Free Objections - District Court of Colorado - Colorado

Case 1:04-cv-01025-ZLW-BNB

Document 105

Filed 11/28/2005

Page 1 of 18

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT IN AND FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Civil Action No.: 04-CV-1025-ZLW-BNB DALE ASMUSSEN, Plaintiff, v. MARVIN WADE, in his individual capacity, and CYNDI LOVELL, in her individual capacity, Defendants.

PLAINTIFF'S OBJECTIONS TO DEFENDANTS' EXHIBITS

The Plaintiff, by and through his counsel of record, respectfully submits the following objections to the defense exhibits listed in the parties' Final Pretrial Order: A. B. C. No objection. No objection. No objection to authenticity. Plaintiff objects to the admissibility of this document

on grounds that it contains hearsay statements which do not conform to an exception to any hearsay rule and is not a record of regularly conducted activity under Fed. R. Ev. 803(6). See also Fed. R. Ev.805. D. E. No objection. Plaintiff objects to the authenticity of this exhibit as it is not what its proponent

claims as required by Fed. R. Ev. 901. Plaintiff objects to the admissibility of this document on grounds that it is hearsay and contains hearsay statements which do not conform to an exception
H:\wpdata\Asmussen\Exhibits Objection.wpd

Case 1:04-cv-01025-ZLW-BNB

Document 105

Filed 11/28/2005

Page 2 of 18

to any hearsay rule and is not a record of regularly conducted activity permissible under Fed. R. Ev. 803(6). See also Fed. R. Ev. 805. Plaintiff objects to the admissibility of this document on grounds that it is not relevant evidence under Fed. R. Ev. 401 and that it should be excluded pursuant to Fed R. Ev. 403. F. Plaintiff objects to authenticity as this document is not what its proponent claims

as required by Fed. R. Ev. 901. Plaintiff objects to the admissibility of this document on grounds that it is hearsay which does not conform to an exception to any hearsay rule and is not a record of regularly conducted activity permissible under Fed. R. Ev. 803(6). Plaintiff objects to the admissibility of this document on grounds that it is not relevant evidence under Fed. R. Ev. 401 and that it should be excluded pursuant to Fed R. Ev. 403. G. No objection to authenticity. Plaintiff objects to the admissibility of this document

on grounds that it is not relevant evidence under Fed. R. Ev. 401. H. No objection, except as to the extraneous remarks on the page, which render the

document inauthentic. If the marks are removed, Plaintiff may withdraw the objection. I. J. No objection. No objection, except as to the extraneous remarks on the page, which render the

document inauthentic. If the marks are removed, Plaintiff may withdraw the objection. K. L. No objection. No objection to authenticity. Plaintiff objects to the admissibility of this document

on grounds that it contains hearsay statements which do not conform to an exception to any hearsay rule and is not a record of regularly conducted activity permissible under Fed. R. Ev. 803(6). Plaintiff objects to the admissibility of this document on grounds that it contains -2-

H:\wpdata\Asmussen\Exhibits Objection.wpd

Case 1:04-cv-01025-ZLW-BNB

Document 105

Filed 11/28/2005

Page 3 of 18

statements which are not relevant evidence under Fed. R. Ev. 401 and 402. M. No objection to authenticity. Plaintiff objects to the admissibility of this document

on grounds that it contains hearsay statements which do not conform to an exception to any hearsay rule and is not a record of regularly conducted activity permissible under Fed. R. Ev. 803(6). Plaintiff objects to the admissibility of this document on grounds that it contains statements which are not relevant evidence under Fed. R. Ev. 401 and 402. N. No objection to authenticity. Plaintiff objects to the admissibility of this document

on grounds that it contains hearsay statements which do not conform to an exception to any hearsay rule and is not a record of regularly conducted activity permissible under Fed. R. Ev. 803(6). Plaintiff objects to the admissibility of this document on grounds that it contains statements which are not relevant evidence under Fed. R. Ev. 401 and 402. O. Objection to authenticity. Plaintiff also objects to the admissibility of this

document on grounds that it contains hearsay statements which do not conform to an exception to any hearsay rule and is not a record of regularly conducted activity permissible under Fed. R. Ev. 803(6). P. Q. No objection. No objection to authenticity. Plaintiff objects to the admissibility of this document

on grounds that it contains hearsay statements which do not conform to an exception to any hearsay rule and is not a record of regularly conducted activity permissible under Fed. R. Ev. 803(6). R. Plaintiff objects that this exhibit is not authentic in that it is missing several pages.

