FROM TODAY DOCKET 301 - THIS IS TYPICAL OF BW TO MISLED THE COURT !
in response to
by
Message: PACER digEcor
The Court notes specifically that it found e.Digital’s witnesses to be credible, while some witnesses offered by digEcor lacked credibility under the above criteria. Specifically, digEcor’s President, Brent Wood, offered self-serving testimony at trial that was often contradicted by his
own past testimony (compare Tr. 305-309 with digEcor 30(b)(6) Dep. p. 74; and Tr. 333-336 with July 14, 2006 Brent Wood Declaration, ¶ 26, Doc. #17) or with his own private statements in the contemporaneous communications offered in evidence. (Compare Tr. 162, 171 with Exs. 62 & 71.) At one point during the trial, Mr. Wood stated that his sworn testimony on a crucial issue (which did not align with digEcor’s litigation position), given in the 30(b)(6) deposition of digEcor, was false. (Tr. 309.) Further, while the Court found digEcor Vice President Chris Wood to be generally credible, documents introduced at trial demonstrate that he misled e.Digital regarding the purpose of the inspection performed by digEcor.2 (See n. 5, infra.) The Court has incorporated these credibility determinations in reaching the findings discussed below. Finally, the Court notes that the trial was extended by several days to permit digEcor to introduce evidence and testimony well beyond the time originally allotted.
own past testimony (compare Tr. 305-309 with digEcor 30(b)(6) Dep. p. 74; and Tr. 333-336 with July 14, 2006 Brent Wood Declaration, ¶ 26, Doc. #17) or with his own private statements in the contemporaneous communications offered in evidence. (Compare Tr. 162, 171 with Exs. 62 & 71.) At one point during the trial, Mr. Wood stated that his sworn testimony on a crucial issue (which did not align with digEcor’s litigation position), given in the 30(b)(6) deposition of digEcor, was false. (Tr. 309.) Further, while the Court found digEcor Vice President Chris Wood to be generally credible, documents introduced at trial demonstrate that he misled e.Digital regarding the purpose of the inspection performed by digEcor.2 (See n. 5, infra.) The Court has incorporated these credibility determinations in reaching the findings discussed below. Finally, the Court notes that the trial was extended by several days to permit digEcor to introduce evidence and testimony well beyond the time originally allotted.
15 Recommendations
Loading...
Loading...
New Message
Please
login
to post a reply