KENGERSKI v. THE ALLEGHENY COUNTY JAIL et al

Filing 186

ORDER. As discussed on the record at the 9/27/2022 final pretrial conference, the Court resolves the following objections to the parties' exhibits. (1) Objections to exhibit nos. 2, 17, 19A, 19B, 20A, 20B, 21, and 22 are sustained. (2) As stated on the record, Plaintiff withdrew his objections to exhibit nos. 29, 30, 32, and 33, except that Plaintiff objects to the authenticity of exhibit no. 30. The Court overrules that objection subject to Defendants laying a foundation for its admissibil ity at trial. (3) The Court sustains Defendant's objection to exhibit no. 36. Plaintiff represented that Warden Harper was not aware of this report, and therefore the exhibit does not relate to what Warden Harper knew at the time of Mr. Kengersk i's termination or the process he undertook in reaching that decision. Daniels v. Sch. Dist. of Philadelphia, 776 F.3d 181, 196 (3d Cir. 2015). Accordingly, the report is not relevant and its probative value is substantially outweighed by the ri sk of unfair prejudice, waste, or confusion. Fed. R. Evid. 403. (4) The Court overrules Plaintiff's objection to exhibit no. 57 without prejudice and subject to Defendant's authenticating the exhibit at trial. (5) As to exhibit nos. 62 and 63, the parties are directed to confer regarding those exhibits as part of the deposition designation process, attempt to resolve any disputes, and raise any unresolved disputes with the Court prior to trial. (6) The Court affirms its decision to exc lude exhibit nos. 65 and 66, pursuant to the Court's Omnibus Order 176 concerning Defendant's motion in limine #5, primarily on the basis of Rule 403. (7) The Court overrules Defendant's objection to exhibit no. 67 without prejudice and subject to Plaintiff's laying a foundation for its admissibility. Signed by Judge J. Nicholas Ranjan on 9/27/2022. (pak)

Case 2:17-cv-01048-NR Document 186 Filed 09/27/22 Page 1 of 22
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA
JEFFREY KENGERSKI,

Civil Action No. 17-1048

Plaintiff,
v.

Judge Nicholas Ranjan

COUNTY OF ALLEGHENY,
Defendant.

JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
JOINT EXHIBIT LIST

Ex.
No.

P/D/Joi
nt
Exhibit

Date

Author

Descript.

1

D

2002-05-06

Kengerski

Acknowledgement of
Receipt of AC Code of
Accountability, Conduct,
and Ethics

2

P

2003
2007
2013

Various
Kengerski
Supervisors;
Latest is
Capt.
McGovern

Kengerski’s performance
evaluations going back to
his time as a Part-Time
C/O

Bates #

Obj.
Auth.

Resp.
Auth.

Obj. Admiss.

Resp.
Admiss.

Court’s Ruling

∆ AC-JK_000685

401, 403 –
receipt of
documents not
relevant,
potentially
confusing
without actual
document

Relevant to
show π’s receipt
and
understanding of
the COC and
supports ∆’s
legitimate nonretaliatory
reasons for
termination: -

∆ AC-JK_000051 000055, 60-65, 6869

Obj. 401, 403
2003 and 2007
Evaluations
conducted
under different
administration;
π was only a
CO and
sergeant at
time of
evaluations
(not Captain)

Records of P’s
Objection is sustained.
satisfactory job
performance are
relevant to his
claims that
defendant’s
reasons for
terminating him
were pretextual

Sustained pursuant to
Court's Order on
Plaintiff's motion in
limine re
acknowledgment sheets
and corresponding brief.

Case 2:17-cv-01048-NR Document 186 Filed 09/27/22 Page 2 of 22
Ex. No.

P/D
Joint

Date

Author

Description

Bates #

Obj.
Auth.

Resp. Auth.

Obj. Admiss.

Resp.
Admiss.

Court’s Ruling

3

Joint

2005-10-30

AC Record

Kengerski Promotion:
Part-Time to Full-Time
C/O

∆ AC-JK_000097

4

D

2005-10-31
(undated)

Kengerski

Acknowledgement of
Receipt of AC Handbook

∆ AC-JK_000657

401, 403 –
receipt of
documents not
relevant,
potentially
confusing
without actual
document.