Plaintiff has no objection to the admissibility of the entire Yellow Bus Gazette dated February 14, -3-

H:\wpdata\Asmussen\Exhibits Objection.wpd

Case 1:04-cv-01025-ZLW-BNB

Document 105

Filed 11/28/2005

Page 4 of 18

2002. S. Plaintiff objects that this exhibit is not authentic. Plaintiff objects to the

admissibility of this document on grounds that it contains hearsay statements which do not conform to an exception to any hearsay rule and is not a record of regularly conducted activity permissible under Fed. R. Ev. 803(6). Plaintiff objects to the admissibility of this document on grounds that it contains statements which are not relevant evidence under Fed. R. Ev. 401 and 402. T. U. V. W. No objection. No objection. No objection. Plaintiff objects to the authenticity of this exhibit only insofar as the enclosures are

not attached and therefore the exhibit is incomplete. Plaintiff may withdraw this objection and may withdraw any objection to admissibility of this document if the enclosures referenced are provided for review. X. No objection, except as to the extraneous remarks on the page, which render the

document inauthentic. If the marks are removed, Plaintiff may withdraw the objection. Y. Plaintiff objects to the authenticity of this exhibit as the memo referenced is not

attached and therefore the exhibit is incomplete. Plaintiff objects to the admissibility of this document on grounds that it contains hearsay statements which do not conform to an exception to any hearsay rule, is inherently untrustworthy and is therefore not a record of regularly conducted activity under Fed. R. Ev. 803(6). Without the referenced memo, the exhibit is also irrelevant evidence under Fed. R. Ev. 401and 402 . Plaintiff may withdraw these objections if the memo referenced is identified and provided for review. -4-

H:\wpdata\Asmussen\Exhibits Objection.wpd

Case 1:04-cv-01025-ZLW-BNB

Document 105

Filed 11/28/2005

Page 5 of 18

Z.

Plaintiff objects to the authenticity of this exhibit as the attachments referenced are

not attached and therefore the exhibit is incomplete. Plaintiff objects to the admissibility of this document on grounds that it is hearsay which does not conform to an exception to any hearsay rule, is inherently untrustworthy and is therefore not a record of regularly conducted activity under Fed. R. Ev. 803(6). Without the referenced attachments, the exhibit is also irrelevant evidence under Fed. R. Ev. 401. Plaintiff may withdraw these objections if the memo referenced is identified and provided for review. AA. Plaintiff objects to the authenticity and admissibility of this document as it is not

identified as to source. Plaintiff may withdraw these objections if the memo referenced is identified. AB. AC. No objection. Plaintiff objects to the authenticity and admissibility of this document as it is not

identified as to source(s), it is hearsay and contains hearsay statements not subject to an exception to the hearsay rules. See also Fed. R. Ev. 805. It also contains irrelevant information impermissible under Fed. R. Ev. 401 and 402. Plaintiff may withdraw or revise these objections if the

documents contained in the exhibit are fully identified. AD. AE. AF. No objection. No objection. Objection to authenticity. Plaintiff also objects to the admissibility of this document

on grounds that it is hearsay and contains hearsay statements which do not conform to an exception to any hearsay rule and is not a record of regularly conducted activity permissible under Fed. R. Ev. 803(6). -5-

H:\wpdata\Asmussen\Exhibits Objection.wpd

Case 1:04-cv-01025-ZLW-BNB

Document 105

Filed 11/28/2005

Page 6 of 18

AG.

Plaintiff objects to the authenticity of this exhibit in that it appears to be incomplete.

