Hans HUB, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. SUN VALLEY CO., Et Al., Defendants-Appellees

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• noting that, under Rule 32(a)(8), “courts have required . . . the presence of an adversary with the same motive to cross-examine the deponent”
• “The accepted inquiry focuses on whether the prior cross-examination 9 would satisfy a reasonable party who opposes admission in the present lawsuit.”
• “The shortcoming here 26 is that Hub failed to show that the deposition relates to issues common to both lawsuits.”
• “Depositions can save the time, effort and money of litigants, and help expedite trials.”
• “Because the underlying objective is efficiency at trial without jeopardizing accurate fact finding, the district court is usually in the best position to decide whether a prior deposition should be admitted.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).