Abbott Laboratories v. Feinberg

Background

The parties disputed the scope of trial testimony from Karmin Maritato and whether the defendants could designate deposition testimony from Maritato and Lela Hersh.

Maritato oversaw the plaintiff’s art collection and related historical archives and had testified as the plaintiff’s witness designated under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 30(b)(6). The plaintiff intended to call her at trial about matters within her personal knowledge and information she learned from the plaintiff’s business records concerning the painting at issue. In an earlier order dated October 7, 2020, the court permitted that testimony to the extent Maritato was qualified to interpret the records and the records were admissible under a hearsay exclusion or exception.

Hersh worked for Museum of Fine Arts Consulting, which the plaintiff retained to determine whether it possessed the original painting or a copy. The defendants sought to use parts of Hersh’s deposition to argue that the plaintiff possessed a copy and should have recognized that fact. Hersh was also designated as a live witness.

Rulings

The court ruled that the defendants could designate portions of Maritato’s Rule 30(b)(6) deposition testimony. At trial, Maritato could testify on direct and cross-examination about matters within the corporation’s knowledge to which she testified during the deposition. The court explained that Rule 30(b)(6) testimony commits a corporation to a position at a particular time but is not a final judicial admission preventing the witness from correcting, explaining, supplementing, or offering different testimony.

The court separately ruled that Hersh’s testimony could not be designated from her deposition. Her testimony had to be elicited live at trial.

Disposition

The order resolved an evidentiary and discovery-related dispute about the use of deposition testimony at trial. It did not decide the parties’ underlying dispute about the painting.