Dittmar v. City of North Las Vegas

Filing 188

ORDER Amending Court's Ruling Resolving Defendant's Objections to Designated Deposition Testimony. See Order for Details. Signed by Judge Jennifer A. Dorsey on 2/5/2024. (Copies have been distributed pursuant to the NEF - JQC)

1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

2

DISTRICT OF NEVADA

3 Pamela Dittmar,
4

Plaintiff

5 v.
6 City of North Las Vegas,
7
8

Defendant

Case No.: 2:17-cv-02916-JAD-BNW
Order Amending Court’s Ruling Resolving
Defendant’s Objections to
Designated Deposition Testimony
[ECF No. 186]

During today’s pretrial conference, plaintiff Pamela Dittmar’s counsel argued that

9 defendant City of North Las Vegas had waived many of its objections to the designated
10 deposition testimony of Dr. Qiong Liu. After reviewing Federal Rule of Civil Procedure
11 32(d)(3) and the deposition transcript, the court hereby revises and provides amended rulings in
12 light of the fact that the City did waive many of its objections by failing to raise them at Dr.
13 Liu’s deposition.
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23

_____________ _________________
U.S. District Judge Jennifer A. Dorsey
February 5, 2024

1
2
3
4
5
6
7

KAMER ZUCKER ABBOTT
R. Todd Creer
#10016
Kaitlin H. Paxton
#13625
6325 South Jones Boulevard, Suite 300
Las Vegas, Nevada 89102-1990
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
[e-mail]
[e-mail]
Attorneys for Defendant
City of North Las Vegas
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF NEVADA

8
9
10
11
12
13
14

PAMELA DITTMAR,

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
)
)
CITY OF NORTH LAS VEGAS, a municipal )
corporation,
)
)
Defendant.
)
______________________________________ )

Case No. 2:17-cv-02916-JAD-BNW
COURT'S AMENDED RULING ON
DEFENDANT CITY OF NORTH LAS
VEGAS’S OBJECTIONS TO
PLAINTIFF’S TRANSCRIPT
DESIGNATIONS FOR QIONG LIU’S
FEBRUARY 26, 2019 DEPOSITION

15

Pursuant to the Court’s January 17, 2024 Order Regarding Trial [ECF No. 163], Defendant

16

City of North Las Vegas (“the City” or “Defendant”), by and through its counsel of record, the law

17

firm of Kamer Zucker Abbott, submits the following objections to Plaintiff Pamela Dittmar’s

18

deposition designations for former City Manager for Defendant Qiong Liu [ECF No. 178].

19

As raised in the City’s Transcript Designations for Qiong Liu’s Deposition [ECF No. 169] and

20

its Trial Brief [ECF No. 168], Defendant objects to the submission of Liu’s deposition transcript at

21

trial, as Plaintiff’s sole reason for requesting the trial be continued from its September 2023 date was

22

due to Liu’s unavailability for the entire month of September, and Liu’s designation by Plaintiff as her

23

“key witness.” If, in fact, Liu never intended to make herself available for the trial while residing out

24

of state, the trial was unnecessarily delayed. Defendant has been prejudiced by that delay, resulting in

KAMER ZUCKER ABBOTT

Attorneys at Law

6325 South Jones Boulevard, Suite 300 • Las Vegas, NV 89118 • [phone]

Page 1 of 8

1

additional costs for trial preparation. OVERRULED as stated on the record 2/5/24.

2

Further, Plaintiff’s designations should be excluded from trial because she missed the filing

3

deadline of Monday, January 29, 2024 at 12:00 p.m. by more than a day. Indeed, Plaintiff’s

4

designations were not filed until Tuesday, January 30, 2024 at 9:37 p.m. The parties were expressly

5

cautioned in the Order Regarding Trial that failure to provide the designations by the deadline could

6

result in exclusion of the testimony from trial. ECF No. 163 at 2-3. Further, such delay resulted in

7

Defendant having significantly less time to review the designations and prepare these objections.

