Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Add Reply
Will Duke buy another confidentiality agreement?
Topic Started: Apr 1 2011, 02:42 PM (3,970 Views)
Joan Foster

I want to see Levicy.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
kbp

cks
Apr 2 2011, 09:06 AM
Acc Esq:

Thank you for the answers to my questions.
I second that!

Such a wonderful job of always sharing information in a manner that allows all to understand it (which sometimes leads to the never ending questions that follow by people like me!).
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
sdsgo

MDNC LR26.1

DIFFERENTIATED CASE MANAGEMENT AND DISCOVERY


(a) Differentiated Case Management. Every case in which an initial pretrial order is entered pursuant to LR16.1(b)-(d) shall be assigned, by agreement of the parties(if adopted by the court) or by order of the court, to one of three case-management tracks. (See LR16.2 and 16.3 for forms of the Fed.R.Civ.P. 26(f) report wherein parties advise the court regarding case management tracks.) The three tracks are defined as follows:

(1) Standard. Discovery (including all discovery with respect to experts) in cases assigned to this track shall be completed within four (4) months from the date of the initial pretrial order. Presumptively, subject to stipulation of the parties or order of the court on good cause shown, interrogatories (including subparts) and requests for admission are limited to 15 in number by each party. Depositions are presumptively limited to four (4) depositions (including any experts) by the plaintiffs, by the defendants, and by third-party defendants.

(2) Complex. Discovery (including all discovery with respect to experts) in cases assigned to this track shall be completed within six (6) months from the date of the initial pretrial order, subject to agreement of the parties for a larger discovery period, if approved by the court. Presumptively, subject to stipulation of the parties or order of the court on good cause shown, interrogatories (including subparts) and requests for admission are limited to 25 in number by each party. Depositions are presumptively limited to seven (7) depositions (including any experts) by the plaintiffs, by the defendants, and by third-party defendants.

(3) Exceptional. Discovery (including all discovery with respect to experts) in cases assigned to this track shall be completed within nine (9) months from the date of the initial pretrial order. Presumptively, subject to stipulation of the parties or order of the court on good cause shown, interrogatories (including subparts) and requests for admission are limited to 30 in number by each party. Depositions are presumptively limited to 10 depositions (including any experts) by the plaintiffs, by the defendants, and by third-party defendants. This management track is reserved for cases of exceptional complexity. It is not to be used for ordinary federal cases even though such cases have some complexity and require significant discovery.

(b) Discovery Procedures and Materials.

(1) The court expects counsel to conduct discovery in good faith and to cooperate and be courteous with each other in all phases of the discovery process. As a part of their Rule 26(f) Report, the parties must formulate a preliminary deposition schedule. They must continue to communicate throughout the discovery period to update the schedule.

(2) Interrogatories, requests for production of documents, or requests for admission shall be numbered consecutively by each party regardless of the number of sets into which they are divided.

(3) Initial disclosures, disclosures of expert testimony, depositions and deposition notices, interrogatories, requests for documents, requests for admission, and answers and responses thereto shall not be filed unless the court so orders or unless the court will need such documents in a pretrial proceeding. All discovery papers must be served on other counsel or parties. The party taking a deposition or obtaining any material through discovery is responsible for its preservation and delivery to the court when needed or ordered. Any party seeking to compel discovery or other pretrial relief based upon discovery material which has not been filed with the clerk must identify the specific portion of the material which is directly relevant and ensure that it is filed as an attachment to the application for relief.

(c) Completion of Discovery. The requirement that discovery be completed within a specified time means that adequate provisions must be made for interrogatories and requests for admission to be answered, for documents to be produced, and for depositions to be held within the discovery period.

(d) Extension of the Discovery Period or Request for More Discovery. Motions seeking an extension of the discovery period or permission to take more discovery than is permitted under the initial pretrial order must be made or presented prior to the expiration of the time within which discovery is required to be completed. They must set forth good cause justifying the additional time and will be granted or approved only upon a showing that the parties have diligently pursued discovery. The court will permit additional depositions only on a showing of exceptional good cause.

