Opinion
19-14100-CIV-MARTINEZ-MAYNARD
05-17-2022
JONATHAN HUFF, as the Administrator of the Estate of the Decedent, PAMELA M. HUFF, Plaintiff, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant.
MAYNARD, MAGISTRATE JUDGE
OMNIBUS ORDER
JOSE E. MARTINEZ, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
THIS MATTER is before the Court on the parties' Joint Motion for Permission to Bring Electronic Equipment into Federal Courthouse Building, (ECF No. 108); Motion to Allow Testimony of Physicians and Witness by Video Deposition in Lieu of in Person Testimony at Trial, (ECF No. 106); Motion to Use Deposition at Trial, (ECF No. 65); and Appendix I, Deposition Designations, (ECF No. 111). After careful consideration, it is hereby
ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows:
1. Plaintiff seeks to introduce at trial certain excerpts of testimony from Katherine Turco, Dr. David Arango, and Dr. Carl Lavin via their recorded video deposition. The Government does not oppose introducing at trial the testimony of Ms. Turco and Dr. Arango via video deposition. Accordingly, their testimony, as identified in Exhibit A attached to this Order, may be introduced at trial via deposition. The Court advises Plaintiff to appropriately edit the video deposition recordings so that only the designated testimony is played at trial. As to the deposition testimony of Dr. Lavin, the Government opposes the introduction of his testimony because Dr. Lavin is not “unavailable” under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 32(a)(4)(B). Indeed, it appears Dr. Lavin is available under Rule 32(a)(4)(B) because his office is less than one hundred miles from Alto Lee Adams, Sr. U.S. Courthouse where the trial in this matter will take place. Accordingly, the Court denies, without prejudice, Plaintiffs request to introduce Dr. Lavin's testimony via deposition. Plaintiff has not met his burden of showing Dr. Lavin's unavailability to testify at trial in person or via Zoom. For the foregoing reasons, Plaintiffs' Motion to Allow Testimony of Physicians and Witness by Video Deposition, (ECF No. 111), is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part as stated herein; and Plaintiffs Motion to Use Deposition at Trial, (ECF No. 65), is GRANTED as stated herein.
2. The parties' Joint Motion for Permission to Bring in Electronic Equipment, (ECF No. 108), is DENIED without prejudice. The parties may file a renewed motion identifying which non-attorneys seek to bring equipment into the courthouse and what specific equipment they seek to bring into the courthouse. The parties shall file their renewed motion on or before close of business (5:00 p.m.) on Wednesday, May 18, 2022.
DONE AND ORDERED.