You have not provided much information on this lawsuit. You have been reluctant in the past to do that, too. And it’s really impossible to try to figure things out from your prior posts since not all of them may relate to this case and even if they did as I recall them there nothing that really tells me what this lawsuit is about. You did not even indicate which type of court this is being litigated in, e.g. federal district court, Illinois circuit court, or something else. That matters because the rules are a bit different in each court. That said, I can give you some very general answers here.
If it is true that the records no longer exist then of course you may state that in response. If you purposely destroyed the records once litigation had started, however, that could work out very much against you if the other side can prove it.
You could do that, but I’d strongly recommend against doing that. You don’t to simply give up the records to the other side without having a copy yourself. Your lawyer could potentially make the books available in his office for the other side to copy if the copying would be too burdensome for you to do it.
You only need to provide those records you have. You are not obligated to chase down records you don’t have in order to satisfy the request.
Perhaps, though that’s risky for a lawyer to do because if the court determines that is what the lawyer is up to the lawyer may well be sanctioned by the court for it. More likely the lawyer is simply trying to be thorough and uncover everything that may be relevant to the case. Knowing the nature of the case might shed some light on what is going on and why these old records might be relevant, but as you evidently do not wish to share that all I can say is that the discovery process is generally quite broad allowing parties to seek evidence in the possession of the other side that is relevant to the case or that is reasonably calculated to lead to relevant evidence.
And just as an aside, the correct term is legal counsel. A council is “a deliberative body.” Black’s Law Dictionary, 8th ED. The U.N. Security Council, the National Security Council, a city council are all examples of that, i.e. a group of people who meet to deliberate and decide things. Counsel is a noun with two meanings, the first meaning advice and the second referring to a lawyer/member of the bar. The second meaning came about from the first, in that a major role of an attorney is providing counsel, i.e. advice, to his client. Easiest way to remember which spelling to use is that the spelling for the lawyer meaning is not the same one as the word used in the phrase “city council.”![]()
You are the defendant in the case. You would not normally do a motion for summary judgement prior to discovery taking place. Instead, prior to discovery all you have of the plaintiff’s case is the complaint. If the plaintiff has failed in the complaint to state a good case against you, i.e. even if all the facts stated in the complaint were true the plaintiff has not laid out a valid claim, then you’d move to dismiss for failure to state claim. If there has been something other than the complaint that has been submitted to the court then you might move for dismissal combined with a motion for summary judgment in the alternative. But the standard for summary judgment is going to be similar to the dismissal for failure to state a claim, the judge would look at any facts that are not contested and if there are contested facts, the judge will look at those facts in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party (the plaintiff). The judge then determines if you would be entitled to a judgment in your favor as a matter of law looking at those facts. In short, you are basically arguing that even if everything was the way the plaintiff said it was, the plaintiff still couldn’t win. So, is that the case here? If the plaintiff proved all the facts he or she is alleging, would the plaintiff lose? If the answer is no, then you wouldn’t win summary judgment. That’s an oversimplified explanation of it, but hopefully gives you an idea of what summary judgment is about.