(e) Trial Preparation After the Close of Discovery. For good cause appearing therefor, the physical or mental examination of a party may be ordered at any time prior to trial. Ordinarily, the deposition of a material witness not subject to subpoena should be taken during discovery. However, the deposition of a material witness who agrees to appear at trial, but who later becomes unable or refuses to attend,may be ordered at any time prior to trial.

http://www.ncmd.uscourts.gov/CIV_lr_adopt.pdf
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Quasimodo

Quote:
 
(3) Exceptional. Discovery (including all discovery with respect to experts) in cases assigned to this track shall be completed within nine (9) months from the date of the initial pretrial order. Presumptively, subject to stipulation of the parties or order of the court on good cause shown, interrogatories (including subparts) and requests for admission are limited to 30 in number by each party. Depositions are presumptively limited to 10 depositions (including any experts) by the plaintiffs, by the defendants, and by third-party defendants. This management track is reserved for cases of exceptional complexity. It is not to be used for ordinary federal cases even though such cases have some complexity and require significant discovery.


I'm assuming this is intended for cases which involve defendants like Toyota, in which it would be absurd to ask to depose
500 assembly workers, 100 upper management, and 500 customers; but which tactic might be used in order to make
a suit prohibitively expensive and instead force a settlement.


Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Baldo
Member Avatar

The McFadyen, Archer, Wilson suit mentions the Chairman's Directive. I assuming somebody on the inside forwarded it.

Also I doubt they could have purged those e-mails easily over such a large network. The one thing I found out about the potbangers is they liked to brag. They talked too much and left digtial trials, especially when the arrogance of the moment had them "winning' in their condemnation of the team.

I will not underestimate the number of decent folk at Duke, people who did not like what the Brodhead Administration was doing. Stuart Taylor mentioned the campus environment was hostile to those professors who opposed what was happening. Clearly intimidation was spread among the Faculty.

Also the families are pretty competent people and they have some pretty intelligence sons.I wouldn't be surprised they have been gathering data. Waiting for the right moment.

Under the protection of a Federal Judge I am hoping some Duke staff will come forward as well as those in Durham. I would think it is a big worry for the Duke Administration, Duke PD, DPD, and the DA's office.

Burness was known to have a big mouth and spoke derogatorily about the team. Time for a little payback in the sauna of direction questioning under oath.

What we know is bad enough, but I suspect what we don't know will shock us.




Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
sdsgo

Quasi,

There’s an old story that goes like this: A man was making small talk with a woman seated next to him in a bar. After buying her a couple of drinks, he asked the lady, “Would you sleep with me for a million dollars?” She replied, “I’d give it serious thought.” Then he asked her, “How about half a million? “ She thought a minute and said, “That’s still good money.” After a few more questions, the man finally said, “Well, then, how about fifty dollars?” She took the question as an insult and indignantly replied, “What kind of woman do you think am?!” The man replied, “We’ve already established that; we’re only haggling over the price.”

The only reason the parties won’t settle is that they can’t agree on a price. The events of the last three and half years were never about the facts, only the law. And, Judge Beaty did an outstanding job spelling out the law as it applies to each count and each defendant. He also posed critical questions that must be answered in discovery. For instance, when did Drummond and Hendricks learn that the players’ key card data had already been provided to the Durham police? Fortunately, that’s an easy question to answer in discovery. I suspect that we’ll learn that a few people were not as bad as expected while others were outright scoundrels. Many, for whatever reason, simply crossed the line between acceptable behavior and obstruction of justice.

I suspect that you’re really going to enjoy the next year.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Sydney Carton

sdsgo,
Talk about urban legends going the rounds!There is a very posh version of the same anecdote in Britain involving Winston Churchill and a 1940's version of Duchess Fergie.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
chatham
Member Avatar

If Duke saved documentation to confront the Insurance issues, it would be pretty stupid for them to selectively delete or destroy documents relating to RCD, the LAX team, Pressler and all other early events. Same with Durham.