Plaintiff objects to the admissibility of this exhibit in that it contains documents which are not relevant evidence under Fed. R. Ev. 401 and 402, or which should be excluded under Fed. R. Ev. 403. AH. Plaintiff objects to the authenticity and admissibility of this exhibit in that it appears

to be incomplete and not what the proponent identifies as required by Fed. R. Ev. 901. If the complete exhibit is offered, Plaintiff may withdraw the objection AI. AJ. No objection. Plaintiff objects to the authenticity and admissibility of this exhibit in that it is

incomplete. If the complete board agenda, minutes, and board support information documents are offered, Plaintiff may withdraw the objection. AK. Plaintiff objects to the authenticity of this exhibit in that it is not what the proponent

identifies as required by Fed. R. Ev. 901. If the exhibit is correctly identified, Plaintiff may withdraw the objection. AL. AM. No objection. Plaintiff objects to the authenticity and admissibility of this document as the many

entries are not identified as to source(s), it is and contains hearsay statements which do not conform to an exception to the hearsay rules, and is not a record of regularly conducted activity permissible under Fed. R. Ev. 803 (6). See also Fed. R. Ev. 805. The exhibit also contains

irrelevant information under Fed. R. Ev. 401 and 402. AN. Plaintiff objects to the authenticity of this exhibit. Plaintiff also objects to the

admissibility of this exhibit in that it is irrelevant and contains information and documents which -6-

H:\wpdata\Asmussen\Exhibits Objection.wpd

Case 1:04-cv-01025-ZLW-BNB

Document 105

Filed 11/28/2005

Page 7 of 18

are not relevant evidence under Fed. R. Ev. 401 and 402. AO. Plaintiff objects to the authenticity of this exhibit. Plaintiff also objects to the

admissibility of this exhibit in that it is irrelevant and contains information and documents which are not relevant evidence under Fed. R. Ev. 401 and 402. AP. No objection to authenticity. Plaintiff objects to the admissibility of this exhibit

in that it is irrelevant and contains information and documents which are not relevant evidence under Fed. R. Ev. 401 and 402.

AQ.

No objection to authenticity. Plaintiff objects to the admissibility of this exhibit

in that it is irrelevant and contains information and documents which are not relevant evidence under Fed. R. Ev. 401 and 402. AR. No objection to authenticity. Plaintiff objects to the admissibility of this exhibit

in that it is irrelevant and contains information and documents which are not relevant evidence under Fed. R. Ev. 401 and 402. AS. No objection to authenticity. Plaintiff objects to the admissibility of this exhibit

in that it is irrelevant and contains information and documents which are not relevant evidence under Fed. R. Ev. 401 and 402. AT. No objection to authenticity. Plaintiff objects to the admissibility of this exhibit

in that it is irrelevant and contains information and documents which are not relevant evidence under Fed. R. Ev. 401 and 402. AU. No objection to authenticity. Plaintiff objects to the admissibility of this exhibit

in that it is irrelevant and contains information and documents which are not relevant evidence -7-

H:\wpdata\Asmussen\Exhibits Objection.wpd

Case 1:04-cv-01025-ZLW-BNB

Document 105

Filed 11/28/2005

Page 8 of 18

under Fed. R. Ev. 401 and 402. AV. No objection to authenticity. Plaintiff objects to the admissibility of this exhibit

in that it is irrelevant and contains information and documents which are not relevant evidence under Fed. R. Ev. 401 and 402. AW. No objection to authenticity. Plaintiff objects to the admissibility of this exhibit

in that it is irrelevant and contains information and documents which are not relevant evidence under Fed. R. Ev. 401 and 402. AX. No objection to authenticity. Plaintiff objects to the admissibility of this exhibit

in that it is irrelevant and contains information and documents which are not relevant evidence under Fed. R. Ev. 401 and 402. AY. No objection to authenticity. Plaintiff objects to the admissibility of this exhibit

in that it is irrelevant and contains information and documents which are not relevant evidence under Fed. R. Ev. 401 and 402. AZ. No objection to authenticity. Plaintiff objects to the admissibility of this exhibit

in that it is irrelevant and contains information and documents which are not relevant evidence under Fed. R. Ev. 401 and 402. BA. No objection to authenticity. Plaintiff objects to the admissibility of this exhibit

in that it is irrelevant and contains information and documents which are not relevant evidence under Fed. R. Ev. 401 and 402. BB. No objection to authenticity. Plaintiff objects to the admissibility of this exhibit

in that it is irrelevant and contains information and documents which are not relevant evidence under Fed. R. Ev. 401 and 402. -8-

H:\wpdata\Asmussen\Exhibits Objection.wpd

Case 1:04-cv-01025-ZLW-BNB

Document 105

Filed 11/28/2005

Page 9 of 18

BC.

