Case Information
*1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT SEATTLE USI INSURANCE SERVICES NATIONAL, INC., formerly known as NO. 2:17-cv-01394-SAB WELLS FARGO INSURANCE SERVICES USA, INC., Plaintiff,
v. JOINT PRETRIAL ORDER STANLEY OGDEN, an individual; ELENOR O’KEEFE, an individual; JOHN HASKELL, JR., an individual; and ABD INSURANCE AND FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC., a Delaware corporation,
Defendants.
JURISDICTION Defendants removed this case to this Court on September 15, 2017, asserting federal jurisdiction based on diversity under 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a). The United States District Court for the Western District of Washington has jurisdiction over this matter under 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a) because there is complete diversity of citizenship between the parties and Defendants have a good faith belief that more *2 than $75,000, exclusive of interest and costs, is at stake. Plaintiff does not dispute the Court’s jurisdiction over this matter on the basis asserted by Defendants.
CLAIMS AND DEFENSES
A. Plaintiff’s Claims When federal courts sit in diversity—as in this case—they must apply the substantive law of the state where they sit. See Erie R.R. Co. v. Tompkins , 304 U.S. 64, 58 S. Ct. 817 (1938). Plaintiff intends to pursue damages for the following claims against Defendants based on Washington law, for which the Court has already entered summary judgment as to liability in Plaintiff’s favor:
1. Breach of contract (against Defendants Stanley Ogden, Eleanor O’Keefe, and John Haskell, Jr.); and 2. Common law tortious interference with contract and/or business expectancy (against Defendant ABD Insurance and Financial Services, Inc.
(“ABD”)).
In addition, Plaintiff intends to pursue the following claim against Individual Defendant Stanley Ogden based on Washington law: 3. Breach of Washington’s common law duty of loyalty (against Defendant Stanley Ogden only). B. Defendants’ Defenses
Defendants intend to pursue the following affirmative defenses at trial: 1. Waiver; 2. Estoppel; 3. Unclean hands; and 4. Failure to mitigate damages. Plaintiff contends that Defendants’ affirmative defenses of waiver, estoppel,
and unclean hands are precluded by this Court’s summary judgment order as to liability in Plaintiff’s favor. Plaintiff does not object to Defendants’ affirmative defense of failure to mitigate damages.
ADMITTED FACTS
*3 The following facts are admitted by the parties: 1. Defendant Stanley Ogden began working for Pettit-Morry Co.
(“Pettit-Morry”), a Washington insurance brokerage, in 1987. In exchange for the purchase of all of Mr. Ogden’s outstanding capital stock in Pettit-Morry, Mr. Ogden entered into an Agreement and Covenant Not to Compete.
2. Defendant Eleanor O’Keefe began working for Pettit-Morry in 1986. In exchange for the purchase of all of Ms. O’Keefe’s outstanding capital stock in Pettit-Morry, Ms. O’Keefe entered into an Agreement and Covenant Not to Compete.
3. Through a series of corporate mergers, Pettit-Morry was ultimately acquired by Wells Fargo Insurance Services USA, Inc. (“WFIS”), which was in turn later acquired by Plaintiff USI Insurance Services National, Inc. (“USI”).
4. Lewis Dorrington began working for an entity then known as ABD Insurance and Financial Services (which was a different corporate entity from Defendant ABD, but which employed and was led by several of the same individuals) in November 2004. This earlier ABD was also thereafter acquired by
WFIS.
5. In 2013 and 2015, Defendant John Haskell, Jr. signed new employment contracts with WFIS. 6. While Lewis Dorrington was still employed by WFIS and after Haskell started working at ABD, Haskell met with Dorrington. 7. During the meeting between Dorrington and Haskell, while Dorrington was still employed by WFIS and Haskell was employed by ABD, Haskell provided Dorrington with the name of ABD’s President, Kurt de Grosz.
8. Before Stanley Ogden resigned from WFIS, he told ABD’s Kurt de Grosz that he (Stanley Ogden) had a book of business of approximately $1.6 *4 million and mentioned the names of certain clients, including Trident Seafoods and Harley Marine.
9. Without waiving their rights to appeal, the parties agree that the Court made the following determinations on summary judgment: a. USI is entitled to enforce certain employment contracts Defendants Stanley Ogden, Eleanor O’Keefe, and John Haskell, Jr. had entered with USI’s predecessor, WFIS.
b. Both Ogden and O’Keefe had enforceable contracts with WFIS that included a provision wherein they agreed, for a period of three years after the termination of their employment with WFIS or its successors, not to “participate directly or indirectly in the handling of the insurance business of … any person, firm or entity which has been a client or customer of [their former employer] within two years prior to the date of termination of” their employment.
c. Both Ogden and O’Keefe breached that provision in their contracts by continuing to handle the insurance business of WFIS clients after they began working for ABD.
d. Haskell had an enforceable contract with WFIS that included a provision wherein he agreed, for a period of two years following the termination of his employment, not to “solicit, recruit or promote the solicitation of any employee . . . of [his former employer] for the purpose of encouraging that employee . . . to leave the Company’s employ . . .”
e. Haskell did not breach any other provisions in his contract with USI’s predecessors, including that he did not breach the confidentiality or nonsolicitation-of-client provisions in that contract.
f. ABD tortiously interfered with USI’s contractual expectations when Ogden and O’Keefe continued handling insurance business of USI clients *5 and when Haskell assisted ABD in recruiting his former co-worker, Lewis Dorrington.
g. None of the following individuals who left WFIS to work at ABD breached any contractual or other duties they may have owed to USI or its predecessors: Lewis Dorrington, Cory Anderson, Mary Mark, or Marcia Ogden.
ISSUES OF LAW
A. The following are issues of law that both Parties agree remain to be determined by the Court (either by appropriate jury instructions or after post-trial motions):
1. Is any party entitled to attorneys’ fees and costs under RCW 4.84.330? 2. Is Plaintiff entitled to prejudgment interest? 3. Any other challenges to the admissibility of evidence raised in the
parties’ motions in limine or other evidentiary objections at trial. B. The following are additional issues of law that Plaintiff believes remain to be determined by the Court: 1. Should Defendants be precluded from offering expert or lay opinion testimony regarding Plaintiff’s damages? 2. Should Defendants be precluded from offering testimony or evidence regarding consumer banking practices or alleged fraud and/or criminal conduct by Wells Fargo Bank or any of its subsidiaries?
