From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Spearman Corp. Marysville Div. v. The Boeing Co.

United States District Court, Western District of Washington
Feb 15, 2023
2:20-cv-00013 RSM (W.D. Wash. Feb. 15, 2023)

Opinion

2:20-cv-00013 RSM

02-15-2023

SPEARMAN CORPORATION MARYSVILLE DIVISION and SPEARMAN CORPORATION KENT DIVISION, Plaintiffs, v. THE BOEING COMPANY, Defendant. THE BOEING COMPANY, Counterclaim and Third- Party Plaintiff, v. SPEARMAN CORPORATION and SPEARMAN CORPORATION KENT DIVISION, Counterclaim Defendant ALEXANDER SPEARMAN, an individual, Third-Party Defendant.

LANE POWELL PC David Schoeggl, WSBA No. 13638 Callie A. Castillo, WSBA No. 38214 Attorneys for Plaintiffs PERKINS COIE LLP David J. Burman, WSBA No. 10661 Susan E. Foster, WSBA No. 18030 Nicholas P. Gellert, WSBA No. 18041 David S. Steele, WSBA No. 45640 Attorneys for Defendant / Counterclaimant The Boeing Company MURPHY PEARSON BRADLEY & FEENEY Nicholas C. Larson, WSBA No. 46034 Merri N. Engler, pro hac vice Attorneys for Counterclaim Defendants Spearman Corporation and Alex Spearman


NOTE ON MOTION CALENDAR: Tuesday, February 14, 2023

LANE POWELL PC

David Schoeggl, WSBA No. 13638

Callie A. Castillo, WSBA No. 38214

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

PERKINS COIE LLP

David J. Burman, WSBA No. 10661

Susan E. Foster, WSBA No. 18030

Nicholas P. Gellert, WSBA No. 18041

David S. Steele, WSBA No. 45640

Attorneys for Defendant / Counterclaimant The Boeing Company

MURPHY PEARSON BRADLEY & FEENEY

Nicholas C. Larson, WSBA No. 46034

Merri N. Engler, pro hac vice

Attorneys for Counterclaim Defendants Spearman Corporation and Alex Spearman

STIPULATED

MOTION FOR IN LIMINE RULINGS

AND ORDER

ORDER

RICARDO S. MARTINEZ UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.

The parties, through their respective counsel, hereby stipulate and jointly move that no party will offer or present evidence, interrogate a witness about, or infer, suggest, or argue on any of the following without first seeking leave from the Court or that are included in the jury instructions:

1. A legally prohibited “Golden Rule” argument.
2. An expert witness's other affiliations with counsel on unrelated matters.
3. A party's use, if any, of jury consultants or jury study or focus groups to assist with trial preparation, jury selection, or trial.
4. The appropriateness of a party invoking the protection of any privilege, including the presence of privileged redactions on an exhibit introduced into evidence.
5. The size of any law firm representing any party; other matters handled by the law firms or their lawyers; other clients of the law firms or their lawyers; or the wealth or resources of any law firm, their lawyers, or any expert witness retained by any party in this case.
6. That the judge or an appellate court may have a right, duty, or ability to later change the ultimate verdict of the jury in this cause or to review the verdict in any manner.
7. Any parties' motives in pursuing their claims in this case, including the potential need to pursue litigation to cover unrelated debts.
8. That Boeing's termination for convenience of the -907 / -908 parts was in breach of the parties' agreement, inappropriate or unfair.

The parties also stipulate to and jointly move that the court approve the following procedural matters:

9. All fact witnesses shall be excluded from the courtroom until excused following their testimony until closing argument, with the exception of Alex Spearman and a single Boeing representative (to be determined) who can be present as party
representatives throughout trial. The parties' respective retained expert witnesses who may still testify (Dreikorn, Wagner, Carter, Barrick and Tregillis) are not excluded.
10. Any substantive (as opposed to illustrative) deposition exhibit to which counsel applied highlighting will be replaced by a clean copy of the document, unless the parties agree to the highlighting or the Court orders it for the sake of efficiency.
11. Deposition testimony shall not be read or presented during opening statement unless the presenting party included that testimony in pretrial designations and all objections to the testimony have been resolved.
12. The parties will make a good faith effort to provide least three days' notice to the Court and the other side of each witness to be called to testify and the anticipated order in which witnesses will be presented.
13. When video or transcripts from depositions are presented to the jury, in addition to removing testimony to which objections are sustained, the parties will remove all objections or responses to objections from the subject matter presented to the jury, to the extent practicable.

ORDER

Based on the above Stipulated Motion, the Court does hereby ORDER:

The Stipulated Motion is granted.


Summaries of

Spearman Corp. Marysville Div. v. The Boeing Co.

United States District Court, Western District of Washington
Feb 15, 2023
2:20-cv-00013 RSM (W.D. Wash. Feb. 15, 2023)
Case details for

Spearman Corp. Marysville Div. v. The Boeing Co.

Case Details

Full title:SPEARMAN CORPORATION MARYSVILLE DIVISION and SPEARMAN CORPORATION KENT…

Court:United States District Court, Western District of Washington

Date published: Feb 15, 2023

Citations

2:20-cv-00013 RSM (W.D. Wash. Feb. 15, 2023)