Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Allison v. Crc Ins. Servs. Inc.

November 15, 2011

ALLISON
v.
CRC INS. SERVS. INC.



Name of Assigned Judge Sitting Judge if Other or Magistrate Judge Judge Zagel than Assigned Judge

CASE TITLE

DOCKET ENTRY TEXT:

Plaintiff's "Motion to Compel a Properly Prepared Rule 30(b)(6) Witness for Deposition and to Preclude Craig Elson from Testifying as a Rule 30(b)(6) Corporate Representative" [146] is GRANTED as to the 30(b)(6) witness Charles Wood. As to Craig Elson, the motion is DENIED.

STATEMENT

Before me is a motion concerning two aspects of a 30(b)(6) deposition. The first concerns deponent Charles Wood, whom Plaintiffs claim was unprepared to answer certain questions despite proper notice on specific subject matter. The second concerns Craig Elson, whom Plaintiffs claim is disqualified from serving as a 30(b)(6) at all.

Charles Wood

Plaintiffs argue that Charles Wood, who was proffered as CRC's witness for certain damages-related topics, was unprepared and did not meaningfully respond to a host of questions. Further, they claim that Wood was unable to answer questions concerning documents which CRC produced just shortly before the deposition. CRC argues simply that Mr. Wood's testimony was sufficient and, to the extent he was unresponsive, it was on topics that were not adequately described in the 30(b)(6) deposition notice.

Rule 30(b)(6) allows for a party to depose a corporation on its collective corporate knowledge through an appointed representative. Fed. R. Civ. P. 30(b)(6). Assuming proper notice that includes "reasonable particularity" of the topics for discussion, the designee must then provide "complete, knowledgeable and binding answers" on the corporation's behalf. Reilly v. Natwest Mkts. Group Inc., 181 F.3d 253, 268 (2nd Cir. 1999). In this case, CRC offered Charles Wood as 30(b)(6) designee on the following topics:

i. The types, categories, and nature of the damages CRC claims to have suffered.

ii. CRC's claims that Former CRC Employees bound policies on behalf of CRC for no commission.

STATEMENT

iii. For CRC's Chicago office:

-- Any actual or alleged effect on CRC or the office of the resignations and departure of Former CRC Employees.

-- Any actual or alleged injury or damage to CRC or the office of the resignations and ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.