Relevant to
show π’s
receipt and
understanding
of the
handbook and
supports ∆’s
legitimate nonretaliatory
reasons for
termination:

Sustained pursuant to
Court's Order on
Plaintiff's motion in
limine re
acknowledgment sheets
and corresponding
brief.

5

D

2005-10-31

Kengerski

Acknowledgement of
Receipt of AC Code of
Accountability, Conduct,
and Ethics

∆ AC-JK_000676

401, 403 –
receipt of
documents not
relevant,
potentially
confusing
without actual
document.

Relevant to
show π’s receipt
and
understanding of
the COC and
supports ∆’s
legitimate nonretaliatory
reasons for
termination: -

Sustained pursuant to
Court's Order on
Plaintiff's motion in
limine re
acknowledgment
sheets and
corresponding brief.

Page 2 of 22

Case 2:17-cv-01048-NR Document 186 Filed 09/27/22 Page 3 of 22
Ex. No.

P/D
Joint

Date

Author

Description

Bates #

Obj.
Auth.

Resp. Auth.

Obj. Admiss.

Resp.
Admiss.

Court’s Ruling

6

D

2005-10-31

Kengerski

Acknowledgement of
Receipt of ADHR Policy
and Report Procedure

∆ AC-JK_000677

401, 403 –
receipt of
documents not
relevant,
potentially
confusing
without actual
document.

Relevant to
show π’s
receipt and
understanding
of the Policy
and supports
∆’s legitimate
non-retaliatory
reasons for
termination: -

Sustained pursuant to
Court's Order on Plaintiff's
motion in limine re
acknowledgment sheets and
corresponding brief.

7

D

2005-11-21

Kengerski

Acknowledgement of
Receipt of ADHR Policy
and Report Procedure

∆ AC-JK_000066

401, 403 –
receipt of
documents not
relevant,
potentially
confusing
without actual
document.

Relevant to
show π’s
receipt and
understanding
of the Policy
and supports
∆’s legitimate
non-retaliatory
reasons for
termination: -

Sustained pursuant to
Court's Order on Plaintiff's
motion in limine re
acknowledgment sheets and
corresponding brief.

8

Joint

2007-04-29

AC Record

Kengerski Promotion:
C/O to Sergeant

∆ AC-JK_000094

9

D

2008-01-01

AC Policy

Allegheny County
Employee Handbook

∆ AC-JK_000422 000470

10

Joint

2008-02-20

Ramon
Rustin

ACJ Code of Ethics
Policy 124

∆ AC-JK_000168 000178

Page 3 of 22

Case 2:17-cv-01048-NR Document 186 Filed 09/27/22 Page 4 of 22
Ex. No.

P/D
Joint

Date

Author

Description

Bates #

11

D

2008-06-23

Lance Bohn

Verbal Warning to
Kengerski for Failing to
Report Incident

∆ AC-JK_000389

12

D

2012-01-12

AC Policy

Allegheny County ADHR
Policy

∆ AC-JK_000321000325

13

Joint

2013
(estimate)

Robyn
McCall

Screenshots of messages
sent from Maj. McCall to
Kengerski

∆ AC-JK_001815001828

14

Joint

2014

AC Record

ACJ Organizational Chart

∆ AC-JK_000040

15

Joint

2014-09-21

AC Record

Kengerski Promotion:
Sergeant to Captain

∆ AC-JK_000075

16

Joint

2014-12-14

AC Record

McCall Promotion from
Captain to Major

∆ AC-JK_002034

Obj.
Auth.

Resp. Auth.

Obj. Admiss.

401, 403 – if
Ex. 2 is
deemed
inadmissible.

Page 4 of 22

Resp.
Admiss.
Relevant to
show notice
that π is
aware of
reporting
procedure

Court’s Ruling

Resolved pursuant to
Court's Order on Plaintiff's
motion in limine regarding
disciplinary action.

Case 2:17-cv-01048-NR Document 186 Filed 09/27/22 Page 5 of 22
Ex. No.

