Docstoc

202 P Request for Telephonic Conf re Deposition Disputes

Document Sample
202 P Request for Telephonic Conf re Deposition Disputes Powered By Docstoc
					Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG
(213) 992-3299 TELEPHONE (213) 596-0487 FACSIMILE
EUGENE D. LEE, ESQ. PRINCIPAL

Document 202

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 1 of 4
ELEE@LOEL.COM E-MAIL WWW.LOEL.COM WEBSITE

L A W

E U G E N E

O F F I C E

L E E

O F

555 WEST FIFTH STREET, SUITE 3100 LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90013-1010

JOAN E. HERRINGTON, ESQ. OF COUNSEL

August 21, 2008 VIA CM/ECF U.S.D.C., Eastern District of California 2500 Tulare St., #1501 Fresno, CA 93721 Re: 100011.001

Severe Ongoing Deposition Disputes Which Go Unpunished by this Court Jadwin / County of Kern, et al. (USDC EDCA No. 1:07-cv-00026-OWW/TAG)

To the Honorable Court: I am counsel of record for Plaintiff. Both I and Mark Wasser, counsel of record for Defendants, are seeking the assistance of the Court to resolve numerous discovery disputes which have arisen in depositions. I have attached rough transcripts of the depositions in question, i.e., the depositions of Toni Smith and of Barbara Patrick. Defendants’ misconduct in discovery in this action is beyond the pale. This Court has seen fit to deny Plaintiff’s repeated requests for protective orders and sanctions against this misconduct. Plaintiff has been prejudiced in countless ways and intends to seek appellate redress at the appropriate time. In the meantime, Plaintiff again requests this Court act to curb Defendants’ discovery obstruction and abuse. Following is a synopsis of the disputes. Plaintiff’s Request for Protective Order re Personal Property; and Request for Sanctions I am seeking an order that prohibits Mr. Wasser from touching or threatening to touch my personal property again without my permission. In addition, I am yet again seeking sanctions against Mr. Wasser, this time for his misconduct in damaging my property. At a minimum, I would appreciate being provided with compensation for my equipment loss. Following is an explanation of how Mr. Wasser damaged my equipment. At the deposition of Toni Smith conducted during the morning of August 19, 2008, I stated on the record that I had heard Mr. Wasser tapping his foot against deponent’s foot during a critical line of questioning regarding Dr. Royce Johnson, a comparator for Plaintiff. (Smith Deposition, 88:19-23). During a colloquoy in which Mr. Wasser denied he had tapped deponent’s foot, he stood up, reached across the conference table, and without my permission, picked up my webcam which I had been using to videotape Mr. Wasser (I had previously given notice to Mr. Wasser that I would be videotaping him because of his egregious and persistent obstruction and misconduct in nearly every deposition in this action. Plaintiff has twice sought a protective order I.

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 2 of 4

re depositions from this Court. Both times, the Court denied Plaintiff’s requests, stating that the Court had faith Mr. Wasser would not engage in misconduct.). Mr. Wasser grabbed the webcam by the stalk, sat down, repositioned his feet, then pointed the webcam at his feet as if to prove he had not tapped deponent’s feet. (90:16-23). The webcam is a top-of-the-line Logitech Orbit AF for which I paid $129.99. The instructions that came with the webcam specifically state that the camera should not be handled or held by the stalk, which is exactly what Mr. Wasser did. I asked Mr. Wasser to release my camera and give it back to me. (90:24-25). He refused. (91:1-4). I also warned him he was going to damage my webcam handling it in the manner he was doing. (90:19). After I eventually got my webcam back, I warned Mr. Wasser not to touch my equipment again without my permission. Mr. Wasser repeatedly stated, “I will touch the camera”. (91:18; 92:4; 92:12-14). A few minutes later, he stood up and this time grabbed both of my webcams by their stalks. (93: 22). He replaced the webcams on the table. Then, about a minute later, Mr. Wasser again stood up and again grabbed both of my webcams by their stalks. (94:18-22). After he again replaced both webcams on the table, I noticed the Orbit AF was no longer working and stated so on the record, at which point I adjourned the deposition to seek a protective order. (95:1-4). II. Plaintiff’s Request for Order Reconvening Deposition of Barbara Patrick and Compelling Responses; Motion for Protective Order re Speaking Objections and Witness Coaching; and Request for Sanctions

During Plaintiff’s deposition of Ms. Patrick, Mr. Wasser engaged in numerous and egregious speaking objections which coached deponent how to answer and were intended to frustrate Plaintiff’s examination. (43:16 – 46:4; 47:10-11; 63:14-64:12; 64:24 – 65:12; ). At one point, Mr. Wasser chose to engage in an irrelevant and time-consuming diatribe on the difference in criminal law between “malum in se” and “malum prohibitive” (62:1-63:1): 14:20:52 1 MR. WASSER: Counsel, your questions are 14:20:53 2 objectionable on innumerable bases, but among the 14:20:57 3 examples you gave are not analogous to the statutory 14:21:04 4 violations. There's the difference in the criminal 14:21:08 5 law between malum in se and malum prohibitive and 14:21:13 6 you're trying to make a distinction for the witness 14:21:16 7 that she's having trouble with. As shown by the above excerpt, Mr. Wasser’s conduct at the deposition was egregious and abusive. Plaintiff repeatedly asked that he state his objections succinctly as required by the FRCP but he refused. Following Mr. Wasser’s lead, deponent repeatedly refused to answer Plaintiff’s questions. She instead played word games with Plaintiff, deliberately giving answers to questions which Plaintiff had not been asked and which deponent deliberately misinterpreted. (47:24 – 48:5; 48:925; 50:23 – 59:1; 64:14-18). Meanwhile, Mr. Wasser added to the chaos by repeatedly haranguing Plaintiff and stating that Plaintiff’s question had been answered by deponent when it had not. (48:6 – 49:18). This coordinated tactic of Mr. Wasser’s and deponent’s achieved its intended goal of burning up significant amounts of time on the record and pages of deposition transcript, all the while denying Plaintiff a single response to his questions. Plaintiff admonished 2

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 3 of 4

and warned deponent and Mr. Wasser that continued refusals to respond to questioning could force Plaintiff to adjourn the deposition, but the warning was to no avail. (66:4-6). Plaintiff seeks an order reconvening Ms. Patrick’s deposition, compelling her to respond to Plaintiff’s questions and refrain from obstruction, imposing sanctions on her and/or Mr. Wasser, as well as a protective order against Mr. Wasser re speaking objections, coaching and obstruction. It should be noted that Ms. Patrick openly and voluntarily admitted on the record – without any prompting by Plaintiff – to shredding evidence in this action. Plaintiff will be seeking the appropriate sanctions for Ms. Patrick’s spoliation of evidence once the transcript becomes available. III. Plaintiff’s Request for Motion to Reconvene Deposition of Toni Smith and Compel Responses; and Request for Sanctions

Plaintiff also seeks an order to reconvene the deposition of Toni Smith. Although Plaintiff had adjourned the deposition due to Mr. Wasser’s damaging my equipment, previous to that, Defendants had adjourned Ms. Smith’s deposition based on Plaintiff’s repeatedly asking the same question to Ms. Smith. The parties had later agreed to continue the deposition on the understanding that Plaintiff would not be permitted to ask Ms. Smith questions regarding the demotion of Plaintiff pending the Court’s ruling on Defendants’ adjournment due to Plaintiff’s repetitive questions. Following is the question which prompted Mr. Wasser to instruct deponent not to answer based on an objection that the question had already been repeatedly asked. As Plaintiff attempted to give an admonition to deponent, Mr. Wasser then chose to adjourn the deposition: 09:49:09 19 Q. You did not. 09:49:11 20 Besides Dr. Jadwin's physical unavailability 09:49:29 21 and absence from the hospital, what other basis did 09:49:33 22 you hear about at the removal meeting to -- that 09:49:37 23 dictated -- that persuaded you to vote in favor of 09:49:41 24 removing Dr. Jadwin? Plaintiff challenges Defendants to identify a single other place in the deposition transcript where Plaintiff had previously asked this question. They will not find any because this was the first and only time Plaintiff asked deponent the question. Defendants’ instruction not to answer and then adjournment of the deposition was baseless and improper and merits sanctions. Plaintiff seeks a motion for an order to re-convene the deposition and requests sanctions against Mr. Wasser for his inappropriate conduct. Furthermore, Plaintiff reiterates his request for a protective order against Mr. Wasser. IV. Pending Deposition Disputes

Plaintiff further notes that the behavior of Mr. Wasser complained of above was replicated in full this morning at Plaintiff’s deposition of Dr. Dutt. Plaintiff intends to seek sanctions, an order 3

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 4 of 4

reconvening his deposition and a protective order against Mr. Wasser for egregious speaking objections, witness coaching and obstruction on the record. It should be noted that Dr. Dutt admitted on the record to continued failure to produce voluminous, material documents in response to numerous document production requests propounded by Plaintiff on October 11, 2007. Plaintiff has been utterly prejudiced by the nonproduction of these documents and will be seeking sanctions and other appropriate remedies against Defendants and/or Mr. Wasser once the transcript is available. Further, Defendants have yet to schedule a single one of the 4 depositions ordered to be reconvened by this Court at the last hearing. With time fast running out, Plaintiff anticipates having to request an OSC why Defendants’ have not complied with the Court’s order. Plaintiff has every reason to believe Mr. Wasser will continue his obstruction at every remaining deposition for the foreseeable future. Already, the Court has had to order the reconvening of 4 depositions. Plaintiff would not be surprised if, in the end, the Court will need to order the reconvening of nearly all of the 17 depositions which the Court had previously ordered the parties to convene. (Doc. 194). V. Conclusion Plaintiff and Defendants are jointly requesting the Court’s intercession in ongoing and continuing deposition disputes. The Court has already ordered the parties to adhere to a rigorous deposition schedule of 17 depositions in 11 days, which became necessary as a result of Defendants’ unilateral and improper refusal to produce a single deponent in response to Plaintiff’s properly served deposition notices served on July 3, 2008. Now, Defendants continue to engage in misconduct with impunity, threatening further delay and continuances. Plaintiff urgently requests the Court’s assistance to avoid additional prejudice to Plaintiff.

Very truly yours,

EUGENE D. LEE

4

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-2
A0819rfa (2)

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 1 of 85

1

1 2 3 4 5

WOOD & RANDALL Certified Shorthand Reporters Bakersfield and Fresno Offices 800.322.4595 or randall@bakersfieldcourtreporter.com

6 (BE ADVISED THAT ALL ROUGH DRAFTS WILL BE FOLLOWED BY 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 This realtime draft is unedited and ROUGH DRAFT UNCERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT Deposition of ANTOINETTE CATHERINE SMITH Tuesday, August 19, 2008 A CERTIFIED COPY AND BILLED APPROPRIATELY)

16 uncertified and may contain untranslated steno, an 17 occasional reporter's note and/or nonsensical English 18 word combinations. All such entries will be

19 corrected on the final certified transcript upon its 20 delivery to you in accordance with our standard 21 delivery terms. 22 This realtime draft is intended only for the

23 purpose of augmenting counsel's notes and is not 24 intended to be used or cited in any court 25 proceedings. ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT


2

09:09:27

1

EXAMINATION Page 1

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-2
A0819rfa (2)

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 2 of 85

09:09:27 09:09:30 09:09:32 09:09:33 09:09:36 09:09:37 09:09:39 09:09:40

2 BY MR. LEE: 3 Q. Ms. Smith will you please state your full

4 name for the record. 5 6 7 8 court. 9 A. Q. A. Q. Antoinette Catherine Smith. Thank you. You're appearing under an order of the Is that correct? Yes, sir. Okay. Have you ever had your deposition

09:09:41 10

09:09:43 11 taken before? 09:09:44 12 09:09:45 13 09:09:48 14 A. Q. A. Yes, sir. And when? The approximate time frame was, gosh, I Maybe two or three years ago.

09:09:51 15 can't tell you. 09:09:54 16 09:09:55 17 09:09:56 18 Q. A. Q.

An estimate is good enough? Okay. And what was that for? Were you a witness

09:09:59 19 or a party in that? 09:10:01 20 A. It -- it was related to a -- a lawsuit that

09:10:07 21 a patient had brought at -- for -- a patient care 09:10:13 22 issue at Kern Medical Center. 09:10:14 23 Q. And were you named as a defendant or were

09:10:16 24 you just deposed as a witness? 09:10:19 25


A.

You know, I can't remember. I was deposed ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT 3

09:10:27 09:10:30 09:10:32 09:10:35 09:10:36

1 originally as a defendant I think and then -- and 2 then dropped as a defendant. 3 4 5 A. Q. Dropped, okay. How many other depositions do you -That was the one and only. Page 2

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-2
A0819rfa (2)

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 3 of 85

09:10:38 09:10:40 09:10:43 09:10:46

6 7

Q.

One and only. Okay.

Good.

So you're not a deposition virgin but

8 I'll ask you a few questions -- just lay some ground 9 rules out for you anyway -A. Q. A. Q. Okay. -- just to remind you. That would be helpful. So the lady sitting to your left is a court

09:10:47 10 09:10:47 11 09:10:48 12 09:10:50 13

09:10:52 14 reporter and her job is to transcribe and record 09:10:55 15 everything that is said today, my questions and your 09:10:58 16 answers, and create a transcript. She can only

09:11:02 17 record what's said; so when you respond to a question 09:11:05 18 please do not shake your head or nod your head in 09:11:08 19 response or shrug your shoulders or say uh-huh or 09:11:12 20 huh-uh. Please clearly state yes or no so she can

09:11:15 21 create a clean record. 09:11:17 22 09:11:20 23 to do. Also, this is very difficult for most people This is not natural. But please wait for me The

09:11:22 24 to finish my question before you begin speaking.

09:11:25 25 worst thing that can happen is when two people talk ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT


4

09:11:28 09:11:30 09:11:34 09:11:37 09:11:40 09:11:42 09:11:46 09:11:48

1 over each other and the reporter just throws her 2 hands up in despair. So for her sake please wait for Also before you answer

3 me to finish my question.

4 questions it's very important you understand the 5 question if you answer a question it will be presumed 6 that you understood it. So to be very short please

7 ask me to rephrase or restate a question if you don't 8 understand it before you answer. Page 3 Do you understand?

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-2
A0819rfa (2)

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 4 of 85

09:11:50

9

A. Q.

Yes. The oath you've been administered has the

09:11:52 10

09:11:54 11 same force and effect as an oath administered in a 09:11:57 12 court of law before a judge and/or a jury. You are

09:12:01 13 under the same duty to tell the truth and the whole 09:12:03 14 truth. 09:12:04 15 09:12:06 16 A. Q. Do you understand that? Yes. If at any time you have given testimony and

09:12:09 17 you decide later that it's not correct or it's 09:12:12 18 incomplete, please feel free to state that you want 09:12:15 19 to correct or add to previous -- prior testimony and 09:12:20 20 make sure you do so before the end of the deposition. 09:12:22 21 We'd like to have as accurate as transcript as 09:12:26 22 possible? 09:12:27 23 09:12:28 24 A. Q. Yes. Okay. So are you aware of any reason why

09:12:31 25 today's deposition can't proceed? ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT


5

09:12:33 09:12:34 09:12:37 09:12:39 09:12:40 09:12:42 09:12:46 09:12:46 09:12:49

1 2

A. Q.

No. Is there anything that prevents or restricts

3 from you giving your best and most truthful answer? 4 5 A. Q. No. And have you taken any medication, drugs, or

6 alcohol in the last 24 hours? 7 8 A. Q. Yes. You have? Without specifying, can you just

9 tell me if you believe it will affect your testimony

09:12:52 10 today? 09:12:53 11 09:12:54 12 A. Q. No. Okay. Okay. Did you engage in any Page 4

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-2
A0819rfa (2)

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 5 of 85

09:13:01 13 preparations for today's deposition? 09:13:03 14 09:13:04 15 A. Q. No. Did you speak with your attorney about

09:13:05 16 today's deposition? 09:13:07 17 09:13:08 18 A. Q. Yes. Okay. Did you speak to anyone else about

09:13:10 19 today's deposition? 09:13:12 20 A. No. I mean, I saw a friend at the gym and

09:13:15 21 said I was going to go have my deposition taken. 09:13:18 22 Q. Okay. And have you looked at any documents

09:13:21 23 in preparation for today? 09:13:22 24 09:13:28 25


A. Q.

No, I haven't. Do you understand what this lawsuit is ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT 6

09:13:29 09:13:31 09:13:35 09:13:38 09:13:41 09:13:47 09:13:51 09:13:54 09:14:02

1 about? 2 3 4 A. Q. A. Actually I don't know all the details of it. Tell me your understanding of what it is. My understanding is that Dr. Jadwin is

5 unhappy because he was removed as chair of the 6 department of pathology. 7 8 9 A. Q. Q. Sure. That's really all I know.

