Free Motion for Miscellaneous Relief - District Court of Connecticut - Connecticut

Case 3:02-cv-01802-AVC Document 106 Filed 10/12/2004 Page 1 of 4
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF CONNECTICUT
-—- ---------- ---- ------ ·· ---------- -·· —----- - ---------- X
PHILIP GLYNN, CIVIL NO. 3-02C\/1802 (AVC)
Plaintiff,
BANKERS LIFE AND CASUALTY CO.,
Defendant. October 3, 2004
----------·---- ·· ------------ --- ---- -· ------------ · ---· X
DEFENDAN'I"S MOTION TO REOPEN DISCOVERY
Defendant Bankers Life & Casualty Company ("Bankers"), through undersigned
counsel, hereby moves to reopen discovery to allow for: (I) the deposition of two people
identified for the first time in Plaintiffs Opposition to Bankers’ Motion for Summary
Judgment, as well any other persons with knowledge identified by Plaintiffl and/or these
heretofore undisclosed witnesses; (2) Bankers to produce, and Plaintiff to examine, an
expert witness regarding the cause and effect ofthe alcohol contained in Plaintiffs
Decedent’s blood at the time of his death, and (3) Bankers to depose Plaintiff s alcohol
expert.
As described in the accompanying memorandum of law, Plaintiff disclosed the
identity of two persons with alleged knowledge in his September l, 2004 opposition to
I As described herein, the parties have been forced to postpone Plaintiff' s deposition until the and of
October due to Plaintiff‘s poor health.
ORAL ARGUMENT BLEQUESTED l

Case 3:02-cv-01802-AVC Document 106 Filed 10/12/2004 Page 2 of 4
Bankers’ Motion for Summary Judgment- i.e. two months after the close of discovery.
Plaintiffs tardy disclosure came in the guise of two affidavits from Dccedent's sisters
(the "Gly1m Sisters"), who now profess to have knowledge regarding Decedcnt's alleged
actions in the hours before his death. These persons were never identified by Plaintiff in
his interrogatory responses or in any supplemental response.
Significantly, Bankers’ instant request to reopen discovery to depose the Glynn
Sisters will neither prejudice Plaintiff nor slow this action because the parties have
already been forced to postpone Plaintiff' s deposition until the end of October due to
Plaintiffs poor health. Thus, Bankers needs to depose the Glynn Sisters, as well any
other persons with knowledge identified by Plaintiff and/or the Glynn Sisters.
Next, Plaintiff argues in its opposition to Bankers’ Motion for Summary
Judgment (and his motion to strike portions of same) that Bankers needs an expert to (a)
offer evidence regarding the cause and effect of the high levels of alcohol in Deccdenfs
bloodstream, and (b) opine that drinking excessive amounts of alcohol, and thereafter
operating a motor vehicle at a great rate of speed, robs one of a reasonable expectation of
survival. While Bankers disagrees that expert testimony is needed on these axioms,
Bankers is willing to produce an expert to opine on these topics. Judicial economy
dictates that Bankers be allowed to designate an expert as Plaintiff insists, and thereafter
give Plaintiff the opportunity to depose said expert (should Plaintiff so desire), rather than
litigating the admissibility of this evidence and/or Bankers’ need to use an expert from
now through trial, Reciprocally, Bankers requests the opportunity to depose Plaintiff s
experts on the same topics.
ORAL. ARGUMENT REQUESTED 2

Case 3:02-cv-01802-AVC Document 106 Filed 10/12/2004 Page 3 of 4
For the foregoing reasons, Bankers respectfully requests the Court to reopen
discovery to allow (l) the deposition of the Glynn Sisters, as well any other persons with
knowledge identilied by Plaintiff and/or the Glynn Sisters; (2) Bankers to produce, and
Plaintiff to examine, an expert witness regarding the cause and effect of the alcohol
contained in Deeedent’s blood at the time of his death; and (3) Bankers to depose
Plaintiff’ s alcohol expert.
BANKERS E -· * tw SUALTY
C I u|L · ·- '“ `
hl-
By: ··¤1§"'°"
JOHN T. HAB · N
Federal 7- ar No ctl40'/5
Whitrn Bree Abbott Se Morgan LLC
10 F` ld Poi t Road
Gr nwich C 06830
(203) 869-38 0
(203) 869-1.9 l
OF COUNSEL
ANDREW MUSCATO
SKADDEN, ARPS, SLATE, MEAGHER
& FLOM LLP
One Newark Center
Newark, NJ 07102
ORAL ARGUMENT REQUESTED 3

Case 3:02-cv-01802-AVC Document 106 Filed 10/12/2004 Page 4 0f 4
CERTIFICATION
This is to certify that a true and co1·rect copy ofthe was mailed via First Class
Mail, postage pre-paid on this t of October, 2004, to the following counsel of
record:
Everett H. Madin, Jr.
Riscassi and Davis, P.C.
131 Oak Street
Hartford, CT 06l 06
Counsel for Plaintiff Philip Glynn
- @7
ORAL ARGUMENT REQUESTED 4