ML19329C957

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Responds to DC Hjelmfelt 751028 Request for Addl Discovery Re Expert Testimony to Be Submitted in Cases of O Lentz & H Caruso.Request Untimely & Inappropriate.Questions Can Be Addressed at Evidentiary Hearing
ML19329C957
Person / Time
Site: Davis Besse, Perry  Cleveland Electric icon.png
Issue date: 10/29/1975
From: Reynolds W
SHAW, PITTMAN, POTTS & TROWBRIDGE
To: Hjelmfelt D
GOLDBERG, FIELDMAN & HJELMFELT
References
NUDOCS 8002200932
Download: ML19329C957 (1)


Text

foo 3t/64,500M,60lR RELATED CORRESPONDENCE "

ERUER ID. & Uill Fisc. 4 9 0 M, 4 & / 4 s

SHAW, PITTMAN PoTTs & TROWBRIDGE 910 S CV E N T C C N T H ST R C CT, N. W.

WASHINGTO N, D. C. 2 0 00 6 sausa' o_ ports sec o-c = L. *apa c e tacat ase-se a s sitvaart.pitewas use avoc%euca ca s t c.*s.* awt aw-sconocr.too es.oct reco ceas ca srcanc= o.eores c e=csv 6. et anc. sa.

TctcL taoi43 ocaato enannorr castcrow s so cs em. ster o. sosr ca v=owasa.saatte enacntcv swaw e.viuorp,manto=

sa cs v=o as 6c==an, or cov= set ocometis.acocas.sm, servc= t. =ctra ce e AWCc W. C#W8CM5tt Oca= o.aWUC4 tesus a.=.caotsom. se sactoom J. =cisct*

esamtse. o. eamus cusaecta as pr ie c.c 'e se nicnano J.

ci.can moscar

  • a==a=o CO g

,av c. site cmo taunc=ct stoec=

g saneana =. sossorte stce=cs. e nuev6ce f

October 29, 1975 off07. $

ocoacc <. auc=.s.

,4, n. e c== s t c.=

.e...,o...c.=otos

.....o. = e o =

osc== A.s..,=-

p,

.......e..u 4

David C. Hjelmfelt, Esquire OCT31197 2

yy;,y u.. s,,,

Goldberg, Fieldman & Hjelmfelt y.?. '***

/

f -iff f

1700 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.

9 Washington, D. C.

20006 cl o

g Re:

Perry & Davis-3 esse Antitrust Proceeding

Dear Mr. Hj elmfelt :

s In your letter to me of October 28, 1975, you have asked for add'itional discovery based on the filed direct expert testi-mony that will be submitted on behalf of all Applicants in the case of Mr. Owen Lent, and by The Cleveland Electric Illuminating Company in the case of Mr. Henry Caruso.

Your request is both untimely and inappropriate.

Appli-cants' dirnet expert testimony provides no' legitimate basis for the City to commence on the eve of the evidentiary hearing another round of discovery.

The City had ample opportunity for prehearing discovery over the past nine monthu.

It took full advantage of the discovery procedures by serving en Applicants elaborate inter-rogatories and document requests, all of which were answered, and by taking a large number of depositions.

If the City has any questions it wishes to address to Mr. Lents or Mr. Caruso it will have a full opportunity to do so when they take the stand.

Discovery requests directed to these two expert witnesses, or any others appearing on behalf of Appli-cants (either individually or collectively) in this proceeding, are out of order.

Sincerely yours,

[, d, p '

1 JA

\\

Wm. Bradford Reynolds 1

Counsel for Applicants WBR:ats l

cc: Members'of the Board 8002 m % 2 All Parties g