The opinion of the court was delivered by: Magistrate Judge P. Michael Mahoney
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
Plaintiff, David Orgler, was deposed on September 17, 2007. During Mr. Orgler's deposition, the following exchange took place:
Defense counsel: Since May 24, 2006, has the Union picketed and distributed leaflets naming Orgler Homes and David Orgler stating, "On Strike Against Orgler Homes?"
Plaintiff's counsel: Objection. It calls for a legal conclusion. . . . .
Defense counsel: I am asking him a factual question. Since May 24, 2006, has the Union put handbills or picket signs outside that said, "On Strike Against Orgler Homes?"
Plaintiff's counsel: That calls for a legal conclusion because the word "on strike" is a legal term. . . .
Defense counsel: I will ask it again.
Plaintiff's counsel: If you ask it one more time, I will instruct him not to answer it. Defense counsel: That is tantamount to telling your witness not to answer the question. It is a simple question that has not been answered.
Plaintiff's counsel: It has been.
Defense counsel: Mr. Orgler, you can't tell me a specific instance after May 24th, 2006, where the union held up a picket sign or distributed handbills that said, 'On strike against Orgler Homes;' isn't that true?
Plaintiff's counsel: We have denied that that is true.
Defense counsel: The question is pending. Please don't answer the question.
Mr. Orgler: Can I answer it?
Plaintiff's counsel: You can ...