C. The following are additional issues of law that Defendants believe remain to be determined by the Court (either by appropriate jury instructions or after post-trial motions):
1. Did Plaintiff prove with reasonable certainty that it would have earned additional, net profits if Stanley Ogden had not handled the business of his former WFIS customers after his employment with Plaintiff terminated?
*6 2. If so, then what damages, if any, did USI suffer as a result of defendant Stanley Ogden’s handling of business from his former WFIS customers in breach of his contractual commitments to Plaintiff?
3. Did Plaintiff prove with reasonable certainty that it would have earned additional, net profits if Eleanor O’Keefe had not handled the business of her former WFIS customers after her employment with Plaintiff terminated?
4. If so, then what damages, if any, did USI suffer as a result of Eleanor O’Keefe’s handling of business from his former WFIS customers in breach of his contractual commitments to Plaintiff?
5. Did Plaintiff prove with reasonable certainty that it would have earned additional, net profits if John Haskell had not promoted the solicitation of Lewis Dorrington to change employers to ABD?
6. If so, then what damages, if any, did USI suffer as a result of defendant John Haskell’s promotion of the solicitation of Lewis Dorrington to change employers to ABD in breach of Haskell’s contractual commitment to Plaintiff?
7. Did Plaintiff prove that Defendant Stanley Ogden owed a common law duty of loyalty to Plaintiff? 8. If Plaintiff proved that Defendant Stanley Ogden owed a common law duty of loyalty to Plaintiff, did Plaintiff also prove that Stanley Ogden breached that duty by disclosing protectable, confidential information about his clients to Defendant ABD in order to solicit business while he was still employed by WFIS?
9. If Plaintiff proved that Stanley Ogden breached a duty of loyalty to USI by disclosing protectable, confidential information about his clients to defendant ABD in order to solicit business while he was still employed by WFIS, did Plaintiff also prove with reasonable certainty that it would have earned additional, net profits if Stanley Ogden had not committed that breach of duty of loyalty to Plaintiff?
*7 10. If so, then what damages, if any, were proximately caused by such breach? 11. Did Plaintiff waive any of its claims for relief, in whole or in part? 12. Should Plaintiff be estopped from recovering damages, in whole or in
part, on any of its claims because it made a statement to a Defendant that caused that Defendant to fail to perform his or her contract with Plaintiff?
13. Does the equitable defense of unclean hands bar Plaintiff, in whole or in part, from recovering on any of its claims?
EXPERT WITNESSES
Plaintiff intends to call the following expert witnesses:
NAME
ADDRESS/PHONE SUBJECTS OF INFORMATION STATUS
NUMBER
R. Bryan 526 Red Gate Road Mr. Tilden is an insurance industry expert Will testify. Tilden Pittsboro, NC 27312 and will testify about issues related to
Ph: 919.542.1042 account retention, staffing, and anything else related to economic damages suffered by Plaintiff as a result of Defendants’ wrongful and unlawful conduct.
Peter c/o Nickerson & Dr. Nickerson is an economist and will Will testify. Nickerson, Associates LLC testify about historical financial aspects of Ph.D. 520 Pike Street WFIS’s maritime practice groups, calculated
Suite 1200 average account retention, issues related to Seattle, WA 98101 revenues, profits, and losses, reduction of Ph: 206.332.0270 damage calculations to present value, and
anything else related to economic damages suffered by Plaintiff as a result of Defendants’ wrongful and unlawful conduct.
OTHER WITNESSES
A. Plaintiff intends to call the following lay witness:
NAME
ADDRESS/PHONE SUBJECTS OF INFORMATION STATUS
NUMBER
Tim c/o Littler Mendelson, Mr. Prichard will testify regarding the nature Will call. Prichard P.C. of the maritime practice group’s work and
revenues, the role and responsibilities of John Haskell, Jr., as the former Managing Director of WFIS’s Seattle Office, ABD’s efforts to raid WFIS’s and USI’s employees and clients, and anything related to any claim or defense in the case. Wilson c/o Littler Mendelson, Mr. Criswell will testify regarding the nature Will call.
NAME
*8 ADDRESS/PHONE SUBJECTS OF INFORMATION STATUS
NUMBER
Criswell P.C. of the maritime practice group’s work and revenues, WFIS’s cost structures, overhead, and net profits related to the maritime practice group, USI’s damages caused by the wrongful conduct of ABD and the Individual Defendants, and anything related to any claim or defense in the case.
Stanley c/o Morgan, Lewis & Mr. Ogden will testify regarding his contract Will call. Ogden Bockius LLP with WFIS, his solicitation of WFIS
customers, planning and implementing the departure of WFIS’s Maritime Group to ABD, the value of his client relationships to WFIS/USI, the benefits ABD now receives from his former WFIS clients, and anything related to any claim or defense in the case.
Eleanor c/o Morgan, Lewis & Ms. O’Keefe will testify regarding her Will call. O’Keefe Bockius LLP contract with WFIS, her solicitation of WFIS
customers, planning and implementing the departure of WFIS’s Maritime Group to ABD, the value of her client relationships to WFIS/USI, the benefits ABD now receives from her former WFIS clients, and anything related to any claim or defense in the case.
Lewis c/o Morgan, Lewis & Mr. Dorrington will testify regarding his Will call. Dorrington Bockius LLP contract with WFIS, his solicitation of WFIS
customers, planning and implementing the departure of WFIS’s Maritime Group to ABD, the value of his client relationships to WFIS/USI, the benefits ABD now receives from his former WFIS clients, and anything related to any claim or defense in the case.
John c/o Morgan, Lewis & Mr. Haskell will testify regarding his Will call. Haskell, Jr. Bockius LLP contract with WFIS, planning and
implementing the departure of WFIS’s Maritime Group to ABD, his promotion of the solicitation of Lewis Dorrington to leave WFIS and join ABD, and anything related to any claim or defense in the case.
Robert c/o Littler Mendelson, Mr. Volkel would be called to testify May call. Volkel P.C. regarding the nature of the maritime practice
group’s work and revenues, the role and responsibilities of John Haskell, Jr., as the former Managing Director of WFIS’s Seattle Office, ABD’s efforts to raid WFIS’s and USI’s employees and clients, and anything related to any claim or defense in the case.
Michael c/o Morgan, Lewis & Mr. McCloskey is Defendant ABD’s Chief May call. McCloskey Bockius LLP Financial Officer and would be called to
testify regarding ABD’s intentions and handling with respect to the solicitation and
NAME
*9 ADDRESS/PHONE SUBJECTS OF INFORMATION STATUS
NUMBER
hiring of the Individual Defendants, as well as the Individual Defendants’ ongoing handling of the insurance business of their former WFIS insurance accounts.
