Bel Air Mart et al v. Arnold Cleaners, Inc. et al

Filing 260

ORDER signed by Chief Judge Morrison C. England, Jr. on 6/24/2014 ORDERING that the deposition testimony of Melva Jo Kirby Armstrong, Han Hoi Joo, and Peter Kim, Joseph Armstrong, Craig Yamane, Lowell Baker, Mike Lawson, Patrina Serpa, Valerie Osmu n, and Mark Field and Linda Kelley on behalf of Bel Air Mart pursuant to Rule 30(b)(6) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, (collectively, the "Deponents"), taken in the action entitled Arrowood Indemnity Company, et al. v. Bel Air M art, et al., pending in the United States District Court, Eastern District of California, Case No. 2:11-CV-00976-JAM-DAD (the "Coverage Action"), (the "Deposition Testimony") may be used for any purpose allowed under Federal Rul es of Civil Procedure 32(a) as if the deposition testimony was taken in the above entitled action (the "CERCLA Action"). The Parties have waived and may not assert any objection to the admissibility of the Deposition Testimony on the foll owing grounds: That the Party was not present or represented at the taking of the Deposition Testimony or that the Party did not have reasonable notice of the Depositions, (Fed. R. Civ. Proc. 32(a)(1)(A)); That the Party received less than 14 days& #039; notice of the Deposition and promptly moved for a protective order and such motion was pending when the Depositions were taken, (Fed. R. Civ. Proc. 32(a)(5)(A)); That the Deponent was substituted under Rule 25 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, (Fed. R. Civ. Proc. 32(a)(7).) All objections to the admissibility of the Deposition Testimony, or any part thereof, not specifically waived in Paragraph 2 are reserved. (Zignago, K.)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

12

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

13
14
15

BEL AIR MART, et al.,
Plaintiffs,

16
vs.

17
18

ARNOLD CLEANERS, INC., et al.,

ORDER ON JOINT STIPULATION ON
ADMISSIBILITY OF DEPOSITION
TESTIMONY TAKEN IN COVERAGE
ACTION

Defendants.

19
20

Case No. 2:10-cv-02392-MCE-EFB

AND RELATED COUNTERCLAIMS

The Honorable Morrison C. England, Jr.

21
22
After full consideration of the representations and agreements reflected in the Joint

23
24

Stipulation on Admissibility of Deposition Testimony Taken in the Coverage Action filed by

25

Plaintiffs Bel Air Mart and Wong Family Investors, L.P., together with Defendants R. Gern

26

Nagler as Trustee of the John W. Burns Testamentary Trust, and Robert Gern Nagler, Ralph

27

Armstrong, Yolanda Panattoni, Arnold Cleaners, Inc., Han Hoi Joo, Chang Sun Joo, Peter Kim,

28

The Estate of Ronald G. Armstrong, Deceased, by and through its alleged insurer Century
1
1372056.1

[PROPOSED] ORDER ON JOINT STIPULATION ON ADMISSIBILITY OF DEPOSITION TESTIMONY

1

Indemnity Company, as successor to CCI Insurance Company, as successor to Insurance

2

Company Of North America, pursuant to California Probate Code section 550 et seq., and The

3

Estate of John W. Burns and The Estate of Elice G. Burns, by and through their insurer Arrowood

4

Indemnity Company, pursuant to California Probate Code section 550 et seq. (collectively, the

5

“Parties”), the Joint Stipulation on Admissibility of Deposition Testimony is approved, and

6

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that:

7

1.

The deposition testimony of Melva Jo Kirby Armstrong, Han Hoi Joo, and Peter

8

Kim, Joseph Armstrong, Craig Yamane, Lowell Baker, Mike Lawson, Patrina Serpa, Valerie

9

Osmun, and Mark Field and Linda Kelley on behalf of Bel Air Mart pursuant to Rule 30(b)(6) of

10

the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, (collectively, the “Deponents”), taken in the action entitled

11

Arrowood Indemnity Company, et al. v. Bel Air Mart, et al., pending in the United States District

12

Court, Eastern District of California, Case No. 2:11-CV-00976-JAM-DAD (the “Coverage

13

Action”), (the “Deposition Testimony”) may be used for any purpose allowed under Federal

14

Rules of Civil Procedure 32(a) as if the deposition testimony was taken in the above entitled

15

action (the “CERCLA Action”).

16
17

2.

The Parties have waived and may not assert any objection to the admissibility of

the Deposition Testimony on the following grounds:

18

a.

That the Party was not present or represented at the taking of the

19

Deposition Testimony or that the Party did not have reasonable notice of the Depositions,

20

(Fed. R. Civ. Proc. 32(a)(1)(A));

21

b.

That the Party received less than 14 days’ notice of the Deposition and

22

promptly moved for a protective order and such motion was pending when the

23

Depositions were taken, (Fed. R. Civ. Proc. 32(a)(5)(A)); and

24

c.

25

That the Deponent was substituted under Rule 25 of the Federal Rules of

Civil Procedure, (Fed. R. Civ. Proc. 32(a)(7).)

26

///

27

///

28

///
2
1372056.1

[PROPOSED] ORDER ON JOINT STIPULATION ON ADMISSIBILITY OF DEPOSITION TESTIMONY

1
2

3.

thereof, not specifically waived in Paragraph 2 are reserved.

3
4

All objections to the admissibility of the Deposition Testimony, or any part

IT IS SO ORDERED.
Dated: June 24, 2014

5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
3
1372056.1

[PROPOSED] ORDER ON JOINT STIPULATION ON ADMISSIBILITY OF DEPOSITION TESTIMONY