Parrish et al v. National Football League Players Incorporated

Filing 254

Declaration of Ronald Katz in Support of 253 Reply Memorandum, filed byBernard Paul Parrish, Walter Roberts, III, Herbert Anthony Adderley. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 1, # 2 Exhibit 2, # 3 Exhibit 3, # 4 Exhibit 4, # 5 Exhibit 5, # 6 Exhibit 6, # 7 Exhibit 7, # 8 Exhibit 8, # 9 Exhibit 9, # 10 Exhibit 10, # 11 Exhibit 11, # 12 Exhibit 12, # 13 Exhibit 13, # 14 Exhibit 14)(Related document(s) 253 ) (Katz, Ronald) (Filed on 4/4/2008)

Download PDF
Exhibit 9 to the Declaration of Ronald Katz in Further Support of Plaintiffs' Motion for Class Certification C R manatt March 12, 2008 manatt phelps I phillips onald S. Kays Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP Direct Dial: (660) 812-1346, Ext. 1346 E-mail: rkatz@manatt.com lient-Matter: 29749-050 VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL Jeffrey Kessler, Esq. Dewey & LeBoeuf LLP 1301 Avenue of the Americas New York; NY 10019-6092 Re: Bernard Paul Parrish, et al. v. NFLPA and Players Inc, Case No. C07-0943 WHA Dear Mr. Kessler: I have now had the opportunity to review Mr. Adderley's deposition transcript, and I therefore request that you withdraw certain lines of questioning posed to Mr. Adderley because they are, among other things, improper and oppressive. As you are aware, a deposition should not be "conducted in bad faith or in a manner that unreasonably annoys, embarrasses, or oppresses the deponent or party." Fed. R. Civ. Proc. 30(d)(3)(A). Yet, the questions cited below (and the atmosphere they generated) were abusive and should be withdrawn. Recommendation of a Settlement Offer in conjunction with the February 6, 2008 Mandatory Settlement Conference, I sent you a letter (attached as Exhibit A) on January 31, 2008 which specifically requested permission to advise Mr. Adderley of my settlement recommendation. Specifically, my letter stated as follows: Although we are prepared to recommend the above to Mr. Adderley, we have not yet done so because doing so risks disclosing information to him that you have designated to be confidential from him. Please advise if you will permit us to make this recommendation to him in order to facilitate the settlement process. Despite never responding to my letter, you berated Mr. Adderley for not knowing the settlement number that counsel wanted to recommend to him. [Adderley Deposition, 280:5284:13.11 When 1 informed you of this fact, you then attackers both counsel and Mr. Adderley over this issue, which was a problem of your own making. The majority of this harassing exchange is as follows: 'All excerpts from the Adderley Deposition referenced herein are attached as Exhibit B. 1001 Page Mill Road, Building 2, Palo Alter, Califomia 94304-9006 Telephone: 650.812.1300 Fax: 650.213.0260 Albany I Los Angeles New York I Orange County I Palo Alto I Sacramento I San FranGisco I Washington, D.C. i H S B IH L O manatt manatt I phelps i phillips Jeffrey Kessler; Esq. Marcia 12, 2008 Page 2 Q. A. Q. A. Q. A: Q. A. kay. Well, but you didn't get -- they didn't tell you what they were asking for? t was part of the confidential or part of the blackout, whatever this is. et me ask you this, sir. They can't give you confidential information of the union of Players, Inc., correct? don't know whether they can or not. ut what's to stop them from telling you how much money they want to ask for as a settlement demand? ere's the attorney here. Ask him. I don't know. o he refused to tell you? e said it was confidential. Mr. Katz; This is quite objectionable for you to designate all this material confidential and then to ask questions impugning the integrity of the people who kept it confidential. Mr. Kessler: You raised this issue of the settlement demand and frankly, I am shocked and stunned that a settlement demand was made. It was not confidential for you to tell your client and discuss with a class representative in advance how much money you were going to ask for in advance, I would not be the one protesting, if I were you, about this subject. Mr_ Katz: In fact, Mr. Kessler, a demand was not made, What was told to the settlement conference j udge was that this was what we would recommend, but we were prohibited from conveying that information by the protective order and we thought that was a problem. Mr. Kessler: