Free Motion for Order - District Court of Connecticut - Connecticut

I I
» Case 3:00-cv-O065_t5—SRU Document 96 Filed 04/l__2/2004 Page 1 of 3
I
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT I
I DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT g In § D I
I
|y|_AR3HA|_;_ (;HAMBERS_ } IIIIIII APR I2 FD I2: 25
Plaintiff } Docket No.; 3:00Cv00656ISRU8 I
v_ I } I U.S. D STR! {count
} BRIDGEPURI. DUNN
ANTHONY J. PRINCIPI, Secretary, } ° I I I.
U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, } April 9, 2004 I
Defendant } I
I
MOTION FOR ORDER
I
Pursuant to FRE 804 (b) Plaintiff MARSHALL CHAMBERS, hereby moves this I
Court for an order permitting the Plaintiff to introduce, at any trial of the above- I
captioned matter, relevant excerpts from any and all affidavits, or testimony,
proffered by those witnesses/agentslemployees of the Defendant, who may now I
be out of state, or no longer employed by the Defendant, or whose whereabouts
are presently unknown. i I
In support of this motion, Plaintiff represents as follows: I
1. Opposing counsel on Monday, March 29, 2004, indicated to I ;
Plaintiffs counsel that only two of all those witnesses listed by the Plaintiff were I
still employed by the Defendant, and that those two witnesses were employed I
out of state. Upon information and belief, Plaintiff, Marshall Chambers, I
maintains otherwise.
2. Plaintiff has requested that Defendant provide the last I
known addresses of all those witnesseslagentslemployees of the Defendant I
listed by the Plaintiff. I
3. Several witnesses listed by the Plaintiff testified in EEO
I
Hearings on the discrimination and retaliation complaints brought by this Plaintiff
against this Defendant. (EEO Cases its 97-1322, 97-2202 and 98-0205).
I

, ` Case 3:00-cv-006665SRU Document 96 Filed 0461-%/2004 Page 2 of 3
···1 l
l
4. Defendant was in fact the Respondent, an interested party in those
prior proceedings, had notice of those proceedings, and had both the opportunity ` \
and motive to develop the testimony of these witnesses by direct, cross, or re- l
direct examination. K
l
5. Moreover, the subject affidavitsltestimony during the EEO i
proceedings were all under oath. (
l
6. In addition, Defendants counsel has also stated on Monday, March
29, 2004, that the Federal Government would not pay for its employees to come I
to Bridgeport to testify on the Plaintiffs behalf. _
l
7. Plaintiff is demonstrably indigent, without income, and cannot afford {
the costs of transporting any Federal Government, or out of state witnesses, to
Bridgeport to testify. !
8. Introduction of the afore-mentioned prior sworn testimony and
Affidavits shouldlwould reasonably be expected to aid the truth—seeking function E
of the court. i
l
WHEREFORE: Plaintiff moves this Court for the afore-mentioned order.
Respectfully submitted,
PLA NTIFF, MARSHALL CHAMBERS i
Q l
M. PILGR , ESQ.
LAW OFFICES OF CALEB M.
PILGRIM, LLC l
1404 WHALLEY AVENUE, 2ND FLOOR
NEW HAVEN, CT 06515
(203) 387-2524 ‘
FEDERAL BAR NO. CT14857 N
l

I £"“_—"_——”`_`VI
[ é `J Cage 3300-cv-OOGESESRU Document 96 Filed 0441-252004 Page 3 of 3
I I
I CERTIFICATE I
I
I I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing wa mailed to Attorney Lauren
. Nash, AUSA, U.S. Department of Justice, 1 C urch Stree aven, CT E
06510 on April 9, 2004. I
C-:¥/¢ Gwen M-»· {
ALEB M. PILGRI , ESQ.
I
I
I

I
I
I
I