Kurt de c/o Morgan, Lewis & Mr. de Grosz is Defendant ABD’s President May call. Grosz Bockius LLP and would be called to testify regarding
ABD’s intentions and handling with respect to the solicitation and hiring of the Individual Defendants, as well as the Individual Defendants’ ongoing handling of the insurance business of their former WFIS insurance accounts.
Plaintiff expressly reserves the right to call any and all of the Individual Defendants as hostile witnesses during Plaintiff’s case-in-chief regardless of whether Defendants identify them as witnesses who will be testifying at trial. B. Defendants intend to call the following lay witnesses:
Name Address/Phone Subjects of Information Status Number Stanley c/o Morgan, Lewis & Ogden is a named defendant in this action Will call. Ogden Bockius LLP and will testify on all issues relevant to the
claims and defenses that remain at issue in this trial. In particular, he will testify about his experience in the maritime insurance industry and with his clients, difficulties he faced building and maintaining his client practice at WFIS in late 2016, the costs associated with his practice, the maritime insurance brokerage market in the Seattle area, his clients’ particularized needs and WFIS’s and USI’s abilities to satisfy those client needs after his departure, WFIS’s actions after his departure, and other facts related to causation, damages and Defendants’ affirmative defenses.
Eleanor c/o Morgan, Lewis & O’Keefe is a named defendant in this action Will call. O’Keefe Bockius LLP and will testify on all issues relevant to the
claims and defenses that remain at issue in this trial. In particular, she will testify about her experience in the maritime insurance industry and with her clients, difficulties she faced building and maintaining her client practice at WFIS in late 2016, the costs associated with her practice, the maritime insurance brokerage market in the Seattle *10 area, her clients’ particularized needs and WFIS’s and USI’s abilities to satisfy those client needs after his departure, WFIS’s actions after her departure, and other facts related to causation, damages and Defendants’ affirmative defenses.
John c/o Morgan, Lewis & Haskell is a named defendant in this action Will call. Haskell Bockius LLP and will testify on all issues relevant to the
claims and defenses that remain at issue in this trial. In particular, he will testify about his experience in the maritime insurance industry and with his clients, his and others’ experiences at the WFIS Seattle office, the costs associated with his practice and the practice of others in the Seattle office of WFIS (which Haskell managed), the maritime insurance brokerage market in the Seattle area, clients’ particularized needs and WFIS’s and USI’s abilities to satisfy those client needs after Defendants’ departures from WFIS, WFIS’s actions after Defendants’ departures, his communications with Lewis Dorrington before Dorrington began working for ABD, and other facts related to causation, damages and Defendants’ affirmative defenses.
Lewis c/o Morgan, Lewis & Dorrington was a named defendant in this Will call. Dorrington Bockius LLP action and will testify on all issues relevant
to the claims and defenses that remain at issue in this trial. In particular, he will testify about his experience in the maritime insurance industry and with his clients, his and others’ experiences at the WFIS Seattle office, the costs associated with his practice and the practice of others in the Seattle office of WFIS, the maritime insurance brokerage market in the Seattle area, clients’ particularized needs and WFIS’s and USI’s abilities to satisfy those client needs after Defendants’ departures from WFIS, WFIS’s actions after Defendants’ departures, his communications with Haskell before Dorrington began working for ABD, and other facts related to causation, damages and Defendants’ affirmative defenses.
Kurt de c/o Morgan, Lewis & Kurt de Grosz is Defendant ABD’s President May call. Grosz Bockius LLP and he will testify about his communications
with Lewis Dorrington and Dorrington’s recruitment by ABD, his experience in the
*11 1 insurance brokerage industry and with ABD’s clients, the maritime insurance
2 brokerage market in the Seattle area, clients’ particularized needs and WFIS’s and USI’s
3 abilities to satisfy those client needs after Defendants’ departures from WFIS, and
4 other facts related to causation, damages and Defendants’ affirmative defenses.
5 Jim Dunlap Dunlap Towing Jim Dunlap is the president of Dunlap Will call. 6 PO Box 593 Towing. He will testify about Dunlap LaConner, WA 98275 Towing’s insurance needs, the market for
7 360-466-3114 insurance brokerage services in the Seattle area that meet Dunlap Towing’s needs, the impact the Wells Fargo banking scandal had on Dunlap Towing’s desire to continue doing business with USI, and whether Dunlap Towing would have stayed with USI if Eleanor O’Keefe could not have serviced Dunlap Towing’s account.
Joe Misenti Tote Shipping Joe Misenti was previously the General Will call. 10401 Deerwood Park Counsel at Silver Bay Seafoods. He will Blvd testify about Silver Bay Seafoods’ insurance Building 1, Suite 1300 needs, the market for insurance brokerage Jacksonville, FL 32256 services in the Seattle area that met Silver 877-775-7447 Bay Seafoods’ needs, the impact the Wells
Fargo banking scandal had on Silver Bay Seafoods’ desire to continue doing business with USI, and whether Silver Bay Seafoods would have stayed with USI if Stanley Ogden could not have serviced Silver Bay Seafoods’ account.
Joe Plesha 206-331-0643 Joe Plesha was previously the Chief Legal Will call. Counsel at Trident Seafoods. He will testify about Trident Seafoods’ insurance needs, the market for insurance brokerage services in the Seattle area that met Trident Seafoods’ needs, the impact the Wells Fargo banking scandal had on Trident Seafoods’ desire to continue doing business with USI, and whether Trident Seafoods would have stayed with USI if Stanley Ogden could not have serviced Trident’s account.
Mike Trident Seafoods Mike McCarthy was previously the ultimate Will call. Corporation person responsible for selecting insurance McCarthy
20001 W Garfield St. brokerage services at Trident Seafoods. He Seattle, WA 98119 will testify about Trident Seafoods’ insurance needs, the market for insurance 206-281-9832 brokerage services in the Seattle area that
28 *12 met Trident Seafoods’ needs, the impact the Wells Fargo banking scandal had on Trident Seafoods’ desire to continue doing business with USI, and whether Trident Seafoods would have stayed with USI if Stanley Ogden could not have serviced Trident’s account.
