Unlocking the truth: Requests for admission

HERSHEY'S REQUIRED ADMISSIONS

Rakestraw v. The Hershey Company, et al. — Case No. 2:25-cv-02682-JWB-TJJ

Navigating the complexities

LEGAL DISCLAIMER

This website discusses a pending lawsuit. The claims described are allegations made in a court filing and have not yet been proven. The defendant denies liability. This content is for informational purposes only and is not legal advice.

WHAT ARE REQUESTS FOR ADMISSION?

Requests for Admission are formal legal demands requiring the opposing party to admit or deny specific statements of fact under oath within 30 days of service. Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 36, any matter not denied within 30 days is automatically admitted and established as fact for the entire case. Defendants cannot later contradict an admission at trial.

These 15 requests are prepared and ready to deploy the moment discovery opens following the Court's ruling on the pending Motion to Dismiss.

WHERE THIS CASE STANDS

Defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss on January 27, 2026. That motion is pending before Judge John W. Broomes in the United States District Court for the District of Kansas. Discovery is stayed until Judge Broomes rules. These requests will be served on Defendants on the first day discovery opens.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF KANSAS

KANSAS CITY, KANSAS

DONNIE LEE RAKESTRAW, JR., Plaintiff,

v. Case No. 2:25-cv-02682-JWB-TJJ

THE HERSHEY COMPANY, et al., Defendants.

PLAINTIFF DONNIE LEE RAKESTRAW, JR.'S

FIRST REQUESTS FOR ADMISSION TO DEFENDANTS

(Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 36)

Plaintiff Donnie Lee Rakestraw, Jr., appearing pro se, requests that Defendants answer the following Requests for Admission separately and fully in writing within thirty (30) days of service, pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 36.

INSTRUCTIONS

Each matter for which an admission is requested is admitted unless, within 30 days after service, Defendants serve a written answer or objection addressed to the matter. Fed. R. Civ. P. 36(a)(3).

If Defendants object to a request, the grounds for the objection must be stated. A failure to admit or deny without a specific objection is not a proper response. Fed. R. Civ. P. 36(a)(5).

If Defendants cannot truthfully admit or deny a request, Defendants must state in detail why they cannot do so. Fed. R. Civ. P. 36(a)(4).

A denial must fairly respond to the substance of the matter. A qualified denial must specify the part admitted and qualify or deny the remainder. Fed. R. Civ. P. 36(a)(4).

REQUESTS FOR ADMISSION

Request for Admission No. 1:

Admit that Defendants utilize an electronic Learning Management System ("LMS") to track employee training participation and completion.

Request for Admission No. 2:

Admit that the LMS records user login activity, including timestamps and duration of access.

Request for Admission No. 3:

Admit that the LMS records whether assigned training modules were completed.

Request for Admission No. 4:

Admit that certain managers or supervisors were required to complete training relating to workplace safety, injury reporting, and/or accommodation obligations.

Request for Admission No. 5:

Admit that Defendants maintain records reflecting completion of such training by managers or supervisors.

Request for Admission No. 6:

Admit that, for at least some managers or supervisors, records reflecting training completion exist without corresponding LMS records showing login activity sufficient to complete the training.

Request for Admission No. 7:

Admit that LMS metadata does not reflect completion of every training module reflected as completed in Defendants' records.

Request for Admission No. 8:

Admit that Defendants rely, at least in part, on training completion records to demonstrate compliance with company policies relating to safety, injury reporting, and accommodation obligations.

Request for Admission No. 9:

Admit that Defendants have no requirement that all training be completed exclusively through the LMS.

Request for Admission No. 10:

Admit that Defendants do not maintain complete records of all training conducted outside the LMS.

Request for Admission No. 11:

Admit that Defendants cannot, based solely on LMS data, confirm that all training reflected as completed in Defendants' records was actually completed through the LMS.

Request for Admission No. 12:

Admit that accurate completion of training relating to safety, injury reporting, and accommodation obligations is important for managers responsible for employee supervision.

Request for Admission No. 13:

Admit that managers responsible for employee safety and work assignments are expected to rely on their training when making decisions concerning employee injuries and accommodations.

Request for Admission No. 14:

Admit that discrepancies between training completion records and LMS metadata may impact the reliability of Defendants' training records.

Request for Admission No. 15:

Admit that Defendants have identified discrepancies, inconsistencies, or gaps in training records or LMS data for managers or supervisors during the period January 1, 2022 through December 31, 2025.

Respectfully submitted,

Donnie Lee Rakestraw, Jr.

Plaintiff, Pro Se

15739 Whispering Oaks Drive, Apt. 9

Paola, Kansas 66071

913-447-4745

supertech007@gmail.com

What are requests for admission?

Requests for admission are a powerful legal tool used in the discovery phase of a lawsuit. They are written requests sent by one party to another, asking them to admit or deny certain statements of fact or the genuineness of documents. The goal is to narrow down the issues in dispute and reduce the need for extensive proof at trial.

