Earl Robert Velger v. DARWIN CARR,
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS DIVISION OF ST. THOMAS AND ST. JOHN EARL ROBERT VELGER, Plaintiff, CASE NO. 2010-42 v. DARWIN CARR individually and as Trustee of LIVE BY FAITH IRREVOCABLE TRUST, Defendants. MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Before the Court is the motion of plaintiff Velger and counterclaim defendant Murdjeff (ECF 142) for sanctions pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 30(g), because Attorney Darwin Carr, having noticed Velger’s deposition for August 19, 2011 on St. Thomas, did not appear personally to take the deposition, but rather deposed Mr. Velger by telephone. …
Download the original document · Plain text (TXT) · Browse the archive · How this archive works
Original source: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCOURTS-vid-3_10-cv-00042/pdf/USCOURTS-vid-3_10-cv-00042-6.pdf
SHA-256 63e79b80af91d6b5219d8792aa9a8ca127825389b524e6c85a63d22a0a6dd434
Re-using this document
two independent grounds: a work of the United States Government under 17 USC 105, AND a judicial opinion, which is an edict of government and uncopyrightable by anyone including the court that wrote it
Our description, tagging, arrangement, extracted text and machine transcripts are released under CC0 1.0. We assert nothing about the document itself.
Archive identifier LF-63e79b80af91
Document text
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS DIVISION OF ST. THOMAS AND ST. JOHN EARL ROBERT VELGER, Plaintiff, CASE NO. 2010-42 v. DARWIN CARR individually and as Trustee of LIVE BY FAITH IRREVOCABLE TRUST, Defendants. MEMORANDUM AND ORDER Before the Court is the motion of plaintiff Velger and counterclaim defendant Murdjeff (ECF 142) for sanctions pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 30(g), because Attorney Darwin Carr, having noticed Velger’s deposition for August 19, 2011 on St. Thomas, did not appear personally to take the deposition, but rather deposed Mr. Velger by telephone. Rule 30 (g) (emphasis added) provides for the recovery of expenses where a party attends his duly noticed deposition and the noticing party fails to “attend and proceed with the deposition.” Inasmuch as Attorney Carr did attend by telephone and did proceed with the deposition at the time and place noticed 1, the requirements for an award of sanctions have not been met.2 1 Rule 30(b)(4) provides that the deposition “takes place where the deponent answers questions.” According to Velger, the deposition was noticed to take place at the offices of Attorney Francis Jackson at 10:00 a.m. on August 19, 2011. Mr. Velger was present at that location at that time and date, and his deposition was taken. 2 Velger’s musings regarding Carr’s intention not to appear personally, and the length of time the deposition might have taken had he done so, are speculative at best, and do not support an award of sanctions. Case: 3:10-cv-00042-CVG-RM Document #: 157 Filed: 10/03/11 Page 1 of 2 Earl Robert Velger v. Darwin Carr, et al. Civil No. 2010-42 Accordingly, the premises considered, the motion for sanctions is DENIED. S\________________________________ RUTH MILLER United States Magistrate Judge Case: 3:10-cv-00042-CVG-RM Document #: 157 Filed: 10/03/11 Page 2 of 2