Objection to authenticity. Plaintiff also objects to the admissibility of this exhibit

in that it is irrelevant and contains information and documents which are not relevant evidence under Fed. R. Ev. 401 and 402, and that any probative value is outweighed by the dangers prohibited by Fed. R. Ev. 403. BD. Plaintiff objects to the authenticity and admissibility of this document as the many

entries are not identified as to source(s), the exhibit contains hearsay statements and irrelevant information prohibited by Fed. R. Ev. 402 and 403. Plaintiff may withdraw or revise these objections if the documents contained in the exhibit are fully identified. BE. Objection to authenticity. Plaintiff also objects to the admissibility of this exhibit

in that it is irrelevant and contains information and documents which are not relevant evidence under Fed. R. Ev. 401 and 402. BF. Plaintiff objects to authenticity on the grounds that this exhibit is not what the

proponent claims as required by F.R.E.901. Many pages are missing, some pages are illegible, and whole years of records are not included in the exhibits. Moreover, the documents are inadmissible to the extent that they are irrelevant or excludable pursuant to Fed R. Ev. 402 and 403. BG. Plaintiff objects to the authenticity and the admissibility of this exhibit. The

documents will cause confusion of the issues, undue delay and waste of time under Fed. R. Ev. 403. Moreover, the exhibit is irrelevant itself and contains irrelevant material prohibited by Fed. R. Ev. 401 and 402, hearsay prohibited by Fed. R. Ev. 802, and statements which do not conform to any exception to the hearsay rules. BH. No objection to authenticity. Plaintiff objects to the admissibility of this exhibit -9-

H:\wpdata\Asmussen\Exhibits Objection.wpd

Case 1:04-cv-01025-ZLW-BNB

Document 105

Filed 11/28/2005

Page 10 of 18

as the deposition transcript constitutes needless presentation of cumulative evidence, will cause confusion of the issues, undue delay and waste of time under Fed. R. Ev. 403. Moreover, the exhibit is irrelevant itself and contains irrelevant material, prohibited by Fed. R. Ev. 401 and 402, hearsay prohibited by Fed. R. Ev. 802, and statements which do not conform to an exception to any hearsay rule. See Fed. R. Ev. 805. BI. No objection to authenticity. Plaintiff objects to the admissibility of this exhibit as

the deposition transcript constitutes needless presentation of cumulative evidence, will cause confusion of the issues, undue delay and waste of time under Fed. R. Ev. 403. Moreover, the exhibit contains irrelevant material prohibited by Fed. R. Ev. 401 and 402, hearsay prohibited by Fed. R. Ev. 802, and statements which do not conform to an exception to any hearsay rule. See Fed. R. Ev. 805. BJ. No objection to authenticity. Plaintiff objects to the admissibility of this exhibit

as the deposition transcript constitutes needless presentation of cumulative evidence, will cause confusion of the issues, undue delay and waste of time under Fed. R. Ev. 403. Moreover, the exhibit contains irrelevant material prohibited by Fed. R. Ev. 401 and 402, hearsay prohibited by Fed. R. Ev. 802, and statements which do not conform to an exception to any hearsay rule. See Fed. R. Ev. 805. BK. No objection to authenticity. Plaintiff objects to the admissibility of this exhibit as

the deposition transcript constitutes needless presentation of cumulative evidence, will cause confusion of the issues, undue delay and waste of time under Fed. R. Ev. 403. Moreover, the exhibit contains irrelevant material prohibited by Fed. R. Ev. 401 and 402, hearsay prohibited by Fed. R. Ev. 802, and statements which do not conform to an exception to any hearsay rule. See -10-

H:\wpdata\Asmussen\Exhibits Objection.wpd

Case 1:04-cv-01025-ZLW-BNB

Document 105

Filed 11/28/2005

Page 11 of 18

Fed. R. Ev. 805. BL. No objection to authenticity. Plaintiff objects to the admissibility of this exhibit as

it is a compilation of many other exhibits constituting needless presentation of cumulative evidence, will cause confusion of the issues, undue delay and waste of time under Fed. R. Ev. 403. Moreover, the exhibit contains irrelevant material prohibited by Fed. R. Ev. 401 and 402, hearsay prohibited by Fed. R. Ev. 802, and statements which do not conform to an exception to any hearsay rule. See Fed. R. Ev. 805. BM. No objection to authenticity. Plaintiff objects to the admissibility of this exhibit

