters, emails, meeting notes, records of telephone calls, and submissions to or correspondence with the Seminole County Development Services Division, the Seminole County Board of County Commissioners, or the Seminole County Clerk of the Circuit Court.
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 9 — Communications with Seminole County Regarding Access
Produce all documents and communications between Ridgemark (or any person acting on its behalf) and any official, employee, or representative of Seminole County, Florida regarding vehicular access to the Southern Parcel, including but not limited to: any requests for road improvements, paving, or upgrades to Lakemont Trail; any applications for access permits, driveway permits, or curb cuts on Commerce Park Boulevard; and any correspondence or discussions regarding the adequacy of existing access or the availability of alternative access routes.
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 10 — Documents Relating to Lakemont Trail
Produce all documents in Ridgemark's possession, custody, or control relating to the condition, use, capacity, or potential improvement of Lakemont Trail, including but not limited to: engineering reports, traffic impact studies, pavement condition assessments, cost estimates for paving or improvements, geotechnical reports, correspondence with governmental entities or utility providers, and any photographs or visual depictions of Lakemont Trail.
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 11 — Pinnacle Shores Loan Documents
Produce the complete set of loan documents relating to the Pinnacle Shores Loan dated November 12, 2020, including but not limited to: the loan commitment letter, loan agreement, promissory note, mortgage, security agreement, assignment of rents and leases, environmental indemnity agreement, guaranty (if any), construction loan disbursement agreement, and all amendments, modifications, waivers, side letters, and ancillary documents related thereto. This request also includes all draw requests, draw schedules, inspection reports, and lien waiver forms submitted in connection with the Pinnacle Shores Loan.
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 12 — Communications with Pinnacle Shores Bank Regarding the Easement
Produce all documents and communications between Ridgemark (or any person acting on its behalf) and Pinnacle Shores Bank, National Association (or any officer, employee, or representative thereof, including but not limited to Patricia Leung) regarding the Cross-Parcel Easement, access to the Southern Parcel, the 2014 Replat, or the effect of this litigation on the Pinnacle Shores Loan or on Ridgemark's ability to draw funds thereunder.
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 13 — Pinnacle Shores Loan Draw Requests and Approvals
Produce all draw requests submitted by Ridgemark under the Pinnacle Shores Loan and all approvals, denials, conditional approvals, or conditions imposed by Pinnacle Shores Bank with respect thereto, including any supporting documentation submitted with or in connection with each draw request (e.g., contractor's affidavits, lien waivers, inspection reports, and architect's certificates).
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 14 — Pinnacle Shores Loan Suspension Documents
Produce all documents relating to any suspension, restriction, hold, or conditioning of further draws under the Pinnacle Shores Loan by Pinnacle Shores Bank, including but not limited to: any correspondence, notices, emails, memoranda, or internal communications from Pinnacle Shores Bank regarding the suspension or restriction; any conditions imposed for the resumption of draws; and any responses or communications from Ridgemark to Pinnacle Shores Bank regarding such suspension, restriction, or conditions.
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 15 — Ridgemark Commerce Village Development Plans
Produce all site plans, conceptual plans, schematic designs, design development drawings, construction documents, architectural drawings, structural drawings, civil engineering plans, landscape plans, development budgets, project cost estimates, financial pro formas, return-on-investment analyses, project schedules, and critical-path timelines relating to the proposed Ridgemark Commerce Village development on the Southern Parcel.
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 16 — Ridgemark Commerce Village Permit Applications
Produce all permit applications, zoning applications, site plan applications, variance requests, special exception requests, development order applications, environmental permits, stormwater management permits, utility connection applications, and all governmental approvals, denials, conditions of approval, or pending applications relating to the proposed Ridgemark Commerce Village development.