Robert Purse Seine Vessel Robert Kehoe was previously the ultimate Will call. Kehoe Owners Association person responsible for selecting insurance
1900 W Nickerson St. brokerage services at Purse Seine. He will #320 testify about Purse Seine’s insurance needs, Seattle, WA 98119 the market for insurance brokerage services 206-283-7733 in the Seattle area that met Purse Seine’s
needs, the impact the Wells Fargo banking scandal had on Purse Seine’s desire to continue doing business with USI, and whether Purse Seine would have stayed with USI if Stanley Ogden could not have serviced Purse Seine’s account.
Augie Chemithon Corporation Augie Catalano is the VP of Finance and Will call. Catalano 5430 W Marginal Way CFO at Chemithon. He will testify about
SW Chemithon’s insurance needs, the market for Seattle, WA 98106 insurance brokerage services in the Seattle area that meet Chemithon’s needs, the impact 206-858-7053
the Wells Fargo banking scandal had on 15 Chemithon’s desire to continue doing business with USI, and whether Chemithon
16 would have stayed with USI if Eleanor O’Keefe could not have serviced
17 Chemithon’s account. 18 Corey c/o Morgan, Lewis & Anderson was a named defendant in this May call. 19 Anderson Bockius LLP action and will testify on all issues relevant to the claims and defenses that remain at 20 issue in this trial. In particular, he will testify about his experience in the maritime 21 insurance industry and with his clients, his and others’ experiences at the WFIS Seattle
22 office, the costs associated with his practice and the practice of others in the Seattle office
23 of WFIS, the maritime insurance brokerage market in the Seattle area, clients’
24 particularized needs and WFIS’s and USI’s abilities to satisfy those client needs after
25 Defendants’ departures from WFIS, WFIS’s actions after Defendants’ departures, and
26 other facts related to causation, damages and Defendants’ affirmative defenses.
27 Marcia c/o Morgan, Lewis & Marcia Ogden was a named defendant in this May call. 28
*13 Ogden Bockius LLP action and will testify on all issues relevant to the claims and defenses that remain at issue in this trial. In particular, she will testify about her experience in the maritime insurance industry and with clients, her and others’ experiences at the WFIS Seattle office, the costs associated with Stan Ogden’s practice and the practice of others in the Seattle office of WFIS, the maritime insurance brokerage market in the Seattle area, clients’ particularized needs and WFIS’s and USI’s abilities to satisfy those client needs after Defendants’ departures from WFIS, WFIS’s actions after Defendants’ departures, and other facts related to causation, damages and Defendants’ affirmative defenses.
Mary Mark c/o Morgan, Lewis & Mary Mark was a named defendant in this May call. Bockius LLP action and will testify on all issues relevant to the claims and defenses that remain at issue in this trial. In particular, she will testify about her experience in the maritime insurance industry and with clients, her and others’ experiences at the WFIS Seattle office, the costs associated with the practice of others in the Seattle office of WFIS, the maritime insurance brokerage market in the Seattle area, clients’ particularized needs and WFIS’s and USI’s abilities to satisfy those client needs after Defendants’ departures from WFIS, WFIS’s actions after Defendants’ departures, and other facts related to causation, damages and Defendants’ affirmative defenses.
Machiko c/o Morgan, Lewis & Monzaki will testify about WFIS’s efforts to May call. Monzaki Bockius LLP retain business after Defendants’ departures,
her experiences a WFIS’s Seattle office, her experience in the maritime insurance industry and with clients, the maritime insurance brokerage market in the Seattle area, clients’ particularized needs and WFIS’s and USI’s abilities to satisfy those client needs after Defendants’ departures from WFIS.
Lisa c/o Morgan, Lewis & Langdon will testify about WFIS’s efforts to May call. Langdon Bockius LLP retain business after Defendants’ departures,
her experiences a WFIS’s Seattle office, her experience in the maritime insurance industry and with clients, the maritime *14 insurance brokerage market in the Seattle area, clients’ particularized needs and WFIS’s and USI’s abilities to satisfy those client needs after Defendants’ departures from WFIS.
Defendants may also call one or more rebuttal witnesses, the necessity of whose testimony, and the contents thereof, cannot be reasonably anticipated prior to trial. Defendants reserve the right to call any witness identified by Plaintiff.
EXHIBITS
In making objections to Plaintiff’s proposed trial exhibits, Defendants’ objections are identified using the following abbreviations: Plaintiff’s Exhibits Authenticity Admissibility Objection Admitted No. Description R 1 Stanley Ogden 1994 Agreement Stipulated Disputed P/WT/C and Covenant Not to Compete, MIL No. 2 WFIS000190–WFIS000196
2 Eleanor O’Keefe 1994 Stipulated Disputed R P/WT/C Agreement and Covenant Not MIL No. 2 to Compete, WFIS000237–
WFIS000243
3 Lewis Dorrington 2004 Stipulated Disputed R P/WT/CTI Employment Agreement, MIL No. 1
WFIS000018–WFIS000020