17

P/D
Joint
D

Date

2015-03-13

Author

Robyn
McCall

Description

Bates #

Email chain between
McCall and Kengerski re
Taser

π 000353-000358

Obj.
Auth.

Resp. Auth.

Obj. Admiss.

Resp.
Admiss.

401, 403
relevance –
reserve
objection
pending proffer
and/or proper
foundation at
trial.

Relevant to
show actual
state of
occurrences
between
McCall and π
during time he
is accusing her
of
“harassment”
in his alleged
protected
report; π
specifically
refers to the
emails in his
alleged
protected
report that is
central to this
lawsuit and are
part of defense

403 – This is
cumulative.
Propose just
using 357-58
which includes
the entire
chain.

18

Joint

2015-03-15

AC Policy

ACJ Policy #154, Code
of Ethics/Conduct
Required for ACJ
Employees

π 000482 000484

Page 5 of 22

Court’s Ruling

Objection is sustained.

Case 2:17-cv-01048-NR Document 186 Filed 09/27/22 Page 6 of 22
Ex. No.

19A

P/D
Joint
D

Date

2015-03-15

Author

Kengerski

Description

Report re Taser Incident

Bates #

Obj.
Auth.

Resp. Auth.

Obj. Admiss.

401, 403
relevance –
reserve
objection
pending proffer
and/or proper
foundation at
trial

π 000359

Page 6 of 22

Resp.
Admiss.

Court’s Ruling

Relevant to
show actual
Objection is sustained.
state of
occurrences
between
McCall and π
during time he
is accusing her
of
“harassment”
in his alleged
protected
report; π
specifically
refers to the
emails and this
incident in his
alleged
protected
report that is
central to this
lawsuit and are
part of defense

Case 2:17-cv-01048-NR Document 186 Filed 09/27/22 Page 7 of 22
Ex. No.

19B

P/D
Joint
D

Date

2015-03-15

Author

McCall

Description

Email Re Report on
Inspection Assignment

Bates #

Obj.
Auth.

π 000360

Page 7 of 22

Resp. Auth.

Obj. Admiss.

Resp.
Admiss.

401, 403
relevance –
reserve
objection
pending proffer
and/or proper
foundation at
trial

Relevant to
show actual
state of
occurrences
between
McCall and π
during time he
is accusing her
of
“harassment”
in his alleged
protected
report; π
specifically
refers to the
emails and this
incident in his
alleged
protected
report that is
central to this
lawsuit and are
part of defense

Court’s Ruling

Objection is sustained.

Case 2:17-cv-01048-NR Document 186 Filed 09/27/22 Page 8 of 22
Ex. No.

20A

P/D
Joint
D

Date

2015-04-01

Author

Robyn
McCall;
Kengerski;
Others

Description

Email Chain with McCall
re Kengerski Office
Assignment

Bates #

Obj.
Auth.

π 000363

Page 8 of 22

Resp. Auth.

Obj. Admiss.

Resp.
Admiss.

401,403relevance –
reserve
objection
pending proffer
and/or proper
foundation at
trial

Relevant to
show actual
state of
occurrences
between
McCall and π
during time he
is accusing her
of
“harassment”
in his alleged
protected
report; π
specifically
refers to the
emails and this
incident in his
alleged
protected
report that is
central to this
lawsuit and are
part of defense

Court’s Ruling

Objection is sustained.

Case 2:17-cv-01048-NR Document 186 Filed 09/27/22 Page 9 of 22
Ex. No.

20B

P/D
Joint
D

Date

2015-04-01

Author

Robyn
McCall;
Kengerski;
Others

Description

Bates #

Email Chain with McCall
re: vacation scheduling

π 000364-000366

Obj.
Auth.

Page 9 of 22

Resp. Auth.

Obj. Admiss.

Resp.
Admiss.

401,403relevance –
reserve
objection
pending proffer
and/or proper
foundation at
trial

Relevant to
show actual
state of
occurrences
between
McCall and π
during time he
is accusing her
of
“harassment”
in his alleged
protected
report; π
specifically
refers to the
emails and this
incident in his
alleged
protected
report that is
central to this
lawsuit and are
part of defense

Court’s Ruling

Objection is sustained.

