Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

Lauris v. Novartis AG, : 1-16-cv-00393-SEH. (2018)

Court: District Court, E.D. California Number: infdco20180403598 Visitors: 8
Filed: Mar. 15, 2018
Latest Update: Mar. 15, 2018
Summary: ORDER SAM E. HADDON , District Judge . ORDERED: To assist the Court in addressing issues of admissibility into evidence at trial of both will offer and may offer trial exhibits that were the subject of or were referenced by counsel for any party in any portion of the depositions of: (1) Karen Habucky; (2) Richard Woodman; (3) Mary Aghoghovbia; (4) Frank Hong; (5) Neil Gallagher; or (6) Mark Sims and which were designated by any party for admission at trial, counsel shall meet and confer an
More

ORDER

ORDERED:

To assist the Court in addressing issues of admissibility into evidence at trial of both will offer and may offer trial exhibits that were the subject of or were referenced by counsel for any party in any portion of the depositions of: (1) Karen Habucky; (2) Richard Woodman; (3) Mary Aghoghovbia; (4) Frank Hong; (5) Neil Gallagher; or (6) Mark Sims and which were designated by any party for admission at trial, counsel shall meet and confer and submit to the Court on or before 4:45 p.m. (MT) on Friday, March 23, 2018, a summary chart compiled from deposition designations to be offered at trial that: (1) identifies each deponent; (2) identifies by trial exhibit number each exhibit that was the subject of questions asked or answers provided or that was commented upon on the record during the deposition of a particular deponent; and (3) that identifies by (a) beginning page and line reference; and by (b) ending page and line reference all such counsel questions, witness answers, and exhibit-related comments in a particular deposition.

If a party disagrees with another party or parties as to whether a particular designation does or does not relate to a particular exhibit, that party shall file, on or before 4:45 p.m. (MT) on March 23, 2018, a written statement-of-position brief explaining the party's position as to whether and why the contested designation does or does not relate to a particular exhibit.

This Order requires the parties to identify and fully disclose, on the record, all designations appearing by way of question, or answer, or comment that relate to each of the trial exhibits about which a particular identified deposition witness was examined.

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