8

OVERRULED as stated on the record 2/5/24.

9
10

Notwithstanding Defendant’s general concerns with the use of Liu’s deposition testimony
at trial, Defendant offers the following objections to Plaintiff’s designations:

11

1. P. 15, ll. 13-15 – Leading; OVERRULED (waived)

12

2. P. 15, ll. 16-18 – Asked and Answered; OVERRULED (waived)

13

3. P. 15, l. 19 through p. 16, l. 6 – Leading; OVERRULED (waived)

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21

4. P. 18, l. 22 through p. 19, l. 1 – Improper characterization of evidence;
OVERRULED
5. P. 19, ll. 2-8 – Leading; OVERRULED (waived)
6. P. 19, ll. 9-21 – Leading; improper characterization of evidence; calls for legal
conclusion; OVERRULED (waived)
7. P. 20, ll. 5-8 – Improper characterization of evidence; OVERRULED (waived)
8. P. 20, ll. 9-24 – Leading; improper characterization of evidence; calls for legal
conclusion; OVERRULED (waived)

22

9. P. 20, l. 25 through p. 21, l. 2 – Leading; misstates testimony; OVERRULED
(waived)

23

10. P. 22, ll. 19-21 – Leading, asked and answered; OVERRULED (waived)

24

11. P. 23, ll. 3-7 – Hearsay within hearsay; SUSTAINED
12. P. 23, ll. 13-14 – Hearsay; SUSTAINED
13. P. 23, ll. 15-19 – Hearsay within hearsay; SUSTAINED
Page 2 of 8

1

14. P. 23, l. 23 through P. 24, l. 12*1 - Leading; calls for speculation; argumentative; OVERRULED
(waived)

2

15. P. 24, ll. 14-18 – Incomplete designation that lacks a question; calls for speculation;

3

OVERRULED (waived)

4

16. P. 24, ll. 19-24 – Leading; argumentative; OVERRULED (waived)

5

17. P. 25, ll. 6-13 – Unresponsive; OVERRULED (waived)

6

18. P. 26, l. 21 through 27, l. 4 – Unresponsive WAIVED; hearsay OVERRULED

7

19. P. 27, ll. 5-9 – Leading; OVERRULED (waived)

8

20. P. 27, l. 23 through p. 28, l. 19 – Hearsay; OVERRULED

9

21. P. 29, 7 through p. 30, l. 9 – Unresponsive; OVERRULED (waived)

10

22. P. 30, l. 24 through p. 31, l. 21 – Leading; argumentative; OVERRULED (waived)

11

23. P. 32, l. 21 through p. 33, l. 7 – Speculative WAIVED; irrelevant OVERRULED

12

24. P. 33, ll. 19-25 – Lacks foundation, assumes facts not in evidence; SUSTAINED
25. P. 34, ll. 5-13 – Leading, calls for speculation; OVERRULED (waived)

13

26. P. 35, ll. 14-15 – Hearsay; SUSTAINED

14

27. P. 36, l. 20 through p. 37, l. 3 – Unresponsive; OVERRULED (waived)

15

28. P. 37, ll. 8-10 – Misstates testimony; leading; OVERRULED (waived)

16

29. P. 37, ll. 12-21 – Unresponsive; OVERRULED (waived)

17

30. P. 37, l. 22 through p. 38, l. 4 – Leading; OVERRULED (waived)

18

31. P. 38, ll. 5-12 – Leading; calls for legal conclusion; argumentative; improper

19

characterization of evidence; SUSTAINED (calls for legal conclusion)

20

32. P. 39, ll. 4-9 – Leading, misstates testimony; OVERRULED (waived)

21

33. P. 39, ll. 19-23 – Unresponsive; OVERRULED (waived)

22

34. P. 39, l. 24 through p. 40, l. 3 – Irrelevant OVERRULED; speculative WAIVED

23
24

1

Plaintiff’s list of designations does not include all of the lines highlighted in Plaintiff’s accompanying
transcript. To the extent she intended to include the additional highlighted lines, Defendant includes
objections to certain lines.
KAMER ZUCKER ABBOTT