Case 2:17-cv-01048-NR Document 186 Filed 09/27/22 Page 10 of 22
Ex. No.

21

P/D
Joint
D

Date

2015-04-22

Author

Robyn
McCall;
Kengerski

Description

Email chain between
Kengerski and McCall re
scheduling access

Bates #

Obj.
Auth.

π 000367

Page 10 of 22

Resp. Auth.

Obj. Admiss.

Resp.
Admiss.

401,403relevance –
reserve
objection
pending proffer
and/or proper
foundation at
trial

Relevant to
show actual
state of
occurrences
between
McCall and π
during time he
is accusing her
of
“harassment”
in his alleged
protected
report; π
specifically
refers to the
emails and this
incident in his
alleged
protected
report that is
central to this
lawsuit and are
part of defense

Court’s Ruling

Objection is sustained.

Case 2:17-cv-01048-NR Document 186 Filed 09/27/22 Page 11 of 22
Ex. No.

22

P/D
Joint
D

Date

2015-04-25

Author

Robyn
McCall;
Robert
Bytner

Description

Email Chain between
McCall and Bytner re
Kengerski’s vacation
changes

Bates #

Obj.
Auth.

Resp. Auth.

Obj. Admiss.

801, 802 –
hearsay

π 000369-000370

401,403relevance –
reserve
objection
pending proffer
and/or proper
foundation at
trial

Page 11 of 22

Resp.
Admiss.

Court’s Ruling

Objection is sustained.
Relevant to
show actual
state of
occurrences
between
McCall and π
during time he
is accusing her
of
“harassment”
in his alleged
protected
report; π
specifically
refers to the
emails and this
incident in his
alleged
protected
report that is
central to this
lawsuit and are
part of
defense; Non
hearsay not
being offered
for the truth –
the emails are
specifically
referred to and
part of the
alleged
protected
report π
submitted

Case 2:17-cv-01048-NR Document 186 Filed 09/27/22 Page 12 of 22
Ex. No.

P/D
Joint

Date

Author

Description

Bates #

23

Joint

2015-04-27

Orlando
Harper

Email to Kengerski req. a
memo re. allegations
against McCall

π 000371

24

D

2015-04-27

Orlando
Harper

Email from Harper to
Kengerski, Suzio, re
printing screenshots

π 000372

25

Joint

2015-04-29

Kengerski

Memo to Warden
Harper re. Major McCall

π 000373 000374

26

Joint

2015-05-05

Robyn
McCall

McCall Email re overdue
Buddy Days

π 000377

27

Joint

2015-05-14

Orlando
Harper

Email between Harper
and Kengerski re
investigating filed
complaint

π 000378

28

Joint

2015-06-08

AC Record

McCall Personnel Form

π MSJ Ex. P9

29

D

2015-07-01

Simon
Wainwright

Notice of hearing to
Kengerski re Buddy Days

∆ AC-JK_000386

Obj.
Auth.

Page 12 of 22

Resp. Auth.

Obj. Admiss.

Resp.
Admiss.

401, 403relevance –
reserve
objection
pending proffer
and/or proper
foundation at
trial

Relevant to
establish ∆
legitimate nonretaliatory
reasons for π
five-day
suspension and
goes to
causation

Court’s Ruling

Objection withdrawn
by Plaintiff.

Case 2:17-cv-01048-NR Document 186 Filed 09/27/22 Page 13 of 22
Ex. No.

30

P/D
Joint
D

Date

2015-07-01

Author

AC Record

Description

Bates #

Kengerski Buddy Day
violations from personnel
file

∆ AC-JK_000105000119

Obj.
Auth.

Resp. Auth.

Obj. Admiss.

Foundation will be
laid at trial

801 – hearsay.
Author/prepar
er is not
identified. NO
business
record
foundation laid.
Even if
business
records,
document
contain
handwriting
from an
unidentified
individual who
is not subject
to cross
examination.
401, 403. - not
relevant.
Documents
are incomplete
(pages are cut
off).

