McAdams et al v. Gilsdorf et al

Filing 63

ORDER granting 59 Motion to Compel Videorecording of the inspection of May 5, 2012. Ordered by Magistrate Judge Cheryl R. Zwart. (AOA)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA ROBIN L. McADAMS, ADMINISTRATRIX OF THE ESTATE OF STEPHEN C. McADAMS and WANZEK CONSTRUCTION, INC. Plaintiffs v. : : No. 4:11-cv-3117 : MYRLE D. GILSDORF and ANDREWS VAN LINES, INC., : Motion to Compel Videorecording of the inspection of May 5, 2012 : Defendants : Order AND NOW THIS 23rd of April, 2012, it is hereby Ordered that: 1. Plaintiff McAdams may have a profession videographer present who may video record the entire inspection to be conducted by Defendants on May 5, 2012 in Kimball South Dakota. 2. The videographer must disable any device which will pick up the voices of the persons at the scene. 3. The videographer may not reveal to Plaintiff’s counsel or any other person the contents of any conversation he may accidentally overhear between Defense counsel and his experts or between the experts. 4. The videographer shall not place himself in position which impedes the movement of any vehicle involved in the inspection nor the defense expert’s movements. The videographer shall not ask any person to take any action to stop or re enact any portion of the inspection at any time. 5. The defendants representatives shall act in good faith and not unnecessarily interfere with the videographer’s ability to tape the events, unless he is interfering with Defendants’ inspection. 5 The videographer shall serve as Plaintiff’s sole observer at the inspection. 6. If any issue arises regarding the taping, defense counsel shall contact Plaintiff’s counsel by cell phone and both parties are expected to make a good faith effort to resolve the issues. s/ Cheryl R. Zwart Cheryl R. Zwart, United States Magistrate Judge

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?