Kirkbride v. Terex USA et al, No. 2:2010cv00660 - Document 182 (D. Utah 2013)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER granting 173 Motion for Clarification on Plaintiff's Witnesses. Signed by Magistrate Judge Evelyn J. Furse on 9/11/13 (alt)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF UTAH, CENTRAL DIVISION LARRY KIRKBRIDE, Plaintiff, MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER CLARIFYING RULING ON PLAINTIFF S WITNESSES (ECF No. 173) v. Case No. 2:10 cv 660 TC EJF TEREX USA, LLC, TEREX CORPORATION, and DOES 1 THROUGH 5, District Judge Tena Campbell Magistrate Judge Evelyn J. Furse Defendants. The Court clarifies its ruling on Plaintiff Larry Kirkbride s witnesses (ECF No. 158) as follows. Defendant Terex USA, LLC (Terex) Objected to Mr. Kirkbride s use of general designations in his Rule 26(a)(3)(A)(i) Pretrial Witness Disclosures. (ECF No. 111.) In this Court s Order overruling in part and sustaining in part Terex s objections (ECF No. 158), the Court found Mr. Kirkbride s general designations insufficient because they failed to provide sufficient notice to the opposing party of witnesses he intended to call. Shortly after that Order, Mr. Kirkbride amended his Rule 26(a)(3)(A)(i) disclosures to identify a specific representative of the Utah Worker s Compensation Fund, Deb Meyer, to testify to authenticity of documents. (See ECF No. 136.) Because Mr. Kirkbride promptly amended his disclosures and Terex has not raised a new ground for objection, the Court allows the modification to Mr. Kirkbride s witness list. DATED this 11th day of September, 2013. BY THE COURT: ________________________________ Evelyn J. Furse United States Magistrate Judge
]]>
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You
should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google
Privacy Policy and
Terms of Service apply.