You think the protective order, sir, prohibits you from saying what demand you're going to recommend? Not the underlying information? You think that's prohibited? Mr, Katz: I think it's prohibited for me to take information, to come up with a number, based on information that you have designated, and I might say over-desi,gilated, to be confidential, and convey that to my clients and I told that to Judge Larson. As you are undoubtedly aware, most documents produced in this case contain confidentiality designations. We respected your clients' designations by not informing our client of our recommended settlement offer that carne solely from such documents. Criticizing Mr. Adderley for a situation that you created, and of which my January 31, 2008 letter expressly nformed you, constitutes conducting a deposition in bad faith in violation of Fed. R. Civ. Proc. 30(d)(3)(A). M manatt manatt phelps I phillips Jeffrey Kessler, Esq. arch 12, 2008 Page 3 Discover is Served Not Filed On several occasions, you asked Mr. Adderley whether he had seen various discovery documents before they were "filed." [Adderley Deposition, 99 A -100:3, 100:18-19, 160:5.17 ] As you know, discovery documents are served, not "filed," which renders this entire confusing line of questioning meaningless. As such, these questions should be formally withdrawn. The Complaints You made a number of mischaracterizations to Mr. Adderley. For instance, you informed Mr. Adderley that he had testified that he had not seen the First Amended Complaint before he "spoke" to any of his lawyers. [1d, 244:22-245:17.1 In fact, the operative word in your earlier question was " tzieet," not "spoke." [Id., 22:5-8.1 Additionally, during the course of the deposition it became abundantly clear that Mr. Adderley was confused about your use of the various versions of the partial complaints you showed him. This confusion was legitimate for a variety of reasons. First, you showed him complaints without exhibits, and you refused to mark these complaints as exhibits to the deposition so it would not be obvious on the record ghat you did (I later numbered the incomplete documents you used, i.e., Exhibits 179 and 180). Second, you represented that those unmarked incomplete documents were "court documents." [Id., 72:6-8..] Third, MT. Adderley testified on the record that legal documents have a certain similarity to him (Id., 307:5-308:12), and that he saw drafts of and approved these documents. [Id., 181:11-14,182:11-19,199:16-201:24,212:14-213-4,299:3-8,] This confusion was evident when he said in frustration: "How could I acknowledge or get the thing [lawsuit] going without speaking to there [my lawyers]?" [Id., 247:11-13.]. To alleviate what was becoming extremely abusive, I advised you that I would show you redacted communications which made clear the obvious: that he had been sent all draft complaints in advance of filing for his comment and approval. [Id., 305:23-306:19.] Instead of accepting that reasonable offer, which would have satisfied any legitimate objective you had, you simply created more confusion: ' Attached hereto as Exhibits C and D are examples of redacted mails. from me to Mr, Adderley demonstrating that I sent him the initial Complaint and the most recent complaint (the 'third Amended Complaint) for his review before filing. The Third Amended Complaint was sent to him in a highly redacted form necessitated by your clients' designations of confidentiality. These emails are cover emails only, and are given to you without waiver of any privilege. I L Y manatt manatt I phelps I phlllips Jeffrey Kessler, Esq. March 12, 2008 Page 4 ou are conf vying him. You are saying that he said i t was about -Mr. Katz: Mr. Kessler: I don't want to speak. You're coaching hire. et me finish. Mr. Kessler, I can document for the record, many, Mr. Katz: many communications by phone records and by e-mail and by snail with Mr. Adderley before this complaint was filed. That's the truth. Mr. Kessler: If you' d like to go under oath I'll take your deposition but otherwise I don't think that's relevant for you to offer your testimony, sir: Mr. Katz: think that you have confused the witness. And his testimony is out there. And it can be documented. [Id., 305:23-30b:19 j . This behavior is unacceptable and violates, among other things, Fed. R. Civ. Proc. 30(d)(3 