Page 13 of 22

Resp.
Admiss.
Business
Record
contained in
π’s personnel
file also offered
for nonhearsay
purpose of
notice to
County to
support nonretaliatory
business
decision to
suspend π for
Buddy Day
violation –
goes to
causation issue

Court’s Ruling

Objection withdrawn
by Plaintiff except as
to authenticity. That
objection is overruled
subject to Defendant's
laying a foundation at
trial.

Case 2:17-cv-01048-NR Document 186 Filed 09/27/22 Page 14 of 22
Ex. No.

32

P/D
Joint
P

Date

2015-07-14

Author

Kengerski

Description

Incident Report re. Sgt.
Coulter

Bates #

Obj.
Auth.

Resp. Auth.

Obj. Admiss.

Yes
801, 805
401, 403

π 000387

Self-serving
statement
document not
produced by ∆;
Hearsay within
hearsay Best
Evidence Rule
– “post” was
never
produced

33

D

2015-07-14

Simon
Wainwright

Letter detailing
Kengerski’s Buddy Day
suspension

∆ AC-JK_000385

401, 403relevance –
reserve
objection
pending proffer
and/or proper
foundation at
trial

Page 14 of 22

Resp.
Admiss.
Business
record.
Statements of
wainwright and
Bytner are
statements of a
party
opponent.
Admissible to
rebut a charge
of recent
fabrication.
Statements
reported by
Kengersi are
Admissible to
establish the
effect him and
the fact that
the ACJ was
aware of these
incidents.
Relevant to
establish ∆
legitimate nonretaliatory
reasons for π
five-day
suspension and
goes to
causation

Court’s Ruling

Objection withdrawn
by Plaintiff.

Objection withdrawn
by Plaintiff.

Case 2:17-cv-01048-NR Document 186 Filed 09/27/22 Page 15 of 22
Ex. No.

P/D
Joint

Date

Author

Description

Bates #

34

D

2015-08-11

Orlando
Harper

Email from Harper
reminding all of ADHR
Policy

π 000392

35

Joint

2015-08-17

Orlando
Harper;
Kengerski

Email RE return to
Sergeant

π 000395

36

P

2015-08-18

Kengerski

Incident Report re
Officer Tucker –
Kengerski to Bytner

π 000396

39

Joint

2015-09-09

Unknown

Anonymous Letter

Obj.
Auth.

Yes;
County
has
disputed
the
authentici
ty of this
document
since the
personnel
board
hearing;
County
does not
have this
record

∆ AC-JK_001123

Page 15 of 22

Resp. Auth.

Obj. Admiss.

Yes
Hearsay
403;
County was
never in
possession of
this report and
has disputed
that it is a
county record
since the
personnel
board hearing;
Self serving
statement
being used to
establish truth

Resp.
Admiss.

Business
Record. Not
being used to
establish truth
of contents,
used to
establish that P
made the
report.

Court’s Ruling

Sustained. The report
is not relevant and its
probative value is
substantially
outweighed by the
risk of unfair
prejudice, waste, or
confusion. Fed. R.
Evid. 403.

Case 2:17-cv-01048-NR Document 186 Filed 09/27/22 Page 16 of 22
Ex. No.

P/D
Joint

Date

Author

Description

Bates #

Obj.
Auth.

Resp. Auth.

Obj. Admiss.

Resp.
Admiss.

40

P

2015-09-09

Inspector
William
Palmer

Investigator’s Report on
Anonymous Letter

∆ AC-JK_001410001412

Rel 401, 403

Relevant to
establish
Harper’s
knowledge of
factions and
likely
retaliation
against P.

41

P

2015-09-20

Kengerski

Redacted e-mail from
Plaintiff to Jail Personnel

π MSJ Ex. P28

Obj, 801, 403

Not hearsay.
Offered to
show notice to
jail
administration.
Relevant to
show that jail
administration
was aware of
P’s complaints.

Confusing This
is a blank email
with only a
subject line and
no attachments
or explanation

42

Joint

2015-10-08

AC Record

PA 1000 Termination
Report for Robert
Bytner

∆ AC-JK_002028

Page 16 of 22

Court’s Ruling

Report is admissible.
Overrule Defendant's 401,
403 objections.

Admissible. Statement is
not hearsay if offered to
show Plaintiff noticed
recipients. Fed. R. Evid
801(c).

