Portions of my document that address the affidavit of Dr. Nichols...

5.         Since plaintiffs insist on dealing with minutiae,  the Harrisons have no choice but to respond in like manner.

(a)            Therefore, the Harrisons question the alleged affidavit by Dr. Nichols, which was attached to plaintiffs’ request for summary judgment. The Harrisons allege that this document was

not signed before a notary and that the notary later affixed her signature and stamp, after the fact.

            (b)            For the Court’s convenience, attached are two copies of documents alleged to be affidavits by Dr. Nichols.  The first one (Exhibit “A”) was faxed to the Harrisons by counsel for plaintiffs on February 17, 2003. The Harrisons call the Court’s attention to the fact that this document has been signed by Dr. Nichols, but has not been notarized.

(c)            The Harrisons now direct the Court’s attention to the second document (Exhibit “B”), which was faxed to the Harrisons on February 27, 2003. Dr. Nichols signature on this document now has been notarized. This document is identical in every way to Exhibit “A,” even including the hand-written fax number of counsel for plaintiffs in the upper right corner, except that the font on Exhibit “B” is slightly larger, indicating that the document had been slightly enlarged when it was copied.

(d)            Now here’s the interesting part: the Harrisons ask the Court to place page 2 of Exhibit “A” over page two of Exhibit “B,” hold the pages up to the light, and line up the text regarding the top and left margins. The Court can then see that the text on Exhibit “B” is slightly larger due to the enlargement. The Harrisons then ask the Court, after lining up the top and left margins of the two documents, to take notice of the signature of Dr. Nichols. It is identical, except it is slightly larger on Exhibit “B” due to the enlargement while photocopying.

(e)       This is clear indication that Dr. Nichols signed the “affidavit” without being sworn before a

notary, and then later the document was notarized, after the fact.

Back to CHRONOLOGY