as it is a compilation of many other exhibits constituting needless presentation of cumulative evidence, will cause confusion of the issues, undue delay and waste of time under Fed. R. Ev. 403. Moreover, the exhibit contains irrelevant material prohibited by Fed. R. Ev. 401 and 402, hearsay prohibited by Fed. R. Ev. 802, and statements which do not conform to an exception to any hearsay rule. See Fed. R. Ev. 805. BN. No objection to authenticity. Plaintiff objects to the admissibility of this exhibit

as it is a compilation of many other exhibits constituting needless presentation of cumulative evidence, will cause confusion of the issues, undue delay and waste of time under Fed. R. Ev. 403. Moreover, the exhibit contains irrelevant material prohibited by Fed. R. Ev. 401 and 402, hearsay prohibited by Fed. R. Ev. 802, and statements which do not conform to an exception to any hearsay rule. See Fed. R. Ev. 805. BO. No objection to authenticity. Plaintiff objects to the admissibility of this exhibit as

it is a compilation of many other exhibits constituting needless presentation of cumulative evidence, will cause confusion of the issues, undue delay and waste of time under Fed. R. Ev. 403. -11-

H:\wpdata\Asmussen\Exhibits Objection.wpd

Case 1:04-cv-01025-ZLW-BNB

Document 105

Filed 11/28/2005

Page 12 of 18

Moreover, the exhibit contains irrelevant material prohibited by Fed. R. Ev. 401 and 402, hearsay prohibited by Fed. R. Ev. 802, and statements which do not conform to an exception to any hearsay rule. See Fed. R. Ev. 805. BP. No objection to authenticity. Plaintiff objects to the admissibility of this exhibit as

it is a compilation of many other exhibits and documents constituting needless presentation of cumulative evidence, will cause confusion of the issues, undue delay and waste of time under Fed. R. Ev. 403. Moreover, the exhibit contains irrelevant material prohibited by Fed. R. Ev. 401 and 402, hearsay prohibited by Fed. R. Ev. 802, and statements which do not conform to an exception to any hearsay rule. See Fed. R. Ev. 805. BQ. No objection to authenticity. Plaintiff objects to the admissibility of this exhibit

as it is a compilation of many other exhibits constituting needless presentation of cumulative evidence, will cause confusion of the issues, undue delay and waste of time under Fed. R. Ev. 403. Moreover, the exhibit contains irrelevant material prohibited by Fed. R. Ev. 401 and 402, hearsay prohibited by Fed. R. Ev. 802, and statements which do not conform to an exception to any hearsay rule. See Fed. R. Ev. 805. BR. BS. No objection. Objection to authenticity. Plaintiff also objects to the admissibility of this exhibit

in that it is irrelevant and contains information and documents which are not relevant evidence under Fed. R. Ev. 401 and 402. BT. BU. BV. No objection. No objection. Plaintiff objects to the authenticity and admissibility of this document on grounds -12-

H:\wpdata\Asmussen\Exhibits Objection.wpd

Case 1:04-cv-01025-ZLW-BNB

Document 105

Filed 11/28/2005

Page 13 of 18

that it contains hearsay statements which do not conform to an exception to any hearsay rule and is not a record of regularly conducted activity permissible under Fed. R. Ev. 803(6). Moreover, the document appears to be incomplete. If the complete exhibit is offered, Plaintiff may withdraw the objection. BW. BX. BY. No objection. No objection. No objection to authenticity. Plaintiff objects to the admissibility of this document

on grounds that it is hearsay and contains hearsay which does not conform to an exception to any hearsay rule and is not a record of regularly conducted activity permissible under Fed. R. Ev. 803(6). It should also be excluded pursuant to Fed R. Ev. 403. Plaintiff also objects to the admissibility of this exhibit in that it is irrelevant and contains information which is not relevant evidence under Fed. R. Ev. 401. See also Fed. R. Ev. 805. BZ. CA. CB. CC. No objection. No objection. No objection. Objection to authenticity. Plaintiff also objects to admissibility on grounds that this

document is incomplete. CD. Objection as to authenticity in that this document appears to be part of a larger

document which is not identified. Plaintiff also objects to the admissibility of this document on grounds that it is not relevant evidence under Fed. R. Ev. 401 and that it should be excluded pursuant to Fed R. Ev. 403. Furthermore, the document is hearsay under Fed. R. Ev 801, and contains hearsay statements which do not conform to any exception to the hearsay rules and it is -13-