That's fine.

What is your exact title, your job? Chief nursing officer. Chief nursing officer and how -- when did

09:14:04 10

09:14:08 11 you first join -- when did you first become employed 09:14:12 12 by the County of Kern, roughly? 09:14:14 13 09:14:18 14 A. Q. Roughly September of '96. Okay. So you're going on about 12 years of

09:14:21 15 employment now? Page 5

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-2
A0819rfa (2)

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 6 of 85

09:14:22 16 09:14:24 17

A. Q.

Yes. And what position did you start at had you

09:14:26 18 first came to Kern Medical Center? 09:14:27 19 09:14:28 20 09:14:29 21 A. Q. The same position. Same position. And when did you become a member of the

09:14:39 22 joint conference committee at Kern Medical Center? 09:14:42 23 A. I believe I began to go to the meetings at

09:14:49 24 the -- of the joint conference committee when I 09:14:52 25 started my employment there. ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT


7

09:14:56 09:15:00 09:15:03 09:15:03 09:15:07 09:15:08 09:15:11 09:15:14 09:15:17

1

Q.

Okay.

And you're there in your capacity as Correct?

2 chief nursing officer. 3 4 5 6 A. Q. A. Q. Yes, sir.

Do you have a vote at the JCC? Yes, I do. Do you recall a meeting of the joint

7 conference committee of July 10, 2006, where the 8 matter came before the JCC of whether to remove 9 Dr. Jadwin from chair of pathology? A. I don't -- I couldn't testify to the date,

09:15:20 10

09:15:23 11 but I do remember that meeting. 09:15:26 12 09:15:28 13 09:15:32 14 Q. A. Q. Okay. I was. Who else was at that meeting? Was it the So you were present at that meeting?

09:15:34 15 entire JCC? 09:15:36 16 A. Well, at times there are members of the JCC

09:15:38 17 that are not able to attend because of absence from 09:15:42 18 the city or other obligations, that meaning I don't 09:15:47 19 recall if everyone was there or not. Page 6

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-2
A0819rfa (2)

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 7 of 85

09:15:52 20 09:15:59 21 09:16:01 22 09:16:03 23

Q. A. Q. A.

Do you recall if David Culberson? David Culberson. I believe he was the interim CEO. He was the interim CEO at Kern Medical I didn't recall that this occurred when he

09:16:08 24 Center.

09:16:10 25 was there but maybe he did. ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT


8

09:16:13 09:16:15 09:16:19 09:16:20 09:16:23 09:16:24 09:16:28 09:16:30 09:16:31

1

Q.

Well, he was the interim CEO from, what, Is that correct? Does

2 September to December of '06. 3 that sound right? 4

Well, Peter Bryan, he retired around Correct?

5 September of 2006. 6 7 A. Q.

I do know that Pete retired in September. Right. And that's when David Culberson came Correct? That's

8 as the interim CEO. 9 A.

David did come in following Pete.

09:16:34 10 correct. 09:16:34 11 Q. And he was the interim CEO for about two,

09:16:37 12 three months, four months? 09:16:38 13 A. He was there until a permanent CEO was

09:16:41 14 selected and that sounds like the right time frame. 09:16:43 15 Q. And the permanent CEO is Paul Hensler.

09:16:47 16 Right? 09:16:47 17 09:16:47 18 A. Q. Correct. So David Culberson couldn't have been at

09:16:51 19 that JCC meeting in July -- well, I'll represent to 09:16:52 20 you that Dr. Jadwin was -- his removal was voted on 09:16:56 21 and approved at the meeting of the JCC of July 10, 09:17:00 22 2006. So David Culberson couldn't have been in that Page 7

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-2

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 8 of 85

A0819rfa (2) 09:17:03 23 joint conference meeting then around July, could he 09:17:06 24 have? 09:17:07 25


A.

As I recall, Mr. Bryan was the CEO at the ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT 9

09:17:11 09:17:12 09:17:15 09:17:18 09:17:20 09:17:23 09:17:25 09:17:31 09:17:33

1 time that it happened. 2 Q. Okay. So Mr. Bryan, was he present at this

3 JCC meeting? 4 5 A. Q. As best as I can recall. Okay. Just for the sake of brevity if you

6 don't mind I'm going to refer to the JCC meeting of 7 July 10, 2006, where Dr. Jadwin's removal as chair 8 was noted on and approved I'm going to refer to that 9 as the removal meeting. A. Q. A. Q. That's fine. It's a lot shorter. Okay. So do you recall whether Jose Perez was at Is that okay with you?

09:17:35 10 09:17:36 11 09:17:37 12 09:17:38 13

09:17:41 14 this removal meeting? 09:17:45 15 A. Dr. Perez was a member of the JCC; so if the

09:17:49 16 attendance shows that he was there. 09:17:54 17 09:17:54 18 Q. Do you recall if -MR. WASSER: I /PHAOEUFT just say the best It's very The

09:17:56 19 evidence of who was there are the minutes. 09:18:00 20 more reliable than memory after two years.

09:18:04 21 minutes should recite who was there and who wasn't 09:18:06 22 there. 09:18:06 23 09:18:07 24 MR. LEE: It's a good point. And those would be the official

MR. WASSER:

09:18:09 25 record the meeting. ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT Page 8

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-2
A0819rfa (2)

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 9 of 85



10

09:18:10 09:18:12 09:18:14 09:18:14 09:18:16 09:18:22 09:18:24 09:18:25 09:18:28

1

MR. LEE:

That's a good P you know I'll look

2 into that later /S* /S* /S* /S*. 3 BY MR. LEE: 4 Q. And do you recall how you voted on this

5 removal of Dr. Jadwin at the me /ROFL meeting? 6 A. To my best recollection I voted for his

7 removal. 8 Q. And do you recall -- I believe there was a Do you recall who abstained

9 couple of abstentions.

09:18:30 10 on the vote? 09:18:34 11 09:18:39 12 09:18:40 13 09:18:44 14 A. Q. A. Q. I believe Dr. Ragland abstained. Okay. But I do not remember anyone else. Do you believe David Hill might have He was the director of ambulatory care?

09:18:46 15 abstained? 09:18:49 16 A.

David Hill didn't -- is not a voting

09:18:55 17 member -- was not. 09:18:58 18 Q. Any idea why Dr. Ragland might have

09:19:00 19 abstained from the vote? 09:19:02 20 A. I have -- I have no conversation with him or

09:19:04 21 after. 09:19:04 22 09:19:05 23 Q. ( I had.) Okay. And why did you vote to remove

09:19:11 24 Dr. Jadwin from chair? 09:19:13 25


A. ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT 11

09:19:13

1

( Remove? Page 9

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-2

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 10 of 85

09:19:14 09:19:18 09:19:25 09:19:28 09:19:32 09:19:36 09:19:42 09:19:42

2

A.

A0819rfa (2) My rational for removing him from chair was He had not

3 because of his absence from the premises.

4 been present for quite some time, as I recall, I 5 can't tell you the amount of time. And as you might

6 know, those positions are extremely important and we 7 need to have a chair who is present to do the work of 8 the department. 9 Q. When you say absence ask presence, you mean

09:19:46 10 physical presence? 09:19:47 11 09:19:47 12 09:19:49 13 A. A. Q. Correct? Correct. Okay. And were you aware of why Dr. Jadwin

09:19:52 14 was /TPW-L /KHREU absent from Kern Medical Center for 09:19:54 15 a large part of 2006? 09:19:57 16 09:19:57 17 09:19:59 18 A. A. ( Physically.) I have no idea. I believe there was mention

09:20:04 19 that it was -- actually, I have no idea. 09:20:12 20 09:20:14 21 Q. A. No idea? No idea. It was basically due to his

09:20:16 22 unavailability. 09:20:19 23 09:20:21 24 Q. Due to his unavailability. And -- okay. Did Dr. -- well, who was --

09:20:29 25 who brought this -- this agenda item to the JCC of ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT


12

09:20:32 09:20:36 09:20:38 09:20:39 09:20:46

1 Dr. Jadwin's removal? 2 A.

Do you recall?

To the best of my recollection it was

3 Mr. Bryan. 4 Q. Mr. Bryan and do you recall why -- was there

5 any ex marijuana /AEUGS given as to why physical Page 10

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-2
A0819rfa (2)

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 11 of 85

09:20:50 09:20:54 09:20:56 09:20:58

6 presence of a chair is so critical at Kern Medical 7 Center is there any explanation or is that something 8 you just understood or assumed? 9 A. Q. A. It's something I know. Um-hmm? Because I work with them every single day

09:21:00 10 09:21:00 11

09:21:02 12 and we have business to do every single day, 09:21:06 13 depending on what the issues are, there are 09:21:09 14 decisions, there's management issues, there are 09:21:13 15 employee issues, they're patient issues, and the 09:21:16 16 department needs leadership. 09:21:18 17 Q. So to your recollection there was no

09:21:20 18 discussion of why the physical presence of a chair is 09:21:23 19 required at Kern Medical Center during the removal 09:21:27 20 meeting? 09:21:32 21 A. I don't think there was a discussion as to I think in my mind maybe I didn't pay any It's an understood issue. Did you ever discuss this requirement

09:21:36 22 details.

09:21:39 23 attention. 09:21:43 24 Q.

Okay.

09:21:59 25 that a chair has to be physically present at Kern ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT


13

09:22:02 09:22:04 09:22:06 09:22:09 09:22:12 09:22:15 09:22:21 09:22:23

1 Medical Center with anybody else before or after the 2 meeting? 3 4 5 A. Q. A. As far as related to Dr. Jadwin? Or -- yeah. No. Related -But

I mean, not that particular one.

6 the issue of a chair needing to be present is -- is 7 routinely discussed as a matter ever business because 8 when vacancies are there we try to fill them as soon Page 11

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-2

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 12 of 85

09:22:27

A0819rfa (2) 9 as possible and interim folks are appointed because

09:22:32 10 the absence is -- leaves a gaping hole. 09:22:35 11 Q. And you said that you had no idea why

09:22:38 12 Dr. Jadwin was not available, why he was physically 09:22:42 13 absent. Do you think that's because -- well, do you

09:22:46 14 have any recollection at all of that being discussed 09:22:48 15 or reasons why Dr. Jadwin was physically absent? 09:22:51 16 A. Well, the -- the only -- no. I believe that

09:22:57 17 I am aware somewhere in the course of things and I 09:23:00 18 don't know if that was during that time or previous 09:23:02 19 to that time or subsequent to that time that there 09:23:05 20 was a medical leave. 09:23:09 21 Q. Okay. But you are aware at the time of the

09:23:11 22 removal meeting that Dr. Jadwin was unavailable at 09:23:14 23 least in part due to medical leave? 09:23:17 24 A. I was only aware that he was -- had been

09:23:20 25 unavailable for a long period of time. ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT


14

09:23:23 09:23:24 09:23:29 09:23:32 09:23:35 09:23:41 09:23:42 09:23:44 09:23:48

1

Q.

Did you think it was important to know why

2 Dr. Jadwin was unavailable for a long period of time? 3 A. I wasn't -- I'm not sure it was my privilege

4 to know that. 5 Q. So you thought it was privileged

6 information? 7 A. It potentially could have been. You know,

8 as far as I was concerned. 9 been discussed.

But again, it may have

I mean, I just truly don't remember

09:23:51 10 that part. 09:23:52 11 09:23:54 12 Q. You just don't remember that part. So you don't remember one way or the other Page 12

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-2
A0819rfa (2)

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 13 of 85

09:23:56 13 whether the reason for Dr. Jadwin's unavailability 09:23:58 14 was discussed at the removal meeting? 09:24:03 15 A. The reason that I remember and that's all I

09:24:07 16 could say as an answer to that question is that he 09:24:11 17 was not -- had not been there for a lengthy period of 09:24:15 18 time. 09:24:17 19 Q. Okay. And you recall whether there was any

09:24:21 20 discussion of whether Dr. Dutt could have filled the 09:24:24 21 acting or interim chair role during Dr. Jadwin's 09:24:28 22 physical absence or unavailability at KMC? 09:24:32 23 A. Do you mean on a move forward basis or a

09:24:35 24 historical basis while he was gone. 09:24:38 25


Q.

Well, isn't it -- I'm asking this question, ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT 15

09:24:41 09:24:44 09:24:46 09:24:49 09:24:53 09:24:55 09:24:56 09:24:56 09:25:01

1 is it or is it not a common arrangement that when a 2 chair going to be absent from the hospital for a long 3 time that an interim chair would be appointed to kind 4 of hold the fort down, an acting or interim chair 5 would be appointed? 6 A. There have been times when that's done.

7 That's correct. 8 9 Q. A. Can you name some examples? Well, currently we don't have a department

09:25:05 10 chair in OB/GYN and our chief medical officer, 09:25:13 11 Dr. Kercher, was been appointed as an interim chair. 09:25:17 12 09:25:20 13 Q. A. Dr. Kercher has, not Dr. Wallace? Dr. Wallace had been -- he was initially

09:25:25 14 appointed and Dr. Wallace is no longer there. 09:25:27 15 Q. Oh, he's no longer there. Page 13

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-2

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 14 of 85

09:25:28 16 09:25:32 17 there? 09:25:33 18 A.

A0819rfa (2) Do you know why Dr. Wallace is no longer

No.

Okay.

Can you think of any other

09:25:39 19 examples? 09:25:41 20 MR. WASSER: Your question was if she knew

09:25:43 21 of any instances where an interim had been appointed 09:25:46 22 because a chair was going to be absent for a long 09:25:49 23 period of time. 09:25:52 24 answered. 09:25:52 25


That's not the question she just

THE WITNESS:

Thank you for that. ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT 16

09:25:53 09:25:54 09:25:55 09:25:57 09:25:59 09:26:01 09:26:01 09:26:02 09:26:05

1 BY MR. LEE: 2 Q. You didn't understand that? Do you want me

3 to repeat the question again? 4 MR. WASSER: Let's just make sure the two of I don't think she answered

5 you are communicating. 6 the question. 7 THE WITNESS:

My -- I was under the

8 impression that you were asking me has there been an 9 instance where an interim has been appointed. 10 BY MR. LEE:

09:26:07 11 09:26:08 12

Q. A.

Oh, yeah. Not -- okay. Not when -- not when we've

09:26:11 13 known that there is -- chair was going to be absent 09:26:14 14 for a long period of time. 09:26:16 15 09:26:19 16 Q. A. Okay. So you can't think of any --

So to answer your question no, I can't think

09:26:21 17 of a time when we have knowingly known that the -09:26:24 18 that the chair was going to be absent for a long 09:26:26 19 period of time and an interim was appointed -Page 14

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-2
A0819rfa (2)

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 15 of 85

09:26:30 20 09:26:31 21

MR. WASSER: THE WITNESS:

During the absence. During the absence.

