Haukereid v. National Passenger Railroad Corporation
ORDER re telephone conference held 22 July 2014 regarding the disagreement between counsel about the informal interviews. The Court directed that all of the interviews previously ordered would go forward so that Haukereid can confirm with each listed person whether he or she was actually on the train, and if so, ask follow-up questions. After the Court's ruling, the lawyers went back to work conducting the informal interviews. Signed by Judge D. P. Marshall Jr. on 7/22/2014. (jak)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS
SCOTT HAUKEREID, individually and as
Personal Representative and Administrator
of the Estate of Andrew Haukereid Jr., deceased
NATIONAL PASSENGER RAILROAD
CORPORATION, dfb/a AMTRAK
Counsel advised the Court this morning that they had a disagreement
about the informal interviews, which began today. Without objection from
either party, the Court conferred by telephone with Mr. Tucker and Mr.
Chamberlin to resolve the dispute immediately so that the interviews could
proceed as planned. No court reporter was present with the agreement of
both lawyers. Mr. Tucker discovered yesterday that the list of individuals
provided by Amtrak who were on the train was incorrect in some respects.
Apparently some of these individuals were not on the train, and one or two
unlisted individuals were. Amtrak requested that the parties forego informal
interviews of the people who were not on the train. Haukereid wanted the
interviews to go forward, at least until it could be confirmed by each
individual that he or she was not on the train. The Court directed that all of
the interviews previously ordered would go forward so that Haukereid can
confirm with each listed person, N2 38 at 1, whether he or she was actually on
the train, and if so, ask follow-up questions. After the Court's ruling, the
lawyers went back to work conducting the informal interviews.
D.P. Marshall r.
United States District Judge
22 July 2014
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?