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 17 — Appraisals of the Southern Parcel
Produce all appraisals, broker opinions of value, comparative market analyses, feasibility studies, or other valuations of the Southern Parcel obtained by or on behalf of Ridgemark at any time, whether prepared in connection with the acquisition of the Southern Parcel, the Pinnacle Shores Loan, or for any other purpose.
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 18 — Documents Relating to the Estate of Roland P. Thurmond
Produce all documents relating to Ridgemark's communications, negotiations, and dealings with the Estate of Roland P. Thurmond (or any personal representative, attorney, real estate broker, or other representative thereof) in connection with Ridgemark's acquisition of the Southern Parcel, including but not limited to: letters of intent, term sheets, correspondence, emails, memoranda of understanding, and any documents provided by the Estate to Ridgemark during the due-diligence period.
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 19 — Documents Relating to Common Ownership of Both Parcels (2012–2014)
Produce all documents in Ridgemark's possession, custody, or control reflecting, evidencing, or relating to the ownership of the Northern Parcel and/or the Southern Parcel by Roland P. Thurmond, members of the Thurmond family, or entities owned or controlled by them, during the period from January 1, 2012 through December 31, 2014, including but not limited to: deeds, corporate records, organizational documents, property tax records, and correspondence.
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 20 — Communications with Thurmond Industrial Holdings, Inc. or Sunbelt Distribution Centers, Inc.
Produce all documents and communications between Ridgemark (or any person acting on its behalf, including its members Hector J. Vilanova and Claudia R. Vilanova) and Thurmond Industrial Holdings, Inc. or Sunbelt Distribution Centers, Inc. (or any successor, officer, director, shareholder, agent, or representative thereof) regarding the Cross-Parcel Easement, the Northern Parcel, the Southern Parcel, or any related matter.
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 21 — Pre-Suit Demand Letter and Related Correspondence
Produce all versions (including drafts) of the demand letter dated April 2, 2021 from Castellon Foley & Ruiz LLP to Fairwater Real Estate Investment Trust, and all internal and external correspondence, memoranda, emails, and notes relating to the preparation, review, approval, and sending of that demand letter. This request also includes all response correspondence received by Ridgemark or its counsel, including but not limited to the letter dated May 14, 2021 from Calderwood & Harkness LLP to Castellon Foley & Ruiz LLP.
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 22 — Communications with Fairwater Regarding the Easement
Produce all documents and communications between Ridgemark (or any person acting on its behalf, including counsel) and Fairwater Real Estate Investment Trust (or any person acting on its behalf, including counsel) regarding the Cross-Parcel Easement, access to the Southern Parcel, the 2014 Replat, the proposed Ridgemark Commerce Village development, or any related matter, from March 8, 2019 to the present. This request is not limited to pre-suit communications and includes any post-filing communications not otherwise protected by applicable privilege.
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 23 — Communications with Condor Supply Chain Solutions, Inc.
Produce all documents and communications between Ridgemark (or any person acting on its behalf) and Condor Supply Chain Solutions, Inc. (or any officer, employee, or representative thereof, including but not limited to Nathan H. Brierly, Vice President of Real Estate) regarding the Cross-Parcel Easement, access to or across the Northern Parcel, truck-court operations at the Fairwater Sanford Logistics Center, shared-access arrangements, or any matter relating to the proposed Ridgemark Commerce Village development or this litigation.
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 24 — Ridgemark Operating Agreement and Organizational Documents
Produce Ridgemark's Articles of Organization (as filed with the Florida Department of State, Division of Corporations), Operating Agreement, and all amendments, restatements, and supplements thereto, reflecting the members, managers, governance structure, capital contributions, and profit-and-loss allocations of the entity.
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 25 — Financial Statements
