Sara Lamson Cumbus

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
RALEIGH DIVISION
IN RE:
SARA LAMSON CUMBUS
DEBTOR
CASE NO.
05-01435-5-ATS
ORDER REGARDING MOTIONS FOR RULE 2004 EXAMINATIONS
The matters before the court are the motions to conduct Rule 2004
examinations of the debtor and of the Matsco Companies and the motion
for protective order filed by the Matsco Companies. A hearing took
place in Raleigh, North Carolina on June 28, 2005.
Sara Lamson Cumbus filed a petition for relief under chapter 7 of
the Bankruptcy Code on April 12, 2005. Dr. Cumbus is also the
designated representative of a related chapter 7 debtor, Greenwood
Veterinary Hospital, P.C., Case No. 05-01149-5-ATS. The Matsco
Companies filed a motion to conduct a Rule 2004 examination of Dr.
Cumbus, and Dr. Cumbus objected to the scope of the document production
requested in conjunction with the examination. In addition, Dr. Cumbus
contends that she is entitled to a witness fee for her testimony to the
extent it relates to Greenwood Veterinary Hospital’s case, as opposed
to her own case.
Dr. Cumbus filed a motion to conduct a Rule 2004 examination of
a representative of the Matsco Companies. Matsco objected, contending
that all of its representatives are located in California, and it would
Case 05-01435-5-ATS Doc 28 Filed 06/28/05 Entered 06/29/05 07:51:51 Page 1 of 2

2
be entitled to travel and witness fees if it is required to attend an
examination in North Carolina. Dr. Cumbus acknowledged that Matsco
would be entitled to these fees, and withdrew her motion when she
learned that no representative of Matsco would be in North Carolina to
attend Dr. Cumbus’ examination.
Based on the representations made at the hearing, the motion to
conduct a Rule 2004 examination of Dr. Cumbus is ALLOWED. Dr. Cumbus
is entitled to a $40 witness fee for her testimony in connection with
the Greenwood Veterinary Hospital case, but not for her testimony in
her own case. Dr. Cumbus is required to produce only those documents
in her possession, custody or control, and is not required to produce
documents already turned over to the trustee in the Greenwood
Veterinary Hospital case or otherwise not in her possession or control.
Dr. Cumbus’ motion to conduct a Rule 2004 examination of a Matsco
representative was WITHDRAWN in court, rendering Matsco’s motion for a
protective order MOOT.
SO ORDERED.
DATED: June 28, 2005
Case 05-01435-5-ATS Doc 28 Filed 06/28/05 Entered 06/29/05 07:51:51 Page 2 of 2