09:26:33 22 BY MR. LEE: 09:26:33 23 09:26:33 24 Q. A. Okay. Okay. It's been -- the instances that I am

09:26:36 25 aware have been totally when we have had no chair. ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT


17

09:26:41 09:26:41 09:26:42 09:26:43 09:26:46 09:26:48 09:26:50 09:26:54 09:26:57

1 2

Q.

Gotcha? THE WITNESS: Thank you.

3 BY MR. LEE: 4 Q. Okay. Well, was that a consideration at all

5 during -- for you at least during this removal 6 meeting that an interim chair could have been 7 appointed to basically hold the fort down in the 8 department of pathology until Dr. Jadwin was -- was 9 no longer -- was available again? A. Q. That decision was not mine to consider. But it's -- it's certainly an alternative to

09:27:00 10 09:27:05 11

09:27:09 12 permanent removal of the chair from Dr. Jadwin, isn't 09:27:13 13 it? 09:27:13 14 09:27:19 15 A. Q. That's not my decision either. Well, why -- I mean, whose -- you could

09:27:25 16 have -- I mean, in theory you could have voted no? 09:27:28 17 Right? And you could have proposed an alternative

09:27:32 18 arrangement such as appointing an acting or interim 09:27:34 19 chair to hold the fort down until Dr. Jadwin was 09:27:37 20 available again. 09:27:38 21 A. Right? The

Well, those are two separate questions.

09:27:40 22 first one I could have voted no. Page 15

The answer is yes,

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-2
A0819rfa (2)

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 16 of 85

09:27:43 23 I could have voted no. 09:27:45 24 09:27:45 25


Q. A.

Yeah. I voted yes. ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT 18

09:27:47 09:27:52 09:28:00 09:28:03 09:28:06 09:28:08 09:28:11 09:28:13 09:28:16

1

The second one, could I have proposed that I suppose I could

2 an interim chair be appointed?

3 have proposed anything, you know, but I didn't. 4 Q. Well, I mean, it's a bit drastic to remove I assume it's not an every day

5 someone from chair.

6 occurrence at KMC, is it? 7 A. It's not an every day occurrence that the

8 chair is absent for a year or greater than a year. 9 In fact, I've never seen that happen in my experience

09:28:19 10 there other than with Dr. Jadwin and I cer- -- he was 09:28:23 11 absent for a very long time. 09:28:25 12 09:28:26 13 Q. Um-hmm. Well to your recollection how long was

09:28:28 14 Dr. Jadwin absent? 09:28:33 15 A. To my recollection, it was a year or

09:28:36 16 greater. 09:28:36 17 09:28:38 18 09:28:41 19 Q. A. Q. A year or greater. I mean, I think so. And do you recall whether or not Dr. Jadwin

09:28:44 20 was absent full time or part time during that year or 09:28:49 21 so? 09:28:53 22 09:28:56 23 A. Q. I don't recall. Do you think it might have made a difference

09:28:58 24 to your vote? 09:29:01 25 MR. WASSER: If what? ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT Page 16

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-2
A0819rfa (2)

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 17 of 85



19

09:29:02 09:29:02 09:29:05 09:29:05 09:29:10 09:29:17 09:29:20 09:29:25 09:29:28

1 BY MR. LEE: 2 Q. If he had been absent full time versus part

3 time? 4 A. If he had been absent, you know, would days

5 out of a year, I mean, I wouldn't call that absent. 6 So I'm not sure what you're referring to as part time 7 absence, you know, if the greater part of the year he 8 was gone, I consider that to be absent. 9 Q. Well let's say Dr. Jadwin was during his

09:29:30 10 part time leave, let's say he was on part time leave 09:29:33 11 and he was working one to two days a week. 09:29:37 12 09:29:39 13 vote? 09:29:39 14 09:29:39 15 09:29:42 16 A. Q. A. No. And why is that? I think I tried to explain earlier that my Would that have made any difference in your

09:29:46 17 opinion is the chair needs to be present in the 09:29:48 18 department full time in order to manage the 09:29:51 19 department. 09:29:52 20 09:29:53 21 Q. I see. Okay. And now, I don't know if I actually

09:30:00 22 got an answer to this previously, but do you recall 09:30:04 23 any discussion of the reasons why Dr. Jadwin was 09:30:08 24 unavailable or physically absent? 09:30:11 25


A.

No.

I -- I indicated that I don't. ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT 20

09:30:14

1

Q.

You don't remember. Page 17

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-2

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 18 of 85

09:30:15 09:30:17 09:30:19 09:30:20 09:30:25 09:30:29 09:30:31 09:30:34

2

A0819rfa (2) So in other words, you don't remember one It's possible it was discussed or

3 way or the other.

4 it's possible it wasn't? 5 A. I believe I said that it was possible

6 that -- the fact that he had been absent for an 7 extended period of time had been discussed. 8 aware of that. I'm

I don't know whether it was at that

9 meeting or in another discussion. Q. Okay. So I mean again that's a little bit But the

09:30:36 10

09:30:40 11 different answer to a different question.

09:30:41 12 question I'm asking is if you have any recollection 09:30:44 13 at all of whether the reason for Dr. Jadwin's 09:30:46 14 unavailability was discussed at the JCC -- I mean at 09:30:50 15 the removal meeting? 09:30:51 16 09:30:52 17 09:30:54 18 now. 09:30:54 19 BY MR. LEE: 09:30:57 20 Q. So you don't recall that one way or another. A. I don't recall that. MR. WASSER: You've covered that a few times

09:31:00 21 Correct? 09:31:00 22 09:31:00 23 A. Q. (Witness nods head.) Do you think it would have been important

09:31:00 24 for your decision -- I know you said you thought it 09:31:03 25 was privileged information but even so do you think ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT


21

09:31:04 09:31:06 09:31:09 09:31:10 09:31:13

1 it would have been important for your decision to 2 know why Dr. Jadwin was unavailable during 2006? 3 MR. WASSER: And you asked her that before

4 and she's answered that question at least one. 5 MR. LEE: I said even though privilege Page 18

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-2
A0819rfa (2)

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 19 of 85

09:31:17 09:31:18 09:31:21 09:31:24

6 notwithstanding. 7 8 MR. WASSER: THE WITNESS: Yeah, she -- answer it again. No. He was gone for an

9 extended period of time.

09:31:24 10 BY MR. LEE: 09:31:25 11 09:31:26 12 Q. A. Okay. And I believe we need to have a department

09:31:27 13 chair there. 09:31:28 14 Q. Regardless for the reason for the

09:31:30 15 unavailability? 09:31:31 16 09:31:37 17 A. Q. Correct. Do you know anything about the medical leave

09:31:38 18 laws? 09:31:41 19 09:31:43 20 A. Q. No. Okay. Are you familiar with the term

09:31:45 21 California family rights act? 09:31:48 22 09:31:49 23 09:31:52 24 A. Q. A. Yes. What does that mean to you? It means basically that -- that when someone

09:31:58 25 asks for a leave of absence that I make sure that I ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT


22

09:32:01 09:32:05 09:32:07 09:32:09 09:32:11 09:32:15 09:32:16 09:32:17

1 refer them to our H.R. department to have all of the 2 details handled appropriately. 3 4 Q. Um-hmm. Um-hmm.

So if someone comes to you requesting a

5 California family rights act leave you would say go 6 to H.R.? 7 8 A. Q. Absolutely. Okay. And are you also familiar with the Page 19

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-2

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 20 of 85

09:32:21

A0819rfa (2) 9 term Family & Medical Leave Act? A. Q. Similarly to the other one. So are you -- are you aware that people have

09:32:25 10 09:32:28 11

09:32:31 12 a right to medical leave? 09:32:32 13 09:32:33 14 A. Q. Absolutely. You do? Okay. Even if it causes

09:32:35 15 unavailability of physical absence from Kern Medical 09:32:38 16 Center? 09:32:41 17 09:32:42 18 A. Q. Yes. Okay. So if I tell you -- you said you

09:32:45 19 later became aware Dr. Jadwin was on some kind of 09:32:47 20 medical leave? 09:32:48 21 MR. WASSER: She said it it could have been

09:32:50 22 later or earlier.

She doesn't remember, counsel.

09:32:52 23 Don't misstate her testimony. 09:32:53 24 BY MR. LEE: 09:32:54 25


Q.

Okay.

So you can't remember, but at some ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT 23

09:32:55 09:32:56 09:32:59 09:33:01 09:33:04 09:33:05 09:33:07 09:33:08 09:33:09

1 point you learned that Dr. Jadwin was on medical 2 leave. 3 A. Right? I -- there was discussion about the fact

4 that he had had some medical leave. 5 Q. Okay. Do you recall where this

6 discussion -- who was in this discussion, the 7 circumstances? 8 9 A. Q. No. You don't recall the timing of this

09:33:10 10 discussion? 09:33:11 11 09:33:11 12 A. No, sir. MR. WASSER: She's answered that, counsel. Page 20

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-2
A0819rfa (2)

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 21 of 85

09:33:13 13 BY MR. LEE: 09:33:14 14 Q. Okay. So now, when the -- when you learned

09:33:18 15 that Dr. Jadwin had been on some kind of a medical 09:33:21 16 leave did it -- did it make any difference to you as 09:33:24 17 to Dr. Jadwin's unavailability? 09:33:26 18 09:33:28 19 MR. WASSER: THE WITNESS: You asked her that. From the -- no. Obvious --

09:33:37 20 you know. 21 BY MR. LEE: 09:33:38 22 Q. It wouldn't have made a difference? I mean,

09:33:39 23 had you actually learned of his medical leave it 09:33:42 24 didn't make a difference for you. 09:33:44 25


Right.

A.

I don't know when I learned it. I don't ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT 24

09:33:46 09:33:50 09:33:53 09:33:56 09:33:58 09:34:01 09:34:03 09:34:05 09:34:07

1 know what discussion was held related to that and I 2 don't know -- I certainly don't know what part of his 3 absence was accredited to a medical leave. 4 Q. Okay. You're sitting here -- sitting here Right?

5 today you know he was on medical leave. 6 7 counsel. 8 MR. WASSER: She just -THE WITNESS:

She hasn't even said that,

There was discussion that he I

9 had participated in some type of medical leave.

09:34:11 10 don't know if it was one day or if it was two days or 09:34:15 11 if it was 16 days. 09:34:16 12 BY MR. LEE: 09:34:16 13 09:34:17 14 Q. A. Okay. I don't know anything about it other than

09:34:19 15 that. Page 21

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-2

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 22 of 85

09:34:19 16

Q.

Okay.

A0819rfa (2) So the answer to my question.

I'm

09:34:21 17 going to ask the question again.

Sitting here today

09:34:24 18 do you know Dr. Jadwin was on some kind of medical 09:34:26 19 leave. 09:34:27 20 09:34:29 21 09:34:31 22 ask you. 09:34:32 23 BY MR. LEE: 09:34:33 24 Q. When what? I'm sorry. Your attorney is Right? MR. WASSER: THE WITNESS: When? Yeah. When I guess I would

09:34:36 25 questions for you.


Hold on. Let me say something. ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT 25

09:34:36 09:34:38 09:34:40 09:34:41 09:34:42 09:34:42 09:34:47 09:34:51 09:34:56

1 If you don't understand a question, please feel free 2 to ask me a question. 3 4 A. Q. Okay. So what don't you understand about my Okay?

5 question? 6 A. I don't understand when -- you're asking --

7 you're asking me to confirm that I know that 8 Dr. Jadwin was on a medical leave. 9 he was on a medical leave. I don't know that

My understanding is --

09:35:01 10 all I know is that there was a discussion about 09:35:03 11 medical leave. I don't know when it was, I don't

09:35:08 12 know if he was on it, I don't know how long it was. 09:35:11 13 I don't know if it was before or after. 09:35:15 14 know. 09:35:16 15 Q. And you don't know whether it was before or I don't

09:35:18 16 after you voted for his removal? 09:35:19 17 09:35:20 18 A. No. MR. WASSER: And she's told you that I think Page 22

09:35:22 19 at least three times now.

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-2
A0819rfa (2)

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 23 of 85

09:35:23 20 BY MR. LEE: 09:35:23 21 Q. Do you think that's important information at Let's just say you know -- you know You don't know the

09:35:24 22 all to know?

09:35:28 23 Dr. Jadwin was on medical leave. 09:35:30 24 circumstances. 09:35:31 25


Right? I

A.

My -- let me just say something else. ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT

26

09:35:37 09:35:41 09:35:48 09:35:50 09:35:50 09:35:51 09:35:53 09:35:57 09:36:00

1 know that when I voted I based it on the fact that 2 Dr. Jadwin was not present to do his job. 3 4 5 6 Q. A. Q. Regardless of the reason? Absolutely. And -MR. WASSER: You keep -- Mr. Lee, if you

7 keep covering the same questions again I am going to 8 adjourn this in just a moment. 9 She's answered your question. You've covered it. Don't go over the same

09:36:03 10 information again or we will leave. 09:36:05 11 BY MR. LEE: 09:36:06 12 Q. So I'm going to ask you now this different

09:36:09 13 question. 09:36:10 14 When -- you know, sitting here today knowing

09:36:19 15 that he was on some kind of medical leave, if I 09:36:19 16 represent to you -09:36:19 17 09:36:21 18 that. MR. WASSER: Counsel, she has not stated You do that

Do not misstate her testimony.

09:36:23 19 again and we are leaving this deposition. 09:36:27 20 09:36:29 21 09:36:30 22 MR. LEE: I'm recording this. Good. Record it. Okay.

MR. WASSER: MR. LEE:

Okay. Page 23

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-2

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 24 of 85

09:36:31 23

MR. WASSER:

A0819rfa (2) Get her answers down.

Pay

09:36:32 24 attention. 09:36:32 25


MR. LEE:

Mr. Wasser, would appreciate it ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT 27

09:36:35 09:36:37 09:36:39 09:36:39 09:36:41 09:36:44 09:36:44 09:36:46 09:36:47

1 before you object if you'd let me finish my question. 2 3 times. 4 5 again. MR. LEE: Mr. Wasser. I'm going to state it MR. WASSER: You've answered it multiple

I will be adjourn this deposition if you

6 don't let me -7 8 MR. WASSER: MR. LEE: Then we'll both adjourn it.

Mr. Wasser, you are interrupting

9 me again.

I'm just going to state for the record

09:36:49 10 that I will appreciate it if you let me finish the 09:36:51 11 question before you state your objections. If you'd

09:36:53 12 like to adjourn you're certainly welcome to do that, 09:36:55 13 but I request as a point of courtesy to not only 09:36:57 14 myself but also to the reporter that you let me 09:36:59 15 finish my question before you begin to speak. 09:37:02 16 understand? 09:37:07 17 you. 09:37:07 18 BY MR. LEE: 09:37:08 19 Q. Okay. So Ms. Smith, I'll represent to you Is that understood, Mr. Wasser? Do you Thank

09:37:14 20 that Dr. Jadwin was on a medical leave in 2006. 09:37:19 21 Okay? 09:37:21 22 So -MR. WASSER: How long? State a complete If

09:37:23 23 representation, counsel.

When was he on leave?

09:37:25 24 you're going to make a representation make it 09:37:27 25 accurate. He was not on leave for the entire year. ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT Page 24

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-2
A0819rfa (2)

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 25 of 85



28

09:37:30

1 That's false. 2 BY MR. LEE:

09:37:31 09:37:34 09:37:37 09:37:39 09:37:41 09:37:43 09:37:46

3

Q.

Ms. Smith, Mr. -- Dr. Jadwin was on medical Okay? Now --

4 leave for some portion of 2006. 5 6 7 MR. WASSER: MR. LEE:

That means a day or more.