Case 2:17-cv-01048-NR Document 186 Filed 09/27/22 Page 17 of 22
Ex. No.

P/D
Joint

Date

Author

Description

Bates #

43

D

2015-11-01

AC Record

ACJ Captain Job
Description

∆ AC-JK_000375000376

44

Joint

2015-11-20

Kengerski

Incident Report re
Officer Tucker –
Kengerski to
Administration

∆ AC-JK_000367

45

D

2015-11-20

Kengerski

Acknowledgement of
Receipt of ADHR Policy
and Report Procedure

∆ AC-JK_000662

46

D

2015-11-20

AC Record

Sexual Harassment
Training Sign-in Sheet

∆ AC-JK_001405001406

47

D

2015-11-23

Orlando
Harper

Harper email to Nichole
Nagle encl. Tucker sexual
harassment complaint

∆ AC-JK_000421

48

Joint

2015-11-23

Alyssia
Tucker

Incident Report re
Sergeant Brown

∆ AC-JK_000363 –
000364

49

Joint

Undated;
Incident
occurred
2015-11-23

Jason
Batykefer

Incident Report re
Tucker, Brown.

∆ AC-JK_000371

Obj.
Auth.

Resp. Auth.

Yes, Date
unknown.
Cannot
establish
when job
descriptio
n was in
effect.

Will lay a foundation

Page 17 of 22

Obj. Admiss.

401,403

Resp.
Admiss.
Relevant to
show captain’s
role within the
jail; what is
expected of
the position;
supports ∆
legitimate nonretaliatory
justifications
for termination

Court’s Ruling

Admissible. Overrule
Plaintiff's 401, 403
objections.

Case 2:17-cv-01048-NR Document 186 Filed 09/27/22 Page 18 of 22
Ex. No.

P/D
Joint

Date

Author

Description

Bates #

50

Joint

2015-11-24

Alyssia
Tucker

Incident Report re
Kengerski asking Tucker
to say she spoke with
Bytner

∆ AC-JK_000366

51

Joint

2015-11-24

Andrew
Coulter

Incident Report re
Kengerski asking Brown,
Tucker, to say they
spoke with Bytner

∆ AC-JK_000365

52

Joint

2015-11-24

Michael
Brown

Incident Report re
Kengerski asking Brown
to not report
conversation

∆ AC-JK_000370

53

Joint
Assume
P agrees
to use
redated

2015-11-30

Orlando
Harper

Termination Letter

∆ AC-JK_000915

54

D

2015-11-30

AC Record

PA 1000 Termination
Report of Kengerski

∆ AC-JK_000073

55

Joint

2015-12-08

Orlando
Harper

Post-Termination
Hearing Memo

∆ AC-JK_000303

56

Joint

2015-12-14

Orlando
Harper

Harper email to Samuel
Pastor req. footage

∆ AC-JK_001790

Obj.
Auth.

Page 18 of 22

Resp. Auth.

Obj. Admiss.

Resp.
Admiss.

Court’s Ruling

Case 2:17-cv-01048-NR Document 186 Filed 09/27/22 Page 19 of 22
Ex. No.

P/D
Joint

Date

Author

Description

Bates #

57

D

various

AC Record

KRONOS timesheets

∆ AC-JK_001791001794

58

P

2016-01-12

Ct. Reporter

Unemploy. Comp.
Transcript

59

P

2016-03-14

Ct. Reporter

61

D

2019-01-23

Kengerski

Obj.
Auth.
Yes

Resp. Auth.

Resp.
Admiss.

801 – Hearsay
–
401, 403 –
relevance as to
D’s additional
pages.

Business
record being
offered to
show ∆ notice
and what was
relied on in
legitimate nonretaliatory
reasons for
term

π 000722-752

Obj. – Hearsay
these should
have been
designated
excerpts to be
filed with
pretrial
statement

Non-hearsay Statement of a
party
opponent.
Relevant to
show pretext.

π Personnel Hearing
Transcript

π 000568-721

Obj. – Hearsay
these should
have been
designated
excerpts to be
filed with
pretrial
statement

Non-hearsay Statement of a
party
opponent.
Relevant to
show pretext.

