Free Supplement - District Court of Arizona - Arizona

DAWSON & ROSENTHAL, P.C. _____________________
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Gregg H. Temple, State Bar No. 009866 GREGG H. TEMPLE, P.C. 11801 N. Tatum Blvd., Suite 247 Phoenix, AZ 85028 [email protected] (602) 808-0508 Steven C. Dawson, State Bar No. 006674 Anita Rosenthal, State Bar No. 006199 6586 Highway 179, Suite B-2 Sedona, AZ 86351 [email protected] (602) 494-3800)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF ARIZONA (1) Brett D. Leavey, Plaintiff, vs. (2) UNUM/Provident Corporation, a foreign corporation, and(3) Provident Life and Accident Insurance Company, a foreign corporation, Defendants. PLAINTIFF'S SUPPLEMENTAL DEPOSITION DESIGNATIONS TO JOINT PRE TRIAL Case No. CIV-02-2281 PHX SMM

Respectfully submitted this 25th day of August, 2005. DAWSON & ROSENTHAL, P.C. and GREGG H. TEMPLE, P.C.

By

s/Steve Dawson Steven C. Dawson Anita Rosenthal 6586 Highway 179, Suite B-2 Sedona, AZ 86351 Attorneys for Plaintiff
-1-

Case 2:02-cv-02281-SMM

Document 188

Filed 08/30/2005

Page 1 of 3

DAWSON & ROSENTHAL, P.C. _____________________
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

Copy of the foregoing served on counsel for defendants through the Court's electronic filing service this 25th day of August, 2005, to: Stephen Bressler Lewis and Roca LLP 40 North Central Phoenix, AZ 85004 Attorney for Defendants ____S/CARLA PARKES_____

Deposition Deposition of Daniel Hayes taken 7/1/04

Page and Line

Objection General Objection: Defendants object to the untimely designations. These could have and should have been included with the Proposed Joint Pretrial Order filed with the Court on May 5, 2005.

Page 5, line 22 through page 7, line 5 Add: Page 20, lines 11-16 Page 27, line 1 through page 30, line 8 Objection. Page 28, line 6 ­ page 29, line 1. Lack of foundation. Add: Page 20, lines 9-11 Add: Page 24, line 21 ­ p.
-2-

Case 2:02-cv-02281-SMM

Document 188

Filed 08/30/2005

Page 2 of 3

DAWSON & ROSENTHAL, P.C. _____________________
1 2 3 4 5 6 7

Deposition

Page and Line 25, line 2 Page 30, line 23 through page 34, line 13

Objection

Add: Page 34, lines 14-22 Page 36, line 7 through page 37, line 14 Objection: Page 38, line ­ 18 ­ page 39, line 3. Lack of foundation.

8

Objection: Page 40, lines 19

6. Lack of foundation.
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26

Page 37, line 23 through page 41, line 13 Page 47, line 4 through page 48, line 18 Page 49, line 6 through page 54, line 19 Add: Page 55, lines 5-14 Page 55, line 20 through page 57, line 20 Page 64, line 25 through page 69, line 25 Page 74, line 18 through page 76, line 17

Objection. (1) Lack of foundation. The witness stated he was speculating. (2) Irrelevant.

-3-

Case 2:02-cv-02281-SMM

Document 188

Filed 08/30/2005

Page 3 of 3