4 John Haskell 2013 Agreement R Stipulated Disputed P/WT/C Regarding Trade Secrets, MIL No. 2 Confidential Information, Non- Solicitation, and Assignment of Inventions, WFIS000086–
WFIS000088
5 John Haskell 2015 Agreement R Stipulated Disputed
P/WT/C
Regarding Trade Secrets, MIL No. 2 Confidential Information, Non- Solicitation, and Assignment of Inventions, WFIS000083–
WFIS000085
6 March 10, 2017 Email Stipulated Disputed R P/WT/C exchange between Diane MIL No. 2 Bundrant (Trident Seafoods) and Stanley Ogden, with forwarded communications,
ABD-MT-005969–ABD-MT-
005970
*15 Plaintiff’s Exhibits Authenticity Admissibility Objection Admitted
No. Description 7 January 2–3, 2017 Email R Stipulated Disputed P/WT/C exchange between Joe Misenti MIL No. 2 (Silver Bay Seafoods) and Stanley Ogden, attaching BOR,
ABD-MT-005541–ABD-MT-
005543
8 January 4, 2017 Email R Stipulated Disputed
P/WT/C
exchange between Stanley MIL No. 2 Ogden and Tim (Wards Cove) attaching ABD promotional flyer and BOR, ABD-MT-
005538- ABD-MT-005540
9 January 2, 2017 Email Stipulated Disputed R P/WT/C exchange between Augie MIL No. 2 Catalano and Eleanor O’Keefe, attaching BOR, ABD-MT-
005430–ABD-MT-005431
10 March 7, 2017 Email exchange R Stipulated Disputed
P/WT/CTI
between Lewis Dorrington and MIL No. 1 Jacob Lee (NYK Group), including attachments, ABD-
MT-005897–ABD-MT-005904
11 January 3, 2017 Email R Stipulated Disputed P/WT/C exchange between Lal MIL No. 2 Chandwaney and Stanley Ogden, ABD-MT-005555
12 Template Broker of Record R Stipulated Disputed P/WT/C Letter, ABD-MT-005900 MIL No. 2 13 December 28, 2016 from R Disputed Disputed P/WT/C Eleanor O’Keefe to herself MIL No. 2 forwarding client contact information, USI_Ogden006734
14 Spreadsheet re: NYK Group Disputed Disputed R P/WT/C Commission Payments, ECF MIL No. 2 No. 116-1 15 ABD Producer Employment R Stipulated Disputed
P/WT/CTI
Agreement – Stanley Ogden, MIL No. 4 ABD-MT-000379–ABD-MT- 000392
16 Text Messages between Stanley R Stipulated Disputed 25
P/WT/ CTI/
Ogden and Kurt de Grosz, C ABD-MT-001667– ABD-MT- 26 MIL No. 2 001676 27 28
*16 1 Plaintiff’s Exhibits 2 Authenticity Admissibility Objection Admitted No. Description 3 17 Text Messages between Stanley R Stipulated Disputed P/WT/ CTI Ogden and Cory Anderson, 4 MIL No. 1 ABD-MT-001677–ABD-MT- 001679
5 18 December 30, 2016 Email R Stipulated Disputed P/WT/C Exchange between Eleanor 6 MIL No. 2 O’Keefe and Terry (LNU), with attachments, ABD-MT-
7
001586–ABD-MT-001588
19 Acknowledgment of Prior Stipulated Disputed R 8 P/WT Trade Secrets and MIL No. 4 9 Confidentiality Agreement Compliance (Eleanor O’Keefe), 10 ABD-MT-000393–ABD-MT- 000395 20 ABD Non-Disclosure, R Stipulated Disputed P/WT Proprietary Information, and MIL No. 4 Inventions Agreement (Eleanor O’Keefe), ABD-MT-000396–
ABD-MT-000403
21 Eleanor O’Keefe ABD Offer Stipulated Disputed R P/WT Letter dated December 28, MIL No. 4 2016, ABD-MT-000404–ABD- MT-000406
22 December 30, 2016 Email Stipulated Disputed R P/WT/C Exchange between Eleanor MIL No. 2 O’Keefe and Paul Koojoolian, with attachments, ABD-MT-
001592–ABD-MT-001594
23 December 30, 2016 Email R Stipulated Disputed
P/WT/C
Exchange between Eleanor MIL No. 2 O’Keefe and Harry Humphrey, with attachments, ABD-MT-
001583–ABD-MT-001585
24 December 30, 2016 Email R Stipulated Disputed P/WT/C Exchange between Eleanor MIL No. 2 O’Keefe and Salt River Co., with attachments, ABD-MT-
001589–ABD-MT-001591
25 Eleanor O’Keefe AT&T Stipulated Disputed R P/WT/C Wireless Statement 12/19/16– MIL No. 2 01/18/17, ABD-MT-000273– ABD-MT-000300
*17 Plaintiff’s Exhibits Authenticity Admissibility Objection Admitted
No. Description 26 February 21, 2017 Email (With respect Stipulated Disputed to Exchange between Lewis attachment) Dorrington and Kurt de Grosz,
R
with attachment, ABD-MT- P/WT/CTI 001138–ABD-MT-001153 MIL No. 4 27 January 26, 2017 Email Stipulated Disputed (With respect to Exchange between Lewis attachment) Dorrington and Kurt de Grosz,
R
including attachments, ABD- P/WT/CTI MT-001154–ABD-MT-001169 MIL No. 1 28 February 12, 2017 Email Stipulated Disputed R P/WT/CTI Exchange between Lewis MIL No. 4 Dorrington and Kurt de Grosz,
ABD-MT-001126–ABD-MT-
001134
29 February 16, 2017 Email Stipulated Disputed R P/WT/CTI Exchange between Lewis MIL No. 4 Dorrington and Kurt de Grosz,
ABD-MT-001135–ABD-MT-
001137
15 30 Acknowledgment of Prior R Stipulated Disputed
P/WT/CTI
Trade Secrets and 16 MIL No. 1, 4 Confidentiality Agreement Compliance (John Haskell),
17
ABD-MT-001424–ABD-MT-
001434
18 31 Declaration of John Haskell, Stipulated Disputed R P/WT/CTI Jr., ECF No. 60 19 MIL No. 1, 2 32 February 5, 2016 Email Stipulated Disputed R 20 P/WT/CTI Exchange between John MIL No. 4 Haskell and Brian 21 Hetherington, ABD-MT-
001300–ABD-MT-001301
22 33 Defendants’ Supplemental R Stipulated Disputed
P/WT/CTI
23 Interrogatory Response #1, MIL No. 1 ABD-MT-001680–001735 24 (November 16, 2018) 34 Defendants’ Supplemental R Stipulated Disputed 25 P/WT/CTI
Interrogatory Response #2, MIL No. 1 ABD-MT-001680–
26 001744(November 20, 2018) 27 28
*18 Plaintiff’s Exhibits Authenticity Admissibility Objection Admitted
No. Description R 35 Defendants’ Supplemental Stipulated Disputed P/WT/CTI Responses to Plaintiff’s HS Discovery Requests per Dkt. No. 102 Order Granting in Part Plaintiff’s Motion to Compel.