And I am going out on the limb here to suggest that if any of the plaintiffs lawyers received any supposed confidential e-mails then someone in the Administration had a heart and knew that the kids were getting screwed. The only mole I would guess at, and I admit its a controversial guess, is either Alleva or Dean Sue. Just my opinion and guess. I dont see brodhead, steel, or burness or any of the underlings having that heart. It would also be nice to know if that e-mail went to anyone at City Hall. Maybe like Bell.
Edited by chatham, Apr 2 2011, 03:30 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
JSwift
Member Avatar

How can the information obtained through discovery be made public? I assume that there is some expectation of confidentiality at least during the process itself.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
pogo

a question -- who are the defendants going to depose, and to what end?
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Joan Foster

Excellent post, Sdsgo, and it may be that for some there is a price...a sum of money that Duke could offer..to make this all go way.

Maybe so.

But there just might be no amount of money...in the view of some...that would compensate for letting the Hoaxers "save face"...waltz off with no apologies, no contrition, and at the same time, avoid answering questions that might just relieve some of the unfair lifetime burden placed on their sons.

There are so many unanswered questions...so many unpunished, unrepentant villains. How much would be enough to let them walk off..snickering...just to resume (as Nifong did) the perpetual smear of their sons again? How much in the Bank would compensate? Maybe for just one or two...there will not be a "price" that money can fulfill.

Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
sceptical

Joan Foster
Apr 2 2011, 03:47 PM
Excellent post, Sdsgo, and it may be that for some there is a price...a sum of money that Duke could offer..to make this all go way.

Maybe so.

But there just might be no amount of money...in the view of some...that would compensate for letting the Hoaxers "save face"...waltz off with no apologies, no contrition, and at the same time, avoid answering questions that might just relieve some of the unfair lifetime burden placed on their sons.

There are so many unanswered questions...so many unpunished, unrepentant villains. How much would be enough to let them walk off..snickering...just to resume (as Nifong did) the perpetual smear of their sons again? How much in the Bank would compensate? Maybe for just one or two...there will not be a "price" that money can fulfill.

Joan is right.

The familes of the unindicted players could have settled years ago when Duke offered to pay their attorneys fees (estimated at the time at $10,000 per famly) and their out-of-pocket expenses. They refused.

The families of the unindicted players since then have taken the same stance both publicly (at the news conference when the Carrington lawsuit was filed) and privately.

I do not see them settling without public release of the discovery and deposition material, and some sort of apology.

Again, it's not about the money.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
cks
Member Avatar

"Again, it's not about the money."

This very simple statement is what Brodhead, Alleva, Trask, Wausiolek, Burness,Steele, Nifong, Wilson, Himan, Gottleib, Levicy, the Gang of 88, Nancy Grace, Wendy Murphy, and all the others have never been able to understand - and Ihave no doubt will go to their graves not understanding.

I know that had that been my son - no amount of money could make him whole - what would at least go a long way would be that very public admission and apology that individuals had played fast and loose with the facts and the law, and in the case of those in the Duke administration and faculty had abandoned those very principles upon which academia is based. One would think that it would have dawned on such a learned group that there are those who have principles and that those principles can never be purchased - no matter how much silver is offered. Sadly, it did not. They will now see just how much it will cost them - just not monetarily (and personally I hope that their lawyers charge them top dollar) but emotionally. I am not one who generally wishes ill on others but it is very difficult not to wish the very worse on those who made the lives of those young men and their families a living hell.

Edited by cks, Apr 2 2011, 04:28 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Joan Foster

cks
Apr 2 2011, 04:12 PM
"Again, it's not about the money."

This very simple statement is what Brodhead, Alleva, Trask, Wausiolek, Burness,Steele, Nifong, Wilson, Himan, Gottleib, Levicy, the Gang of 88, Nancy Grace, Wendy Murphy, and all the others have never been able to understand - and I doubt will go to their graves not understanding.

I know that had that been my son - no amount of money could make him whole - what would at least go a long way would be that very public admission and apology that individuals had played fas and loose with the facts and the law and in the case of those in the Duke administration and faculty had abandoned those very principles upon which academia is based. One would think that it would have dawned on such a learned group that there are those who have principles and that those principles can never be purchased - no matter how much silver is offered.
Bravo, cks. Great post.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
kbp

JSwift
Apr 2 2011, 03:43 PM
How can the information obtained through discovery be made public? I assume that there is some expectation of confidentiality at least during the process itself.
Court filings have often worked quite well to accomplish that.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · DUKE LACROSSE - Liestoppers · Next Topic »
Add Reply