Cerveceria Modelo de Mexico, S. de R.L. de C.V. v. CB Brand Strategies, LLC
- Lewis Kaplan
- 1:21-cv-01317
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 3
In Cerveceria Modelo v. CB Brand Strategies, Judge Kaplan’s text records defendants’ request to bar deposition playback but shows no clear ruling.
The plaintiffs and defendants in the case, particularly their planned use of William Newlands’s deposition and live trial testimony.
What happened
Cerveceria Modelo de México, S. de R.L. de C.V. v. CB Brand Strategies, LLC concerns defendants’ request about how William Newlands’s deposition testimony would be used at trial. Defendants said Newlands would testify live and argued that plaintiffs should question him live rather than play his deposition testimony.
Defendants argued that playing the deposition would be inefficient, inconsistent with the preference for live testimony, and unfair because plaintiffs would get two opportunities to present Newlands’s testimony while defendants would get one. In the alternative, defendants asked to take another deposition for use at trial if plaintiffs were allowed to play theirs.
The text identifies Judge Lewis A. Kaplan, but it does not clearly show what ruling, if any, he made on the request. Accordingly, the available text does not establish whether the request was granted, denied, or otherwise resolved.
The detailed version
- Cerveceria Modelo de Mexico, S. de R.L. de C.V. v. CB Brand Strategies, LLC · No. 1:21-cv-01317
- Lewis Kaplan
- Feb. 27, 2023
Nature of the filing
The available text is a letter from defendants’ counsel concerning the proposed use at trial of deposition testimony from William Newlands, identified as Constellation’s President and Chief Executive Officer. The letter asks the court to prevent plaintiffs from designating and playing portions of Newlands’s deposition in their case-in-chief because defendants intended to call him as a live witness.
Background
Defendants said they added Newlands to their amended initial disclosures on March 25, 2022, and to their witness list on January 27, 2023. At plaintiffs’ request, defendants agreed to produce Newlands for a 3.5-hour deposition on February 7, 2023, even though fact discovery had closed approximately nine months earlier. Defendants later told plaintiffs that Newlands would be called live at trial and would be available during the week of March 13, 2023. The letter stated that medical procedures and a speaking engagement made him unavailable before then.
Arguments presented
Defendants argued that deposition testimony is generally disfavored when the witness will appear live. They also argued that playing approximately an hour and a half of designated deposition testimony would be inefficient because the jury would see the same witness live several days later. Defendants further claimed that plaintiffs’ proposed use would prejudice them by giving plaintiffs two opportunities to present or examine Newlands while defendants had no affirmative deposition testimony to play.
As an alternative, defendants asked that they be permitted to conduct their own three-hour trial-preservation deposition if the court allowed plaintiffs to play their designations. The letter ultimately requested that plaintiffs be instructed to cross-examine Newlands live.
Disposition
The available opinion text does not clearly state the court’s disposition. It contains the defendants’ request and bears an endorsement associated with Judge Lewis A. Kaplan, but the endorsement’s text is not legible or otherwise sufficient in the provided material to establish whether the request was granted, denied, or resolved in another way.
Read the full 3-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.