.II Metro by T-Mobile r:- 7100 AM Done Attachment E] PART II (30 Points) 21. You are employed as a paralegal at a small rm in Philadelphia. Tony Falco, a resident of Philadelphia, bought land from Lure Realty, a Philadelphia business for $310,000 on July 2, 2019, through a realtor, John Genzale. When Tony went to see the land, he found that it was flooded and filed with debris; Genzale had described the land as \"ready to build a structure on." Your supervising attorney asks you to draft a complaint alleging fraud against Lure Realty and Genzale. He tells you that the elements of fraud are: 1) Intentionally misrepresenting a material fact; 2) That a party relies on to their detriment. Please draft a complaint with a caption, allegations and WHEREFORE clause. Pursuant to a complaint (No. 51721), with hearing date 5/29/2020, and proceeding pursuant to 42 Pa.C.S. 6252(h) fer reasons stated below, the Court finds that there is no reason that this action should not be certied as a class action as all of the plaintiffs are represented similarly and have common questions of law or fact in common, together with claims for relief in common, related to Defendants' fraudulent conduct in connection with the purchase of land located at 1531 Kline Road in North Philadelphia from Lure Realty, Inc. Tony Falco ("Plaintiff") sues Lure Realty ("Defendant") and John Genzale ("Defendant\") for fraud where both parties reside in Philadelphia: Philadelphia County. On July 2, 2019, Plaintiff, A. Falco purchased from Defendant, Lure Realty land consisting of seven (7) blocks for three hundred ten thousand dollars ($310,000). Plaintiff alleges that he never would have bought the land had the Defendant not made material misrepresentations by stating that the property was "ready to build a structure on. Plaintiff came to the property to see it and found that it was flooded with debris. Because of these actions, Plaintiff asserts that he is entitled to monetary damages. Plaintiff, Tony Falco sues Defendant, Lure Realty and .II Metro by T-lviobile '3' 7100 AM Done Attachment E] Plaintiff, Tony Falco sues Defendant, Lure Realty and John Genzale for fraud in Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas where both parties reside in Philadelphia: Philadelphia County. On July 2, 2019, Plaintiff A. Realty land consisting of seven (7) blocks for three hundred ten thousand dollars ($310,000). Plaintiff alleges that he never would have bought the land had the Defendant not made material misrepresentations by stating that the property was "ready to build a structure on. Plaintiff came to the property to see it and found that it was flooded with debris. Because of these actions, Plaintiff asserts that he is entitled to monetary damages. b. Please prepare an answer for defendant Genzale with any possible affirmative defenses and cross-claims. Plaintiff, Falco sues Defendant, Lure Realty and John Gonzales for fraud in Philadelphia County Court of Common Pleas where both parties reside in Philadelphia: Philadelphia County. On July 2, 2019, Plaintiff A. Falco purchased from Defendant Lure Realty land consisting of seven (7) blocks for three hundred ten thousand dollars ($310,000). Plaintiff alleges that he never would have bought the land had the Defendant not made material misrepresentations by stating that the property was "ready to build a structure on. Plaintiff came to the property to see it and found that it was flooded with debris. Because of these actions, Plaintiff asserts that he is entitled to monetary damages. Pursuant to a complaint (No. 74321), with hearing date 7/21/2019, and proceeding pursuant to 42 Pa.C.S. 6252(h) for reasons stated below, the Court nds that there is no reason that this action should not be certied as a class action as all of the plaintiffs are represented similarly and have common questions of law or fact in common, together with claims for relief in common, related to Defendants' fraudulent conduct in connection with the purchase of land. .II Metro by T-iviobile r:- 7100 AM Done Attachment E] PART III (10 Points) You represent Gerry in an employment discrimination case. Please discuss the discovery process. Be sure to explain: 1)The different techniques used to gather discovery and how they work. The discovery process requires that the plaintiff, in this case Gerry, orders and receives from the court a copy of the pretrial order, which defines the time limits for discovery and for other pretrial preparation. The pretrial order also requires that each party send to all other parties a list of all documents relevant to the case. 2) The ways that discovery can be limited. There is a different technique for limiting the amount of discovery, it is called a protective order. It is a legal document that limits what discovery each party can receive from the other. Typically, a protective order will require that only specific kinds of discovery be received by each party and limited to certain subjects. For example, the protective order might restrict the kind of documents being requested. 3) Why the discovery process exists. The discovery process exists to allow each party in a lawsuit to obtain evidence from the other side and help them prepare for trial. The discovery process allows parties to gather statements in writing or orally under oath, written documents or emails, photographs, records of telephone calls and other physical evidence. 4) What information you will need from your adversaries. Once you have obtained information from the other side, you may need to determine what is useful or usable. You can do this by reviewing the discovery and considering whether it will be helpful for trial preparation. The discovery process usually starts after the pretrial conference. The pretrial conference is a meeting of the judge and counsel within a few weeks of the filing of the complaint to discuss case management issues. The Court may order that each party le a list of all documents relevant to the case, an initial r'licrlncnr'n nn :II nnn-nriuilnnnr'l inFnr-mni-inn :inri