H:\wpdata\Asmussen\Exhibits Objection.wpd

Case 1:04-cv-01025-ZLW-BNB

Document 105

Filed 11/28/2005

Page 14 of 18

not a record of a regularly conducted activity permissible under Fed. R. Ev. 803(6) as the source of information and circumstances of preparation indicate lack of trustworthiness. Id.. See also Fed. R. Ev. 805. CE. No objection to authenticity. Plaintiff objects to the admissibility of this document

on grounds that it is not relevant evidence under Fed. R. Ev. 401 and that it should be excluded pursuant to Fed R. Ev. 403. CF. Plaintiff objects that this exhibit is not authentic in that it is missing several pages.

Plaintiff has no objection to the admissibility of the entire Yellow Bus Gazette Transportation Newsletter from which this page is taken. CG. No objection to authenticity. Plaintiff objects to the admissibility of this document

on grounds that it is not relevant evidence under Fed. R. Ev. 401 and that it should be excluded pursuant to Fed R. Ev. 403. CH. No objection as to authenticity. Plaintiff objects to the admissibility of this

document on grounds that it contains statements not relevant under Fed. R. Ev. 401 and that portions of the exhibit should be excluded pursuant to Fed R. Ev. 403. Furthermore, the document is impermissible hearsay under Fed. R. Ev 801 and 802, and contains hearsay statements which do not conform to any exception to the hearsay rules. Moreover, under Fed. R. Ev. 803(6) the source of information and circumstances of preparation indicate lack of trustworthiness. Id. See also Fed. R. Ev. 805. CI. Objection as to authenticity, including but not limited to the fact that the document

appears to be a part of another, larger document. Plaintiff also objects to the admissibility of this document on grounds that it is not relevant evidence under Fed. R. Ev. 401 and that it should be -14-

H:\wpdata\Asmussen\Exhibits Objection.wpd

Case 1:04-cv-01025-ZLW-BNB

Document 105

Filed 11/28/2005

Page 15 of 18

excluded pursuant to Fed R. Ev. 403. Furthermore, the document is hearsay and contains hearsay statements which do not conform to any exception to the hearsay rules, and it is not a record of a regularly conducted activity under Fed. R. Ev. 803(6) and the source of information and circumstances of preparation indicate lack of trustworthiness. Id. CJ. Objection to authenticity. Plaintiff also objects to the admissibility of this

document on grounds that it is not relevant evidence under Fed. R. Ev. 401 and that it should be excluded pursuant to Fed R. Ev. 403. Furthermore, the document contains hearsay statements which do not conform to any exception to the hearsay rules, and it is not a record of a regularly conducted activity permissible under Fed. R. Ev. 803(6) and the source of information and circumstances of preparation indicate lack of trustworthiness. Id. CK. Objection to authenticity. Plaintiff also objects to the admissibility of this

document on grounds that it is not relevant evidence under Fed. R. Ev. 401 and that it should be excluded pursuant to Fed R. Ev. 403. Furthermore, the document is hearsay and refers to hearsay statements which do not conform to any exception to the hearsay rules, and it is not a record of a regularly conducted activity under Fed. R. Ev. 803(6) as the source of information and circumstances of preparation indicate lack of trustworthiness. Id. CL. Objection as to authenticity. Plaintiff also objects to the admissibility of this

document on grounds that it is not relevant evidence under Fed. R. Ev. 401 and that it should be excluded pursuant to Fed R. Ev. 403. Furthermore, the document is hearsay under Fed. R. Ev 801 and 802, and contains hearsay statements which do not conform to any exception to the hearsay rules, and it is not a record of a regularly conducted activity permissible under Fed. R. Ev. 803(6) as the source of information and circumstances of preparation indicate lack of trustworthiness. Id. -15-

H:\wpdata\Asmussen\Exhibits Objection.wpd

Case 1:04-cv-01025-ZLW-BNB

Document 105

Filed 11/28/2005

Page 16 of 18

CM.