Mr. Wasser, are you objecting now? Yes. You are not giving her

MR. WASSER:

8 facts that she can rely on, counsel. 9 MR. LEE: Can you just please object and I'd appreciate it.

09:37:47 10 leave it at that. 09:37:49 11 BY MR. LEE: 09:37:50 12 Q. Okay.

So Ms. Smith, Dr. Jadwin was on a Do you feel

09:37:53 13 medical leave for some portion of 2006.

09:37:56 14 that that would have changed your decision at all at 09:38:00 15 the removal meeting as to whether to vote to remove 09:38:02 16 Dr. Jadwin or not? 09:38:04 17 09:38:05 18 09:38:07 19 A. Q. No, sir. No, sir. And why is that? She's answered that, this is

MR. WASSER:

09:38:09 20 going on six or seven times now. 09:38:12 21 THE WITNESS: Because I feel the chair needs

09:38:15 22 to be present full time to manage the department. 09:38:19 23 BY MR. LEE: 09:38:20 24 Q. Are you aware that person cannot be punished

09:38:24 25 for taking medical leave under California family ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT


29

09:38:26

1 rights act and the family medical leave act? Page 25

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-2

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 26 of 85

09:38:29 09:38:31 09:38:35 09:38:37 09:38:39 09:38:43 09:38:44 09:38:45

2

A.

A0819rfa (2) I refer those questions that relate to

3 California medical leave act to H.R. 4 Q. Okay. You didn't think it was important to

5 know what the California family rights act and the 6 Family & Medical Leave Act would dictate in a case of 7 Dr. Jadwin's removal? 8 MR. WASSER: When?

9 BY MR. LEE: Q. A. At the removal meeting? No. I -- I voted according to the way that

09:38:46 10 09:38:51 11

09:38:56 12 I felt was in the best interests of Kern Medical 09:39:00 13 Center. 09:39:01 14 Q. Well, do you think that when you vote to

09:39:04 15 remove -- when you voted to remove Dr. Jadwin, did 09:39:08 16 you think it was important to make sure that you were 09:39:10 17 complying with the California family rights act and 09:39:13 18 the California medical leave act? 09:39:14 19 MR. WASSER: That's argumentative, counsel. Don't

09:39:15 20 That assumes she was not complying with it. 09:39:18 21 argue the law with the witness. 09:39:19 22 MR. LEE:

It's a different question.

I'm

09:39:20 23 asking if you thought it was important to comply with 09:39:23 24 those laws. 09:39:23 25


MR. WASSER:

That assumes that there was ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT 30

09:39:24 09:39:26 09:39:29 09:39:30 09:39:30

1 noncompliance, counsel. 2 MR. LEE:

That misstates the facts. I'm asking if

No, it does not.

3 she thinks it was important. 4 BY MR. LEE: 5 Q. I'm going to ask you again Ms. Smith -Page 26

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-2
A0819rfa (2)

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 27 of 85

6 09:39:31 09:39:33 09:39:36 7

A. Q.

Well, let me --- did you think it was important when you

8 voted to remove Dr. Jadwin that -- that the removal 9 complied with California family rights act and the

09:39:38 10 Family Medical Leave Act? 09:39:40 11 A. I believe that it's important to abide by

09:39:43 12 all laws. 09:39:45 13 09:39:46 14 Q. A. Correct. Okay.

I am not aware that there were any laws in

09:39:50 15 question at the time of the vote. 09:39:53 16 Q. Well, were you aware of what the California

09:39:55 17 family rights act and the Family Medical Leave Act 09:39:58 18 would have dictated in Dr. Jadwin's case at the time 09:40:01 19 you voted at the removal meeting? 09:40:04 20 A. I rely on folks who are experts in those

09:40:09 21 areas to guide decisions at Kern Medical Center 09:40:12 22 related to those items. 09:40:14 23 09:40:16 24 09:40:19 25


Q. A. Q.

Who are they? Our H.R. department, legal counsel. Okay. So did you consult or did you hear ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT 31

09:40:23 09:40:28 09:40:31 09:40:32 09:40:32 09:40:33 09:40:34 09:40:38

1 from legal counsel or H.R. regarding Dr. Jadwin's 2 medical leave rights prior to voting at the removal 3 meeting? 4 5 6 7 A. Q. A. Q. Personally? Yes. No. Did you think to check with H.R. or legal

8 counsel as to compliance with all laws prior to Page 27

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-2

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 28 of 85

09:40:41

A0819rfa (2) 9 voting to remove Dr. Jadwin at the removal meeting? A. Legal counsel is a part of joint conference

09:40:46 10

09:40:49 11 committee. 09:40:51 12 Q. So in other words you just expected -- are

09:40:55 13 you talking about Karen Barnes? 09:40:58 14 09:41:01 15 A. Q. Karen Barnes and/or others. Okay. Well do you recall whether Karen

09:41:03 16 Barnes was present at the removal meeting? 09:41:06 17 09:41:06 18 09:41:07 19 A. Q. No. No? Do you recall if any legal counsel was

09:41:10 20 present at the removal meeting? 09:41:12 21 A. I don't recall by name. My experience tells

09:41:18 22 me that there is always at least one legal counsel at 09:41:22 23 the meeting. 09:41:23 24 Q. Okay. But you have no specific recollection

09:41:24 25 one way or the other as to that removal meeting. ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT


32

09:41:27 09:41:28 09:41:32 09:41:35 09:41:38 09:41:38 09:41:39 09:41:43 09:41:47

1 Correct? 2 A. As to that meeting, no. But the attendance

3 roster would show that. 4 MR. WASSER: It's in the minutes, counsel.

5 BY MR. LEE: 6 Q. And do you recall whether the legal counsel

7 stood up at any point and discussed the relevant laws 8 that could affect -- that could be implicated by the 9 removal of Dr. Jadwin at any time during the removal

09:41:49 10 meeting? 09:41:54 11 A. I don't specifically recall that. That

09:41:58 12 doesn't mean it didn't happen. I just don't Page 28

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-2
A0819rfa (2)

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 29 of 85

09:42:00 13 remember. 09:42:01 14 Q. Okay. I think the -- I'm going to represent

09:42:19 15 to you that Karen Barnes was present at the removal 09:42:21 16 meeting. Okay? Now, do you recall whether Karen

09:42:24 17 Barnes spoke at all at the removal meeting in regard 09:42:28 18 to the removal of Dr. Jadwin? 09:42:33 19 09:42:33 20 09:42:34 21 A. Q. No. No. Do you think it was -- would have been

09:42:42 22 important to hear from Karen Barnes as to the 09:42:45 23 applicable laws that might be implicated by 09:42:48 24 Dr. Jadwin's removal? 09:42:49 25


MR. WASSER:

You already asked that, ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT 33

09:42:50 09:42:53 09:42:53 09:42:55 09:42:56 09:42:56 09:42:58 09:43:03 09:43:06

1 counsel. 2 BY MR. LEE: 3 4 5 6 Q. A. Q. Do you understand the question? Would you repeat it. Sure. Do you think it would have been important to

7 hear from Ms. Barnes regarding the applicable laws at 8 the removal meeting with respect to Dr. Jadwin's 9 removal? A. I believe that prior to presenting the

09:43:11 10

09:43:19 11 recommendations that the staff of Kern Medical Center 09:43:26 12 does their homework related to those items. 09:43:30 13 Q. You just trusted that whatever legal

09:43:33 14 compliance needed to be done was being done behind 09:43:35 15 the scenes? Page 29

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-2
A0819rfa (2)

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 30 of 85

09:43:38 16 09:43:39 17

A. Q.

Yes. And hearing no advice from or no statements

09:43:43 18 from any legal counsel, otherwise you assumed it 09:43:46 19 would be okay to vote to remove Dr. Jadwin. 09:43:49 20 A. Right? I

I didn't say that I didn't hear anything.

09:43:52 21 said I don't remember any. 09:43:54 22 09:43:54 23 Q. You don't recall. Did you hear from Dr. Jadwin -- was

09:44:00 24 Dr. Jadwin present at the removal meeting, to your 09:44:03 25 recollection? ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT


34

09:44:04 09:44:07 09:44:10 09:44:12 09:44:15 09:44:15 09:44:16 09:44:19 09:44:22

1 2

A. Q.

No. Did you ever hear from Dr. Jadwin

3 regarding -- did you hear anything from him or see 4 any writing from him regarding his removal from 5 chair? 6 7 8 9 A. Q. A. Q. A. Q. Personally? Or -- personally or otherwise. No. Actually, I --

Did not? -- don't.... Do you think that was important to hear from

09:44:23 10 09:44:23 11

09:44:29 12 Dr. Jadwin at all regarding his removal prior to your 09:44:32 13 vote? 09:44:33 14 09:44:34 15 09:44:35 16 A. Q. A. Me personally? Yeah. Not -- I mean, if Dr. Jadwin didn't feel it

09:44:40 17 was important enough to contact me or talk to me, 09:44:44 18 then I suppose it wasn't. 09:44:46 19 Q. How would he have -- to your understanding, Page 30

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-2
A0819rfa (2)

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 31 of 85

09:44:48 20 how would Dr. Jadwin have known to have contacted you 09:44:51 21 prior to or at the removal meeting? 09:44:53 22 09:44:56 23 09:44:56 24 09:44:59 25 me? ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT


A. Q. A.

How would he have known to contact me? Yes. Do you mean how would he get in touch with

35

09:44:59 09:45:02 09:45:06 09:45:07 09:45:08 09:45:09 09:45:09 09:45:10 09:45:13

1

Q.

No.

No.

The question is how would he have

2 known that this removal meeting was going to occur, 3 how would we have known that? 4 5 counsel. 6 BY MR. LEE: 7 8 Q. A. To your understanding. How would he have known that this removal MR. WASSER: It's a different question

9 meeting was going to occur? A. Q. A. I have no idea. You just assumed he knew then? No. MR. WASSER: THE WITNESS: That misstates his testimony. I don't even know what you're You're asking me if I

09:45:15 10 09:45:16 11 09:45:18 12 09:45:18 13 09:45:20 14

09:45:22 15 talking about.

I'm sorry.

09:45:24 16 assumed he knew the meeting was happening? 09:45:26 17 BY MR. LEE: 09:45:27 18 Q. Well, you just testified earlier that

09:45:29 19 Dr. Jadwin didn't bother to contact you before his 09:45:32 20 removal. 21 09:45:34 22 Correct? MR. WASSER: THE WITNESS: No. No. Page 31

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-2

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 32 of 85

09:45:34 23 09:45:35 24

MR. WASSER: THE WITNESS:

A0819rfa (2) That's not what she said. You asked me if Dr. Jadwin had

09:45:37 25 contacted me or I felt it was important for him to ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT


36

09:45:41 09:45:45 09:45:45 09:45:47 09:45:48 09:45:52 09:45:57 09:45:58 09:45:59

1 contact me, and I said no. 2 BY MR. LEE: 3 Q. Okay. Now, the question I asked you,

4 Ms. Smith, is did you think it was important to hear 5 from Dr. Jadwin or to see a writing from him with 6 respect to his removal prior to voting to remove him. 7 Do you want me to -8 A. The answer to that question that you just

9 asked is no. Q. It wasn't important for him to know or -MR. WASSER: That's a different question

09:46:01 10 09:46:03 11

09:46:04 12 than you just asked her. 09:46:05 13 09:46:07 14 again. 09:46:07 15 09:46:07 16 MR. WASSER: MR. LEE: No. MR. LEE: Mr. Wasser, I'm going to ask you

Excuse me, excuse me, Mr. Wasser.

09:46:09 17 You've interrupted me yet again, I'm in the middle of 09:46:12 18 a question and you've continued to interrupt me, 09:46:13 19 please let me finish what I'm saying before you begin 09:46:15 20 to speak. 09:46:17 21 09:46:18 22 Can you do that? Don't misstate her testimony.

MR. WASSER: MR. LEE:

I will -- thank you Mr. Wasser for

09:46:20 23 your objection, but I'm going to ask that you refrain 09:46:21 24 from objecting until I finish. 09:46:24 25 MR. WASSER: Can you do that?

Don't misstate her testimony. ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT Page 32

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-2
A0819rfa (2)

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 33 of 85



37

09:46:26 09:46:28 09:46:30 09:46:31 09:46:33 09:46:34 09:46:38 09:46:40 09:46:40

1

MR. LEE:

Ms. Wasser, if you interrupt me I've warned you

2 again I will adjourn this meeting.

3 several times that when I'm speaking you cannot 4 interrupt me. 5 6 7 Is that understood? Don't misstate her testimony.

MR. WASSER: MR. LEE:

Mr. Wasser do you understand? You have a question to ask,

MR. WASSER:

8 counsel, ask it. 9 MR. LEE: Mr. Wasser I'm going -- I'm

09:46:42 10 warning you that if you interrupt me before I finish 09:46:44 11 my question on the record and you therefore prevent 09:46:48 12 me from creating a record here and the court reporter 09:46:50 13 from recording a clean record. 09:46:53 14 time I will adjourn this. If you do it one more You

You are obstructing.

09:46:55 15 need to save your objections until after I've 09:46:57 16 finished my question. You don't even know what my Is that clear

09:46:59 17 question is before you object. 09:47:01 18 Mr. Wasser? 09:47:06 19 BY MR. LEE: 09:47:06 20 Q. Okay.

I'm going to take that as a yes.

Ms. Smith, the question I asked you

09:47:10 21 is did you think it was important for Dr. Jadwin to 09:47:12 22 know that -- did you think it was important for you 09:47:15 23 to know or to hear from Dr. Jadwin what his side of 09:47:19 24 the story was before you voted to remove him? 09:47:21 25


MR. WASSER:

You asked her that. ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT 38

09:47:22

1

THE WITNESS:

My answer was yes. Page 33

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-2
A0819rfa (2)

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 34 of 85

09:47:23 09:47:24 09:47:24 09:47:26 09:47:28 09:47:30 09:47:34 09:47:37

2 BY MR. LEE: 3 4 5 Q. A. Q. Okay. When you asked the question the last time -Okay. Ms. Smith, why did you think it was

6 not important to hear from him and to know his side 7 of the story? 8 A. I -- I indicated that I think it's important

9 for a chair to be present to manage his department.

09:47:43 10 He was not present; therefore, I voted accordingly. 09:47:47 11 09:47:49 12 09:47:50 13 Q. A. Q. That's all you needed to know? That's true. The fact that he was absent is all you

09:47:54 14 needed to know? 09:47:55 15 09:47:55 16 A. Q. Yes. And were you aware that when Dr. Jadwin was

09:47:58 17 going -- was removed from chair it was also going to 09:48:02 18 result in a significant pay cut and a change in terms 09:48:05 19 of his contract? 09:48:08 20 A. I did not make it my business to know other

09:48:10 21 people's salaries. 09:48:12 22 09:48:14 23 09:48:17 24 09:48:18 25


Q. A. Q.

That's not the question I asked, Ms. Smith. Okay. No. The answer is no.

You didn't know that. You thought -- so did you think Dr. Jadwin ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT 39

09:48:20 09:48:22 09:48:25 09:48:27 09:48:32

1 was going to continue with the same rate of 2 compensation with the same job duties after he was 3 removed from chair then of his department? 4 5 A. Q. Frankly, I didn't think about that part. You didn't think about the implications of Page 34

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-2
A0819rfa (2)

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 35 of 85

09:48:33 09:48:36 09:48:37 09:48:40

6 removing Dr. Jadwin from his chair of the department? 7 8 Counsel. MR. WASSER: That's not what she said,

She said she didn't think about that part.

9 Now you're trying to expand it into a different She didn't say that.

09:48:42 10 answer.

