U.S. Bank National Association v. Triaxx Asset Management LLC
- Barbara Moses
- 1:18-cv-04044
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 2
In U.S. Bank v. Triaxx, Judge Moses set trial procedures, allowed conditional remote testimony, and limited exhibit changes.
The parties preparing for the April 2023 trial, particularly the TAM Parties, and witness John G. Moon.
What happened
U.S. Bank National Association v. Triaxx Asset Management LLC is an order about preparing for a trial scheduled to begin April 17, 2023. The court selected the courtroom and set the location for the final pretrial conference.
The court allowed the TAM Parties to present John G. Moon’s testimony by videoconference if his doctors advised that he could not travel to New York City. It also required the parties to prepare exhibits and deposition-designation materials by April 4, and it limited changes to the TAM Parties’ exhibit list while allowing two additional proposed exhibits, subject to certain objections.
Judge Barbara Moses also explained that trial exhibits and testimony would generally remain public, although parties could request sealing or redaction in writing. The order addressed trial administration and evidence preparation; it did not decide the underlying dispute.
The detailed version
- U.S. Bank National Association v. Triaxx Asset Management LLC · No. 1:18-cv-04044
- Barbara Moses
- Mar. 22, 2023
Background
The court issued this order after a telephonic conference concerning the upcoming trial. The trial was scheduled to begin on April 17, 2023, and the final pretrial conference was scheduled for April 11, 2023.
Courtroom and Witness Arrangements
The trial will take place in Courtroom 20C at the Daniel Patrick Moynihan United States Courthouse. The final pretrial conference will take place in Courtroom 20A.
The TAM Parties may present John G. Moon’s trial testimony by videoconference if, at the time of trial, his doctors advise that he cannot travel to New York City. The TAM Parties must tell the parties and the court by April 11 whether Mr. Moon will testify in person or remotely. If he testifies remotely, they must provide a supporting letter from one of his physicians, arrange the necessary technology, and pay the related costs. They must also promptly notify the parties and the court if he cannot testify either in person or remotely.
Exhibits and Deposition Designations
The court rejected the TAM Parties’ proposed corrected exhibit list to the extent it changed document descriptions or reordered and renumbered trial exhibits. The TAM Parties may add proposed exhibits 3505 and 3506 to their original exhibit list, subject to objections or motions concerning those exhibits on grounds other than timeliness. The court will accept no further additions to the parties’ witness lists. Documents that refer to exhibits by the proposed new numbers must be resubmitted using the original exhibit numbers.
The parties must provide two copies of their pre-marked trial exhibits by April 4. The court also requested electronic copies. During trial, the parties must provide a paper copy of an exhibit for a witness when questioning the witness about it.
The parties must also submit consolidated deposition designations by April 4. These materials must show all parties’ designations and objections and include specified deposition pages and related pages.
Sealing and Disposition
The court stated that it did not anticipate sealing trial exhibits or trial testimony. A party seeking to seal or redact such material must apply in writing and explain why the restriction is essential to protect an important interest and is narrowly tailored. The court noted that this requirement does not apply to redactions required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5.2.
This was a procedural trial-management order. It did not resolve the merits of U.S. Bank National Association’s claims or the defendants’ positions.
Read the full 2-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.