36 Stanley Ogden’s Responses to Stipulated Disputed R P/WT/CTI Plaintiff’s First Set of
HS
Discovery Requests 37 Eleanor O’Keefe’s Responses R Stipulated Disputed P/WT/CTI to Plaintiff’s First Set of HS Discovery Requests
38 Lewis Dorrington’s Responses Stipulated Disputed R P/WT/CTI to Plaintiff’s First Set of HS Discovery Requests
39 John Haskell, Jr.’s Responses R Stipulated Disputed P/WT/CTI to Plaintiff’s First Set of HS Discovery Requests
40 ABD’s Responses to Plaintiff’s R Stipulated Disputed
P/WT/CTI
First Set of Discovery Requests
HS
41 ABD Acknowledgment of Prior R Stipulated Disputed
P/WT/CTI
Trade Secrets and MIL No. 4 Confidentiality (John Haskell),
ABD-MT-001424–ABD-MT-
001426
42 ABD Non-Disclosure, R Stipulated Disputed P/WT/CTI Proprietary Information and MIL No. 4 Invention Agreement (John Haskell), ABD-MT-001427–
ABD-MT-001434
43 March 4, 2016 ABD Offer Stipulated Disputed R P/WT/CTI Letter (John Haskell), ABD-
MIL No. 4
MT-001435–ABD-MT-001437
44 ABD Acknowledgment of Prior R Stipulated Disputed P/WT/CTI Trade Secrets and MIL No. 4 Confidentiality (Lewis Dorrington), ABD-MT-
000312–ABD-MT-000314
45 ABD Non-Disclosure, R Stipulated Disputed P/WT/CTI Proprietary Information and MIL No. 4 Invention Agreement (Lewis Dorrington), ABD-MT-
000315–ABD-MT-000322
46 February 21, 2017 ABD Offer Stipulated Disputed R P/WT/CTI Letter (Lewis Dorrington), MIL No. 4 ABD-MT-000323–ABD-MT- 000325
28 *19 Plaintiff’s Exhibits Authenticity Admissibility Objection Admitted
No. Description 47 ABD Non-Disclosure, R Stipulated Disputed P/WT/CTI Proprietary Information and MIL No. 4 Invention Agreement (Stanley Ogden), ABD-MT-000368–
ABD-MT-000375
48 November 18, 2016 ABD Offer Stipulated Disputed R P/WT/CTI Letter (Stanley Ogden), ABD- MIL No. 4
MT-000376–ABD-MT-000378
49 January 3, 2017 Email from R Stipulated Disputed P/WT/C Meghan Rice (Dunlap Towing) MIL No. 2 to Eleanor O’Keefe, ABD-MT-
001595–ABD-MT-001596
50 February 28, 2017 Email R Stipulated Disputed P/WT/C exchange between Lewis MIL No. 2 Dorrington and Janice McDonald (NYK Ports), attaching BOR, ABD-MT-
005000–ABD-MT-005002
51 January 4, 2017 Email R Stipulated Disputed
P/WT/CTI
exchange between Marcia MIL No. 1 Ogden and Jenn Cabotage (Monterey Fish), ABD-MT-
005517–ABD-MT-005519
52 January 4, 2017 Email R Stipulated Disputed P/WT/C exchange between Stanley MIL No. 2 Ogden and Tim Smyer (wards Cove), ABD-MT-005521–
ABD-MT-005524
53 February 25, 2017 LinkedIn Disputed Disputed R P/WT/CTI Email to Lewis Dorrington, MIL No. 1
USI_OGDEN 007539
54 February 25, 2017 LinkedIn R Disputed Disputed P/WT/CTI Email to Lewis Dorrington, MIL No. 1 USI_OGDEN 007545–
USI_OGDEN 007546
55 February 25, 2017 LinkedIn R Disputed Disputed Email to Lewis Dorrington, P/WT/CTI USI_OGDEN 007547– MIL No. 1
USI_OGDEN 007548
56 February 25, 2017 LinkedIn Disputed Disputed R Email to Lewis Dorrington, P/WT/CTI USI_OGDEN 007549– MIL No. 1
USI_OGDEN 007550
57 ABD Marine Lost rev. HS Disputed Disputed proforma_2012-2016_v3.xlsx, LF
USI_OGDEN 001839
*20 Plaintiff’s Exhibits Authenticity Admissibility Objection Admitted
No. Description 58 USI v. Ogden, et al. – Account With Respect Disputed Disputed Information [Current 7 30 to Anderson 18].xlsx, USI_OGDEN 001845 and Haskell:
R P/CTI LF HS MIL No. 1 With Respect to Dorrington, O’Keefe, and Ogden: LF HS
59 USI v. Ogden, et al. – Lost With Respect Disputed Disputed Revenue Totals, USI_OGDEN to Anderson 001846 and Haskell:
R P/CTI LF HS MIL No. 1 With Respect to Dorrington, O’Keefe, and Ogden: R P/CTI LF HS
60 December 30, 2016 Broker of R Disputed Disputed Record Letter (Trident P/WT/C Seafood), USI_OGDEN MIL No. 2 006984
61 January 6, 2017 Broker of Disputed Disputed R Record Letters (Silver Bay P/WT/C Seafood, Monterey Fish Co.), MIL No. 2 including cover email, USI_OGDEN 006968– USI_OGDEN 006971
62 January 10, 2017 Broker of R Disputed Disputed Record Letter (Harley Marine P/WT/C Services), including cover MIL No. 2 email, USI_OGDEN 006938,
USI_OGDEN 006927
*21 1 Plaintiff’s Exhibits 2 Authenticity Admissibility Objection Admitted No. Description 3 63 January 16, 2017 Broker of R Disputed Disputed Record Letter (Prowler P/WT/C 4 Fisheries LLC), including cover MIL No. 2 email, USI_OGDEN 006980–
5
USI_OGDEN 006982
64 January 3, 2017 Broker of R Disputed Disputed 6 Record Letter (Dunlap P/WT/C Towing), including cover MIL No. 2
7 email, USI_OGDEN 006942–
USI_OGDEN 006943
8 65 March 3, 2017 Broker of R Disputed Disputed Record (St. Francis Yacht), P/WT/C 9 including cover email, MIL No. 2
USI_OGDEN 001359–
10
USI_OGDEN 001361
66 January 31, 2017 Broker of R Disputed Disputed 11 Record (Royal Coffee), P/WT/C including cover email, USI MIL No. 2
12
OGDEN 000808–USI_OGDEN
000810
67 January 3, 2017 Broker of R Disputed Disputed Letter Record (Pacific Rim P/WT/C Transportation), including MIL No. 2 cover email, USI_OGDEN
000765–USI_OGDEN 000767
68 February 27, 2017 Broker of R Disputed Disputed Record Letter (Pasha Hawaii P/WT/C Holdings), including cover MIL No. 2 email, USI_OGDEN 001782–
USI_OGDEN 001783
69 February 27, 2017 Broker of R Disputed Disputed Record Letter (The Pasha P/WT/C Group), including cover email, MIL No. 2 USI_OGDEN 001431– USI_OGDEN 001432 70 March 3, 2017 Broker of R Disputed Disputed Record Letter (HMS/American P/WT/C Queen Steamboat), including MIL No. 2 cover email, USI_OGDEN
001181–USI_OGDEN 001183
