EvidenceProf Blog

Editor: Colin Miller
Univ. of South Carolina School of Law

A Member of the Law Professor Blogs Network

Sunday, March 2, 2008

Blending In: Court Finds That Documents Used To Refresh Witness' Recollection Must Be Produced In Blender Patent Dispute

My wife and I are currently trying to decide on what blender to purchase because she recently got Jessica Seinfeld's cookbook "Deceptively Delicious," and she wants a heavy duty machine that can make all of the book's recommended purees.  Of course, Seinfeld's cookbook has caused an interesting legal battle as Missy Chase Lapine has claimed that Jessica's cookbok plagiarized from her own puree cookbook "The Sneaky Chef" and that Jessica's husband, Jerry, slandered her by calling her a "wacko."  While researching blenders, however, I came across another lawsuit with an intersting evidentiary ruling.

Apparently, in 1994, blender maker Vita-Mix got a patent entitled "Method of Preventing the Formation of an Air Pocket in a Blender."  According to Vita-Mix, competitor Back to Basics infringed on this patent in the creation of its own blenders.  During a deposition in the patent infringement case, "Thomas E. Daniels, Jr. testified on behalf of [the] defendant...." Vita-Mix Corp. v. Basic Holdings, Inc., 2008 WL 495781 at *2 (N.D. Ohio 2008).  When Vita-Mix's counsel attempted to ask what documents were shown to refresh his recollection so that he could testify, defense counsel instructed Daniels not to answer. See id.  Daniels thus did not describe the contents of the documents that he was shown, but he did testify that he was given a stack of documents "several inches tall." Id.

Vita-Mix thus moved to compel the production of these documents, or, in the alternative, that Daniels' testimony be stricken pursuant to Federal Rule of Evidence 612, which states in relevant part that "if a witness uses a writing to refresh memory for the purpose of testifying, either--

     (1) while testifying, or

     (2) before testifying, if the court in its discretion determines it is necessary in the interests of justice,

an adverse party is entitled to have the writing produced at the hearing, to inspect it, to cross-examine the witness thereon, and to introduce in evidence those portions which relate to the testimony of the witness."

The court granted Vita-Mix's motion finding that the case before it was "a complex intellectual property dispute" and that "it would be unfair to expect it to be able to adequately cross-examine Mr. Daniels without knowing which documents refreshed his recollection and formed the basis for the corporation's knowledge on certain matters." Id. at *4.  The court also pointed out that the defendant had not raised an issue which has split courts across the country (and which I have addressed before):  whether, Federal Rule of Evidence 612 notwithstanding, documents used to refresh a witness' recollection is covered by the work product privilege?

-CM

http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/evidenceprof/2008/03/blending-in-cou.html

| Permalink

TrackBack URL for this entry:

http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341bfae553ef00e5509bae738834

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Blending In: Court Finds That Documents Used To Refresh Witness' Recollection Must Be Produced In Blender Patent Dispute:

Comments

Speaking of the best blenders, if you have not bought one yet, I highly recommend the Vita-Mix. We have tried most of them, and "the evidence is" that the Vita-Mix blows the socks off all we tried. We have had ours for about 10 years now, use it every day, and it is still wonderful. We like to give them as gifts to special friends who don't already have one.

There is a web site with a "free shipping coupon" at http://www.ph-n.com/tools/vitamix.htm. It seems like the prices are about $50 lower also, compared to other Vita-Mix searches I have done.

While you are there, look around that web site. It is a great resource for natural health info, and it is free.

Posted by: Vindi Siemens | Jul 18, 2008 11:04:07 AM

Post a comment