Newirth v. Aegis Senior Communities LLC
- Jeffrey White
- 4:16-cv-03991
- U.S. District Court · Northern District of California
- 3
In Newirth v. Aegis, Judge Illman granted remote expert depositions and MedModel inspection, denying Aegis’s request to delay them.
The ruling affected the plaintiffs, Aegis Senior Communities LLC, the expert witnesses Cristina Flores and Dale Schroyer, and the planned inspection of MedModel.
What happened
In Newirth v. Aegis Senior Communities LLC, the parties disagreed about whether depositions of experts Cristina Flores and Dale Schroyer, along with an inspection of MedModel software, should be delayed because of pandemic-related travel and in-person restrictions. Aegis argued that the complex documents and technical issues made remote proceedings impractical; the plaintiffs argued they could proceed remotely.
The court decided that the depositions and inspection should proceed remotely. It found that complex exhibits were not necessarily a barrier to remote videoconference depositions and that waiting until August for in-person proceedings was speculative.
Judge Illman granted the plaintiffs’ request for remote proceedings and denied Aegis Senior Communities LLC’s request to delay the depositions until August 2020. The court said Aegis could later request additional deposition time if a basis arose after the remote proceedings and after consulting with the plaintiffs.
The detailed version
- Newirth v. Aegis Senior Communities LLC · No. 4:16-cv-03991
- Jeffrey White
- May 27, 2020
Background
The court addressed a discovery dispute presented in a joint letter brief. Aegis Senior Communities LLC asked the court to delay further depositions of the plaintiffs’ expert witnesses, Cristina Flores and Dale Schroyer, and an inspection of the MedModel discrete-event simulation software until August 2020. Aegis cited restrictions on travel and in-person activities caused by the pandemic and argued that remote proceedings would be impractical because they involved numerous complicated documents, files, exhibits, and technical issues.
The plaintiffs opposed a delay and argued that the depositions and inspection could proceed remotely. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 30(b)(4) permits depositions by remote means when the parties agree or the court orders them.
Court’s reasoning
The court relied on decisions recognizing that remote videoconference depositions can be effective and efficient. It rejected the argument that complex exhibits alone made remote depositions infeasible, noting that similar concerns had previously been rejected and that documents could be exchanged in advance or displayed through videoconference technology.
The court also found speculative the assumption that in-person depositions would be permitted in August. Although the court’s courthouse restrictions did not control the location of depositions, the restrictions indicated that conditions for in-person civil litigation might not substantially change by then. The court therefore found it prudent to proceed remotely.
Ruling
The court ordered that the depositions of Cristina Flores and Dale Schroyer and the inspection of MedModel be conducted remotely, and it granted the plaintiffs’ request. It denied Aegis’s request to delay the depositions until August 2020. The court stated that Aegis could request additional deposition time later if a basis arose after the remote proceedings and after meeting and conferring with the plaintiffs.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.