American Home Assurance Company et al v. Greater Omaha Packing Company Inc.

Filing 501

ORDER - This matter is before the Court on cross motions in limine (Filing No. 442 and Filing No. 450 ) regarding video-tape deposition designations. The parties have withdrawn several objections to exhibits and therefore the Court does not addre ss those objections below. IT IS ORDERED: The plaintiff's motion to admit two certified CDC line lists (Ex. Nos. 99A and 100A) is deferred until trial. Video Deposition Exhibit Rulings is set forth in this order. Ordered by Senior Judge Lyle E. Strom. (GJG)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA
AMERICAN HOME ASSURANCE
COMPANY and CARGILL MEAT
SOLUTIONS CORPORATION,

)
)
)
)
Plaintiffs,
)
)
v.
)
)
GREATER OMAHA PACKING COMPANY,)
INC.,
)
)
Defendant.
)
______________________________)

8:11CV270

ORDER

This matter is before the Court on cross motions in
limine (Filing No. 442 and Filing No. 450) regarding video-tape
deposition designations.

The parties have withdrawn several

objections to exhibits and therefore the Court does not address
those objections below.
IT IS ORDERED:
1) The plaintiff’s motion to admit two certified CDC
line lists (Ex. Nos. 99A and 100A) is deferred until trial.
2) Video Deposition Exhibit Rulings:
Nellie Dumas - The objections to
Depo. Ex. 330A, 340, 341, 343, 344,
345, and 346 are overruled (Filing
No. 489 at 9, Filing No. 478 at 6).
Alana Forcier - The objection to
Depo. Ex. 349A is overruled (Filing
No. 489 at 2, Filing No. 478 at 6).

Kevin Thompson - The objection to
Depo. Ex. 468 is sustained (Filing
No. 489 at 10).
Sean Orness - The objection to
Depo. Ex. 432 is moot pursuant to a
stipulation to remove a section of
the exhibit (Filing No. 489 at 2).
Craig Allen - The objection to 352
is sustained. The objection to 358
is overruled (Filing No. 489 at 11,
Filing No. 478 at 6).
Norman O’Connor - All objections
withdrawn (Filing No. 489 at 3).
Pamela O’Brien - The objection to
Depo. Ex. 394 is overruled (Filing
No. 489 at 3-5).
Michele Nakata - All objections
withdrawn (Filing No. 489 at 3).
Rebecca Kanenaka - All objections
withdrawn (Filing No. 489 at 11).
Denise Van Voorhis - Objections to
Depo. Ex. 447, 448, and 450 are
overruled. Objection to Depo. Ex.
455 is overruled (Filing No. 489 at
8, Filing No. 478 at 6).
Stephen Gladbach - All objections
withdrawn (Filing No. 489 at 8).
Autumn Grim - All objections
withdrawn (Filing No. 489 at 7).
Edward Meyer - Objection to 365 is
moot because Cargill will withdraw
this exhibit (Filing No. 489 at 1113). Objections to 369, 370, and
372 are overruled (Filing No. 478
at 6).
-2-

Kirk E. Smith - The objection to
Depo. Ex. 417 is overruled (Filing
No. 489 at 7).
Mansour Samaspour - Objections to
140 and 141 are sustained.
Objection to 143 is overruled
(Filing Nos. 489 at 5-6, 477 at
11).
Thomas Safranek - All objections
withdrawn (Filing No. 489 at 13).
Bill Buckner - Objections to Depo.
Ex. 750, 754-56, and 762 are
sustained.1 Objections to Depo.
Ex. 758-61 and 763 are overruled.
Objection to Depo. Ex. 7572 was
erroneous and withdrawn (Filing No.
464 at 7).
Rebecca Hayne - Objections to Depo.
Ex. 713,3 718,4 and 7255 are
redundant and therefore the same as
their co-designations: sustained.

1

The Court notes that Cargill objected to Depo Exs. “75057”. Filing No. 464 at 7. However, neither party has submitted
Depo. Ex. 451-53 and these exhibits appear nowhere in Buckner’s
deposition. Therefore, the Court believes the objections to be
made in error and does not make a ruling.
2

GOPAC mistakenly stated Cargill objected to an e-mail
(Dep. Ex. 756) which GOPAC said was Depo. Ex. 757. In fact,
Deposition Exhibit 757 is actually Cargill’s privilege log and
does not appear in the Buckner Deposition. Cargill maintained
its objection to the privilege log in the Rebecca Hayne
deposition.
3

Redundant of Depo. Ex. 754 (objection sustained).

4

Redundant of Depo. Ex. 755 (objection sustained).

5

Redundant of Depo. Ex. 756 (objection sustained).
-3-

Objection to 715, 736, and 7576 are
sustained (Filing No. 464 at 6).
DATED this 14th day of August, 2014.
BY THE COURT:
/s/ Lyle E. Strom
____________________________
LYLE E. STROM, Senior Judge
United States District Court

6

This objection was cited against the privilege log,
Filing No. 210-5. Filing No. 451 at 26. See also fn.2 supra.
-4-