Toy v. American Family Mutual Insurance Company

Filing 276

ORDER Regarding the Parties' Objections to Designations of Deposition Testimony of Maureen Roberts by Judge Philip A. Brimmer on 02/11/14. (jhawk, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Judge Philip A. Brimmer
Civil Action No. 12-cv-01683-PAB-MJW
GREGORY TOY,
Plaintiff,
v.
AMERICAN FAMILY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY,
Defendant.
_____________________________________________________________________
ORDER REGARDING THE PARTIES’ OBJECTIONS
TO DESIGNATIONS OF DEPOSITION TESTIMONY OF MAUREEN ROBERTS
_____________________________________________________________________
This matter comes before the Court on Plaintiff’s Objections to Defendant
American Family Mutual Insurance Company’s Counter Designations [Docket No. 182-1
at 3] and American Family’s Objections and Counter Designations [Docket No. 171 at
12-13] as to Maureen Roberts.
The Court rules as follows on plaintiff’s objections:
Item Testimony
#
1
9:1 – 12:8
2

29:6-29:14

Objection

Ruling

F.R.E. 403; not required by Fed. R. Civ. P.
32(a)(6)
F.R.E. 403; not required by Fed. R. Civ. P.
32(a)(6)

Overruled.
Sustained.

The Court rules as follows as to defendant’s objections:
Testimony
34:10 – 16

Defendant’s Objections
Calls for a legal conclusion, vague

Ruling
Sustained.

58:1-19

Assumes facts not in evidence, the question
contains hearsay

Overruled.

58:23 – 59:22

Assumes facts not in evidence, the question
contains hearsay, calls for speculation

Overruled.

61:17 – 62:19

Calls for speculation, calls for a legal
conclusion, relevance,
Asked and answered, the question contains
hearsay,
Calls for speculation, the question contains
hearsay, leading
The question contains hearsay, assumes facts
not in evidence
The question contains hearsay, assumes facts
not in evidence
Question violates the Court’s previous orders
as it asks about conduct post arbitration
demand

Overruled.

67:19 – 68:24
69:11 – 70:3
70:13 – 70:25
76:3 – 24
77:18 – 79:16

80:10-80:14

Overruled.
Overruled.
Overruled.
Overruled.

Overruled. The
designated portions
ask about preAugust 15 conduct,
which is the date
referenced by the
Court’s orders.
Question violates the Court’s previous orders Overruled.
as it asks about conduct post arbitration
demand, calls for a legal conclusion, relevance

80:21-25

Question violates the Court’s previous orders Overruled.
as it asks about conduct post arbitration
demand, calls for a legal conclusion,
relevance

82:15-84:24

Relevance, the question contains hearsay
and assumes facts not in evidence

DATED February 11, 2014.
BY THE COURT:
s/Philip A. Brimmer
PHILIP A. BRIMMER
United States District Judge

2

Overruled.