Gaza, Anne
From: Gaza, Anne
Sent: Monday, March 19, 2007 5;€3 PM
To: Dick Kirk; Coitreii, Frederick; Jaclyn M Mason; jbove@cb§h com; jheEsman@cbin com
Cc: Christensen, Cass; meridethf@gtIaw com; hov@g€iaw com; §
While we had hoped to not have to burden the Court with an issue we believe was squarely
addressed by Ms. Ho’s declaration, we will plan to discuss these issues with the Special
Master this eveningi
Best regards,
Anne
Anne Shea Gaza, Esquire
RICHARDS, LAYTON s FINGER
Phone: {302) 651-7539
[email protected]
——-—— Original Message ———-—
From: Dick Kirk {mailto:rkirk@bayardfirmNcom]
Sent: Monday, March ls, 2007 $:06 PM
To: Gaza, Anne; Cottrell, Frederick; Jaclyn Mi Mason; [email protected]; jheisman@cblhicom
Cc: Christenson, Cass; meridethf@gtlawicom; hov@gtlaw,com; krietzmanm@gtlaw,com
Subject: RE: LG.Philips LCD Cor, Ltd. vi Tatung Company, et ali, CMA. Non 0%~343»JJ?
Anne:
We think that with depositions continuing it would be useful to get the Special Master's
guidance. Ms. Ho's declaration does not completely answer our concerns, If you feel that
you need to bring parts of the Kim deposition to the Special Master‘s attention, I believe
he has the entire transcript already,
Dick Kirk
——-—— Original Message —————
From: Gaza, Anne [mailto:gaza@RLF com]
Sent: Monday, March 19, 2007 4:23 PM
To: Dick Kirk; Cottrell, Frederick; Jaclyn M. Mason; [email protected]; [email protected]
Cc: Christenson, Cass; [email protected]; [email protected]; krietzmanm@gtlaw`com
Subject: RE: LG.Philips LCD Co,, Ltdi v. Tatung Company, et ali, C.Ai
No. 04-343—JJF
Importance: High
Dick,
Having reviewed your email below, we believe that you are generally correct in your
understanding of deposition practice in Delawarei Even in Delaware, however, we sometimes
will go beyond merely "objection as to form" and add something short like: compound
question, asked and answered etci... However, we agree that any comments made by the
defending attorney must be very short and that coaching a witness is strictly prohibited.
Notably, Mr. Bono has engaged in a practice of making numerous objections where he goes
beyond merely stating "Objection, Form" while defending LPL witnessesn See, e.g , 2/28
Kim transcript, pages 10-27,
Of course, when discussions happen between counsel and the witness during breaks in a
deposition, if the witness is being coached or asked to change answers, then the court may
allow questions into what was actually discussed between counsel and the witness during
the break.
1
Case 1:04-cv—OO343-JJF Document 593-3 Filed O3/19/2007 Page 2 of 3
That was not the case, however, during Mr. Kevin Ho's deposition and I have attached a
declaration from Valerie Ho addressing the circumstances surrounding her instruction to
Mr. Ho that he not answer a particular question posed to him by Mr. Christensen.
In light of Msn Valerie Ho’s declaration, we request that you withdraw your objections to
Mr. Ho's deposition and cancel the hearing for this evening. Given the timing, please let
me know whether you will withdraw your objections by 5 p.m. EST so that we can take
appropriate steps, if necessary, to put the complete record before the Special Master,
including, but not limited to, Mr. Eono's behavior during the deposition of Mr. Kim.
I look forward to hearing from you.
Best regards,
Anne
Anne Shea Gaza, Esquire
RICHARDS, LAYTON & FINGER
Phone: (302) 65l~7539
[email protected]
Richards, Layton and Finger, P.A. is not providing any advice with respect to any federal
tax issue in connection with this matter.
The information contained in this e-mail message is intended only for the use of the
individual or entity named above and may be privileged and/or confidential. if the reader
of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notiried that any
unauthorized dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly
prohibited by law. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately
notify us by return e—mail or telephone (3U2~G5lw770G) and destroy the original message.
Thank you.
From: Dick Kirk [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Monday, March l9, 2007 11:33 AM
To: Cottrell, Frederick; Gaza, Anne; Jaclyn M. Mason; [email protected]; jheisman@cblh,oom
Cc: Christensen, Cass
Subject: LG Philips LCD Col, Ltd. v. Tatung Company, et al,, C.A. No.
G4-343-JJF
Dear counsel:
Judge Poppiti charged us to discuss deposition behavior with our respective teams.
when Judge Poppiti refers to Delaware cases governing attorney and witness behavior at
depositions, I believe he is referring to Tuerkes~Beckers, Inc. v. New Castle Associates,
158 F.R D. 573 (D.Del.
1993}, a decision by Judge McKeivie; Hali v. Clifton Precision, 150 F R.D" 525 (E.D, Pa.
1993), a decision by Judge Gawthrop of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania that is known
to and has been applied by the Judges of the District of Delaware; and In Re: Asbestos
Litigation, 492 AH2d 256 (Del Super. 1985}, a decision by Judge Poppiti while he was on
the Superior Court.
I think a fair summary of Delaware deposition practice is this:
First, an attorney defending a deposition should state objections succinctly, for example
by saying only "objection, form.“ It is not proper to make an objection that suggests a
response to the witness.
Second, an attorney defending a deposition may only instruct a witness not to answer a
2
Case 1:04-cv—OO343-JJF Document 593-3 Filed O3/19/2007 Page 3 of 3
question (1) when the answer will reveal a privileged communication or (2) when the
attorney intends to terminate the deposition and seek a ruling from the court about the
area of inquiryn
Third, an attorney defending a deposition may not consult with the witness during a break
or continuance of the deposition about the testimony already given or anticipated to he
given. At the resumption of a deposition following a break or continuance, the questioner
may inquire of the witness whether any such consultation has occurred and with whom it has
occurred (without inquiring into the specifics of the consultation if any did occur).
Do you have a different view of what is considered proper practice for depositions in
Delaware cases?
These are the subjects that I expect to come up during today's teleconferencei
Dick Kirk
Richard DU Kirk
The Bayard Firm
222 Delaware Avenue, 9th Floor
Wilmington, Delaware 29801
Main: (302) 655-5000
Direct: (302) 429—420B
Fax: {302) 658-6395
[email protected]
IRS Circular 230 DISCLOSURE:
Notice regarding federal tax matters: Internal Revenue Service Circular 230 requires us to
state herein that any federal tax advice set forth in this communication (1) is not
intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of avoiding penalties
that may be imposed by federal tax laws, and (2} cannot be used in promoting, marketing,
or recommending to another person any transaction or matter addressed herein.
This message is sent by a law firm and may contain information that is privileged or
confidential. If you received this transmission in error, please notify the sender by
reply e~mail and delete the message and any attachmentst
3
Case 1:04-cv-00343-JJF
Document 593-3
Filed 03/19/2007
Page 1 of 3
Case 1:04-cv-00343-JJF
Document 593-3
Filed 03/19/2007
Page 2 of 3
Case 1:04-cv-00343-JJF
Document 593-3
Filed 03/19/2007
Page 3 of 3
United States Free Forms
Canada Free Forms
United Kingdom Free Forms
Australia Free Forms