Kinkeade v. Beard et al

Filing 65

ORDER signed by Magistrate Judge Carolyn K. Delaney on 6/6/2017: Plaintiff's counsel's request to use a personal video camera during Defendant's deposition pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 30(b)(3) is denied. (Owen, K)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

9

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

10
11

CARLOS KINKEADE,

12

Plaintiff,

13
14

No. 2:15-cv-1375 TLN CKD P

v.

ORDER

JEFFERY BEARD, et al,

15

Defendants.

16
Counsel for the parties in the above-entitled civil rights action requested an informal

17
18

telephone conference with the undersigned in order to resolve a discovery dispute concerning

19

plaintiff’s counsel’s use of a video camera during defendant’s deposition. Defendant objected

20

because the videotape could not be properly authenticated at trial without making plaintiff’s

21

counsel a witness. After hearing argument from both sides, the court finds defendant’s objection

22

to be well-taken and plaintiff’s authority cited during the conference call to be irrelevant to the

23

ultimate admissibility issue. See Fed. R. Evid. 901(b)(1). Plaintiff’s counsel failed to address the

24

foundational problems in admitting the videotape as evidence at trial. The court finds that the

25

potential cost savings cited by plaintiff’s counsel as a reason for videotaping the deposition is not

26

an adequate basis to warrant the use of this recording method, especially since the deposition will

27

also be transcribed by a certified court reporter.

28

/////
1

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that plaintiff’s counsel’s request to use a

1
2

personal video camera during defendant’s deposition pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 30(b)(3) is

3

denied.

4

Dated: June 6, 2017

_____________________________________
CAROLYN K. DELANEY
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12

12/kink1375.discoorder.docx

13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
2