ESCOBAR v. GAINES, 3:11-0994. (2014)
Court: District Court, M.D. Tennessee
Number: infdco20140409727
Visitors: 13
Filed: Mar. 18, 2014
Latest Update: Mar. 18, 2014
Summary: ORDER TODD J. CAMPBELL, District Judge. Pending before the Court are Plaintiffs' Motion for Testimony in Open Court by Contemporaneous Transmission Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 43 (Docket No. 326) and related Motion to Ascertain Status (Docket No. 348). The Defendants have not filed responses. The Motion for Testimony in Open Court by Contemporaneous Transmission (Docket No. 326) is DENIED. The Court does not have the technical infrastructure to accommodate the request for tria
Summary: ORDER TODD J. CAMPBELL, District Judge. Pending before the Court are Plaintiffs' Motion for Testimony in Open Court by Contemporaneous Transmission Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 43 (Docket No. 326) and related Motion to Ascertain Status (Docket No. 348). The Defendants have not filed responses. The Motion for Testimony in Open Court by Contemporaneous Transmission (Docket No. 326) is DENIED. The Court does not have the technical infrastructure to accommodate the request for trial..
More
ORDER
TODD J. CAMPBELL, District Judge.
Pending before the Court are Plaintiffs' Motion for Testimony in Open Court by Contemporaneous Transmission Pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 43 (Docket No. 326) and related Motion to Ascertain Status (Docket No. 348). The Defendants have not filed responses.
The Motion for Testimony in Open Court by Contemporaneous Transmission (Docket No. 326) is DENIED. The Court does not have the technical infrastructure to accommodate the request for trial in terms of access, reliability and quality.
The parties are authorized to take remote depositions of any out-of-country witnesses for testimony at trial. The Magistrate Judge shall decide any scheduling issues or related matters.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