09:48:44 11 BY MR. LEE: 09:48:44 12 09:48:46 13 09:48:48 14 Q. A. Do you understand my question? Do you want to repeat it? MR. LEE: Madam Reporter, could you please

09:48:50 15 repeat my question for the deponent, please. 09:48:52 16 09:49:07 17 (Requested portion of record read.) THE WITNESS: No.

09:49:08 18 BY MR. LEE: 09:49:09 19 09:49:11 20 Q. You did not. Besides Dr. Jadwin's physical unavailability

09:49:29 21 and absence from the hospital, what other basis did 09:49:33 22 you hear about at the removal meeting to -- that 09:49:37 23 dictated -- that persuaded you to vote in favor of 09:49:41 24 removing Dr. Jadwin? 09:49:42 25


MR. WASSER:

Counsel, you have asked that ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT 40

09:49:43 09:49:46 09:49:48 09:49:51 09:49:51 09:49:56 09:49:59 09:50:00

1 now -- we're over a dozen times on this.

We're not

2 going to continue to respond to the same question 3 over and over again. 4 BY MR. LEE: 5 Q. So -- do you understand the question? Do She's covered it.

6 you want me to have the reporter read it back then? 7 MR. WASSER: We're not going to answer the That's something else. Page 35

8 question again, Counsel.

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-2
A0819rfa (2)

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 36 of 85

09:50:04

9 BY MR. LEE: Q. Ms. Smith, are you going to answer the

09:50:04 10

09:50:06 11 question or not? 09:50:06 12 MR. WASSER: I'm instructing her not to She's not Move on.

09:50:07 13 answer, Counsel.

Is that clear to you?

09:50:09 14 answering the same question yet again. 09:50:12 15 09:50:13 16 MR. LEE: What's the basis --

MR. WASSER:

You've covered it ad nauseam.

09:50:16 17 We're standing on the record the way it stands. 09:50:18 18 BY MR. LEE: 09:50:18 19 Q. I'm going to give you an admonition,

09:50:20 20 Ms. Smith. 09:50:20 21 MR. WASSER: We'll stipulate to the Move on.

09:50:21 22 admonition, counsel. 09:50:23 23 MR. LEE:

I think she needs to hear it just The admonition

09:50:25 24 once, if you don't mind, Mr. Wasser. 09:50:28 25 is this:


Your attorney's instructing you not to ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT 41

09:50:30 09:50:32 09:50:36 09:50:38 09:50:40 09:50:43 09:50:45 09:50:47 09:50:50

1 answer.

It's an improper basis for an instruction Ask -- the objection that the

2 not to answer.

3 question's been asked and answered is not a proper 4 basis for instruction not to answer. 5 knows that. Mr. Wasser We

He's instructed you not to answer.

6 disagree with his grounds. 7 compel.

We're going to move to

We're going to do that immediately and we

8 are going to seek the reconvening of this deposition 9 and the imposition of sanctions on you and/or your

09:50:53 10 attorney. 09:50:54 11 Are you going to follow your attorney's

09:50:55 12 instruction not to my answer my question? Page 36

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-2
A0819rfa (2)

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 37 of 85

09:50:59 13

MR. WASSER:

We're going to leave now.

09:51:00 14 We're off the record. 09:51:01 15 MR. LEE: Okay. And let's call judge -- and Let's call Judge

09:51:04 16 actually, let's not do that.

09:51:07 17 Goldner now and deal with this. 09:51:08 18 MR. LEE: I'm not going to go off the record

09:51:10 19 until you adjourn. 09:51:11 20 MR. WASSER: Fine. Your going to adjourn

09:51:13 21 and let's call her. 09:51:14 22 MR. LEE: Okay. We are off the record to

09:51:18 23 speak with the court and to seek a ruling on this 09:51:20 24 right now. 09:51:22 25


It's 9:51 a.m. And we're going to need the ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT 42

MR. WASSER:

09:51:23 09:51:25 09:51:28 09:51:29 09:51:31 10:07:01 10:07:01 10:07:02 10:07:04

1 reporter for this conference because she's going to 2 need to read back the multiple questions and answers 3 on the same subject. 4 MR. LEE: Sure. That's not the problem. We

5 are off the record at 9:52 a.m. 6 7 (Recess taken.) MR. LEE: Okay. We are back on the record

8 at 10:07. 9 MR. LEE: Mr. Wasser, and I have agreed that

10:07:06 10 we are going to continue this deposition but not on 10:07:09 11 the topic of the removal meeting but on other topics 10:07:12 12 and we will -- we will submit that to the court for a 10:07:18 13 liti- -- motion in litigation for the court's 10:07:20 14 determination as to whether or not we're -- the 10:07:23 15 deposition should continue or not with respect to the Page 37

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-2

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 38 of 85

10:07:26 16 removal meeting. 10:07:28 17

A0819rfa (2) Is that correct, Mr. Wasser? We're going to ask the judge

MR. WASSER:

10:07:30 18 whether you've covered the questions you've covered 10:07:33 19 or get to keep asking them or not. 10:07:37 20 meeting is not the dispute. The removal

The dispute is over your

10:07:40 21 repetitive asking Ms. Smith for the reasons for her 10:07:44 22 vote and whether she considered other things and 10:07:46 23 she's answered that definitively and clearly. 10:07:50 24 lost count, five, six, seven, eight times. 10:07:52 25 the issue. ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT


I've

That's

43

10:07:53 10:07:55 10:07:56 10:07:57 10:07:59 10:08:01 10:08:03 10:08:06 10:08:06

1

MR. LEE:

Mr. Wasser, we don't need to get

2 into it now. 3

We'll save that for the judge. The point is it's not the

MR. WASSER:

4 removal meeting. 5 MR. LEE:

It's that specific question. The point is, Mr. Wasser, is we've

6 agreed that this deposition will not continue on that 7 topic for now pending a court order. 8 correct? 9 MR. WASSER: MR. LEE: Yes. That's correct. Is that

10:08:07 10

That's the point.

10:08:08 11 BY MR. LEE: 10:08:09 12 Q. Okay, Ms. Smith, are you familiar with the

10:08:12 13 term PCC? 10:08:19 14 A. If I'm not mistaken, that was Dr. Jadwin's

10:08:22 15 term and he used it to designate the -- the chart 10:08:31 16 copy. I think it -- it was product chart copy, I

10:08:37 17 think, for the blood usage. 10:08:40 18 10:08:43 19 it? Page 38 Q. Okay. What's your -- what's your term for

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-2
A0819rfa (2)

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 39 of 85

10:08:44 20 10:08:45 21 10:08:46 22

A. Q. A.

So -I'm sorry. You know, we have -- I don't -- you know, we

10:08:52 23 have another name for it now and it's something that 10:08:55 24 the computer -- it's spit out by the computer when 10:09:00 25 the blood is -- is processed in the lab and the ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT


44

10:09:04 10:09:08 10:09:12 10:09:15 10:09:15 10:09:16 10:09:19 10:09:19 10:09:21

1 computer company who -- I can't remember the name but 2 it's basically McKesson has named it in their system 3 already and it's some name. 4 5 6 Q. A. Q. Okay. I don't know. But you had understand what you mean when

7 you say product chart copy? 8 9 A. Q. I do understand, yes. So as I understand it product chart copy is

10:09:23 10 some kind of important that needs to be filled out at 10:09:26 11 the time of administration of blood? 10:09:27 12 10:09:28 13 A. Q. That's correct. Okay. And it's -- what is the purpose of Why would you take the time to

10:09:31 14 the product chart? 10:09:33 15 fill out PCCs? 10:09:36 16 A.

When blood is being administered there are

10:09:39 17 certain legal requirements and the -- and the product 10:09:44 18 chart copy sort of is a compendium of those 10:09:49 19 requirements for checking the blood and writing down 10:09:53 20 the numbers and so forth. 10:09:55 21 10:09:57 22 Q. A. So it's a form of legal compliance? It's a form of compliance with -- as you Page 39

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-2

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 40 of 85

A0819rfa (2) 10:10:05 23 know, in hospitals we have lots of different 10:10:07 24 compliance issues. It's a -- it's a compliance that

10:10:11 25 the joint commission requires some of the elements on ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT


45

10:10:15 10:10:18 10:10:20 10:10:23 10:10:26 10:10:31 10:10:38 10:10:39 10:10:42

1 the product chart copy and a lot of that depends on 2 your hospital policy. 3 Q. Are you aware if there's -- whether there

4 are any state laws or regulations that would dictate 5 or regulate the filling outs of these so-called PCCs? 6 A. I believe the per Cap -- what does that California --

7 stand for? 8 9 Q. A.

College of American pathologists? College of American pathologists They probably have some --

10:10:45 10 certification of the lab.

10:10:47 11 they have some of the requirements, I guess you could 10:10:50 12 call it, legal, and as I indicated joint commission 10:10:53 13 has some requirements related to administration of 10:10:57 14 blood. 10:10:59 15 Q. Okay. And do you think -- what's the

10:11:05 16 rational, to your understanding, what's the rational 10:11:08 17 behind the laws requiring PCCs? 10:11:12 18 bureaucratic -10:11:13 19 A. The law doesn't require PCC as such. It I mean is it just

10:11:16 20 requires the documentation of certain elements that 10:11:20 21 you validated when you you're administering the 10:11:24 22 blood. 10:11:24 23 Q. Why would -- to your mind, why is it

10:11:26 24 necessary to validate certain elements when you 10:11:30 25 administer blood? ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT Page 40

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-2
A0819rfa (2)

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 41 of 85



46

10:11:33 10:11:35 10:11:37 10:11:39 10:11:41 10:11:46 10:11:49 10:11:49 10:11:50

1

A.

So that the correct blood -- so that you can

2 verify that you're giving the correct -- blood is 3 considered a medication and you need to validate that 4 you're giving the correct blood.. 5 Q. Blood is also -- it could potentially be Is that

6 considered a hazardous or toxic substance. 7 correct? 8 9 A. Q. Certainly it is.

So the handling of blood is very dangerous

10:11:54 10 potentially? 10:11:55 11 10:11:57 12 A. Q. Handling of blood is critical. And the administration of blood could also

10:11:59 13 potentially lead to morbidity or mortality if it's 10:12:04 14 incorrectly done. 10:12:06 15 10:12:09 16 A. Q. Correct?

As with other medications, correct. So blood administration is not something you It's a very important patient care

10:12:11 17 take lightly. 10:12:14 18 issue. 10:12:16 19 10:12:17 20 A. Q.

Correct? Absolutely. Okay. And do you feel that PCCs help

10:12:23 21 promote the safer administration of blood? 10:12:33 22 A. I feel that PCCs are -- no, I don't think

10:12:35 23 that PCC has anything to do with safe administration 10:12:40 24 of blood. That's a person -- that's user issue. PCC

10:12:45 25 offers a way of -- of consistent documentation of ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT


47

10:12:51

1 what the administering people do -- did. Page 41

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-2

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 42 of 85

10:12:55 10:13:01 10:13:02 10:13:07 10:13:10 10:13:17 10:13:22 10:13:25

2

Q.

A0819rfa (2) Well, what are the steps involved in filling

3 out a PCC? 4 A. The steps involved in filling out a PCC are

5 reflective of the process that was used in 6 administering the blood, i.e. two people check the 7 blood to make sure you have the right blood from the 8 blood bank, the patient's vital signs are documented 9 on the record to include the blood pressure, the

10:13:33 10 fact -- after the transfusion the fact of whether or 10:13:35 11 not the patient had any kind of blood reaction or 10:13:39 12 reaction to the blood it is documented. 10:13:42 13 10:13:44 14 Q. A. This is all document on PCC? It's -- it's -- at that point in time I

10:13:47 15 believe the form was called a PCC but PCC is not the 10:13:51 16 legal name of any kind of a form. 10:13:54 17 10:13:54 18 Q. I understand. So you were filling out this PCC -- you were

10:13:58 19 recording -- you said the blood pressure, I believe? 10:14:01 20 A. They're several elements. I can't remember

10:14:03 21 them all. 10:14:03 22 10:14:04 23 Q. A. Sure. And I wasn't ever doing it. It's the nurses

10:14:07 24 on the units that are doing it. 10:14:09 25


Q.

Okay.

But to the best of your recollection ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT 48

10:14:11 10:14:13 10:14:13 10:14:14 10:14:16

1 you were saying that you record the blood pressure of 2 the patient? 3 4 5 A. Q. A. Yes. On the PCC and then -The unit number. Page 42

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-2
A0819rfa (2)

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 43 of 85

10:14:18 10:14:19 10:14:20 10:14:22

6 7 8

Q. A. Q.

Of the blood being administered? Correct. And then I understand there's a step at some

9 point where two nurses have to sign the PCCs? A. That's correct. It takes two nurses to

10:14:26 10

10:14:29 11 double-check the blood unit against the numbers that 10:14:33 12 are already provided and so forth. 10:14:35 13 10:14:35 14 10:14:37 15 Q. A. Q. Um-hmm. The name of the patient, all that. So it's like a form of cross verification,

10:14:41 16 then? 10:14:42 17 10:14:42 18 A. Q. Correct. Make sure the right blood is going to the

10:14:45 19 right patient? 10:14:45 20 A. Correct. It's a documentation that that

10:14:47 21 process has taken place. 10:14:48 22 Q. And you have two nurses involved because

10:14:50 23 it's two pairs of eyes in ensuring that -10:14:53 24 10:14:53 25


A. Q.

Right. -- that the right blood is going to right ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT 49

10:14:55 10:14:55 10:14:58 10:14:59 10:15:00 10:15:02 10:15:04 10:15:08

1 person. 2 A. It could be a nurse and a physician. It

3 doesn't have to be two nurses. 4 5 6 Q. A. Q. So two people? Two licensed individuals, uh-huh. So after these two individuals -- these two

7 licensed individuals sign their signatures on the PCC 8 to verify that the process of cross verification has Page 43

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-2

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 44 of 85

10:15:12

A0819rfa (2) 9 occurred what happens next with the PCC to your

10:15:14 10 recollection? 10:15:16 11 A. We put it in our chart. It's placed in the

10:15:22 12 patient record so that for all time to come if anyone 10:15:26 13 wants to look and see whether or not that patient 10:15:29 14 received blood that will be in the chart. 10:15:32 15 10:15:32 16 Q. Um-hmm. What were your -- you were -- you said you What was the duties

10:15:35 17 were the chief nursing officer.

10:15:38 18 of the chief nursing officer with respect to the 10:15:42 19 PCCs? 10:15:44 20 A. My duties with relationship to that are

10:15:48 21 similar to my responsibilities with other items and 10:15:51 22 that is since it was a document that nurses document 10:15:57 23 on I try to make it my responsibility to make sure 10:16:02 24 that those documents are as user friendly, compliant 10:16:06 25 with the regulations that we're looking at at the ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT


50

10:16:11 10:16:20 10:16:23 10:16:24 10:16:29 10:16:32 10:16:34 10:16:37 10:16:37

1 time and -- and audited to make sure that they're 2 being completed correctly and so forth. 3 Q. When you said that you wanted to make sure

4 that the PCCs or the process, filling out the PCCs 5 handling them or whatever that's all complying with 6 the regulations that something you checked with legal 7 counsel on or is that something you were able to do 8 yourself? 9 A. No. We met with the blood -- there's a

10:16:39 10 blood committee at Kern Medical Center and there's a 10:16:42 11 person at Kern Medical Center who actually is very 10:16:45 12 helpful and has been helpful throughout the process Page 44

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-2
A0819rfa (2)

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 45 of 85

10:16:51 13 in making sure that our policy and the form and so 10:16:56 14 forth was compliant with the regulations. 10:16:58 15 10:16:59 16 10:17:01 17 10:17:04 18 10:17:04 19 Q. A. Q. A. Q. Do you know that person's name? Michelle Burris. B U RR I.S.? That's correct. She's the director of blood bank -- not the What is that?