XA). If you are not willing to withdraw each line of questioning referenced above, please advise when this week you are available to meet and confer on these issues. STery truly yours, Ronald S. Katz 201959564 W R 4B a w m manatt manatt 1 pheros I phillips Ronald S. Katz Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP Direct Dial: (650) 812-1346, Ext. 1346 F--.nail: rkaL7@manatt.corn January 29, 2008 Client-Maher: 29749-060 BY E-i4 AIL & FACSIMfLE Jeffrey Kessler, Esq. Dewey & LeBoeufi LLB' 1301 AvenuL of the Americas Ncw York, NFY 10019-6092 Re, ernard Pau) Parrish, et al. v. National F ootball League Players Association and Players Inc, Case No. C07-0943 WHA i Dear Mr. Kessler This is the demand letter required by paragraph 7 of Judge (.arson's October 19, 2007 Settlement Conference Order. The theories for recovery and the supporting facts have been set out in Plaintiffs' notion for leave to file a Third Amended Complaini, which. Judge Alsup granted. This cornrnunicat-ion and all related communications are subject to all of the protections afforded by the law to settlement communications. Re. damages, for the Retired Member Class represented by Mr. Parrish, the theory is straightforward: $50 plus interest for each year of clues paid by the class members since February 14, 2003. Because of Defendants' delay tactics, wo do not yet have the mmaber of tnembers in the class, but you know that number. 'vvIien you ;et us know it, -we will quantify this claim. To show good faith, we have recorroncndcd to Mr. Parrish .trot to consider punitivc damages at this juncture, even though we believe an award of such damages is well within the realm of possibility. e the GLA Class represented by Mr. Adderley, based on the incomplete discovery to date, our current best estimate, which is subject to change as we obtain more facts and expert hich includes input, i s that that claim approximates REDACTED . From that to Mr. Adderley that the GLA Class settle for ve would be wiliing to rccoimriend ore in fees likely which "represents a deduction o.fthe approximately s a show of good faith. As a further showing of to be expended in this case plus 1001 Wage Mill Road, Building 2, Palo Alto, Calitomia 94304-1006 Telephone: 650.812.1300 Fax: 650.213.0260 Aibany I Los Angeles I New York 1 Orange County J Paln Alta E Sacramento I San Francisco I Washington, D.C. E Y' A D A 1l F ^ , manatt .lanuaiy 29, 200 Pa-e rnana,t j pWps ; phWips Jeffrey Kessler, Esq8 ffood faith, v^'c would recommend to Nfr. Adderley not to consider p nit1w, damages at this point, cven ihougit w-e b,.sievo [ImL the gwaid of such damages is ^,vell witl2iii the raalm of possibility.Ithough lvv are prepared to recommend the above to Mr. Adderl;,y, We have not yct done so because doing so risks disclosing information to him that you have &signated to be confidential froin him, Please advise if you will peririit us to make this recommendation to him in order to facilitatc the settlement process: Very tru yAraurs, . Ronald S. E 'ell R,SK:k.1nr cc: ,-wis LeClair, Esq- 30195936.1 E xhib it B 2 2 I V S NC Herbert Anthony Adderley Page 1 I N THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 2 AN FRANCISCO DIVISION IVIL ACTION 3 BERNARD PAUL PARRISH, HERBERT ANTHONY 4 ADDERLEY, and WALTER ROBERTS, TIT, on 5 behalf of themselves and all others -6 similarly situated, Plaintiffs 7 V. NATIONAL FOOTBALL 9 LEAGUE PLAYERS ASSOCIA'T'ION; a 10 Virginia Corporation and NATIONAL FOOTBALL ; 11 LEAGUE PLAYERS, INC., : d/b/a PLAYERS, INC., . Copy 12 a Virginia corporation: Defendants 13 14 25 O. C07-0943-WHA February 20, 2008 ideotape deposition of HERBERT ANTHONY ADDERLEY, held in the offices of Blank Rome, One. Logan Square, 9th Floor, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103, commencing at 8:30 a.m. on the above date, before Teresa M. Beaver, a Federally-Approved Registered Professional Reporter and a Notary Public in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 \ ,. 3 4 JOB NO. 200714 ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SERVICES, LLC. 1-800- 944-9454 21 Q QA QA AQ A HDV DTN DN Herbert Anthony Adderiey Page 22 1 did you meet with Mr. Parrish or other 2 people to learn more about your being in 3 this lawsuit? 4 5 . . o. id you ever meet with the 6 lawyers in this case before the case was 7 started? 