Produce Ridgemark's financial statements, including balance sheets, income statements (or statements of operations), statements of members' equity, and cash flow statements, for the fiscal years ending December 31, 2018; December 31, 2019; December 31, 2020; and year-to-date through the most recent month-end prior to the date of Ridgemark's response in 2021. If audited financial statements are not available, produce unaudited financial statements, compiled financial statements, or internally prepared financial statements.
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 26 — Insurance Policies Relating to the Southern Parcel
Produce all insurance policies relating to the Southern Parcel or the proposed Ridgemark Commerce Village development, including but not limited to: owner's title insurance policies, lender's title insurance policies, commercial general liability policies, builder's risk policies, course-of-construction policies, umbrella or excess liability policies, and any declarations pages, endorsements, or riders thereto.
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 27 — Expert Reports and Analyses
Produce all reports, analyses, opinions, memoranda, correspondence, or other documents prepared by, or prepared for, any expert witness or consultant retained by Ridgemark in connection with this action, including but not limited to: real estate appraisal reports, traffic impact studies, engineering reports, land-use analyses, damage calculations, and lost-profit analyses. This request is subject to the limitations of Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.280(b)(5) to the extent any such materials constitute non-discoverable consulting expert materials.
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 28 — Photographs and Videos of the Easement Corridor and Southern Parcel
Produce all photographs, videos, drone imagery, aerial imagery, satellite imagery, or other visual depictions of the Cross-Parcel Easement corridor, the Southern Parcel, the Northern Parcel (to the extent depicting the easement corridor area), and/or Lakemont Trail, in Ridgemark's possession, custody, or control, regardless of the date such images were created or obtained.
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 29 — Documents Relating to Damages or Harm
Produce all documents relating to any damages, losses, or harm Ridgemark claims it has suffered or will suffer as a result of the alleged inability to use the Cross-Parcel Easement, including but not limited to: financial analyses, lost-profit calculations, delay-cost estimates, carrying-cost calculations, interest-expense analyses, diminution-in-value opinions, comparative market analyses, and any correspondence with lenders, investors, contractors, or prospective tenants reflecting the impact of the alleged inability to use the Cross-Parcel Easement.
REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION NO. 30 — All Other Documents Supporting the Complaint
Produce all other documents not previously identified or produced in response to Requests for Production Nos. 1–29 that Ridgemark intends to introduce into evidence, rely upon, or reference in support of its Complaint for Declaratory Judgment and any claims asserted therein, or that are relevant to any claim or defense in this action and that have not been otherwise requested above.
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I HEREBY CERTIFY that on October 4, 2021, I served the foregoing Defendant Fairwater Real Estate Investment Trust's First Set of Interrogatories (Nos. 1–25) and First Requests for Production (Nos. 1–30) to Plaintiff Ridgemark Development Partners LLC by email through the Florida Courts E-Filing Portal upon the following counsel of record:
Marco D. Castellon, Esq. Rebecca Shin-Torres, Esq. Castellon Foley & Ruiz LLP 228 South Orange Avenue, Suite 1400 Orlando, Florida 32801 Telephone: (407) 555-3200
Email: mcastellon@cfr-law.com
Email: rshintorres@cfr-law.com
Counsel for Plaintiff Ridgemark Development Partners LLC
HARGROVE & LIDDELL, P.A. 501 East Church Street, Suite 300 Orlando, Florida 32801
By: ________
Brenda Hargrove, Esq. Florida Bar No. 0987214 Telephone: (407) 555-7100
Email: bhargrove@hargroveliddell.com
Local Counsel for Defendant Fairwater Real Estate Investment Trust
— and —
CALDERWOOD & HARKNESS LLP 1725 K Street NW, Suite 1100 Washington, DC 20006
Jeffrey Park Lead Associate Telephone: (202) 555-4800
Email: jpark@calderwoodharkness.com
Yuki Nakamura Associate Telephone: (202) 555-4815
Email: ynakamura@calderwoodharkness.com
Admitted pro hac vice; with designation of local counsel pursuant to Florida Rule of Judicial Administration 2.510
Attorneys for Defendant Fairwater Real Estate Investment Trust

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE EIGHTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR SEMINOLE COUNTY, FLORIDA

I. DEFINITIONS

II. INSTRUCTIONS

III. INTERROGATORIES

IV. REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

Record

Parties

Dates

Amounts