HILL v. ARNOLD, 09-cv-05434-TEH. (2015)
Court: District Court, N.D. California
Number: infdco20150529a91
Visitors: 14
Filed: May 28, 2015
Latest Update: May 28, 2015
Summary: ORDER ON EXCERPTS AND OBJECTIONS TO DEPOSITION TESTIMONY OF SERGEANT UNG THELTON E. HENDERSON , District Judge . The parties have submitted a chart for the Court's rulings on their objections to the proposed excerpts from the deposition of Sergeant Alvin Ung. Docket No. 171 at 1, 3-5. The Court will use the chart provided, and hereby rules as follows: Plaintiff's Deposition Objections No. Objection Page-Line Objection Sustained Overrule
Summary: ORDER ON EXCERPTS AND OBJECTIONS TO DEPOSITION TESTIMONY OF SERGEANT UNG THELTON E. HENDERSON , District Judge . The parties have submitted a chart for the Court's rulings on their objections to the proposed excerpts from the deposition of Sergeant Alvin Ung. Docket No. 171 at 1, 3-5. The Court will use the chart provided, and hereby rules as follows: Plaintiff's Deposition Objections No. Objection Page-Line Objection Sustained Overruled..
More
ORDER ON EXCERPTS AND OBJECTIONS TO DEPOSITION TESTIMONY OF SERGEANT UNG
THELTON E. HENDERSON, District Judge.
The parties have submitted a chart for the Court's rulings on their objections to the proposed excerpts from the deposition of Sergeant Alvin Ung. Docket No. 171 at 1, 3-5. The Court will use the chart provided, and hereby rules as follows:
Plaintiff's Deposition Objections
No. Objection Page-Line Objection Sustained Overruled
1 9:2 Leading X
2 9:16-9:17 Lacks foundation X
3 11:8-11:9 Calls for narrative X
4 12:23-12:24 Vague and ambiguous X
Calls for narrative
5 15:7-15:8 Lack of foundation X
Vague and ambiguous
6 16:1-16:2 Lacks foundation X
Vague and ambiguous
7 18:10-18:11 Vague and ambiguous X
8 18:19-18:20 Lacks foundation. X
9 19:6 Leading X
10 20:25-21:1 Calls for narrative X
11 21:25-22:4 Speculative X
12 25:1-25:2 Lacks foundation X
13 25:10-25:11 Lacks Foundation X
14 25:16 Leading X
15 26:7-26:8 Lacks foundation X
16 26:25-27:1 Lacks foundation X
17 27:16-27:17 Lacks foundation X
18 29:4 Compound X
19 30:22-30:23 Speculation X
20 37:18-37:19 Vague and ambiguous. X
21 40:11 Leading X
22 45:3-45:4 Calls for speculation X
23 46:5 Leading X
24 48:4-48:8 Lacking foundation. X
25 48:25-49:1 Calls for speculation X
26 51:1-51:2 Calls for speculation X
Lacks foundation
27 78:22-23 Move to strike 78:13-18 as X
non-responsive
28 86:6-86:7 Calls for speculation X
29 86:13-86:14 Calls for speculation X
30 86:20-86:21 Calls for speculation X
31 87:3-87:4 Calls for speculation X
32 87:11-87:12 Vague and ambiguous. X
Asked and answered
33 88:19-88:20 Calls for speculation X
Defendants' Deposition Objections
No. Objection Page-Line Objection Sustained Overruled
1 61:22 Vague X
2 62:3-4 Vague and Overbroad X
3 62:16 Vague X
4 62:21 Vague X
5 67:11-12 Vague and Overbroad X
6 79:24 Vague X
7 80:8 Vague X
9 8 82:5-6 Speculation X
10 9 83:2-3 Speculation X
Defendants' Objections to Plaintiff's Excerpts
No. Objection Page-Line Objection Sustained Overruled
1 52:13-18 Relevance. A party can X
authenticate a photograph
through its appearance,
substance, or distinctive
characteristics. Fed R.
Evid. 901(b)(4). It is
irrelevant whether Sgt. Ung
took the photograph
himself.
2 61:12-18 Not Question and Answer. X
Fed. R. Evid. 611
2 3 81:12-17 Not Question and Answer. X
Fed. R. Evid. 611.
Excerpts to which there were no requested objection rulings are deemed admitted.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