Why are they so important?

When a party admits to a statement, that fact is considered established for the purposes of the lawsuit, eliminating the need for further evidence. This can streamline the trial process, save time and resources, and help focus on the core disagreements. Failing to properly respond to these requests can have serious consequences, as unresponded requests are often deemed admitted.

The impact on your case

Understanding and strategically using requests for admission can be a game-changer in litigation. For individuals like myself, these requests can be crucial in exposing truths and simplifying complex legal battles. They serve as a testament to the facts and can significantly influence the trajectory of a lawsuit, helping to clarify exactly what is and isn't disputed.

Unlocking the truth: Requests for admission

What are requests for admission?

Why are they so important?

The impact on your case

Statement of Claims

Count I – Failure to Provide Required Safety Equipment
Defendant failed to provide mandated rubber safety mats despite written policy and training materials requiring their use.

Count II – Failure to Provide Reasonable Accommodation (ADA Violations)
Defendant was informed of Plaintiff’s neuropathy and related limitations and refused to provide reasonable accommodations as required under disability law.

Count III – Failure to File a Mandatory Injury Report
Defendant declined to document an on-the-job injury after Plaintiff reported and visibly exhibited wounds, in violation of workplace reporting standards.

Count IV – Denial of Medical Treatment / Failure to Render Aid
Defendant failed to provide basic medical attention or first aid after being notified of an active workplace injury.

Count V – Assignment to Unsafe Work Conditions
Defendant knowingly required Plaintiff to work at the only station without safety mats while numerous alternative employees were available, creating foreseeable risk of injury.

Count VI – Unpaid Required Work (Wage and Hour Violations)
Defendant required employees to don and doff protective gear off the clock, resulting in uncompensated work time and systematic underpayment.

Count VII – Retaliation for Reporting Safety Concerns
After Plaintiff raised safety and accommodation issues, Defendant engaged in retaliatory conduct contrary to federal and state protections.

Count VIII – Wrongful Termination Following Workplace Injury
Plaintiff was terminated after sustaining injuries caused by Defendant’s assignments and after reporting safety violations.

Unlocking the truth: Requests for admission

What are requests for admission?

Why are they so important?

The impact on your case

Statement of Claims

Count I – Failure to Provide Required Safety EquipmentDefendant failed to provide mandated rubber safety mats despite written policy and training materials requiring their use.

Count II – Failure to Provide Reasonable Accommodation (ADA Violations)Defendant was informed of Plaintiff’s neuropathy and related limitations and refused to provide reasonable accommodations as required under disability law.

Count III – Failure to File a Mandatory Injury ReportDefendant declined to document an on-the-job injury after Plaintiff reported and visibly exhibited wounds, in violation of workplace reporting standards.

Count IV – Denial of Medical Treatment / Failure to Render AidDefendant failed to provide basic medical attention or first aid after being notified of an active workplace injury.

Count V – Assignment to Unsafe Work ConditionsDefendant knowingly required Plaintiff to work at the only station without safety mats while numerous alternative employees were available, creating foreseeable risk of injury.

Count VI – Unpaid Required Work (Wage and Hour Violations)Defendant required employees to don and doff protective gear off the clock, resulting in uncompensated work time and systematic underpayment.

Count VII – Retaliation for Reporting Safety ConcernsAfter Plaintiff raised safety and accommodation issues, Defendant engaged in retaliatory conduct contrary to federal and state protections.

Count VIII – Wrongful Termination Following Workplace InjuryPlaintiff was terminated after sustaining injuries caused by Defendant’s assignments and after reporting safety violations.

Count I – Failure to Provide Required Safety Equipment
Defendant failed to provide mandated rubber safety mats despite written policy and training materials requiring their use.

Count II – Failure to Provide Reasonable Accommodation (ADA Violations)
Defendant was informed of Plaintiff’s neuropathy and related limitations and refused to provide reasonable accommodations as required under disability law.

Count III – Failure to File a Mandatory Injury Report
Defendant declined to document an on-the-job injury after Plaintiff reported and visibly exhibited wounds, in violation of workplace reporting standards.

Count IV – Denial of Medical Treatment / Failure to Render Aid
Defendant failed to provide basic medical attention or first aid after being notified of an active workplace injury.

Count V – Assignment to Unsafe Work Conditions
Defendant knowingly required Plaintiff to work at the only station without safety mats while numerous alternative employees were available, creating foreseeable risk of injury.

Count VI – Unpaid Required Work (Wage and Hour Violations)
Defendant required employees to don and doff protective gear off the clock, resulting in uncompensated work time and systematic underpayment.

Count VII – Retaliation for Reporting Safety Concerns
After Plaintiff raised safety and accommodation issues, Defendant engaged in retaliatory conduct contrary to federal and state protections.

Count VIII – Wrongful Termination Following Workplace Injury
Plaintiff was terminated after sustaining injuries caused by Defendant’s assignments and after reporting safety violations.