Attorneys at Law

6325 South Jones Boulevard, Suite 300 • Las Vegas, NV 89118 • [phone]

Page 3 of 8

1

35. P. 40, ll. 4-12 – Unresponsive; speculative; OVERRULED (waived)

2

36. P. 40, ll. 13-19 – Leading; OVERRULED (waived)

3

37. P. 40, l. 20 through p. 41, l. 1 – Speculative; OVERRULED (waived)

4

38. P. 41, ll. 1-4 – Leading; OVERRULED (waived)

5

39. P. 42, l. 24 through 43, l. 4 – Leading; calls for a legal conclusion; improper

6

characterization of evidence; OVERRULED (waived)

7

40. P. 43, ll. 12-13 – Unresponsive; OVERRULED (waived)

8

41. P. 43, l. 24 through p. 44, l. 14 – Leading; misstates testimony; OVERRULED
(waived)

9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24

42. P. 45, ll. 1-13 – Leading; speculative; OVERRULED (waived)
43. P. 47, ll. 4-9 – Leading; OVERRULED (waived)
44. P. 47, ll. 10-19 – Calls for speculation; SUSTAINED
45. P. 47, ll. 20-22 – Leading; argumentative; OVERRULED (waived)
46. P. 48, ll. 3-11 – Hearsay; asked and answered; OVERRULED
47. P. 48, ll. 12-21 – Leading; OVERRULED (waived)
48. P. 49, ll. 5-20 – Misstates testimony; speculative; OVERRULED
49. P. 49, ll. 21-24 – Leading; OVERRULED (waived)
50. P. 49, l. 25 through p. 50, l. 6 – Calls for speculation; OVERRULED (waived)
51. P. 50, l. 19 through p. 51, l. 9 – Hearsay; speculative; OVERRULED (waived)
52. P. 51, ll. 20-21 – Speculative; SUSTAINED
53. P. 53; ll. 10-21 – Irrelevant; unresponsive; hearsay; OVERRULED
54. P. 55, ll. 6-11 – Incomplete designation that is lacking the question for context;
speculative; OVERRULED (waived)
55. P. 55, ll. 12-13 – Attorney is testifying for the witness; OVERRULED (waived)
56. P. 55, ll. 14-19 – Speculative; OVERRULED (waived)
KAMER ZUCKER ABBOTT

Attorneys at Law

6325 South Jones Boulevard, Suite 300 • Las Vegas, NV 89118 • [phone]

Page 4 of 8

1

98. P. 118, l. 8 through 119, l. 8 – Unresponsive; speculative; OVERRULED (waived)

2

99. P. 124, l. 23 through p. 125, l. 2 – Unresponsive; in violation of the order on motion in

3

limine as it is lacking presentation of proof OVERRULED
P. 126, l. 19 through p. 127, l. 3 – Unresponsive; OVERRULED (waived)

4

100.

5

101. P. 130, l. 131, l. 18 – Unresponsive; OVERRULED (no line number given for start of
range)

6

102.

7

P. 136, l. 12-21 – Compound; leading; OVERRULED (waived)

DATED this 2nd day of February, 2024.

8

Respectfully submitted,

9

KAMER ZUCKER ABBOTT
By:

10
11
12
13

/s/Kaitlin H. Paxton
R. Todd Creer
#10016
Kaitlin H. Paxton
#13625
6325 South Jones Boulevard, Suite 300
Las Vegas, Nevada 89118
Tel: [phone]
Fax: [phone]
Attorneys for Defendant
City of North Las Vegas

14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24

KAMER ZUCKER ABBOTT

Attorneys at Law

6325 South Jones Boulevard, Suite 300 • Las Vegas, NV 89118 • [phone]

Page 7 of 8