8 9 . . o. id anyone ever explain to 10 you, before the case was started, what it 11 meant to be a class representative? 2 . ery, very briefly explained 13 that I would be representing a group of 14 retired players and their numbers 15 changed. They started at 3500 and went 16 to 2900 and down to 2500. It was three 17 different numbers of the amount of 18 plaintiffs that we would be representing. 19 . o you know how many you 20 think you represent today? 1 22 . . think 2540. ave you ever learned -w do 23 you know anything about the changes that 24 you' ve made in this case, in terms of the ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SERVICES, LLC. 1-500 -944-9454 gQ A OM N I Herbert Anthony Adderley Page 72 1 200T. 2 3 exhibit . 4 You don't need to give it an MR. KATZ ; You're not 5 6 7 8, 9 BY MR. 10 marking this? MR. KESSLERit needs exhibit. KESSLER: . r. Adderley, I take it you don't think to be marked as an It's a court document 11 never saw this document before; correct? 12 13 14 A. Q. A. I've seen this. When did you first see it? I don't know exactly when; 15 because so many documents have come to 16 me. 17 18 this. 19 Q. You didn't see it before it But I do remember seeing 20 was filed, right? 21, 22 . . o. kay. Now, did you know 23' that in this First Amended Complaint that 24 was filed, you did not make any claim for ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SERVICES, LLC. 1-800-944-9454 21 9 18 17 6 5 4 3 QQe Qd At At AR o y A D YM A IM W YM MN Herbert Anthony Adderley Page 99 1 use of your GLA rights? 2 . o. R..KATZ: Object. R. KESSLER: Let me show ou next a copy of Plaintiff's esponses to Defendant's First Set f Requests for Admissions. R. KATZ: Are you marking his? 0 1 2 3 R. KESSLER: No. Again, I hink it's a court document. I on't think we need it as an xhibit. 14 BY MR. KESSLER: 5 . r. Adderley, have you ever 16 seen this document before? 17 8 . . es. hen did you first see this 19 document? 20 . t was mailed to me some 21 time ago. I'm not exactly sure when. 2 23 4 . . . l fter it was f i ed? es. id you ever discuss the ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SERVICES, LLC. . I-$00-944-9454 QAA Qo A PL N DM AY DY R Herbert Anthony Adderiey Page 104 f 1 answers in this document with anyone 2 before it was filed? 3 4 5 . o. R_ KATZ: I'm going to bject to that. 6 BY MR. KESSLER: 0. 8 Number 4. 9 et, me show you the Request equest for Admission 4 sags 10 that "admit that Adderley did not know 11 the specific terms of any GLA that he 12 signed that was in effect within the 13 statute of limitations until defendants 14 could do such GLAs to Adderley in this 15 action." 16 17 18 . . o you see that, sir? es. nd the answer your counsel 19 filed i s "denied. 11 20 21 .o you see that? es. 22 . lease tell me, prior to 23 filing this action, and receiving the 24 copies of the GLAs produced by defendants ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SERVICES. LLC. 1-804-944-9454 2 2 1 1 QQA QQ QA AA Q TSN I YY AAI YD I3erbert Anthony Adderley Page 160 1 . id you review these 2 Objections and. Responses to Defendant's 3 First Set of Interrogatories? 4 5 . . es. nd after that, did you -- 6 did you review them before they were 7 filed? 8 9 . . o. o, these were filed without 10 your ever seeing them? 1 . knew about there because we 12 had discussed it on the phone and I knew 13 what the contest was going to'be. 4 . ou only read them and 15 verified them after they were filed; 16 right? 7 18 . . es nd that i s your signature 19 on the verification? 0 1 . . es, it is. ' d like to direct your 22 attention to response to Interrogatory 23 number one. 4 here's a question here, ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SERVICES, LLC. . I-800-944-9454 QQA AQ QA A A AYN AA WBN Y Y Herbert Anthony Adderley Page 181 1 that have to do with this case? 2 . othing at all to do with. 3 the lawsuit. 4 . nd you've also been are. 5 advocate for disability; i s that right? 6 A. 9. es. And what if anything, does 8 that have to do with this case? 9 10 lawsuit. 11 . hy did you -- did you . ot a thing with the 12 authorize your lawyers to bring suit in 13 this case? 14 15 15 . . . es. nd why did you do that? ecause I needed legal 17 advice and legal help to do it. Couldn't' 18 do it without it. 19 . nd what's your 20 motivation -- was it your independent 21 decision to do that? 22 . es, after Bernie Parrish 23 called and told me about it, it was my 24 independent decision to be involved. ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SERVICES, LLC. 1-500 -944-9454 QA QQ A QA A AYY AY AY Herbert Anthony Adderley Page 182 1 Q. Did you do it because anyone 2 else told you to do it? 3 4 5 6 A. Q. A. Q, No. Not, Mr. Parrish? No. 'Not me? No. 8 Q. It was your -- it was Herb 9 Adderley's decision? 10 11 . . es, 100 percent. nd before you brought the 12 case, did your attorneys review all the 13 facts and legal theories, et cetera, with 14 you? 15 16 . . es. nd were you satisfied that 17 that was a case that you wanted to 18 associate your name with? 19 20 . . es. nd has the theory of the 21 case changed over time? 22 23 . es. ... okay. And do you have an 24 understanding of why it changed over ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SERVICES, LLC. 1-800944-9454 Q Y T tO I Herbert Anthony Adderley Page 199 1 next document that I'm going to ask you 2 about actually hasn't been numbered. 3 me take a look at this. 4 Let he next document is the - 5 is a document that has been not been 6 marked and I'm going to mark as the first 7 Amended Complaint. 8 showed it to him. 9 10 11 Mr. Kessler, you just MR. KESSLER: kay. f you want to give it an exhibit number. 12 13 14 15 BY MR. 16 KATZ: Q. .(Whereupon, he exhibit was marked. 179 for identification.) Did you discuss your first 17 amended complaint with your counsel. 18 before you -- before it was filed? 19 20 A. Q. Yes. And were you satisfied that 21 it set out the facts and the law as you 22 understood it? 23 24 A. . es And that was before it was ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SERVICES, LLC. 1-800 - 944-9454 t 21 9 1 QQQ QA QA AA A (DY IYY AA Y WY A - Herbert Anthony Adderley Page 200 1 filed? 2 A. . es. nd the document itself, 3 4 actually had a number of different 5 exhibits to it; didn't it? 6 . es. Q8 have exhibits? . 10 . i d the document you see es. nd were there a number of 11 drafts of this document? 2 13 4 15 . . . . es. ere they all sent to you"? es. . nd you discussed them with 16 your counsel? 7 18 . . es. Td like to mark as the next 19 exhibit, let's make it 180, and we'll 20 mark the Second Amended Complaint, which 21 you had showed him, Mr. Kessler, but you 22 had not marked. 3 -- 24 Whereupon, the exhibit was ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SERVICES, LLC. 1-840 - 944-9454 QA Am QQ QA A Q AAY b AY Y Y N Y - - Herbert Anthony Adderley Page 201 I 2 3 BY MR. KATZ: 4 . ow, you understand that arked 180 for identification.) - 5 the --- do you have an understanding that 6 the judge required a Second Amended 7 Complaint to be filed? 8 . es. 9 . nd did you review that - 10 without telling me the substance of any 11 conversation -- did you review that 12 complaint with your counsel 13 A. . es. efore it was filed. And 14 15 did you satisfy yourself that it was 16 legally and factually correct? 17 18 . . es. nd dial you see a number of 19 drafts of that document? 20 21 . . es, I did. nd did the document that 22 you saw before it was fled have exhibits 23 to it?. 24 ._ es. ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SERVICES, LLC. 1-800-944-9454 QQ QA A A ADY NY DN Herbert Anthony Adderley Page 212 1 front of you, lair. Ressler asked you about 2 Line 17, wel l, Paragraph 57, whi ch refers 3 to a letter from Mr. All en to NFLPA, 4 retired NFLPA members, soliciting them to 5 join or renew their membership in the 6 NFLPA and it says Parrish, and Adderley 7 received this fall, 2003 letter. 8 9 sir? 10 11 . es. o you know whether you id you receive that letter, 12 retained a copy of that, sir? 13 14 . . o, T didn't. ow, with respect to Exhibit 15 169, this redacted version, did you, 16 again, without asking you what the .17 substance of the discussion, did you f E 18 review this complaint with your counsel 19 before i t was filed? 20 . es. 21 . nd were you satisfied 22 before it was filed that i t was accurate, 23 factually and legally, as far as you 24 could understand it? ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SERVICES, LLC. 1-800-944-9454 6 QQA QQ A A A ADY AY Y WR AR Y Y Herbert Anthony Adderley 1 . es. 2 . id you understand that 3 there was a new theory being proposed? 4 . es. 5 . nd did -- what 6 relationship, i f any, did that new theory 7 have to the judge's orders as far as you 8 know? 9 10 . . epeat that, please. ell, the judge had 11 dismissed the Second Amended Complaint? 