General Steel Domestic Sales, LLC v. Chumley et al

Filing 331

ORDER REGARDING THE PARTIES' OBJECTIONS TO DESIGNATIONS OF DEPOSITION TESTIMONY OF DAVID NARDOZZI. By Judge Philip A. Brimmer on 7/11/12. (mnfsl, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Judge Philip A. Brimmer
Civil Action No. 10-cv-01398-PAB-KLM
GENERAL STEEL DOMESTIC SALES, LLC,
d/b/a General Steel Corporation, a Colorado limited liability company,
Plaintiff,
v.
ETHAN DANIEL CHUMLEY, individually, and
ATLANTIC BUILDING SYSTEMS, LLC, a Delaware corporation,
doing business as Armstrong Steel Corporation,
Defendants.
_____________________________________________________________________
ORDER REGARDING THE PARTIES’ OBJECTIONS TO
DESIGNATIONS OF DEPOSITION TESTIMONY OF DAVID NARDOZZI
_____________________________________________________________________
This matter comes before the Court on Defendants’ Objections to Designated
Deposition Testimony of David Nardozzi [Docket No. 221] and Plaintiff’s Objections to
Defendants’ Counter Designations to Deposition Testimony of David Nardozzi [Docket
No. 256].
The Court rules as follows on defendants’ objections [Docket No. 221]:
Item #

Testimony

Objection

Ruling

1

7:7-10

Leading

Overruled

2

7:11-14

Compound; vague

Overruled

3

7:15-18

No question posed

Overruled

4

10:1-7

Assumes facts not in
evidence; lack of
foundation

Overruled

Item #

Testimony

Objection

Ruling

5

10:12-13

Assumes facts not in
evidence; lack of
foundation

Overruled

6

11:13-19

No questions posed

Overruled

7

13:7-14:10

Compound; answer is
not responsive

Sustained, unresponsive and
irrelevant pursuant to Court’s
ruling of July 3, 2012

