Abu Dhabi Commercial Bank et al v. Morgan Stanley & Co. Incorporated et al

Filing 263

ORDER REGARDING PLAINTIFFS' MOTION TO QUASH THE DEPOSITION OF MICHAEL SMITH AND FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER PREVENTING THE DEPOSITION OF ALA'A ERAIQAT: Report and Recommendation No.9 is adopted. Plaintiffs' Motion to Quash the Deposition of M ichael Smith is hereby denied. Defendants are entitled to notice Mr. Smith's deposition to take place in Plaintiffs' chosen forum, New York, New York. Plaintiffs' Motion for a Protective Order Preventing the Deposition of Ala'a Eraiqat is granted, as set forth in this Order. (Signed by Judge Shira A. Scheindlin on 6/7/2011) (jpo) Modified on 6/8/2011 (jpo).

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COVRT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK
ABU DHABI COMMERCIAL BANK,
KING COUNTY, W.A.SHINGTON
Together and On Behalf of All Others
Similarly Situated,

ORDER REGARDING PLAINTIFFS'
MOTION TO QUASH THE
DEPOSITION OF MICHAEL SMITH
AND FOR PROTECTIVE ORDER
PREVENTING THE DEPOSITION OF
ALA' A ERAIQAT

Plaintiffs,

Case No.

v.

08 Civ. 7508 (SAS)

MORGAN STi\NLEY & CO.
INCORPORATED, MORGAN
STANLEY & CO. INTERNATIONAL
PLC, MOODY'S INVESTORS
SERVICE, INC., MOODY'S
INVESTORS SERVICE LTD.,
STANDf\RD AND POOR'S RATINGS
SERVICES and THE McGRAW HILL
COMPl\NIES, INC.,
Defendants.

SHIIL\

A SCHEINDLIN, DISTRICT JUDGE:
The Court, having reviewed Report & Recommendation No.9 of the Special Master

~ ~v\V')
D¥-V~\Z-S

(UeAV.e..l-V\-b

L\) DV~~"'i).--z.;;:-1.-1

00)Lt.:h DvLS ~~ ~A.(-n~~) "'-.e-( ,L\,J

~.:

1. Report and Recommendation No.9 is adopted.
2. Plaintiffs' Motion to Quash the Deposition of l\fichael Smith is hereby denied.

Defendants are entitled to notice Mr. Smith's deposition to take place in Plaintiffs'

chosen forum, New York, New York.

3. Plaintiffs' Motion for a Protective Order Preventing the Deposition of i\la'a Eraiqat is

granted. However, the Court will permit Defendants to submit a request seeking

permission to depose

~fr.

Eraiqat if, after the anticipated 30(b)(6) deposition of i\DCB

and any other ADCB witnesses that may be made available in discovery in this case,
Defendants are able to make an adequate showing that that Mr. Eraiqat possesses
uni(jue, non-duplicative knowledge of relevant facts that Defendants were unable to
obtain through a Rule 30(b)(6) deposition of ADCB or through the testimony of other
ADCB witnesses.

District Judge

Dated: May

) 2011

00~\ ~ 1-, 'UJ \ \