Plaintiff’s Responses to
Defendant’s
Interrogatories and
Request for Production
of Documents

Unnumbered

Page 19 of 22

Will lay foundation

Obj. Admiss.

Court’s Ruling

Objection is overruled
subject to Defendant's
laying a foundation at
trial.

Overrule Defendant's
objection. Admissible as
statements of party
opponent or for
impeachment. Fed. R.
Evid. 801(d)(1), (2).
Overrule Defendant's
objection. Admissible as
statements of party
opponent or for
impeachment. Fed. R.
Evid. 801(d)(1), (2).

Case 2:17-cv-01048-NR Document 186 Filed 09/27/22 Page 20 of 22
Ex. No.

P/D
Joint

Date

Author

Description

Bates #

Obj.
Auth.

Resp. Auth.

Obj. Admiss.

Resp.
Admiss.

62

D

2019-02-07

Various

Kengerski Deposition &
exhibits A, C, E, I, J, L, P,
Q, R, S, T, U, V, W, Y, z,
CC, FF, GG, HH

Various

To the extent
that D wants
to use any of
these exhibits,
they should be
listed
separately so
that P can
object to their
admissibility
and/or
relevance
separately
individually.

These are
exhibits that
coordinate
depo
designations in
pre-trial: it
would only
come in at
time particular
designation
was read

63

D

2019-03-21

Ct. Reporter

Video Deposition of
Simon Wainwright &
Exhibits 3, 4, 6, 7, 13, 14

Unnumbered

To the extent
that D wants
to use any of
these exhibits,
they should be
listed
separately so
that P can
object to their
admissibility
and/or
relevance
individually.

These are
exhibits that
coordinate
depo
designations in
pre-trial: it
would only
come in at
time particular
designation
was read

64

P

2018
2019
2020
2021

Kengerski

P W-2’s

π 000562-567

Page 20 of 22

Court’s Ruling

Parties are to confer
as part of deposition
designation process
and resolve disputes,
or else raise disputes
before trial.

Parties are to confer
as part of deposition
designation process
and resolve disputes,
or else raise disputes
before trial.

Case 2:17-cv-01048-NR Document 186 Filed 09/27/22 Page 21 of 22
Ex. No.

P/D
Joint

Date

Author

Description

Bates #

Obj.
Auth.

Resp. Auth.

Obj. Admiss.

65

P

2019-07-25
Unknown

Carl Prine(?)

Voicemail from Tribune
Review Reporter

π 000558

Yes

Yes
401, 403
802; Hearsay
of someone
available; Not
relevant;
speculation –
asking to infer
leaking of
information on
behalf of D

66

P

2019-07-25

Heather
McDonald

Transcript of Voicemail
from Tribune Review
Reporter, π 000558

π MSJ Ex. P39a

Yes

Yes
401, 403
802; Hearsay
of someone
available; Not
relevant;
speculation –
asking to infer
leaking of
information on
behalf of D

Page 21 of 22

Resp.
Admiss.
Relevant to
show that
information
regarding P’s
discipline was
leaked to the
press
immediately
after his
termination.

Court’s Ruling

Resolved pursuant to the
Court's Order on
Defendant's motion in
limine #5, primarily on
basis of Rule 403.

Resolved pursuant to the
Court's Order on
Defendant's motion in
limine #5, primarily on
basis of Rule 403.

Case 2:17-cv-01048-NR Document 186 Filed 09/27/22 Page 22 of 22
Ex. No.

67

P/D
Joint
P

Date

2022

Author

AC Website

Description

List of County Pay

Bates #

None

Obj.
Auth.
Yes
Not
produced/
requested
in
discovery
Unknown
if accurate
Unfair
surprise

Resp. Auth.

Obj. Admiss.

Yes
Hearsay;
403
P Has not
produced
comparative
info. only
produced w-2
info., and only
from 2016-21.
Difference
between gross
wages and w-2
information
not reflected in
this exhibit – P
is not
prejudiced
already
included
comparator
information in
original pretrial

Page 22 of 22

Resp.
Admiss.
I don’t
understand the
objection.

Court’s Ruling

Objection is overruled
without prejudice.