No objection to authenticity. Plaintiff objects to the admissibility of this document

on grounds that it is not relevant evidence under Fed. R. Ev. 401 and that it should be excluded pursuant to Fed R. Ev. 403. CN. Objection to authenticity. Plaintiff objects to the admissibility of this document on

grounds that it is not relevant evidence under Fed. R. Ev. 401 and that it should be excluded pursuant to Fed R. Ev. 403. Furthermore, the document contains hearsay statements which do not conform to any exception to the hearsay rules, and it is not a record of a regularly conducted activity under Fed. R. Ev. 803(6) and the source of information and circumstances of preparation indicate lack of trustworthiness. Id. CO. Objection to authenticity. Plaintiff objects to the admissibility of this document on

grounds that it is not relevant evidence under Fed. R. Ev. 401 and that it should be excluded pursuant to Fed R. Ev. 403. Furthermore, the document is hearsay and it is not a record of a regularly conducted activity permissible under Fed. R. Ev. 803(6) as the source of information and circumstances of preparation indicate lack of trustworthiness. Id. CP. Objection to authenticity. This document appears to be a part of a larger document

not included in the exhibit. Plaintiff objects to the admissibility of this document on grounds that it is not relevant evidence under Fed. R. Ev. 401 and that it should be excluded pursuant to Fed R. Ev. 403. Furthermore, the document is hearsay and it is not a record of a regularly conducted activity permissible under Fed. R. Ev. 803(6) as the source of information and circumstances of preparation indicate lack of trustworthiness. Id. CQ. Objection to authenticity. Plaintiff objects to the admissibility of this document on

grounds that it is hearsay, is not relevant evidence under Fed. R. Ev. 401 and that it should be -16-

H:\wpdata\Asmussen\Exhibits Objection.wpd

Case 1:04-cv-01025-ZLW-BNB

Document 105

Filed 11/28/2005

Page 17 of 18

excluded pursuant to Fed R. Ev. 403. See also Fed. R. Ev. 805. CR. No objection to authenticity. Plaintiff objects to the admissibility of this document

on grounds that it is not relevant evidence under Fed. R. Ev. 401 and that it should be excluded pursuant to Fed R. Ev. 403. CS. Objection as to authenticity in that this document appears to be part of a larger

document which is not identified. Plaintiff also objects to the admissibility of this document on grounds that it is not relevant evidence under Fed. R. Ev. 401 and that it should be excluded pursuant to Fed R. Ev. 403. Furthermore, the document is hearsay under Fed. R. Ev 801, and contains hearsay statements which do not conform to any exception to the hearsay rules and it is not a record of a regularly conducted activity permissible under Fed. R. Ev. 803(6) as the source of information and circumstances of preparation indicate lack of trustworthiness. Id. See also Fed. R. Ev. 805. CT. Plaintiff objects to the admissibility of this exhibit as it is a reference to and or

compilation of many other exhibits constituting needless presentation of cumulative evidence, will cause confusion of the issues, undue delay and waste of time under Fed. R. Ev. 403. Moreover, the exhibit is irrelevant and contains irrelevant material prohibited by Fed. R. Ev. 401 and 402, is hearsay prohibited by Fed. R. Ev. 802, and constitutes statements which do not conform to any exception to the hearsay rules. CU. Plaintiff reserves the right to object to each exhibit offered by Defendants under this

category as the rules permit. CV. Plaintiff reserves the right to object to each exhibit offered by Defendants under this

category as the rules permit. -17-

H:\wpdata\Asmussen\Exhibits Objection.wpd

Case 1:04-cv-01025-ZLW-BNB

Document 105

Filed 11/28/2005

Page 18 of 18

DATED this 28th day of November, 2005. Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Cathy L. Cooper Cathy L. Cooper, Esq. COLORADO EDUCATION ASSOCIATION 1500 Grant Street Denver, CO 80203 Telephone: 303-837-1500 Facsimile: 303-861-2039 Email: [email protected] CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE (CM/ECF) The undersigned certifies that on the 28th day of November, 2005, the within PLAINTIFF'S OBJECTIONS TO DEFENDANTS' EXHIBITS was filed with the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF system which will send notification of such filing to the following counsel for Defendant via the email address on file with the Court: Matt Ratterman, Esq. Semple, Miller, Mooney & Farrington, P.C. 1120 Lincoln St., Ste. 1308 Denver, CO 80203 Email: [email protected]

/s/ P. J. Morris

H:\wpdata\Asmussen\Exhibits Objection.wpd

-18-