Free Response to Motion - District Court of Federal Claims - federal


File Size: 42.5 kB
Pages: 3
Date: October 19, 2006
File Format: PDF
State: federal
Category: District
Author: unknown
Word Count: 464 Words, 3,303 Characters
Page Size: Letter (8 1/2" x 11")
URL

https://www.findforms.com/pdf_files/cofc/7700/133-1.pdf

Download Response to Motion - District Court of Federal Claims ( 42.5 kB)


Preview Response to Motion - District Court of Federal Claims
Case 1:92-cv-00550-MCW

Document 133

Filed 10/19/2006

Page 1 of 3

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS __________________________________________ ) NORTHEAST SAVINGS, F.A. ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Civil Action No. 92-550C ) Judge Williams UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) ) Defendant. ) __________________________________________) PLAINTIFF'S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT'S NOTICE OF DEPOSITION TESTIMONY COUNTER- AND CROSS-DESIGNATIONS OF MESSRS. BEESLEY, ELLIOTT, GRIDLEY, AND PECKHAM

Pursuant to the Court's ruling from the bench during the October 17 pre-trial conference, Plaintiff Northeast Savings, F.A. ("Northeast") hereby respectfully responds to Defendant's Notice of Deposition Testimony Counter- and Cross-Designations of Messrs. Beesley, Elliott, Gridley, and Peckham ("Defendant's Notice"). Northeast has reviewed the Government's counterdesignations and cross-designations of the deposition testimony given by Messrs. Beesley, Elliott, Gridley, and Peckham. While Northeast believes that some of the Government's designations address subject matters that are different from the subject matters addressed in Northeast's original designations, and that therefore such designations by the Government are not needed to place Northeast's designations into context, Northeast does not object to the Government's designations. Northeast does respectfully submit, however, that if the Court does admit the testimony designated by the Government, it should also admit a few additional excerpts from the Beesley, Elliott, and Gridley depositions that are needed to place the testimony designated by the Government into context. In particular, Northeast has identified the following testimony "which

1

Case 1:92-cv-00550-MCW

Document 133

Filed 10/19/2006

Page 2 of 3

ought in fairness . . . be considered," RCFC 32(a)(4), with the testimony designated by the Government: Brent Beesley 43:1 - 44:6; 45:7 - 45:9 (excerpts attached at Tab 1 of Defendant's Notice) Raymond Elliott Ralph Gridley 12:19 - 13:1(excerpt attached at Tab 2 of Defendant's Notice) 33:4 - 34:23; 44:13 - 45:9 (excerpts attached hereto at Tab 1)

Respectfully submitted,

s/Charles J. Cooper Charles J. Cooper COOPER & KIRK, PLLC 555 Eleventh Street, N.W., Suite 750 Washington, D.C. 20004 (202) 220-9600 (202) 220-9601 (fax) Counsel of Record Of Counsel: Michael W. Kirk Vincent J. Colatriano David H. Thompson David Lehn COOPER & KIRK, PLLC 555 Eleventh Street, N.W., Suite 750 Washington, D.C. 20004 (202) 220-9600 (202) 220-9601 (fax) Dated: October 19, 2006

2

Case 1:92-cv-00550-MCW

Document 133

Filed 10/19/2006

Page 3 of 3

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on this 19th day of October, 2006, copies of the foregoing Plaintiff's Response to Defendant's Notice of Deposition Testimony Counter- and Cross-designations of Messrs. Beesley, Elliot, Gridley and Peckham were filed electronically. Notice of this filing will be sent by operation of the Court's electronic filing system to all parties indicated on the electronic filing receipt. Parties may access this through the Court's system.

/s/ Charles J. Cooper _____________________________ Charles J. Cooper COOPER & KIRK, PLLC 555 Eleventh Street NW Suite 750 Washington, DC 20004 (202) 220-9600 (202) 220-9601 (fax) [email protected]

3