Legal Opinion

Holland v. Cedar Creek Mining, Inc.

District Court, S.D. West Virginia

Decided January 18, 2001No. Civ.A. 2:99-0235PublishedCited by 22 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Memorandum opinion AND ORDER

GOODWIN, District Judge.

Pending is the plaintiffs’ Motion to Exclude Changes in Deposition Testimony of Defendant Larry Cline. Larry Cline (“Cline”) gave a deposition on November 23, 1999. He filed an errata sheet for that depo*652sition on October 6, 2000, making substantive changes to his testimony. Pursuant to Rule 30(e) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the court FINDS that, although Cline’s errata sheet was timely filed, he has failed to provide any reasons for his changes as required by the rule. Accordingly, the plaintiffs’ motion is GRANTED.

DISCUSSION

A.…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Lugtig v. ThomasDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 1981
  2. Sanford v. CBS, INC.District Court, N.D. Illinois · 1984
  3. Podell v. Citicorp Diners Club, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 1996
  4. Innovative Marketing & Technology, L.L.C. v. Norm Thompson Outfitters, Inc.District Court, W.D. Texas · 1997
  5. United States ex rel. Burch v. Piqua Engineering, Inc.District Court, S.D. Ohio · 1993

3Cited by22 opinions

  1. EBC, Inc. v. Clark Building System, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2010
  2. Reilly v. Txu Corp.District Court, N.D. Texas · 2005
  3. Foutz v. Town of VintonDistrict Court, W.D. Virginia · 2002
  4. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co. v. Kolon Industries, Inc.District Court, E.D. Virginia · 2011
  5. Wyeth v. Lupin Ltd.District Court, D. Maryland · 2008

17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API