12 13 . . ight. nd did the new theory, in 14 your mind, have anything to do with the 15 judge's dismissal of the previous theory? 16 17 A. es. Q. n d were you just following 18 the judge's order, as far as you 19 understood? 20 21 22 23 24 BY MR. KATZ : MR. Lea di ng. MR. KESSLER: Objection. KATZ: ou may answer. es. THE WITNESS: ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SERVICES, LLC. 1-800- 944-9454 21 1 1 QAAe QAa QQc A Q AYI YCI AI T Herbert Anthony Adderley Page 244 I 2 3 verything that was in the omp laints.but I didn't see them t that particular time. 4 BY MR. KESSLER: 5 . want to be clear. So, you 6 never saw the First Amended Complaint 7 before it was filed, right? 8 . knew what was in there but 9 I never saw it. 0 . ou never saw it and you 12 never saw the Second Amended Complaint 12 before it was filed; correct? 3 14 . . hat's correct. nd you never saw the Third 3 15 Amended Complaint before i t was filed; 16 correct? 7 . knew what was in there. 18 It was discussed. 9 20 correct? 1 22 . . orrect.' nd it is also true, this . ou never saw it, sir; 23 morning you testified you never spoke to 24 the lawyers before the case was filed; I ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SERVICES, LLC. 1-800-944-9454 c s KIY M T KT CY L Herbert Anthony Adderley Page 245 1 right? 2 R. KATZ : object. 3 4 S HE WITNESS: That I never poke to the lawyers before the ase was filed? About what? 6 BY MR. KESSLER: Q. es. his morning I asked 8 you did you speak to the lawyers. 9 Let me - - 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 BY MR. 19 MR. ATZ: You didn't ask him that this morning, Mr. true. MR. KESSLER: to live note. MR. KATZ: et's go back essler. That's just not an you get back? ou asked him whether he ever met. KESSLER.: Q. did asked you if you ever 20 met with the lawyers in this case before 21 this case was started and you said no? .22 23 A. Q. Correct. An d you never met with them? Correct. 24 A. ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SERVICES, LLC. 1-800-944-9454 QQQA rA AQ Q A IYH WIW MT Y S Herbert Anthony Adderley Page 247 1 order for them to be authorized. 2 . o, when did you speak to 3 them, sir? 4 . ell, this is before 5 anything was filed. 6 7 8 . . , ou j ust told me -o say hello. ou j ust told me 30 seconds 9 ago you didn't speak to them; right? 30 10 seconds ago; right? 11 . ow could 1 acknowledge or 12 get the thing going without speaking to 13 them. 14 . ell, sir, it's your 15 testimony, 30 seconds ago, did you tell 16 me you didn't speak to them before filing 17 the lawsuit? 18 19 says. 20 21 R. KATZ: Objection. The ecord speaks for itself. . f that's what the record 22 BY MR. KESSLER. 23 . 'll represent that you just 24 said that. Sir, do you have a problem ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SERVICES, LLC. 1-800-944-9454 13 12 QA Q AQ QA A ARM DA NT N O . Herbert Anthony Adderley Page 280 1-you any information? R. KATZ: object. HE WITNESS: No. 4 BY MR. KESSLER: 5 . kay. Now, you --- the 6 attorney asked you about the settlement 7 conference that you didn't know about 8 information that led to the settlement 9 amount that was discussed. . 0 o you recall that being 11 asked about that? 2 13 14 conference? 15 16 . bout the settlement? t the recent settlement . . ight. Did you know hoer much you 17 were asking for in that settlement 18 conference? 19 20 . . o. Okay. The lawyers never 21 told you what settlement demand they were 22 making? 23 24 . . o. So, as class -- as a class ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SERVICES, LLC. 1-500-944-9454 21 21 - E kt aA QA A BTI TY L M o I Herbert Anthony Adderley Page 281 1 representat i ve,, you didn't want to 2 approve the amount of money that was 3 being asked for? 4 5 6 get . es. kay. well, but you didn't hey didn't tell you what they _7 were asking for? 8 . t was part of the { 9 confidential or part of the blackout, 10 whatever this is. 11 2 . et me ask you this,, sir: hey can't give you 13 confidential information of the union of 14 Players, Inc., correct? 5 . don't know whether they 16 can or not. 17 ut what's to stop them from 18 telling you how much money they want to 19 ask for as a. settlement demand? 