Judge orders verified discovery, delays sanctions in Shaw v. Riverwood negligent-security dispute

Judge Tammy Long Hayward presiding in Clayton County State Court on Jan. 15, 2025 ordered plaintiffs in Shaw v. Riverwood Housing Partners to verify their complaint and discovery responses within seven days and declined to impose sanctions immediately, after defense lawyers said plaintiffs withheld police-file evidence and key witness identities.

The court set a seven-day deadline for a verified complaint and verified discovery updates, granted plaintiffs leave to add parties in the Clayton County case, and warned that graduated sanctions could follow if the verification and supplemental responses were not filed. “We got 7 days to get the complaint verified. 7 days for verification of the discovery responses. And that means updating the discovery responses,” Judge Hayward said.

The hearing focused on defense allegations that plaintiffs failed to disclose statements and materials from the Clayton County Police Department file, including interviews in which plaintiff Shaquia Denise Shaw reportedly identified a possible key witness, her daughter Nikira (identified in defense briefing as “Nikira/Nakeera”), and social-media evidence suggesting contact between the decedent and an assailant. Defense counsel Anne Rogers of Weinberg Wheeler Hudgins Gunn & Dial told the court that the defendants subpoenaed the police file and discovered material not produced in discovery. Rogers said the file contained statements indicating a preexisting relationship and a motive involving a gun, facts she said were relevant to negligent-security elements.

Plaintiffs’ counsel, represented in court by Daniel Beer, Brian C. Mickelson and Michael Smith, said they would verify and supplement discovery. “We can verify the complaint. We verify the interrogatories. I don't think it's about verifying the complaint. We can verify our discovery responses,” Beer said on the record.

Judge Hayward rejected defense calls for immediate, severe sanctions but signaled she expected full compliance and professional cooperation: “If you as plaintiffs want recovery, then you gotta be willing to give. And under the Civil Practice Act, reciprocal discovery is what is that that's the pieces of it.” She also told counsel that if cases in other courts are related they should be moved and consolidated; several lawyers indicated companion litigation in DeKalb County had been filed to preserve claims.

The court also addressed the defendants’ request for production breadth, rejecting a demand covering the investigator’s work in unrelated cases while directing parties to produce materials tied to the case. Judge Hayward stated she would issue a written order memorializing the seven-day verification requirement and other case management directives. She reserved the right to reconsider sanctions if the ordered supplements were not timely and complete.

The hearing included contested statements about whether plaintiffs had supplied investigative material and why their discovery responses lacked certain items. Defense counsel said the undisclosed material would bear on whether the decedent knew his killers and whether the shooting was random. Plaintiffs’ counsel said some of the investigatory information was hearsay and not relied on for criminal probable-cause decisions; they agreed to supplement.

The judge asked the parties to coordinate informally where possible and emphasized courtroom practice: “I want people to be professionals and don't get so stuck in your adversarial position that you're not willing to exchange information whether through a formal discovery process or informally by picking up the doggone phone.”

The court left open case-management steps including consolidation and further motions, and directed the parties to file the verification and updated discovery responses within seven days. If those filings are not made, the judge warned, she will consider escalating sanctions.