Free Motion for Extension of Time - District Court of Colorado - Colorado

Case 1:03-cv-02462-WYD-PAC

Document 75

Filed 12/27/2005

Page 1 of 4

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Civil Action No. 03-CV-02462 WYD-PAC

BOBBY L. PADILLA Plaintiff, v SAN LUIS CENTRAL RAILROAD COMPANY, Defendant.

STIPULATED MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME IN WHICH TO FINISH DEPOSING HENRY ROTH, MD

DUTY TO CONFER The parties conferred by telephone on December 27, 2005. 1. During the deposition of December 13, 2005 of Henry

Roth, MD at 4:00 P.M., at which Dr. Roth was somewhat unwell, it was discovered that there is a report dated September 28, 2005, Exhibit Three (3) and a "stamped" report of September 19, 2005, both of which plaintiff's counsel did not know about before the deposition of Dr. Roth on December 13, 2005. 2. Plaintiff's counsel only received a copy of the

September 28, 2005, Exhibit Three (3), report after Dr. Roth's deposition ended, but plaintiff's counsel has not yet received

Case 1:03-cv-02462-WYD-PAC

Document 75

Filed 12/27/2005

Page 2 of 4

the "stamped" report, dated September 19, 2005, despite timely sending Exhibit One (1). 3. The last several pages of the report of September 28,

2005 are new opinions and are different from the only report that plaintiff has, which is marked and attached as Exhibit Two (2). 4. The important difference is that in the September 28,

2005 report, apportionment of causation is attempted by Dr. Roth, after Dr. Roth meet with defense counsel on September 28, 2005 for three (3) hours. 5. Again, the September 28, 2005 report, Exhibit Three

(3), was not received until after the Dr. Roth deposition was concluded and there were several reasons why plaintiff could not reopen the deposition and examine Dr. Roth concerning the new report: the first of which was that Dr. Roth was not well; the second of which was it was late in the day; and the third and most important was that there was no time to analyze the attempted, complex apportionment of causation in that surprise, previously undisclosed report of September 28, 2005. 6. What is also very important and what was just found

out after the Dr. Roth deposition is that there is another but separate example of Dr. Roth charging very significant fees for an independent medical examination, as shown by Exhibit Four (4).

2

Case 1:03-cv-02462-WYD-PAC

Document 75

Filed 12/27/2005

Page 3 of 4

7.

The new deposition of Dr. Roth will cover the

September 28, 2005 report, the different and "stamped" report which plaintiff's counsel has yet to receive and the over $13,000.00 charge, Exhibit Four (4), for an independent medical examination by Dr. Roth in a separate case. 8. The deadline for doing Dr. Roth's deposition is

December 31, 2005; however, Dr. Roth has been vacationing since mid-December 2005 and therefore has not been available. 9. By agreement, the following costs of the resumed

deposition during the extended time period shall be divided as follows: The court reporter's appearance fee will be paid by defendant; and The doctor's additional time fee will be paid by plaintiff. 10. It is requested the Subpoena Duces Tecum previously served on the doctor be fully continued to the new, extended date. Respectfully Submitted, s/John A. "Jack" Kintzele_____ John A. "Jack" Kintzele, #1842 Attorney for Plaintiff 1317 Delaware Street Denver, Colorado 80204 Telephone: 303-892-6494 FAX: 303-893-2053 E-mail: [email protected] Attorney for Plaintiff

3

Case 1:03-cv-02462-WYD-PAC

Document 75

Filed 12/27/2005

Page 4 of 4

Certificate of Mailing On this the 27th day of December 2005 a copy of the above was mailed, postage prepaid to: Bobby Padilla P.O. Box 2817 Espanola, NM 87532 On this the 27th day of December 2005 a copy of the above was electronically filed to: Evan S. Lipstein, Esq. 12600 West Colfax Avenue, #C-400 Lakewood, CO 80215 s/John A. "Jack" Kintzele_____ John A. "Jack" Kintzele, #1842

4