0 1 2 3 R. KATZ: Object. HE WITNESS: Here's the ttorney here. Ask him. I don't now. 24 BY MR. KESSLER: SQUIRE DEPOSITION SERVICES, LLC. 1-500-944-9454 21 91 2. 3 12 1 E mA rA cA d a Q t k t a Q o 4 H AI MH S M H T Herbert Anthony Adderley Page 282 . . . o he refused to tell you? e said it was confidential. nd he didn't tell 4 Mr. Parish how much the settlement demand 5 was either? 6 . don't know what he told 7 Mr. Parrish. 8 . . e didn' t tell you? e didn't tell me. 10 1" 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 R. KATZ his is quite bjectionable for you to designate ll this material confidential and hen to ask questions impugning he integrity of the people who ept it confidential. R. KESSLER: You raised his issue of the settlement emand and frankly, I am shocked nd stunned that a settlement emand was made. It was not onfidential for you to tell your lient and discuss with a class epresentative in advance how much oney you were going to ask for in SQUIRE DEPOSITION SERVICES, LLC. 1-800 -944-9454 21 92 27 18 16 5 4 3 yt sf nr pM im ts up gt y pa t M M M Herbert Anthony Adderley Page 283 1 dvance. I would not be the one rotesting, if 1 were you, about his subject. R. KATZ: In fact, r. Kessler, a demand was not ade. What was told to the ettlement conference judge was hat this was what we would ecommend, but we were prohibited 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 rom conveying that information by he protective order and we hought that was a problem. R. KESSLER: You think the rotective order, sir, prohibits ou from saying what demand you're oing to recommend? Not the nderlying information? You think hat's prohibited? R. KATZ: I think it's rohibited for me to take 21 2 3 4 nformation, to come up with a umber, based on information that ou have designated, and 1 might ay overdesignated, to be ESQUIRE DEPOSI'T'ION SERVICES, LLC. 1-800944-9454 21 9 28 1 1 ic rr iJ sc qm f w y t TI -M T M ( Herbert Anthony Adderley Page 284 onfidential, and convey that to y clients and I told that to udge Larson. R. KESSLER: Okay. R. KATZ: And I wrote that o Judge Larson. MR -KESSLER . Okay. We will. f 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 espectfully disagree as to what our obligations are and as to 0 1 hat's confidential and not onfidential. 12 3 4 5 6 7 $ 19 n any event, I have no urther questions. R. KATZ: I have a few uestions, but I want to take a hort break first. HE VIDEOGRAPHER: The time s 2:55 p.m. Off the record. 0 1 22 Whereupon, there was a ecess.) 3 4 HE VIDEOGRAPHER: The time s 3:07 p.m. We are back on the ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SERVICES, LLC. 1-500 -944-9454 QQ f A A IWI E IM Y - Herbert Anthony AdderIey Page 299 3 lawsuit? 2 3 . , es. hy did you tell Mr. Kessler 4 a few moments ago that you had not spoken 5 with a lawyer before you filed? 6 . -wasn't sure what he was 7 talking about, what document he was 8 tal king about. 9 10 11 12 13 XAMINATION R. KATZ: I have nothing urther. 14 BY MR. KESSLER: 15 . have more questions. 16 Mr. Adderley, you're changing -- I'm 1=7 saying this with al l due respect -18 you're changing your testimony every 30 19 seconds on this issue. 20 'm going to ask you again. 21 You've testified now twice under oath, at 22 least twice, maybe three times, that 23 before this case was filed, you don't 24 remember any specific contents of any_ ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SERVICES, LLC. 1-500 -944-9454 21 21 1 I 1 _ hdd tm pw is tm ns w u s t a MY YM I Herbert Anthony Addearley Page 305 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 S 9 0 1 2 3 4 eposition. You are ischaracterizing to him what he aid. R. KESSLER: Sir, this itness has changed his testimony o many times under oath, within a space of inutes; _i don't know, 15, 20 the judge is going to be ppalled by this witness's estimony. ou want to terminate this eposition, go forward. have a feeling here ntruthful testimony is being olicited by you, because this itness keeps changing. I've ever seen, as long as I've been racticing, a witness change his estimony under oath so many times n the same deposition. ou want to terminate, let's erminate. It's your decision. R. KATZ: You are confusing im. You are saying that he said ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SERVICES, LLC. 1-800 -944-9454 .S 9 7 b 5 4 2 Qht ot t di w M a c M M AM MM M Herbert Anthony Adderley Page 306 1 t was about R. KESSLER: I don't want 3 o speak, You're coaching him. R.. KATZ : Let me finish. r. Kessler, I can document for he record, many, many ommunications by phone records nd by e-mail and by mail with r. Adderley before this complaint 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 as filed. That's the truth. R'. KESSLER: If you'd like o go under oath I'll take your eposition but otherwise I don't hink that's relevant for you to ffer your testimony, sir. R. KATZ: I think that you ave confused the witness. And is testimony is out there. nd it can be documented. 