Weaver v. Toyota Motor Corporation et al

Filing 85

ORDER re 84 Response (Non Motion), filed by Toyota Motor Corporation, Toyota Motor Sales USA Inc, 83 Objection filed by Ricky Weaver. The Court overrules plaintiff's objection 83 and orders Mr. Hooker to be present for deposition in Little Rock, AR on December 11 or 12, 2013, or provide the Court before 10:00 a.m. Central Time on December 9, 2013, good reason as to why Mr. Hooker is unavailable on those dates. The Court denies defendants' requests for costs and expenses associated with this matter. Signed by Judge Kristine G. Baker on 12/5/13. (kpr)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
NORTHERN DIVISION
RICKY WEAVER, as Personal
Representative of the Estate of
MICAH WEAVER, Deceased
v.

PLAINTIFF
Case No. 1:11-cv-00025 KGB

TOYOTA MOTOR CORPORATION,
TOYOTA MOTOR SALES, U.S.A., INC.,
and TK HOLDINGS, INC.

DEFENDANTS

ORDER
Before the Court is plaintiff’s objection to defendants’ notice to take deposition (Dkt. No.
83) and defendants’ response to plaintiff’s objection (Dkt. No. 84).

Plaintiff objects to

defendants’ notice to take the deposition of plaintiff’s expert witness Robert M. Hooker on
December 3, 2013, a date now past, because plaintiff alleges that Mr. Hooker was to be in court
in California on that date, that defendants have had ample opportunity to take the oral deposition
of Mr. Hooker, and that plaintiff has made Mr. Hooker available for deposition on May 31, 2013,
which defendants canceled.
Defendants respond by providing correspondence between plaintiff’s and defendants’
counsel over the past three months attempting to schedule and reschedule Mr. Hooker’s
deposition. The correspondence provided by defendants reveals defendants’ repeated attempts to
schedule Mr. Hooker’s deposition over the past three months with little cooperation from
plaintiff’s counsel who has asked to reschedule Mr. Hooker’s deposition at least three times
between May and November 2013, including a request by plaintiff—not defendants—to
reschedule Mr. Hooker’s deposition on May 31, 2013.
Defendants request that the Court overrule plaintiff’s objection, award defendants their
costs and expenses related to Mr. Hooker’s failure to appear, and that the Court either strike Mr.

Hooker as an expert witness from this case or in the alternative order Mr. Hooker to be present
for deposition in Little Rock, Arkansas on December 11 or 12, 2013. The Court grants in part
and denies in part defendants’ requests. Based on good cause shown, the Court overrules
plaintiff’s objection (Dkt. No. 83) and orders Mr. Hooker to be present for deposition in Little
Rock, Arkansas on December 11 or 12, 2013, or provide the Court before 10:00 a.m. Central
Time on December 9, 2013, good reason as to why Mr. Hooker is unavailable on those dates.
The Court denies defendants’ request for costs and expenses associated with this matter.
SO ORDERED this 5th day of December, 2013.

____________________________________
Kristine G. Baker
United States District Judge

2