8

14:11-13,2125;15:1-3

Compound; vague;
leading; answer is not
responsive

Irrelevant pursuant to Court’s
ruling of July 3, 2012

9

15:11-13

Leading;
mischaracterizes the
testimony

Irrelevant pursuant to Court’s
ruling of July 3, 2012

10

15:15-16:14

Leading;
mischaracterizes the
testimony

Irrelevant pursuant to Court’s
ruling of July 3, 2012

11

16:15-18

Leading;
mischaracterizes the
testimony

Irrelevant pursuant to Court’s
ruling of July 3, 2012

12

17:10-25

Leading; lack of
foundation; vague; calls
for hearsay

Irrelevant pursuant to Court’s
ruling of July 3, 2012

13

23:10-24:5

Vague; lack of
foundation

Irrelevant pursuant to Court’s
ruling of July 3, 2012

14

24:6-11

Leading; lack of
foundation

Irrelevant pursuant to Court’s
ruling of July 3, 2012

15

24:12-13

Leading

Irrelevant pursuant to Court’s
ruling of July 3, 2012

16

24:14-25:3

Answer is not
responsive

Irrelevant pursuant to Court’s
ruling of July 3, 2012

17

25:4-9

Leading;
mischaracterizes the
testimony; calls for
hearsay

Irrelevant pursuant to Court’s
ruling of July 3, 2012

2

Item #

Testimony

Objection

Ruling

18

25:16-26:3

Vague; leading;
mischaracterizes the
testimony

Irrelevant pursuant to Court’s
ruling of July 3, 2012

19

27:17-19

Leading; lack of
foundation

Irrelevant pursuant to Court’s
ruling of July 3, 2012

20

29:8-14

Leading

Overruled

21

29:21-30:18

Leading; lack of
foundation

Irrelevant pursuant to Court’s
ruling of July 3, 2012

22

33:9-10

Leading

Overruled

23

33:14-16

Leading

Overruled

24

34:20-222

Mischaracterizes the
testimony

Overruled

25

35:22-36:2

Leading;
mischaracterizes the
testimony; vague

Overruled

26

36:3-7

Leading

Overruled

27

37:14-17

Leading; vague; calls for
hearsay; lack of
foundation

Irrelevant pursuant to Court’s
ruling of July 3, 2012

28

37:18-38:2

Vague; lack of
foundation

Irrelevant pursuant to Court’s
ruling of July 3, 2012

29

38:3-5

Lack of foundation

Irrelevant pursuant to Court’s
ruling of July 3, 2012

30

38:6-8

Leading;
mischaracterizes the
testimony

Irrelevant pursuant to Court’s
ruling of July 3, 2012

31

38:11-13

Lack of foundation; calls
for hearsay

Irrelevant pursuant to Court’s
ruling of July 3, 2012

32

38:17-21

Leading; lack of
foundation

Irrelevant pursuant to Court’s
ruling of July 3, 2012

33

38:22-39:7

Leading; lack of
foundation

Irrelevant pursuant to Court’s
ruling of July 3, 2012

3

Item #

Testimony

Objection

Ruling

34

40:25-41:17

Leading; compound

Overruled

35

42:1-43:15

Answer not responsive

Overruled

36

44:9-17

Leading

Overruled

37

49:6-51:19

Vague; answer is not
responsive

Irrelevant pursuant to Court’s
ruling of July 3, 2012

38

51:25-52:1

Mischaracterizes the
testimony

Irrelevant pursuant to Court’s
ruling of July 3, 2012

39

52:6-24

Answer is not
responsive

Irrelevant pursuant to Court’s
ruling of July 3, 2012

40

53:1-16

Answer is not
responsive

Sustained

41

53:17-25

Lack of foundation

Overruled

42

54:10-12

Lack of foundation

Overruled

43

54:16-56:4

Leading; vague

Irrelevant pursuant to Court’s
ruling of July 3, 2012

44

56:5-7

Lack of foundation

Irrelevant pursuant to Court’s
ruling of July 3, 2012

45

57:13, 22-25;
58:1-59:8

Leading; answer is not
responsive

Irrelevant pursuant to Court’s
ruling of July 3, 2012

46

60:5-61:9, 17-24

Answer is not
responsive

Irrelevant pursuant to Court’s
ruling of July 3, 2012

47

64:13-66:9

Lack of foundation;
mischaracterizes the
testimony; answer is not
responsive

Irrelevant pursuant to Court’s
ruling of July 3, 2012

48

66:10-67:6

Leading; lack of
foundation

Irrelevant pursuant to Court’s
ruling of July 3, 2012

49

67:15-69:18

Leading;
mischaracterizes the
testimony; answer is not
responsive

Irrelevant pursuant to Court’s
ruling of July 3, 2012

4

Item #

Testimony

Objection

Ruling

50

69:19-20

Lack of foundation

Irrelevant pursuant to Court’s
ruling of July 3, 2012

51

69:21-24

Leading; calls for
hearsay

Overruled

52

69:25-71:9

Leading, calls for
hearsay

Overruled

53

71:18-25

No question posed;
answer is not
responsive

Sustained

54

72:23-73:1

Leading;
mischaracterizes the
testimony

Sustained as leading

55

73:7-74:4

Lack of foundation

Irrelevant pursuant to Court’s
ruling of July 3, 2012

56

76:23-77:1

Lack of foundation

Irrelevant pursuant to Court’s
ruling of July 3, 2012

57

77:2-77:7

Lack of foundation

Irrelevant pursuant to Court’s
ruling of July 3, 2012

58

77:12-77:17

Leading

Irrelevant pursuant to Court’s
ruling of July 3, 2012

59

78:8-17

Lack of foundation

Irrelevant pursuant to Court’s
ruling of July 3, 2012

60

78:18-20;79:1380:25

Leading; answer is not
responsive

Irrelevant pursuant to Court’s
ruling of July 3, 2012

61

84:21-85:2

No questions posed

Sustained

62

85:14-16

Leading

Overruled

63

86:20-88:12

Lack of foundation;
answer is not
responsive

Overruled as to 86:20-87:4;
Sustained as nonresponsive
as to 87:5-88:12

64

88:13-22

Compound; leading;
lack of foundation

Overruled

65

93:22-23-95:14

Lack of foundation; calls
for hearsay

Overruled

5

Item #

Testimony

Objection

Ruling

66

96:12-20

Answer is not
responsive

Overruled

67

97:22-98:10

Lack of foundation

Overruled

68

101:12-17

Leading;
mischaracterizes the
testimony

Overruled

69

102:25-104:4

Leading; calls for
hearsay

Irrelevant pursuant to Court’s
ruling of July 3, 2012

70

121:23-122:7

Leading; lack of
foundation

Irrelevant pursuant to Court’s
ruling of July 3, 2012

71

128:1-3

Vague

Overruled

72

128:14-21

Lack of foundation

Overruled

73

129:22-130:11

Leading; lack of
foundation; answer is
not responsive

Overruled

The Court rules as follows on plaintiff’s objections [Docket No. 256]:
Item #

Testimony

Objection

Ruling

1

15:17

Argument by counsel

Overruled since this is a trial
to court

2

29:25

Argument of counsel

Overruled since this is a trial
to court

3

35:24

Argument of counsel

Overruled since this is a trial
to court

4

38:23

Argument of counsel

Overruled since this is a trial
to court

5

54:13

Argument of counsel

Overruled since this is a trial
to court

6

54:18

Argument of counsel

Overruled since this is a trial
to court

6

Item #

Testimony

Objection

Ruling

7

66:12

Argument of counsel

Overruled since this is a trial
to court

8

73:2

Argument of counsel

Overruled since this is a trial
to court

9

85:17

Argument of counsel

Overruled since this is a trial
to court

10

143:1-16

FRCP 106

Overruled

11

148:5-12

Relevance

Overruled

12

148:23-149:2

Relevance

Overruled

13

160:9-10

Argumentative

Overruled

14

174:14-175:1

Vague, foundation

Overruled

15

210:10-212:9

Relevance

Overruled

16

226:13-231:8

Relevance

Overruled

17

233:14-234:14

Incomplete, 234:13-14
should not be read

Irrelevant pursuant to Court’s
ruling of July 3, 2012

18

237:21-24

Beyond the scope of
designation, relevance

Irrelevant pursuant to Court’s
ruling of July 3, 2012

19

238:4-241:21

Beyond the scope of
designation, relevance

Irrelevant pursuant to Court’s
ruling of July 3, 2012

20

246:17-247:20

Foundation and
relevance

Irrelevant pursuant to Court’s
ruling of July 3, 2012

21

254:2-255:19

Hearsay, foundation

Irrelevant pursuant to Court’s
ruling of July 3, 2012

22

259:1-21

Relevance, foundation

Irrelevant pursuant to Court’s
ruling of July 3, 2012

7

DATED July 11, 2012.
BY THE COURT:

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

8