20 BY MR. KESSLER: 21 . r. Adderley, the truth, 22 isn't it, sir, as you're sitting here 23 today, you don't remember what you knew 24 or you didn't know before the complaint ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SERVICES., LLC. 1-800- 944-9454 QA QQ A IYS DB DY Herbert Anthony Adderley Page 307 1 was filed; right? You j ust don't 2 remember? 3 A. ome things I do, some 4 things I don't. 5 . ut one thing you do 6 remember is you know you didn't see the 7 complaint before it was filed, any 8 complaint; right? 9 10 11 MR. KATZ- Object. THE WITNESS: I saw documents but I didn't know whether it was a lawsuit or what. MR. KESSLER: 9. id it look like 15 subsequently you've seen the complaints 16 in this case; right? . . es. id it kook like one of 17 18 19 those complaints? 20 . es. 21 22 like? 23 24 me . . t did. What did it look A. Looked like l egal papers to ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SERVICES, LLC. 1-840-944-9454 2 .QQh Qt t a IM YM WT T I T Herbert Anthony Adderley Page 308 Q, 'm not asking you if it was 2 a legal paper, sir. Do you recall here 3 now what at all it looked like? 4 5 6 7 R. KATZ: Object. HE WITNESS: It looked like he same papers we're looking at ere now. 8 BY MR. KESSLER: 9 . e're looking at a lot of 10 papers here. 11 A. hat's why I was confused. 12 We're looking at a ldt of papers. 13 , ou don't know which. paper 14'you saw or no? Do you? 15 16 17 18 R. KATZ: Object. HE WITNESS: The first mendment, second amendment, I saw hem both. 19 BY MR.. KESSLER: 20 . 'm not asking you that. 21' I'm. asking you, do you know if prior to 22 th e case being filed, you reviewed 3 anything that was a draft of the actual 24 complaint filed? ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SERVICES, LLC. 1-500- 944-9454 ( 1 CT Herbert Anthony Addearley Page 320 1 ERTIFICATE 3 hereby certify that the 4 proceedings and evidence noted are 5 contained fully and accurately in-the 6 notes taken by me on the deposition of 7 the above matter, and that this is _a 8 correct transcript of the same. 9 0 11 1.2 13 14 15 16 17 18 eresa M. Beaver, RPR f The foregoing certification of 19 this transcript does not apply to any 20 reproduction of the same by any means, 21 unless under the direct control and/or 22 supervision of the certifying shorthand 23 reporter.) 24 ESQUIRE DEPOSITION SERVICES, EI,C. 1-800-944-9454 Exhibit C R W B K C Parrish v. NFLPA -- Redacted Complaint Page E of I Hilbert, Ryan From: Sent: To: Cc: atz, Ron ednesday, September 26, 2007 11:16 AM ernard Parrish (bpp12@yahoo.com ); Herb Adderley (HerbAddedey26@aol.com ); walt272002@yahoo.com Subject: E: Parrish v. NFLPA -- Redact-ad Complaint Attachments: 20070926103104181.PDF; 20070925205329469.PDF; 20070925203213850.PDF Attached is _a better, more current copy of the public version of the Third Amended Complaint plus the nonconfidential exhibits. We are faxing the complaint to Bernie per his request & we will FedEx complaint plus exhibits to all of you. 3/12/2008 X, J, A F 'F K Paae 1 of 1 Hilbert, Ryan f=rom: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: atz, Ron riday, February 09, 2007 7:37 PM Bernard Parrish'; 'HerbAdderley26Qaol.com' 'W: NFLPA Cross-Action Complaint.DOC Attachments: Parrish.Exhibit A.pdf; Parrish Exhibit B.pdf; Exhibit C.pdf; Parrish Exhibit D.pdf; Parrish Exhibit E.pdf; Parrish Exhibit F.pdf; Parrish_Adderley Complaint.DOC Team-- Attached is-.a draft of the complaint with the exhibits for your review/cammentsledits. If you all are available, I will send a conference call number for a call at 4pm Eastern, 3pm Central & 1 pm Pacific time on Monday. Please let me know if that is not a convenient time. Please keep this highly confidential. Thanks, Ron I 3112/2008

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?