71 March 9, 2017 Broker of R Stipulated Disputed Record Letter (Yusen P/WT/C Logistics), including cover MIL No. 2 email, ABD-MT-005040–
ABD-MT-005041
72 March 7, 2017 Broker of R Stipulated Disputed Record Letter (NYK Line), P/WT/C including cover email, ABD- MIL No. 2
MT-005897–ABD-MT-005900
*22 Plaintiff’s Exhibits Authenticity Admissibility Objection Admitted
No. Description 73 March 9, 2017 Broker of R Disputed Disputed Record Letter (HMS Global P/WT/C Marine), including cover email, MIL No. 2 USI_OGDEN 000610– USI_OGDEN 000612 74 February 1, 2017 Broker of R Disputed Disputed Record Letter (Diver Institute), P/WT/C including cover email, MIL No. 2 USI_OGDEN 000785– USI_OGDEN 000788
75 February 27, 2017 Broker of R Disputed Disputed Record Letter (Del Mar P/WT/C Seafood, including cover email, MIL No. 2 USI_OGDEN 001281– USI_OGDEN 001283 76 March 24, 2017 Cease and R Stipulated Disputed Desist Letter to Lewis P/WT/CTI Dorrington, including exhibits HS
MIL No. 1 77 June 14, 2016 Cease and Desist Stipulated Disputed R Letter to John Haskell P/WT/CTI
HS
MIL No. 1
78 https://www.theabdteam.com/c Disputed Disputed R ompany/press-release/abd- P/WT/CTI insurance-and-financial- HS services-opens-new-office- MIL No. 1, 2 seattle-washington (date last visited, April 22, 2022) Defendants’ Exhibits Authenticity Admissibility Objection Admitted
No . Disputed Disputed 401-403; 602;
501 “Wells Fargo account fraud 901; 801-805; scandal” entry on
F; MIL
Wikipedia (available at https://en.wikipedia.org/wi ki/Wells_Fargo_account_fr aud_scandal)
502 Consumer Financial Disputed Disputed 401-403; 602; 901; 801-805; Protection Bureau Fines
F; MIL
Wells Fargo $100 Million for Widespread Illegal Practice of Secretly Opening Unauthorized Accounts". Consumer *23 Financial Protection Bureau. (available at https://www.consumerfina nce.gov/about- us/newsroom/consumer- financial-protection- bureau-fines-wells-fargo- 100-million-widespread- illegal-practice-secretly- opening-unauthorized- accounts/).
503 Levine, Matt (9 September Disputed Disputed 401-403; 602; 901; 801-805; 2016). "Wells Fargo
F; MIL
Opened a Couple Million Fake Accounts". Bloomberg.com. (available at https://www.bloomberg.co m/opinion/articles/2016- 09-09/wells-fargo-opened- a-couple-million-fake- accounts)
504 Cowley, Stacy (12 Disputed Disputed 401-403; 602; 901; 801-805; December 2016).
F; MIL
"Prudential Suspends Sales of Its Life Policies by Wells Fargo". The New York Times. (available at https://www.nytimes.com/ 2016/12/12/business/dealb ook/wells-fargo-prudential- insure-policies.html)
505 Corkery, Michael (8 Disputed Disputed 401-403; 602; 901; 801-805; September 2016). "Wells
F; MIL
Fargo Fined $185 Million for Fraudulently Opening Accounts" (available at https://www.nytimes.com/ 2016/09/09/business/dealb ook/wells-fargo-fined-for- years-of-harm-to- customers.html)
506 Corkery, Michael (9 Disputed Disputed 401-403; 602; 901; 801-805; September 2016). "Wells
F; MIL
Fargo Offers Regrets, but Doesn't Admit Misconduct". The New York Times. (available at *24 https://www.nytimes.com/ 2016/09/10/business/dealb ook/wells-fargo- apologizes-but-doesnt- admit-misconduct.html).
507 Puzzanghera, Jim (13 Disputed Disputed 401-403; 602; 901; 801-805; September 2016). "Wells
F; MIL
Fargo is eliminating retail sales goals after settlement over aggressive tactics". The Wall Street Journal. (available at https://www.latimes.com/b usiness/la-fi-wells-fargo- sales-20160913-snap- story.html). Disputed Disputed 401-403; 602;
508 Faux, Zeke (13 October 901; 801-805; 2016). "Wells Fargo CEO
F; MIL
Stumpf Quits in Fallout From Fake Accounts". Bloomberg.com. Bloomberg. (available at https://www.bloomberg.co m/news/articles/2016-10- 12/wells-fargo-ceo-stumpf- steps-down-in-fallout- from-fake-accounts).
509 Koren, James Rufus (21 Disputed Disputed 401-403; 602; 901; 801-805; September 2016). "Wells
F; MIL
Fargo hit with new sanctions following fake- accounts scandal". Los Angeles Times. (available at https://www.latimes.com/b usiness/la-fi-wells-fargo- occ-20161119-story.html)
510 Gray, Alistair (9 January Disputed Disputed 401-403; 602; 901; 801-805; 2017). "Wells Fargo counts
F; MIL
cost of sham accounts scandal". The Financial Times. (available at https://www.ft.com/content /1f22b9c0-d38d-11e6- b06b-680c49b4b4c0)
511 Keller, Laura (13 January Disputed Disputed 401-403; 602; 901; 801-805; 2017). "Wells Fargo Plans
F; MIL
to Close More Than 400 *25 Branches Through 2018". Bloomberg. (available at https://www.bloomberg.co m/news/articles/2017-01- 13/wells-fargo-plans-to- close-more-than-400- branches-through-2018).
512 Chappell, Bill (20 Disputed Disputed 401-403; 602; 901; 801-805; September 2016). "'You
F; MIL
Should Resign': Watch Sen. Elizabeth Warren Grill Wells Fargo CEO John Stumpf". NPR. (available at https://www.npr.org/sectio ns/thetwo- way/2016/09/20/49473879 7/you-should-resign- watch-sen-elizabeth- warren-grill-wells-fargo- ceo-john-stumpf). Disputed Disputed 401-403; 602;
513 Protess, Ben (14 901; 801-805; September 2016). "Wells
F; MIL
Fargo Subpoenaed in Sham Account Case". The New York Times. (available at https://www.nytimes.com/ 2016/09/15/business/dealb ook/wells-fargo- investigation.html?_r=0).
514 Masunaga, Samantha (3 Disputed Disputed 401-403; 602; 901; 801-805; November 2016). "Wells
F; MIL
Fargo says the SEC is also investigating its accounts scandal". The Los Angeles Times. (available at https://www.latimes.com/b usiness/la-fi-wells-fargo- sec-20161103-story.html).