10:17:06 20 director. 10:17:08 21 A.

I'm not sure exactly what her title is, but

10:17:10 22 yes for all intents and purposes she runs the blood 10:17:13 23 bank. 10:17:15 24 Q. And what were your job duties, if any, as

10:17:18 25 chief nursing officer with respect to the blood bank? ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT


51

10:17:23 10:17:28 10:17:29 10:17:31 10:17:36 10:17:39 10:17:41 10:17:44 10:17:46

1

A.

I had -- I have no responsibilities for the

2 blood bank. 3 Q. And you said earlier one of your job duties

4 as chief nursing officer was to audit the -5 6 A. Q. To make certain that audits were completed. Right. To make sure that the PCCs were

7 being filled out correctly, blood was being 8 administered correctly. 9 A. Q. Yes. Okay. Now, how did you go about auditing -What were the steps you Is that correct?

10:17:46 10

10:17:52 11 conducting these audits? 10:17:54 12 followed? 10:17:55 13 A.

The audits were conducted -- well, we had

10:17:58 14 owe, you know, various stages but one of our goals 10:18:03 15 was to make certain that there were charts that were Page 45

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-2

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 46 of 85

10:18:06 16 selected.

A0819rfa (2) Then the we -- we had a person from your

10:18:14 17 quality management department who went through those 10:18:18 18 charts and performed audits on the documents that 10:18:24 19 were contained in the charts related to the 10:18:26 20 administration of blood. 10:18:29 21 10:18:31 22 10:18:36 23 Q. A. Q. Do you know who that person was? Alice Hevle. And how often do you, to your recollection,

10:18:39 24 how often were these audits conducted? 10:18:41 25


A.

I don't recall. It could either be monthly ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT 52

10:18:45 10:18:49 10:18:51 10:18:53 10:18:55 10:18:57 10:19:00 10:19:03 10:19:05

1 or quarterly.

We have audits that are done at

2 various time frames. 3 Q. And do you recall what the findings of those

4 audits were? 5 A. I could find documentation that would show

6 you that but I don't know specific numbers. 7 Q. Well, can you estimate how much

8 compliance -- was she trying to measure percent 9 compliance? A. She was -- she was measuring percent

10:19:06 10

10:19:09 11 compliance with the documentation requirements. 10:19:13 12 Q. Which you're distinguishing that from legal Is that

10:19:16 13 requirements and regulatory requirements. 10:19:21 14 it? 10:19:21 15 A.

Well, if you've had any experience with

10:19:24 16 patient care sometimes you know that we struggle to 10:19:29 17 reach 100 percent compliance on documentation, 10:19:33 18 although the task may have been done correctly. 10:19:38 19 we're always looking to make sure that the Page 46 So

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-2
A0819rfa (2)

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 47 of 85

10:19:41 20 documentation is 100 percent reflective of the task 10:19:45 21 being done. 10:19:46 22 Q. Well, how do you know the task was done

10:19:48 23 correctly if the documentation was incorrect? 10:19:52 24 A. You don't cement by -- by verbal

10:19:57 25 conversations with folks and going back and looking ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT


53

10:20:02 10:20:06 10:20:08 10:20:11 10:20:15 10:20:16 10:20:18 10:20:20 10:20:23

1 at the process to see whether or not there were any 2 adverse effects. 3 Q. But one of the purposes of the documentation

4 is to evidence that the process occurred correctly. 5 Is that correct? 6 7 A. Q. Absolutely. Okay. Like in other words what you're

8 saying is that if the documentation's correct it 9 doesn't necessarily mean that the process was

10:20:25 10 incorrect. 10:20:25 11 10:20:27 12 A. Q. That's true. About how about the other way around, if the

10:20:29 13 process was done incorrectly do you think the 10:20:31 14 documentation reflect it was done correctly, the 10:20:34 15 opposite? 10:20:35 16 10:20:36 17 10:20:37 18 10:20:38 19 A. Q. A. Q. Hopefully not. That would be a form of fraud. That's true. So you would expect that people were being Right?

10:20:40 20 hon of the and that if the process was unincorrectly 10:20:42 21 the documentation would also indicate that. 10:20:48 22 A. Well, I guess you could make that Page 47 Correct?

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-2

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 48 of 85

10:20:55 23 assumption.

A0819rfa (2) In this particular case, for instance,

10:20:58 24 if there were not two signatures on the form, that 10:21:04 25 isn't documentation -- it's document -- it's evidence ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT


54

10:21:09 10:21:13 10:21:16 10:21:17 10:21:18 10:21:20 10:21:24 10:21:24 10:21:27

1 that the form was not completed correctly.

It's not

2 100 percent correct in that two people didn't check 3 the blood. 4 5 Q. A. So it's like -There may have been two people there, one of

6 them forgot to sign. 7 Q. On the other hand it could indicate that

8 only one person was there and did not cross verify 9 the blood with another person? A. Q. It certainly could be interpreted that way. So the documentation is helpful in that

10:21:29 10 10:21:32 11

10:21:35 12 regard in the accepts that if it doesn't -- you know 10:21:37 13 the term false positive, false negative. 10:21:40 14 A. Right?

Not with relationship to documentation but I

10:21:44 15 know the term. 10:21:44 16 10:21:45 17 10:21:46 18 Q. A. Q. The concept? Yes. It's kind of akin do that. You could have

10:21:49 19 documents indicating a problem it could be a false 10:21:51 20 positive but you're not likely -- never mind. 10:21:54 21 10:21:55 22 10:21:58 23 A. Q. Whatever. I'm stretching that a little too far. Okay. Did you have -- did you fine the PCCs

10:22:06 24 to be flawed? 10:22:11 25 A. Well, the process was flawed from the ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT Page 48

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-2
A0819rfa (2)

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 49 of 85



55

10:22:14 10:22:24 10:22:27 10:22:31 10:22:36 10:22:37 10:22:38 10:22:41 10:22:45

1 standpoint of when it was initially started the -2 the blood -- and I don't know how much detail you 3 want me to get into here, but the unit of blood 4 contained -- had a paper on it and it was the PCC or 5 whatever it was called. 6 7 Q. A. Um-hmm. But it was -- it was a duplicate paper so it

8 wasn't just one copy of it, it was two. 9 Q. A. It was a carbon copy. Yeah. Right?

10:22:46 10

I think they were both printed out on

10:22:51 11 the computer at the same time for -- I have no idea 10:22:52 12 why. It was just part of the system. So we worked

10:22:55 13 diligently with the blood bank in order to get that 10:22:57 14 what I considered a major flaw corrected. What

10:23:00 15 was -- what would happen with that would be that one 10:23:05 16 of the -- the nurse was supposed to tear off one of 10:23:10 17 the copies, document on that, leave the other copy on 10:23:14 18 the blood until the blood was transfused and then 10:23:17 19 throw it away. And what was happening was that

10:23:21 20 consistently the nurses couldn't get it through their 10:23:25 21 head that they could actually throw away a document. 10:23:30 22 So they would continually put a blank document in the 10:23:34 23 chart. 10:23:36 24 10:23:39 25 out? ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT


Q.

Making it appear that the PCC was not filled

56

10:23:39

1

A.

Correct. Page 49

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-2

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 50 of 85

10:23:41 10:23:44 10:23:47 10:23:50 10:23:53 10:23:56 10:23:57 10:23:59

2

Q.

A0819rfa (2) And so that was -- that was leading to all

3 sorts of indications that PCC procedure wasn't being 4 followed, that therefore potentially blood was not 5 being administered correctly. 6 A. Right?

That was -- that was actually Dr. Jadwin's

7 perception. 8 Q. I see. So to your understanding

9 Dr. Jadwin's concerns -- he expressed many concerns Is

10:24:02 10 about the PCCs not being filled out correctly. 10:24:06 11 that right? 10:24:06 12 A.

His biggest concern from my -- he did his

10:24:09 13 own audits from what I could tell and I'm not sure 10:24:13 14 what his process was. I have no idea why he didn't

10:24:18 15 use the data that was collected by our quality 10:24:21 16 department. 10:24:25 17 10:24:26 18 Q. A. He insisted on doing his own.

Well how did he do that? I have no idea. I tell you to this day I

10:24:29 19 have no idea how he found forms and what he was 10:24:33 20 auditing. 10:24:34 21 10:24:39 22 10:24:39 23 Q. A. Q. So he somehow got ahold of the PCCs? Correct. Which were actually according to you they

10:24:42 24 were stored in the patient's charts, the medical 10:24:42 25 charts? ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT


57

10:24:42 10:24:44 10:24:46 10:24:50 10:24:52

1

A.

They were stored in the patient charts.

2 That was part of the discussions that we had. 3 Q. So he -- so I mean did you ever -- you never Right?

4 found out how he got them. 5 A.

You know, if I knew at the time I certainly Page 50

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-2
A0819rfa (2)

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 51 of 85

10:24:54 10:24:58 10:25:01 10:25:03

6 don't remember now.

I have no idea whether he would

7 call charts down -- I really don't know. 8 Q. Just don't know. That's fine so one way or

9 another he got a copy of the PCCs from the patient

10:25:06 10 charts and then would he look at them to see if they 10:25:09 11 were fill out correctly, independently? 10:25:12 12 10:25:14 13 A. Q. And do his own audits. Do his own audit and he would come to the

10:25:17 14 conclusion I see well X 91 PCCs are not filmed out 10:25:21 15 correctly based upon my review. 10:25:24 16 understanding? 10:25:24 17 10:25:25 18 A. Q. To my understanding, yes. And then he would contact you I assume and To your

10:25:28 19 say well I found a bunch of PCC that were 10:25:31 20 noncompliant? 10:25:31 21 A. I was one of the ones I think he contacted. Well, I know he contacted me via an

10:25:34 22 I think -- yeah.

10:25:40 23 interoffice memo or something. 10:25:42 24 10:25:42 25


Q. A.

Sure. And it probably was like months -- when I ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT 58

10:25:47 10:25:51 10:25:56 10:25:58 10:26:01 10:26:05 10:26:10 10:26:12

1 would get memos from him, it related to PCCs that 2 were from many months prior. 3 4 5 Q. A. Q. Very old PCCs? Correct. Now, you said that you believe Dr. Jadwin

6 was reviewing the wrong sets of PCCs. 7 A. I believe there's a possibility that some of

8 haze data -- I'm not saying all of them but I believe Page 51

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-2

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 52 of 85

10:26:16

A0819rfa (2) 9 there's a possibility that some of the blank copies

10:26:19 10 were being put in the charts examine they were being 10:26:21 11 reviewed. 10:26:22 12 Q. Let -- when you say blank, do you mean

10:26:23 13 completely blank or just partially? 10:26:26 14 10:26:28 15 A. Q. Pretty much blank. Some of them were blank.

Do you recall Dr. Jadwin contacting you

10:26:30 16 regarding PCCs being largely blank? 10:26:35 17 A. Well, I remember him sending me memos saying

10:26:41 18 here's, you know, samples of PCCs. 10:26:44 19 10:26:47 20 Q. A. So he would say -- I mean sorry? Some of them were partially blank. Some of

10:26:49 21 them were completely blank. 10:26:51 22 Q. I see. So you recall that he was raising a

10:26:53 23 concern about some PCCs being completely blank? 10:26:56 24 10:26:57 25


A. Q.

Um-hmm. And you believe that these were the wrong -ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT 59

10:26:59 10:27:02 10:27:05 10:27:07 10:27:08 10:27:10 10:27:12 10:27:14 10:27:18

1 the PCC copies that should have been thrown away but 2 then somehow they ended up in Dr. Jadwin's hands and 3 he's that I go they're not even filling them out? 4 5 A. Q. Correct. And in reality if you look at the correct

6 PCC they were filled out correctly? 7 A. When our quality auditor was doing the

8 audits their data was considerably different, as I 9 recall, from Dr. Jadwin's. And we, you know, we

10:27:23 10 showed that data at that our quality meetings all the 10:27:27 11 time. 10:27:27 12 Q. You say the quality auditor. Page 52 Is that Alice

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-2
A0819rfa (2)

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 53 of 85

10:27:31 13 Helvie? 10:27:31 14 10:27:32 15 A. Q. Yes. Do you recall how many charts or how many

10:27:33 16 PCC /-Z were generally selected by Ms. Helvie for 10:27:37 17 audit? 10:27:39 18 A. She is quality department according to

10:27:40 19 joining commission there was a certain number that 10:27:43 20 you audit and I don't know that number. 10:27:45 21 Q. No basis for you to even estimate it. Well? Well there would be no purpose for me to do I just don't owe it's a certain percentage

10:27:48 22 Right? 10:27:50 23 A.

10:27:53 24 that now.

10:27:56 25 ever month -- a month or a year or something. ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT


60

10:28:01 10:28:04 10:28:07 10:28:10 10:28:14 10:28:15 10:28:17 10:28:18 10:28:18

1

Q.

Okay.

Are you -- who was -- was anybody

2 looking over Alice Hevle's shoulders to see that she 3 was conducting her audits rigorous will I? 4 A. The quality -- yeah. She had a -- the

5 quality department does that. 6 Q. Okay so. Her boss is in the quality

7 department? 8 9 A. Q. Yeah. They were /W-FPG her supervising her making

10:28:20 10 sure she was conducting the audits? 10:28:22 11 10:28:23 12 10:28:23 13 A. Q. A. Right. Correctly? Plus she reported her data to, negotiate

10:28:27 14 shall 15 or 20 nurse managers who /S* you don't want 10:28:31 15 to be in a room with 15 or 20 nurse managers if you Page 53

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-2

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 54 of 85

A0819rfa (2) 10:28:34 16 haven't done a rigorous audit because they'll get 10:28:37 17 you. 10:28:39 18 10:28:39 19 Q. Yeah. I can imagine.

Did you ever have any -- did you ever tell

10:28:44 20 Dr. Jadwin your idea that perhaps he's reviewing the 10:28:49 21 blank PCC copies that should have been thrown away 10:28:52 22 but were somehow ending up in had I hands? 10:28:55 23 A. I attempted to have several discussions with

10:28:57 24 him related to the entire process. 10:29:01 25


Q.

You say attempt. So it was -- they were ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT 61

10:29:03 10:29:04 10:29:06 10:29:12 10:29:16 10:29:17 10:29:20 10:29:23 10:29:26

1 unsuccessful? 2 A. Dr. Jadwin was not really willing to listen I

3 to anybody's ideas very much, specifically mine.

4 don't know about anybody else but he -- he wanted it 5 his way. 6 Q. Okay. Well, what was the idea that you

7 proposed to him that he refused to listen to? 8 A. Well, the major discussion -- well there, One, we had to

9 were two -- there were two things.

10:29:31 10 work on a way to get rid of the additional copy so 10:29:34 11 that there -- there wasn't an opportunity for the 10:29:36 12 nurses to put this blank copy in the charts. 10:29:41 13 worked actually with the software company and 10:29:43 14 eventually were able to do that. I'm not sure if it We

10:29:47 15 was during the time -- it was -- it was during 10:29:51 16 Dr. Jadwin's absence. 10:29:53 17 10:29:56 18 Q. A. I see. So we ended up with only -- what we call owe

10:29:59 19 he /AOE what they were calling product chart copy at Page 54

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-2
A0819rfa (2)

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 55 of 85

10:30:03 20 the time. 10:30:03 21 10:30:05 22 Q. A. We can use your term if you like? I don't even know the term we call it now

10:30:07 23 that that's fine. 10:30:08 24 10:30:10 25


Q. A.

PCCs fine. We were then able to remove that -- the ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT 62

10:30:14 10:30:16 10:30:20 10:30:23 10:30:26 10:30:30 10:30:34 10:30:37 10:30:39

1 blood container contains the appropriate information. 2 We didn't have to have a paper on it. They remove

3 that, they document it, they put it in the chart. 4 The other -- so we had a major discussion ongoing on 5 how to get rid of that extra copy and Michelle Burris 6 actually worked really, really well with me with the 7 software company to have that actually become a 8 reality. 9 The second issue was the location of where

10:30:42 10 the blood -- where the product chart copy should 10:30:46 11 be -- should be stored. 10:30:48 12 10:30:49 13 Q. A. Um-hmm. And that was a discussion should it be in

10:30:53 14 the patient record in should it be in Dr. Jadwin's 10:30:56 15 office or department somewhere. 10:30:59 16 Q. The original.

