Falise v. the American Tobacco Company

Full title: ROBERT A. FALISE, LOUIS KLEIN, JR., FRANK MACCHIAROLA, CHRISTIAN E…

Court: United States District Court, E.D. New York

Date published: Dec 27, 2000

CV 99-7392 (E.D.N.Y. Dec. 27, 2000)

Opinion

CV 99-7392

December 27, 2000

MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

JACK B. WEINSTEIN, Senior District Judge.

The parties cross move with respect to designations of video deposition testimony of Dr. Arthur Furst and Paul Kotin. They have marked the transcripts with various colored inks to show proposed readings and objections. The following constitutes the courts rulings:

Paul Kotin See rulings on attached Appendix A. In addition pages 41-45 are excluded; the Doctor's current reaction to events years ago is not relevant; the jury can draw its own conclusions from the documents. Pages 67-69 are allowed. Pages 72-73 are excluded.

Arthur Furst See rulings on attached Appendix B.

SO ORDERED.

FALISE v. ATC, ET AL. 99-CV-7392 (JBW) (E.D.N.Y.) DEFENDANTS' DESIGNATIONS — PAUL KOTIN

Falise v. ATC July 7, 2000 October 30, 2000

Paul Kotin 7/16/00 7/7/00 Plaintiffs' Objections to Original Plaintiffs' Counter 10/30/00 Designations Designations From To From To Page/Line Page/Line Page/Line Page/Line 5:4 5:8 5:17 5:19 6:9 9:4 9:9 9:15 25:6 25:12 25:14 25:23 26:01 26:12 Rule 106: Incomplete Testimony 26:16 26:18 Rule 106: Incomplete Testimony 26:13 26:15 26:20 26:24 27:01 27:04 27:07 27:24 28:01 28:03 28:11 28:17 28:19 28:24 29:01 29:24 Rule 106: Incomplete Testimony 30:1 30:3 37:20 37:24 38:01 38:01 38:04 38:14 Rule 701 Impermissible opinion 38:15 39:14 107:18 107:24 108:01 108:24 109:01 109:11 110:21 110:24 Rule 701 Impermissible opinion 111:01 111:18 Rule 701 Impermissible opinion 111:22 111:24 Rule 402 Relevance, Rule 403 Prejudice 112:01 112:24 Rule 402 Relevance, Rule 403 Prejudice 113:01 113:07 Rule 402 Relevance, Rule 403 Prejudice, Rule 602 Lack of Knowledge 113:21 113:23 Rule 402 Relevance, Rule 602 113:08 113:20 Speculation 113:24 114:08 114:09 114:17 Rule 402 Relevance, Rule 701 Impermissible opinion 114:23 114:24 Rule 402 Relevance, Rule 701 Impermissible opinion 115:01 115:24 Rule 402 Relevance, Rule 701 Impermissible opinion 116:24 116:24 Rule 701 Impermissible opinion, Rule 403 Prejudice, Rule 402 Relevance 117:01 117:24 Non-responsive monologue / colloquy (117:13-15); Rule 402 Relevance, Rule 701 Impermissible opinion 118:01 118:24 Rule 402 Relevance, Rule 701 Impermissible opinion 119:01 119:16 Rule 602 Lack of Knowledge, Rule 402 Relevance, Rule 701 Impermissible opinion 119:19 119:21 Rule 402 Relevance, Rule 701 Impermissible opinion 120:03 120:16 Rule 402 Relevance, Rule 701 Impermissible opinion 120:20 120:24 Rule 602 Lack of knowledge, Rule 402 Relevance, Rule 701 Impermissible opinion 121:01 121:02 Rule 602 Lack of Knowledge, Rule 402 Relevance, Rule 701 linpermissible opinion 121:08 121:24 Rule 402 Relevance, Rule 701 Impermissible opinion, Rule 403 Prejudice 122:01 122:19 Rule 402 Relevance, Rule 701 Impermissible opinion, Rule 403 Prejudice, Rule 602 Lack of Knowledge 123:14 123:24 Rule 802 Hearsay 124:01 124:13 Rule 802 Hearsay, Rule 701 Impermissible opinion 124:19 124:24 125:01 125:24 126:01 126:19 Rule 602 Lack of Knowledge 126:20 127:04 127:05 127:24 128:01 128:04 128:14 128:24 129:01 129:07 130:11 130:24 131:01 131:13 131:17 131:24 Rule 802 Hearsay 132:01 132:24 Rule 802 Hearsay, Rule 701 Impermissible opinion 137:01 137:24 Rule 701 linpermissible opinion, (137:824) 138:01 138:24 Rule 701 Impermissible opinion 140:01 140:09 Rule 402 Relevance 140:21 140:24 141:01 141:24 Rule 802 Hearsay 142:01 142:09 Rule 802 Hearsay, Rule 701 142:10 142:18 Impermissible opinion 152:22 152:24 153:01 153:12 153:18 153:24 154:1 154:10 154:23 154:24 155:01 155:24 156:11 156:13 156:18 157:4 157:05 157:24 Rule 602 Lack of Knowledge (157:7- 13); Rule 402 Relevance (157:18-24); Rule 701 Impermissible opinion 158:11 158:24 159:01 159:24 160:01 160:24 Rule 701 Impermissible Opinion (160:12- 19) 161:01 161:03 161:13 161:19 162:11 162:24 163:01 163:02 163:3 163:5 163:06 163:24 164:01 164:24 165:01 165:12 165:23 165:24 166:01 166:24 167:01 167:24 168:01 168:06 168:21 170:12 170:15 170:20 170:21 170:24 Rule 602 Lack of Knowledge 171:1 171:3 171:11 172:19 174:05 174:09 Rule 602 Lack of Knowledge, Rule 106: 172:20 174:04 Incomplete testimony 185:01 185:24 Noerr Pennington 186:01 186:24 187:01 187:24 188:01 188:09 188:18 188:24 189:01 189:03 189:11 189:24 192:22 192:24 193:01 193:24 194:01 194:02 191:4 192:17 194:3 195:9 195:11 195:22 195:23 195:24 196:01 196:15 197:05 197:24 198:01 198:13 198:14 198:24 199:1 199:8 199:09 199:16 200:04 200:16 200:17 200:19 200:20 200:24 201:01 201:17 201:24 202:13 202:14 202:24 203:01 203:14 203:20 203:24 204:01 204:24 205:01 205:24 206:01 206:05 206:6 206:9 206:10 206:24 207:01 207:08 207:16 207:24 208:01 208:09 209:17 209:24 210:01 210:24 211:01 211:22 211:24 211:24 212:01 212:12 213:16-19 245:02 245:05 Rule 402 Relevance 245:17 245:19 Rule 402 Relevance 246:10 246:25 247:01 247:25 248:01 248:24 249:04 249:25 Rule 402 Relevance 250:01 250:08 Rule 402 Relevance 251:13 251:25 Rule 402 Relevance 252:18 252:25 Rule 402 Relevance 253:01 253:05 Rule 402 Relevance 253:14 253:25 Rule 402 Relevance, Misleading (7/13/2000 order) 255:02 255:09 67:10 68:23 69:2 69:22 69:24 69:24 72:19 72:22 73:1 73:14 219:21 220:1 256:03 256:11 256:15 256:25 Rule 402 Relevance 257:01 257:24 Argumentative, Rule 402 Relevance 353:3 353:17 353:21 354:4 355:24 356:3 356:9 356:23 357:1 357:1 365:20 365:24 366:3 366:10 366:13 366:21 258:06 258:25 Argumentative, Rule 402 Relevance 259:01 259:25 Argumentative, Rule 402 Relevance 260:1 260:3 261:6 261:22 374:3 375:10 261:23 261:25 262:01 262:09 262:17 262:25 263:01 263:03 263:4 263:17 263:19 263:19 264:20 264:25 265:01 265:17 265:19 265:25 266:01 266:08 266:9 266:16 267:5 267:16 268:03 268:16 269:05 269:18 269:19 270:1 270:02 270:11 271:19 271:25 272:01 272:04 Rule 402 Relevance 328:12 328:18 Rule 402 Relevance 328:24 328:25 Rule 402 Relevance 329:01 329:06 Rule 402 Relevance 329:09 329:14 Rule 402 Relevance 329:15 329:17 Rule 402 Relevance 329:19 329:21 Rule 402 Relevance 329:23 329:25 Rule 402 Relevance 330:04 330:10 Rule 402 Relevance 330:14 330:15 Rule 402 Relevance 330:17 330:25 Rule 402 Relevance 331:01 331:01 Rule 402 Relevance 331:03 331:11 Rule 402 Relevance 331:21 331:21 Rule 402 Relevance 331:23 331:25 Rule 402 Relevance 332:01 332:23 Rule 402 Relevance 333:19 334:3 338:17 338:25 339:01 339:08 339:15 339:25 Rule 602 Lack of Knowledge 340:04 340:16 353 355 356 357 365 366 374 375

FALISE v. ATC, ET AL. 99-CV-7392 (JBW) (E.D.N.Y.) DEFENDANTS' DESIGNATIONS — ARTHUR FURST

Arthur Furst Falise v. ATC Plaintiffs' Objections to Plaintiffs' Counter- 3/1-2/00 Original Designations Designations From To From To Page/Line Page/Line Page/Line Page/Line 24:8 24:21 150:15 158:4 158:15 172:4 Rule 602 Lack of Knowledge (159:16-160:1) 172:8 181:15 Rule 602 Speculation (179:3-6), Rule 402 Relevance (179:3-6, 179:15-22, 180:8-19), Duplicative (179:15-22), Rule 802 Hearsay (181:8-11) 182:5 183:18 Non-responsive "monologue/colloquy (182:19- 183:18), Rule 402 Relevance (182:19-183:18) 184:10 188:5 189:5 192:21 193:5 193:25 Exhibit 3 Curriculum Vitae of Arthur Furst, Ph.D. 55:16 57:23 58:1 58:7 58:19 60:18 60:22 61:4 208:2 208:11 209:10 209:15 210:5 210:19 259:10 259:24