515 Corkery, Michael (28 Disputed Disputed 401-403; 602; 901; 801-805; September 2016).
F; MIL
"California Suspends Ties With Wells Fargo". The New York Times. (available at https://www.nytimes.com/ 2016/09/29/business/dealb ook/california-wells-fargo- *26 john-stumpf.html?_r=0) Disputed Disputed 401-403; 602;
516 Blake, Paul (3 November 901; 801-805; 2016) “Timeline of the
F; MIL
Wells Fargo Accounts Scandal” (available at https://abcnews.go.com/Bu siness/timeline-wells- fargo-accounts- scandal/story?id=42231128 ) 517 Heidi Singer December 15, Stipulated Disputed (by By Plaintiff: Defendants) 701 & 702; 2014 email to Heidi Signer,
MIL
Josh Tyndell, Vicki Kitley, Reuben Rodriguez, and
By John Haskell Subject: SPW Defendants: 2015 budget review
R
Attachment: Dec14 SPW
HS
2015 budget P&L.xlsx;
LF
Deec14 SPW 2015 budget trend P&L.xlsx
USI_OGDEN007634-
007636 518 Hisae Harris June 1, 2015 Stipulated Disputed (by By Plaintiff:
15 Defendants) 701 & 702; email to Hisae Harris, John 16 MIL Haskell, Barbara Fives Subject: June OL-- Seattle
17 By Attachments: New and Defendants: Lost business forecast - 18
R
June OL Seattle.xlsx;
HS
19 06.2015 SEA OL P&L and
LF
Trend.xlsx USI_OGDEN 20 007637-007639 519 Hisae Harris July 31, 2015 Stipulated Disputed (by By Plaintiff: 21 Defendants) 701 & 702; email to Hisae Harris, John
MIL
Haskell, and Barbara Fives 22 Subject: 2016 Budget -- By 23 Seattle Office Attachment: Defendants: 2016 Seattle Budget
R
24 08.04.2015.xlsx HS USI_OGDEN 007640- LF 25 007642 Stipulated Disputed (by By Plaintiff: 520 Hisae Harris September 1, 26 Defendants) 701 & 702; 2015 email to John 27 MIL Haskell, Barbara Fives, et al Subject: Sep OL and
28 By 2016 Budget (Seattle) *27 1 Attachment: SEA Sep 15 Defendants:
R
FY OL vs. 2016 Plan 2
HS
without Wholesale.xlsx LF USI_OGDEN 007643- 3 007644 521 07_ABD Marine Lost rev Stipulated Disputed (by By Defendants) Defendants: proforma_2012-
HS
2016_v3.xls (spreadsheet
LF
from Nickerson expert files) Stipulated Disputed (by By
522 04_USI v. Ogden, et al. - Defendants) Defendants: Account Information [Current 7 30 18].xlsx
With respect (spreadsheet from to Anderson Nickerson expert files) and Haskell: R P/CTI LF HS MIL No. 1 With respect to Dorrington, O’Keefe, and Ogden: LF HS
523 05_USI v. Ogden, et al. - Stipulated Disputed (by By Defendants) Defendants: Lost Revenue Totals [Current 7 30 18].xlsx.xlsx
With respect (spreadsheet from to Haskell, Nickerson Expert files) Marcia Ogden, Mark, and Anderson: R P/CTI LF HS MIL No. 1 With respect to Stanley Ogden, O’Keefe, and Dorrington: R P/CTI LF HS
524 July 16, 2019 Nickerson Stipulated Disputed (by By Defendants) Defendants: expert report, with
HS
attachments
LF
*28 FRE 701 and 702
525 August 8, 2018 Tilden Stipulated Disputed (by By Defendants) Defendants: expert report, with
HS
attachments
LF
FRE 701 and 702
Defendants reserve the right to identify and add additional, supplemental, or amended exhibits at any point prior to the filing of the final Pretrial Order at its discretion, and thereafter at the discretion of the Court. Additionally, although Defendants have identified certain exhibits they may use at trial (Exhibits 501-525, above), Defendants do not admit or stipulate to their admissibility. The exhibits may be objectionable, in whole or in part, or may only be admissible for a limited purpose.
ADDITIONAL STIPULATIONS
Subject to the approval of the Court, the parties also propose the following stipulations: 1. The parties stipulate and agree that by 5:30 p.m. on each day of trial, they
18 will disclose to the opposing party the witnesses to be called to testify the 19 following trial day. 20 2. The parties stipulate and agree that any damages on Plaintiff’s claim for 21 Tortious Interference with Contract against ABD derive from and are coextensive 22 with Plaintiff’s damages, if any, on its claims for Breach of Contract against 23 Defendants Ogden, O’Keefe, and Haskell. Consequently, because the Court has 24 already ruled that ABD is liable on Plaintiff’s claim for Tortious Interference with 25 Contract, the amount of damages to be awarded to Plaintiff on its claim for 26 Tortious Interference with Contract against ABD shall be affixed by the Court at 27 the total amount of damages awarded, if any, on Plaintiff’s claims for Breach of 28 *29 Contract against Defendants Ogden, O’Keefe, and Haskell. The jury in this trial will not be asked to award any damages or make any findings on Plaintiff’s claim for Tortious Interference with Contract against ABD. This liability shall be joint and several with any liability on Plaintiff’s claims for Breach of Contract, and not additive. The Parties reach this stipulation without prejudice to Defendants’ rights to appeal any of the Court’s liability findings against any of Defendants on any of Plaintiff’s claims, and nothing in this stipulation constitutes or shall be construed as an admission of liability by any Defendant. 3. The parties stipulate and agree that Joe Misenti, a third-party witness disclosed by Defendants, may testify via perpetuation videotaped deposition due to scheduling conflicts with a family vacation, and that the parties agree to coordinate to find a mutually agreeable date for that perpetuation deposition sufficiently in advance of trial to have the videotaped deposition available at trial and any objections to its admission ruled on in advance by the Court. // // // // // // // // // // // // // //
ACTION BY THE COURT
*30 (a) This case is scheduled for trial before a jury on March 1, 2023. (b) This order has been approved by the parties as evidenced by the
signatures of their counsel. This order shall control the subsequent course of the action unless modified by a subsequent order. This order shall not be amended except by order of the Court pursuant to agreement of the parties or to prevent manifest injustice.
IT IS SO ORDERED . The District Court Clerk is hereby directed to enter this Order and to provide copies to counsel. DATED this 6th day of February 2023. ______________________________ U.S. District Judge Stanley A. Bastian