Posted on 08/29/2011 2:49:15 PM PDT by abb
DURHAM – Lawyers in two of Duke-lacrosse-case-spawned lawsuits are due in court Wednesday morning to try to resolve some of their disagreements about how to handle the exchange of depositions and documents.
The pre-trial conference is a continuation of a process, guided by a federal magistrate judge, that began earlier this month.
Duke University and lawyers for two groups of players are trying among other things to figure out where and how many people should be questioned in the course of gathering evidence on the players’ claims against the school.
The players contend that Duke administrators breached confidentiality promises and conspired with local authorities to hide the fact they’d given police data on the players’ comings and goings for the night of an ill-fated team party in 2006.
That March 2006 party yielded stripper Crystal Mangum’s false claim of rape, and the indictment of three players subsequently exonerated by the state attorney general.
Duke is pushing for the depositions to take place in North Carolina, while lawyers for the players want their clients to be questioned on their home turf.
Both say a decision going against them would subject them – or their lawyers at least, in practical terms the same thing as the lawyers would bill travel costs to their clients – to undue expense and inconvenience.
Duke’s argument, in essence, is that it didn’t ask to be sued and that the burden of travel should fall on the players as the plaintiffs in the case.
The university’s lawyers noted that the general rule is that depositions take place in the judicial district where a case was filed.
And given that everyone involved has a North Carolina-based lawyer, it’s “more cost-efficient to have each plaintiff travel to North Carolina for depositions than it is to have a team of lawyers travel around the country to take the depositions of all” the players, Duke’s lawyers said.
The players, however, contend the travel burden on them would be considerable, given that post-graduation they’ve scattered around the country and in some cases the world. They argue that judges can to make exceptions to the general rule, particularly when there’s a threat of hardship to witnesses.
The various sides have also been arguing about how many people should be deposed and about the handling of e-mails and other documents Duke will have to produce.
On the document front, lawyers for the largest, 38-member groups of players suing Duke earlier this month said they haven’t gone along with Duke’s assumption that there will be a judge’s order barring disclosure of the material they receive.
The university’s view is that there should be a protective order to safeguard “the privacy of personal information of individuals and confidential business or financial information.”
The players, however, “have not agreed to any blanket protective order at this time,” their lawyers said, noting that it’s possible to redact documents.
The ongoing proceedings affect only Duke and players who escaped indictment in 2006. Appeals are pending in these cases and another as far as they target actions by the city government.
ping
It turns out that in court many of the relatives of the players were being told by the yutes who came to see the trial that they would be KILLED.
For being related to these INNOCENT men.
They were told this repeatedly and in completely audible tones.
I will predict this case is still progressing through the court system in 2015. The Duke university will eventually add up the lawyer cost for their side and offer enough for the whole thing to end.
I hope they sue Nancy Grace and the New York Times, both of whom excoriated them and never offered a retraction.
I hope they manage to drive some of the “Gang of 88” faculty and administration into personal bankruptcy.
Is she the one who’ll be on the US Dancing With The Stars this September?
Me too.
BTW, did you know that the Black acusser Crystal Mangum) was never charged with a crime?
I think she's in jail now charged with attempted murder in another case.
http://www.newsobserver.com/2011/04/18/1138586/crystal-mangum-indicted-for-boyfriends.html
Published Mon, Apr 18, 2011 03:24 PM
Crystal Mangum indicted in boyfriend’s death
By Jesse James DeConto
DURHAM A grand jury has indicted Crystal Mangum in the death of her boyfriend Reginald Daye.
Charged with murder, she is accused of stabbing her boyfriend, Reginald Daye, during an argument. Police were dispatched to 3507 Century Oaks Drive at 3:15 a.m. April 3, and found Daye stabbed in the torso. Daye, 46, died last Wednesday at Duke Hospital, police spokeswoman Kammie Michael has said.
Mangum, the woman at the center of the Duke University lacrosse scandal five years ago, is in the Durham County jail. She originally faced a charge of assault with a deadly weapon with intent to kill inflicting serious injury. Her bail is set at $300,000.
Five years ago, Mangum accused members of the Duke lacrosse team of sexually assaulting her while she was working as a stripper for an escort service. The accusations were eventually labeled as false, and the case was dismissed by state Attorney General Roy Cooper. The case garnered nationwide attention
A minor upside is that when they get ready to have precious give her deposition, they should have a good idea where to find her.
“I hope they manage to drive some of the “Gang of 88” faculty and administration into personal bankruptcy.”
Unlikely as they are not being sued personally and Duke will pick up the tab for whatever expenses employees incur. What everyone is hoping for is the truth to come out and publicly humiliate those involved in perpetrating this.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.