Let me just back one one second just to make So the first issue that you were

10:31:01 17 sure I understand.

10:31:03 18 raising with Dr. Jadwin that he was not very 10:31:05 19 receptive to was figure out how to get /REUT of the 10:31:09 20 blank? 10:31:10 21 10:31:10 22 A. Q. Correct. Copy, PCC that should be thrown away. Page 55 So

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-2

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 56 of 85

A0819rfa (2) 10:31:13 23 you proposed to him -- what did you propose to him 10:31:16 24 and what did he reject? 10:31:18 25


A.

Well, I didn't know what to propose because ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT 63

10:31:21 10:31:24 10:31:26 10:31:27 10:31:32 10:31:36 10:31:37 10:31:39 10:31:41

1 at the time it was a -- we were sort of stuck with 2 this software. 3 4 Q. A. Um-hmm? That just did it that way. So what Michelle

5 and I eventually propose /-D -6 7 Q. A. To Dr. Jadwin? Well, I can't remember if that was during

8 the time Dr. Jadwin was still there or if it was 9 subsequent during his absences. But we actually -- Michelle worked with

10:31:43 10

10:31:49 11 the -- with the software company and we were able to 10:31:53 12 get it transitioned so that it only -- we only ended 10:31:57 13 up with a single sheet of paper. 10:32:00 14 document on that sheet of paper. 10:32:02 15 Q. . So you didn't actually propose, you know, So we could

10:32:05 16 the solution or -10:32:07 17 A. Well, the solution -- we always knew the

10:32:09 18 solution was to have a single sheet of paper. 10:32:12 19 10:32:13 20 Q. A. Right. What we had to do was work with the software

10:32:15 21 company to have it be that way. 10:32:17 22 Q. Okay. I guess /HRA I'm getting at is

10:32:19 23 earlier you had said that you went to Dr. Jadwin with 10:32:21 24 several ideas of yours and he just -- he wasn't /RE 10:32:25 25 sip tiff? ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT Page 56

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-2
A0819rfa (2)

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 57 of 85



64

10:32:26 10:32:27 10:32:29 10:32:31 10:32:36 10:32:39 10:32:44 10:32:46 10:32:48

1 2 3

A. Q. A.

No. This one of these ideas? Yes. One of ideas was -- well, one of the

4 discussions how do we get rid of that extra copy that 5 appears to be in the charts that's blank all the time 6 and confusing people. I would assume that if it

7 confused him it would have confused anybody that 8 picked up a chart that looked like this blood should 9 have been administered and here's a blank piece of

10:32:51 10 paper. 10:32:51 11 Q. I guess what I'm asking can you describe the

10:32:53 12 conversation you had with him where? 10:32:55 13 10:32:55 14 A. Q. Word for word. Not word for word but just what did you

10:32:57 15 propose to him and then how did he respond to it? 10:33:00 16 A. As I recall the conversations went something

10:33:03 17 like, you know, Dr. Jadwin, I really think that some 10:33:07 18 of these -- some of this information that you're 10:33:10 19 getting here is erroneous because these things are 10:33:17 20 blank and we have too many copies and they need -- we 10:33:20 21 need to get rid of one of these copies, you know, we 10:33:23 22 really need to do that so this doesn't happen, that 10:33:26 23 kind of thing. And the response was something to the

10:33:29 24 effect that, you know, we need to keep all the 10:33:34 25 originals, if we had all the originals in this office ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT


65

10:33:37

1 down here that wouldn't happen, nobody would be Page 57

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-2

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 58 of 85

10:33:39 10:33:41 10:33:42 10:33:44 10:33:46 10:33:49 10:33:51 10:33:52

A0819rfa (2) 2 confused, that kind of thing. 3 4 Q. A. Oh, I see. So it was sort of a circular conversation

5 that never went anywhere. 6 Q. I see. So he -- that was an example of him

7 not being /RE accept /TEUFR? 8 9 A. Q. A. Q. Right. To problem /SOFPLG with you? Yes. /S* receptive.) There do you know whether or You've said there were

10:33:54 10 10:33:55 11

10:33:58 12 not the blank PCCs -- okay.

10:34:02 13 two copies of the PCC /-Z, one was the one that was 10:34:05 14 to be fill out and was filled out and then there was 10:34:07 15 the one that was a plank copy that was supposed to be 10:34:09 16 thrown away. 10:34:11 17 10:34:11 18 A. Q. Correct?

Correct. I'm just -- you've been using the term but

10:34:13 19 just for the sake of chair I we'll refer to the 10:34:16 20 secretary PCC was the blank PCC so is that okay with 10:34:21 21 you? 10:34:21 22 A. Okay. And the first PCC we'll just call

10:34:24 23 them PCCs /S* /S* /S* so do you recall whether -10:34:27 24 where were the blank PCCs stored. You said that the

10:34:33 25 regular PCC /-Z, correct ones were store in the ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT


66

10:34:35 10:34:36 10:34:38 10:34:40 10:34:42

1 patient charts.

Where were the blank PCCs stored if

2 they were not thrown away? 3 A. I think I also said that the nurses were

4 putting those in the charts too. 5 Q. I see. So the patient chart would actually Page 58

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-2
A0819rfa (2)

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 59 of 85

10:34:44 10:34:48 10:34:49 10:34:50

6 contain both the correct PCCs and the blank PCC? 7 Many cases? 8 9 A. Q. Oftentimes. Okay. And so when you explained this

10:34:52 10 problem to Dr. Jadwin which could be throwing off his 10:34:54 11 individual audit results, his response was well this 10:34:57 12 problem wouldn't even arise if the PCCs were stored 10:35:01 13 where I want them to be which is -- I want the 10:35:04 14 originals to be in the pathology department. 10:35:06 15 Correct? 10:35:06 16 10:35:07 17 A. Q. Correct. So now, this /SEG ways into second issue

10:35:11 18 that he wasn't /RE step tiff to you on, this is the 10:35:14 19 location of the PCC storage? 10:35:15 20 10:35:16 21 10:35:17 22 A. Q. A. Correct. Can you describe that issue? Sure. Dr. Jadwin wanted to have the

10:35:22 23 blank -- not the blank, the PCCs, the originals, 10:35:26 24 stored somewhere and I mean I don't know how he 10:35:30 25 propose today store them or anything, in the lab. ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT


67

10:35:33 10:35:38 10:35:41 10:35:49 10:35:53 10:35:55 10:36:03 10:36:08

1

( Proposed to.) It was his -- apparently

2 history or background, wherever he came from that 3 that was done. And myself, as well as medical

4 records department and medical records committee, 5 felt that that was fragmentation of the medical 6 record in the eyes of Title 22, California law, which 7 really promotes the idea of the entire patient record 8 being stored in one location so the information can Page 59

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-2

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 60 of 85

10:36:13

A0819rfa (2) 9 accessible at all times to anyone who looks at it. And the bottom line was The content of

10:36:18 10 So that was the crux of it.

10:36:21 11 Dr. Jadwin never agreed with that.

10:36:27 12 the medical record is ultimately determined by the 10:36:30 13 medical records committee and the medical records 10:36:34 14 committee disagreed with Dr. Jadwin also. 10:36:38 15 Q. Dr. Bill Taylor's, was he the chair of the

10:36:40 16 medical records committee at the time? 10:36:45 17 A. I think he was. I mean, I'm not 100

10:36:48 18 percent, but I'm about 95 percent that he was. 10:36:55 19 The -10:36:55 20 Q. Do you recall who else was on the medical

10:36:57 21 records committee besides Bill Taylor, assuming he 10:37:00 22 was on there? 10:37:01 23 A. Well, Angie raise, who is the supervisor in

10:37:05 24 medical records, is a constant attendant but you 10:37:11 25 would have to look at the list of /( members. ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT


68

10:37:20 10:37:20 10:37:31 10:37:34 10:37:38 10:37:40 10:37:41 10:37:46 10:37:47

1 2 3

Q. A. Q.

Are you a member? I am a member. Okay. And you said Dr. Jadwin wasn't Was he arguing with What was

4 receptive. 5 you?

What does that mean?

He was saying I don't agree with you?

6 he doing? 7 A. All of the above. Not only with me but with

8 multiple people. 9 Q. Okay. Now, you say Dr. Jadwin was not You just named two. Right?

10:37:52 10 receptive to your ideas.

10:37:56 11 He wasn't -- he wasn't really seeing eye to eye with 10:37:58 12 you on. How -- what was the nature of the Page 60

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-2
A0819rfa (2)

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 61 of 85

10:38:04 13 conversations you had with Dr. Jadwin? 10:38:08 14 professional conversations? 10:38:09 15 A.

Were they

No she /SRAOEUD one /WEULTD address I think It just

10:38:12 16 they were very similar to the conversation. 10:38:15 17 was a dead end conversation.

I mean, he had his mind

10:38:18 18 made up that those things he had never seen an 10:38:22 19 organization where they hadn't been stored in the 10:38:24 20 lab. I had indicated -- I indicated to him that I

10:38:27 21 had never seen an organization where they were stored 10:38:29 22 in the lab and I questioned him as to how he was 10:38:32 23 going to be able to locate that if we needed it for 10:38:35 24 patient care purposes. I think he said he was going

10:38:40 25 to store them in binders or in notebooks or boxes or ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT


69

10:38:44 10:38:46 10:38:48 10:38:55 10:38:59 10:39:01 10:39:04 10:39:07 10:39:11

1 something, you know, it was irrelevant as far as I 2 was concerned. 3 I felt that it was very important to have

4 that information, one, we needed to know that the 5 patient had -- had received the blood. We needed the

6 vital sign information during the blood /TRAPBSZ 7 fusion part, which would leave a huge gaping hole 8 inpatient information if that was stored somewhere in 9 the lab. Q. The blood pressure information like that is

10:39:11 10

10:39:13 11 only stored on the PCCs in the patient chart? 10:39:16 12 A. During the time that the transfusion is

10:39:18 13 being administered, that is the location that we 10:39:22 14 document those vital signs. 10:39:24 15 Q. Okay. Now, these conversations where Page 61

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-2

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 62 of 85

A0819rfa (2) 10:39:29 16 Dr. Jadwin was -- he had his mind made up, he wasn't 10:39:33 17 bulging, this is going to be kind of ridiculous, but 10:39:36 18 was he waving had I arms around in was he, you know, 10:39:39 19 shaking a fist in your face? Was he screaming

10:39:41 20 expletives at you loudly so everyone could hear it? 10:39:46 21 Who was haze demeanor like when you were having these 10:39:48 22 conversations? Was he jumping up and down with steam

10:39:51 23 coming out of his ears, perhaps what was he like, 10:39:54 24 that's obviously facetious but what was he like? 10:39:58 25


A.

He never -- he never shook his fist in my ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT 70

10:40:02 10:40:03 10:40:04 10:40:17 10:40:24 10:40:27 10:40:31 10:40:37 10:40:41

1 face. 2 3 Q. A. Okay. He was obviously frustrated, obviously not

4 going to change his mind, obviously not willing to 5 listen to anything. I presented cases from other

6 hospitals, some of the lab directors that I hold in 7 high esteem had no interest in any of that. 8 Q. Neutral. They were neutral? Oh, he had no

9 interest in what these other authorities -A. He had no interest. He had only his own

10:40:44 10

10:40:47 11 goals in mind and whenever there was an attempt made 10:40:52 12 to discussion an alternative, he basically just 10:40:58 13 shutdown the conversation. 10:41:00 14 Q. Okay. I appreciate that. I'm just -- I

10:41:04 15 guess -- let me ask you a few questions, and just yes 10:41:07 16 or no would probably be fine. Was Dr. Jadwin

10:41:10 17 shouting ex /PHRET I was at you at any time? 10:41:12 18 10:41:13 19 A. Q. I don't recall that. Is that something you would recall? Page 62

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-2
A0819rfa (2)

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 63 of 85

10:41:15 20 10:41:16 21

A. Q.

I think I would. Okay. Was Dr. Jadwin -- was he -- I mean, I

10:41:22 22 guess the colloquial term was was he getting up in 10:41:25 23 your face, was he standing very close to you in your 10:41:28 24 personal space and threat /EPG you physically? 10:41:31 25


A.

He was not threatening me physically. ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT 71

10:41:32 10:41:37 10:41:38 10:41:39 10:41:40 10:41:42 10:41:43 10:41:52 10:41:56

1

Q.

So you never felt scared of him.

Right in

2 physically? 3 MR. WASSER: She was answering the question

4 and you cut her off. 5 6 sorry. 7 A. MR. LEE: I apologize. That's correct. I'm

Please finish your answer. I never felt physically threatened by him.

8 I -- I basically felt that conversations with him 9 were dead-end. Q. Right. Was Dr. Jadwin -- was he raising his voice

10:41:58 10 10:42:01 11

10:42:08 12 at you? 10:42:08 13 A. When we had these discussions his voice It was

10:42:11 14 wasn't his normal conversational voice.

10:42:14 15 obvious that he wanted me to listen and to try to get 10:42:17 16 his point. 10:42:21 17 Q. But would you say that his tone of voice

10:42:23 18 became uncomfortably loud so as to make you 10:42:27 19 uncomfortable? 10:42:32 20 A. I think -- it was uncomfortable from the

10:42:44 21 standpoint that as it would be with anyone when 10:42:52 22 you're trying to have a professional business Page 63

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-2

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 64 of 85

A0819rfa (2) 10:42:55 23 conversation and they're talking at you. 10:43:03 24 10:43:07 25


Q. A.

Not hearing you, basically. Not listening to you. ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT 72

10:43:14 10:43:15 10:43:19 10:43:21 10:43:26 10:43:31 10:43:39 10:43:41 10:43:45

1

Q.

Is that something you see in a lot of

2 doctors or is it something particularly unique to 3 Dr. Jadwin? 4 A. I don't see a lot of physicians who have

5 that approach, i.e., basically don't listen, don't 6 take your -- your comments into consideration. 7 Q. Okay. Was there anything else besides

8 Dr. Jadwin's -- do you mine if I just call it close 9 mind /-D /TPHES or stubborn /TPHES or what's a good

10:43:49 10 way to put it in his unwillingness to listen, is 10:43:53 11 there anything else besides Dr. Jadwin's 10:43:54 12 unwillingness to listen that you found offensive or 10:43:57 13 objection about your conversations with him? 10:44:04 14 10:44:06 15 A. A. .) /PR-PB objectionable about your.) No. And I guess -- can I make a comment

10:44:10 16 about that? 10:44:11 17 10:44:12 18 Q. A. Sure many please do. Okay. My relationship with Dr. Jadwin was In fact, it was limited probably to

10:44:14 19 very limited.

