Giles et al v. Gravity Play Entertainment, LLC et al

Filing 150

ORDER re: 145 Plaintiffs' Objections to Defendant's Counter Designation of Video Deposition Testimony of Dr. Steven Murk 138 . The Court rules on the objections as set forth in this Order, by Judge Philip A. Brimmer on 4/29/09. (ebs, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Judge Philip A. Brimmer

Civil Action No. 07-cv-00401-PAB-KLM KATHERINE GILES and ZURICH AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY, Plaintiffs, v. THE INFLATABLE STORE, INC., Defendant. _____________________________________________________________________ ORDER REGARDING PLAINTIFFS' OBJECTIONS TO DEFENDANT'S COUNTER DESIGNATION OF VIDEO DEPOSITION TESTIMONY OF DR. STEVEN MURK _____________________________________________________________________ This matter comes before the court on plaintiffs' Objections [Docket No. 145] to Defendant's Counter Designation of Video Deposition Testimony of Dr. Steven Murk [Docket No. 138]. The Court rules as follows: Item # 44(a) Testimony of Dr. Steven Murk p.30, l.13-19 Objection Irrelevant, F.R.E. 401-402 Ruling Sustained as to foundation under Rule 702 and relevance as to the statement "As you may know, part of the economic redevelopment for downtown in the Springs has been to put a lot of bars downtown." Otherwise, overruled.

Item # 45.

Testimony of Dr. Steven Murk p.32, l.6-p.33, l.15

Objection Beyond the scope of direct examination, F.R.E. 611(b); all grounds stated in Plaintiffs' Motion in Limine [Docket No. 115], incorporated herein by reference, including F.R.E. 702; hearsay, F.R.E. 801, et seq.; misleading and prejudicial effect substantially outweighs probative value, F.R.E. 403 Beyond the scope of direct examination, F.R.E. 611(b); all grounds stated in Plaintiffs' Motion in Limine [Docket No. 115], incorporated herein by reference, including F.R.E. 702; hearsay, F.R.E. 801, et seq.; misleading and prejudicial effect substantially outweighs probative value, F.R.E. 403; irrelevant, F.R.E. 401-402 Beyond the scope of direct examination, F.R.E. 611(b); all grounds stated in Plaintiffs' Motion in Limine [Docket No. 115], incorporated herein by reference, including F.R.E. 702; hearsay, F.R.E. 801, et seq.; misleading and prejudicial effect substantially outweighs probative value, F.R.E. 403; irrelevant, F.R.E. 401-402

Ruling Sustained on relevance grounds. The witness does not indicate whether he was aware of information regarding Ms. Giles' alcohol consumption at a time relevant to any diagnosis he made or whether he used it for any purpose in treating her. As to p.33, l.16-p.34,l.3, overruled. As to p.34, ll.4-10, sustained as to speculation and lack of foundation under Rule 702. As to p.34, ll.1118, sustained as to relevance under Rule 402 and undue prejudice under Rule 403. Overruled as to the statement, "no one ever described her as inebriated." Otherwise, sustained given that the question incorporates a BAC that the witness does not indicate he was aware of during times relevant to his treatment of Ms. Giles.

46.

p.33, l.16-p.34, l16

47.

p.34, l.23-p.35, l.10

2

Item # 48.

Testimony of Dr. Steven Murk p.35, l.18-p.36, l.13

Objection Beyond the scope of direct examination, F.R.E. 611(b); all grounds stated in Plaintiffs' Motion in Limine [Docket No. 115], incorporated herein by reference, including F.R.E. 702; hearsay, F.R.E. 801, et seq.; misleading and prejudicial effect substantially outweighs probative value, F.R.E. 403; irrelevant, F.R.E. 401-402 Beyond the scope of direct examination, F.R.E. 611(b)

Ruling Sustained as to relevance and lack of foundation except for the statement "I simply said that she became combative."

49.

p.38, l.20-p.39, l.6

Overruled.

DATED April 29, 2009. BY THE COURT:

s/Philip A. Brimmer PHILIP A. BRIMMER United States District Judge

3