Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Pennington v. Parmar, 3:16cv248-NBB-JMV. (2017)

Court: District Court, N.D. Mississippi Number: infdco20171213f09 Visitors: 8
Filed: Dec. 12, 2017
Latest Update: Dec. 12, 2017
Summary: ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT SHARANJIT PARMAR D/B/A PARMAR TRUCKLINES' MOTION TO ALLOW DEPOSITION OF DEFENDANT UPS'S 30(b)(6) CORPORATE REPRESENTATIVE WITHOUT THE PRESENCE OF LOCAL COUNSEL, JAMES M. SIMPSON JANE M. VIRDEN , Magistrate Judge . By Consent of the parties, as evidenced by this Agreed Order Granting Motion To Allow Deposition of Defendant UPS's 30(b)(6) Corporate Representative without the Presence of Local Counsel, James M. Simpson, and based on the entire record in this case, the
More

ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT SHARANJIT PARMAR D/B/A PARMAR TRUCKLINES' MOTION TO ALLOW DEPOSITION OF DEFENDANT UPS'S 30(b)(6) CORPORATE REPRESENTATIVE WITHOUT THE PRESENCE OF LOCAL COUNSEL, JAMES M. SIMPSON

By Consent of the parties, as evidenced by this Agreed Order Granting Motion To Allow Deposition of Defendant UPS's 30(b)(6) Corporate Representative without the Presence of Local Counsel, James M. Simpson, and based on the entire record in this case, the Court finds that the motion is well taken and should be granted. The Deposition of UPS's 30(b)(6) Corporate Representative may take place on Friday, December 15, 2017, without the presence of local counsel, James M. Simpson. Defendant Sharanjit Parmar may be represented at the deposition by pro hac vice counsel James B. Summers. All counsel attending the deposition are required to review the guidelines for conducting depositions posted on the Mississippi Bar website and conduct the deposition accordingly.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer