Free Letter - District Court of Connecticut - Connecticut

m1 .ll1t ..___....____....r__rml--._..a_..._l1_____,-_mrm_._l.m
¤ ‘ Case 3:03-cv-00986-JCH Document 106 Filed 07/08/2005 Page 1 of 3
Paul, Haskin s, Janufsky Siqgwt Gm mz
1055 Washingt QBEEI _+ a
Atrormevs telephone 203 40%@g`5§imile 33 03-1 ,p:il1Ihastings.c0m
mi JUL ‘lnu§\iui‘ -@ t¤> s= 22
¤;;s~¤:».~2t;&i. J1-·*Za?i.i%lQ ilétiih ai r=
/. ` ;;`_e;_ time iaefixa-~ it -· -
,_ n 1..2 l»uE:•..i.. .t
Mama (203) 961-7477
gfuggls [email protected]
Hung Kong
UMD'] july 6, 2005 28309.00004
Los Angefes
New Yetk
§,§€§’“ “"““” via OVERNIGHT MAIL
San Diego K
Sa" F'“"F'S°° The Honorable janet C. Hall, U.S.DJ.
Shanghai . . . t
Stamigrd United States D1SKf1Cf Court (
Tekyel District of Connecticut 1
WaSh'"gm"· D9 915 Lafayette Boulevard
Bridgeport, CT 06604
Re: Satan E. Weed 22. .S`c;mpm Ea·e@z Tmcfzag Carp.
Docket No. 3:03~CV—986 ()CI-1)
Dear judge Hall: A
We write in response to the Court’s direction at the pre-trial conference of june 28th
concerning Defendant’s sunimary of Brian Ricker’s expected trial testimony and the issue
of whether plaintiff has made the requisite showing that certain witnesses (Messrs. Barth, (
Stowe and Pardoe) be allowed to testify via satellite. '
We anticipate that Brian Rickers will testify about his observations of the incident that
occurred between Plaintiff and Mr. Howley in]une 2001, his conversations with Plaintiff
regarding her employment at Sempra, his statements to Sempra employees about Plaintiff, 1
Plaintiffs `ob erformance in the Natural Gas de artment and Petroleum Derivatives
l P . 1... 1 P
department, and his interactions with Plaintiff.
l
Also, in the parties joint pre—tria1 memorandum, plaintiff indicated that she intended to file
a motion in limine requesting that certain previously undisclosed witnesses be allowed to
testify via satellite. kjoint Pre—Trial Mem. at 8. To date, plaintiff has not filed such a
motion, nor has she articulated what are the "compelling circumstances" that prevent
these witnesses from appearing in person. @5; Fed.R.Civ.P. 43(a) (allowing remote l
testimony via satellite only “for good cause shown in cempefbrgg n·`rcz¢rmt¢znccf’) (emphasis
added).1
I & U.S. v. Gigante, 166 F .3d 75, 80 (2d Cir. 1999) ("the use of remote, c1osed—circuit
television testimony must be carefully circumscribed[.]"); Murphy v. Tivoli Enter., 953
F.2d 354, 359 (8th Cir. 1992) (excluding telephone testimony from trial and stating that
exceptions to Rule 43(a) should be interpreted narrowly "because of the importance of a
party’s right to cross—examine and impeach witnesses"); Gulino v. Bd. of Ed., No. 96 Civ. l
8414(CBM), 2002 WL 32068971, at *1 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 31, 2003) (denying request for 1
eww sr·¤··=·:= :.<¢
meas.; ......r-..---...,.r ,.__,, __ , ` e ·
;.—.a:e.aa.a,a,.;,`_..; -._ .. V
H - ~ ··-- Q ea-.a~».a

h= F = t were ee are ae 3
».....e ......x...-..-..._., .__,,__, , _ 5 · e
;.—.a;».aa.»;e.ar.:,I-_..t -._ .. _

F i Case 3:03-cv-00986-JCH Document 106 Filed 07/08/2005 Page 2 of 3
Paul Hastings
ATTORNEYS
The Honorable janet C. Hall, U.S.D.).
july 6, 2005 .
Page 2
Further, "[t]he Supreme Court has recognized ‘a preference for live testimony’ because
cross-examination is the greatest legal engine ever invented for the discovery of truth."’
U.S. v. Delvi, 275 F. Supp. 2d 412, 417 (S.D.N.Y. 2003) (quoting White v. Illinois, 502
_ U.S. 346, 356 (1992)) (internal quotation marks omitted).; Only by having the witnesses l
appear in person, will the Court be able to effectively observe the demeanor of Messrs.
Barth, Stowe and Pardoe. These witnesses’ demeanor are particularly important i
here because plaintiff did not previously disclose these individuals as potential witnesses in (
this case.
In the interest of a full and fair trial, if the Court permits Gary Barth, David Stowe, )
jonathan Pardoe to testifyz, Sempra respectfully urges the Court to require them to appear
in person at the trial.
—.?¤—.%r—._.m.___ l
video testimony because “there is no legally sufficient reason offered as to why the request 1
should be granted”); Dagen v. CFC Group Holdings, Ltd., No. 00 Civ. 5682(CBM), 2003 i
WL 22533425, at *1 (stating that requests for remote testimony “should not be granted ,
lightly"); U.S. v. Delvi, 275 F. Supp. 2d 412, 417 (S.D.N.Y. 2003) (quoting White v. (
Illinois, 502 U.S. 346, 356 (1992)) (internal quotation marks omitted) ("The Supreme
Court has recognized ‘a preference for live testimony’ because cross-examination is the
greatest legal engine ever invented for the discovery of truth."’); RLS Assoc., LLC v. The
United Bank of Kuwait PLC, No. 01 Civ. 1290 (CSH), 2005 WL 578917, at *7 (S.D.N.Y.
Mar. 11, 2005) ("There is a strong preference for live testimony being recognized by the
courts, as it provides the trier of fact the opportunity to observe the demeanor of the
witness"); Fed. R. Civ. R. 43(a), Advisory Comm. Notes to 1996 Amendment (as the
Advisory Committee observed: "The importance of presenting live testimony in court
cannot be forgotten. The very ceremony of trial and the presence of the factfinder may
exert a powerful force for truthtelling.").
2 RLS Assoc., LLC v. The United Bank of Kuwait PLC, No. 01 Civ. 1290 (CSH), 2005
WL 578917, at *7 (S.D.N.Y. Mar. 11, 2005) (“There is a strong preference for live
testimony being recognized by the courts, as it provides the trier of fact the opportunity to
observe the demeanor of the witness."); Fed. R. Civ. R. 43(a), Advisory Comm. Notes to
1996 Amendment (as the Advisory Committee observed: "The importance of presenting
live testimony in court cannot be forgotten. The very ceremony of trial and the presence
of the factfinder may exert a powerful force for truthtelling.").
3 Currently pending before the Court is I)efendant’s Motion in Limine to Excluded
Evidence of Undisclosed Witnesses. J

J _ Case 3:03-cv-00986-JCH Document 106 Filed 07/08/2005 Page 3 of 3
Paul Hastings
ATTORNEYS
The Honcxablejanet C. Hall, U.S.DJ.
july 6, 2005
Page 3
Sincerely, _`v___
Ra d W. Bertxamd
for PAUL, HASTINGS, ]ANOFSKY & WALKER LLP
RWB/emc
l . cc: Brendan O’R0uxkc, Esq. (via overmight mail)
STM/299451.2