Stogsdill et al v. Elkins et al

Filing 174

ORDER re 145 Objection filed by Juan J Roman, 143 Objection filed by Jennifer Stogsdill. Signed by Judge James M. Moody on 9/22/10. (bkp)

Download PDF
Stogsdill et al v. Elkins et al Doc. 174 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS WESTERN DIVISION JENNIFER STOGSDILL, Individually, V. JUAN J. ROMAN, M.D. ORDER The Court has reviewed the parties' designations of Dr. Homesley's depositions (Docket # 143 and 145) and the corresponding objections. The Court denies Plaintiff's request to exclude the 2007 deposition of Dr. Homesley. The Federal Rules do not differentiate between evidentiary and discovery depositions. Both may be used at trial. However, Plaintiff's specific objections to page 21, lines 14-16, and page 56, line 7-11, are sustained. Plaintiff's objections to Dr. Homesley's 2007 deposition at page 37, line 3-16, and page 41, line 9-19, are overruled. These sections of the deposition may be read to the jury. As for Dr. Homesley's 2009 video deposition, the Court denies the Defendant's objection to page 58, lines 7-21. Defendant's objection to page 29, lines 5-9 are moot because Plaintiff does not plan to present this portion of the video deposition. IT IS SO ORDERED this 22nd day of September, 2010. 4:08CV00207 JMM DEFENDANT PLAINTIFF ______________________________ James M. Moody United States District Judge

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?