10:44:20 20 the issue of the blood and then my experience with 10:44:26 21 him at meetings. 10:44:30 22 Q. Okay. What about at meetings? Did you --

10:44:33 23 did you find him engaging in any offensive conduct at 10:44:38 24 meetings? 10:44:38 25 A. At med exec committee I would say yes. ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT Page 64

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-2
A0819rfa (2)

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 65 of 85



73

10:44:42 10:44:44 10:44:48 10:44:53 10:44:56 10:45:01 10:45:04 10:45:10 10:45:14

1 2

Q. A.

Can you describe some of that conduct? It's very similar kind of communication that

3 I explained to you and that was whenever he would 4 present a policy or there would be discussion 5 concerning a process that the lab was involved in 6 that the conversation went about as far as my 7 conversations with him and the PCC. If he didn't --

8 if it wasn't going his way, he didn't want to hear 9 about it. Q. Okay. So it's very similar -- the

10:45:21 10

10:45:23 11 interactions you -- well, the conduct you saw by 10:45:26 12 Dr. Jadwin at the medical executive committee 10:45:29 13 meetings was -- was objectionable in the same way 10:45:33 14 that your personal interactions with him were. 10:45:36 15 was very close minded, not receptive to other 10:45:39 16 people's opinions and was kind of pulling ahead on 10:45:42 17 his idea. 10:45:43 18 10:45:45 19 A. Q. Correct? He

Those are your words, but I agree. You agree. I'm a lawyer. I'm good with

10:45:48 20 words, I hope. 10:45:49 21 And I mean /AORBGS than that, though, there

10:45:52 22 was nothing offensive or unprofessional besides just 10:45:55 23 his clothes minded /TPHES. Correct? I mean, that's

10:46:01 24 to me offensive and unprofessional but yes. 10:46:03 25


Q.

Absolutely.

I'm not disagreeing. ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT 74

10:46:05

1

A.

Those are the kinds of behaviors that I was Page 65

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-2
A0819rfa (2)

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 66 of 85

10:46:08 10:46:09 10:46:14 10:46:16 10:46:18 10:46:19 10:46:21 10:46:25

2 witness to. 3 Q. Okay. Okay. Just getting back to the

4 medical records committee do you recall how many 5 people were on that committee at the time? 6 estimating. 7 A. I mean, I would estimate that there are That's just a guess. Just

8 probably eight to ten. 9 Q. A. Q.

Well, I mean -So. We're actually -- guess is a bad word in a Would you say you

10:46:26 10 10:46:27 11

10:46:30 12 depo.

How about your estimate?

10:46:33 13 would estimate it's eight to ten? 10:46:35 14 10:46:41 15 A. Q. I would estimate eight to ten. Now, did you -- do you know if Dr. Jadwin --

10:46:52 16 what were these -- this PCC issue how was it resolved 10:46:58 17 in the end? 10:47:01 18 A. Was it ever resolved?

Well, we currently have one copy, one

10:47:03 19 original, and it's documented and placed in the 10:47:07 20 chart. So I guess the answer to the question is

10:47:11 21 we're doing very well with one copy placing it in the 10:47:14 22 chart now. 10:47:15 23 Q. Okay. Good so. That's the final resolution

10:47:17 24 then? 10:47:18 25


A.

(Witness nods head.) Actually that was the ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT 75

10:47:19 10:47:23 10:47:26 10:47:29 10:47:30

1 final resolution then.

I mean, it's been the final

2 resolution owe /OELTS medical records committee 3 determined that the PCC would remain in the chart. 4 5 Q. A. Okay. So that was resolved some time ago. Page 66 As soon

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-2
A0819rfa (2)

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 67 of 85

10:47:32 10:47:35 10:47:38 10:47:40

6 as we were able to fix the software problem, then we 7 resolved the duplicate documentation -- or the 8 duplicate form. 9 Q. So the location -- so basically the blank

10:47:42 10 PCC problem was finally solved? 10:47:44 11 10:47:45 12 A. Q. Yes. Okay. Now, did Dr. -- Dr. Jadwin, he raised

10:47:48 13 other PCC concerns which -- could they -- could they, 10:47:54 14 to your knowledge, were all the of Dr. Jadwin's 10:47:56 15 concerns about the PCCs arising out of the blank P cc 10:48:01 16 problem or were there other problems that were 10:48:03 17 legitimate that he was spotting in the PCCs? 10:48:07 18 this is to your knowledge? 10:48:08 19 A. To my knowledge -- no. Absolutely. There Again

10:48:10 20 were -- there were blank or not completed forms that 10:48:17 21 were the originals also. 10:48:19 22 10:48:21 23 Q. Um-hmm. Okay.

So a certain percent of -- we don't know the

10:48:25 24 exact percentage but certainly some percentage of 10:48:27 25 Dr. Jadwin's PCC concerns would be explained by the ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT


76

10:48:31 10:48:33 10:48:34 10:48:35 10:48:38 10:48:40 10:48:43 10:48:48

1 blank PCC problem. 2 blank once. 3 4 A. Q.

Right in he was looking at the

Correct?

Correct. Not the original /WUPBL. /TPORPT PCCs, the

5 other percentage where it seemed Dr. Jadwin was 6 looking at the correct PCC, the original one ask was 7 nevertheless seeing issues ever incompetent police or 8 noncompliance, how was that issue resolved? Page 67

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-2

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 68 of 85

10:48:52

9

A.

A0819rfa (2) Well, again, if you have any experience with

10:48:57 10 medical documentation that is an ongoing process that 10:49:04 11 we continually work on. 10:49:06 12 10:49:07 13 10:49:09 14 Q. A. Sure. To improve. So we have taken the blood even at that

10:49:15 15 point in time took the blood documentation very 10:49:18 16 seriously, as I indicated, we presented the data to 10:49:22 17 the nursing quality -- at the nursing quality 10:49:27 18 meetings, at the department manager meetings, various 10:49:31 19 managers, placed various improvement processes on 10:49:42 20 their units and continued to do so to get the 10:49:47 21 documentation as close to 100 percent as we possibly 10:49:51 22 can. 10:49:51 23 Q. So have you actually seen a rise in the

10:49:55 24 percentage of complete and correctly filled out PCCs? 10:49:59 25


A.

Yes. ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT 77

10:50:00 10:50:02 10:50:05 10:50:06 10:50:07 10:50:09 10:50:12 10:50:13 10:50:15

1

Q.

Okay.

And can you estimate what that

2 percentage -- well, can you tell us year by year 3 roughly what the percentages are? 4 5 A. Q. No. No. Do you know -- can you estimate what

6 the percentages around today or the last time you 7 looked at the number? 8 A. No. I would have to refer bankrupt to the

9 document. Q. Okay. But to your recollection or to your

10:50:15 10

10:50:19 11 knowledge the problem of truly incomplete will I 10:50:23 12 filled original PCCs is -- is almost resolved at this Page 68

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-2
A0819rfa (2)

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 69 of 85

10:50:28 13 point? 10:50:28 14 A. It's an ongoing performance improvement

10:50:32 15 issue. 10:50:32 16 Q. Do you recall whether any regulatory

10:50:36 17 authorities ever reviewed the PCC issue? 10:50:40 18 A. We've had multiple regulatory agencies

10:50:43 19 review our entire blood administration process. 10:50:47 20 10:50:50 21 10:50:59 22 10:51:06 23 10:51:08 24 10:51:10 25


Q. A. Q. A. Q.

Okay.

Can you name those agencies?

Joint commission, cap, and CMS. I'm sorry. Shoot. What's CMS?

What the heck does it stand for?

California medical society or -MR. WASSER: No. It's a welfare -ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT 78

10:51:12 10:51:14 10:51:15 10:51:16 10:51:18 11:23:53 10:51:25 10:51:25 10:51:26

1

THE WITNESS:

No.

It's a federal

2 government -3 4 MR. WASSER: MS. BARNES: Social Security. It's the centers for Medicare

5 and Medicaid Services, formerly HCFA, Healthcare 6 Financing Administration. 7 8 9 answer. THE WITNESS: It's the federal government. THE WITNESS: MR. LEE: Thank you. That's a very good

Thank you.

10:51:26 10

10:51:28 11 BY MR. LEE: 10:51:28 12 13 up. 10:51:34 14 Do you recall if the department of health Q. Do you recall if Dr. Jadwin -- let me back

10:51:36 15 services ever looked at the PCC issue or blood Page 69

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-2

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 70 of 85

A0819rfa (2) 10:51:39 16 issue -- blood administration issue? 10:51:40 17 10:51:42 18 10:51:44 19 A. That would be Title 22. MR. WASSER: THE WITNESS: DHS. DHS. I don't recall.

10:51:47 20 BY MR. LEE: 10:51:49 21 Q. And what do you recall -- were you -- did

10:51:56 22 you happen to learn what the findings were or the 10:51:58 23 reports were of these multiple regulatory agencies 10:52:02 24 looking at the blood administration? 10:52:05 25


A.

Well, the way -- the way we usually have ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT 79

10:52:07 10:52:10 10:52:13 10:52:15 10:52:17 10:52:26 10:52:29 10:52:33 10:52:39

1 reports from these agencies is if there are -- if 2 they review something and there's a deficiency then 3 they write it as a deficiency. 4 5 Q. A. Okay. And I mean, I -- our latest survey of CMS I

6 know for a fact because I remember very clearly that 7 we had no deficiencies in nursing, period. 8 did not find any fault with the blood. 9 Q. A. I'm sorry. Go ahead. So they

Joint --

10:52:41 10

I was going to say, I don't believe joint I would have to refer to those

10:52:43 11 commission found any. 10:52:46 12 reports. 10:52:52 13 10:52:56 14 10:52:56 15 10:52:58 16 Q. A. Q. A.

The same thing with cap? Yes. J A.C. H /OFPL.) It's actually T C.T. J S it's called the

10:53:06 17 joint commission. 10:53:07 18 THE WITNESS: Just as I piece of Page 70

10:53:08 19 information.

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-2
A0819rfa (2)

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 71 of 85

10:53:09 20 10:53:12 21 10:53:15 22 Q.

MR. LEE: ( It's.

It sound like a T.V. show.

So as far as you know Dr. Jadwin's concerns

10:53:18 23 about the original PCCs that he was finding didn't 10:53:22 24 really rise to a regulatory deficiency, to your 10:53:26 25 knowledge? ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT


80

10:53:26 10:53:30 10:53:32 10:53:36 10:53:39 10:53:42 10:53:43 10:53:46 10:53:49

1

A.

If they did, they were -- they would be --

2 it would have been a minor one where they would have 3 said, you know, and I really -- no, I don't know if 4 it rows to that but it certainly didn't rise to 5 anything major. 6 Q. Actually how do you make that distinction

7 between major and minor just so I know? 8 A. Well, major -- if you've been reading the

9 papers recently, major the CMS actually has been

10:53:55 10 going from -- to many very well known organizations 10:53:59 11 and finding things that they refer to as immediate 10:54:03 12 jeopardy. 10:54:04 13 10:54:04 14 Q. A. Okay. Which in their mind places the safety of

10:54:09 15 patients or staff in immediate harm. 10:54:14 16 Q. So in other words, none of the regulatory

10:54:18 17 agencies determined that there was jeopardy? 10:54:21 18 10:54:25 19 A. Q. Correct. Nevertheless a deficiency is never a good

10:54:28 20 thing to hear from from a regulatory? 10:54:32 21 A. We want to be perfect and we want our /S* /S* that's a

10:54:33 22 patients to have perfect care.

Page 71

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-2
A0819rfa (2)

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 72 of 85

10:54:39 23 goal. 10:54:40 24 Q. Right. Now, Dr. Jadwin was finding some

10:54:47 25 original PCCs that were incomplete or incorrectly ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT


81

10:54:50 10:54:54 10:54:59 10:55:01 10:55:05 10:55:12 10:55:20 10:55:25 10:55:27

1 filled out.

Were you aware of whether Ms. Hevle in

2 her audits were picking up the same types of errors 3 in the original PCCs? 4 A. Well, Ms. Hevle's audits certainly reflected Whether they were

5 less than 100 percent compliance.

6 looking at the same things, I have no idea. 7 Q. Okay. But there was some corroboration ever

8 Dr. Jadwin's concerns about incomplete or 9 inaccurately -- inaccurately filled PCC /-Z, to your

10:55:34 10 knowledge? 10:55:34 11 A. Well, I wouldn't call it corroboration

10:55:37 12 because I don't know if they were working together. 10:55:39 13 In fact, I know they weren't because Ms. Hevle had a 10:55:43 14 different time also trying to coordinate with 10:55:45 15 Dr. Jadwin. But as I indicated, her audits reflected

10:55:52 16 that we were not at 100 percent compliance on all 10:55:56 17 things. 10:55:57 18 Q. So in that sense she was finding something

10:55:59 19 similar to Dr. Jadwin's findings from his individual 10:56:02 20 audit? 10:56:04 21 A. Not -- not to the extent. Her numbers were

10:56:07 22 far different than his numbers. 10:56:09 23 Q. Oh, so you do recall that her numbers from

10:56:12 24 different from Dr. Jadwin's? 10:56:13 25 A. I do recall that. ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT Page 72

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-2
A0819rfa (2)

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 73 of 85



82

10:56:14 10:56:17 10:56:21 10:56:23 10:56:24 10:56:26 10:56:27 10:56:30 10:56:33

1

Q.

And do you recall owe okay.

You don't know

2 how many PCC /-Z Ms. Her will I was audit /SKP-G we 3 don't know -- do you know how many Dr. Jadwin was 4 looking at? 5 A. (Witness shakes head.) I'm shacking my head no. Good. You caught that instead ever me Oh, no, the answer

6 is no. 7 Q.

8 catching it so I mean it's possible it could be -9 are you familiar with statistical sampling error? A. Yes. /STKPHR-LT size of the sample will

10:56:35 10

10:56:38 11 determine the accuracy or truth worthiness of the 10:56:41 12 average you derive /S* /S*. 10:56:43 13 A. I'm familiar with that. I'm not sure it

10:56:45 14 applies here. 10:56:46 15 10:56:48 16 Q. A. But you don't know one way or the other? I don't know one way or the other. I know

10:56:50 17 that Ms. Hevle's samples were statistically -- that 10:56:57 18 that she is a /PWAOEUD /-D by joint commission 10:56:59 19 regular laying /-Z on how many samples /S* /S* Karen 10:57:02 20 out. 10:57:02 21 Q. So probably her sample side was large enough

10:57:05 22 to yield a /PRELT he pretty accurate finding? 10:57:09 23 10:57:10 24 A. Q. We believe so. Okay. Okay. But regardless finding --

10:57:17 25 let's say you find one percent or two percent ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT


83

10:57:21

1 incomplete or inaccurate if.

Cc.'s being filled out.

Page 73

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-2

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 74 of 85

10:57:25 10:57:27 10:57:30 10:57:36 10:57:38 10:57:40 10:57:41 10:57:43

A0819rfa (2) 2 That's still a problem regardless. You wouldn't want 3 to /SEU there and say oh, that's fine? 4 5 A. Q. I would never say that was okay. Would you mind going off the record just

6 briefly for a /REUF room break? 7 8 MR. WASSER: MR. LEE: Fine. Let will he stop /THR-FPL

Okay.

9 we're going to go off the record at ten 58 a.m.. MR. LEE: Okay. We're back on the record at

11:10:06 10

11:10:08 11 1110:00 a.m.. 11:10:25 12 MR. LEE: Oak what time --

11:10:28 13 BY MR. LEE: 11:10:29 14 Q. Ms. Smith, did Dr. Jadwin, to your knowledge

11:10:31 15 did he ever get' hole hold of these audit reports 11:10:36 16 from Alice hell have I, do you know? 11:10:39 17 11:10:40 18 A. Q. I don't know the answer to that. You don't know one way or another whether Do you

11:10:42 19 Dr. Jadwin -- well, let me ask the question.

11:10:45 20 know whether or not Dr. Jadwin knew that Ms. Hevle 11:10:47 21 was conducting ah /EUTS audits of the P cc.'s? 11:10:52 22 11:10:55 23 11:11:06 24 A. Q. A. To the best of my knowledge he did know. Okay. And what do you base that on?

She was working with Dr. Jadwin's office to

11:11:06 25 determine the samples or the chart names and so ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT


84

11:11:10 11:11:15 11:11:22 11:11:27 11:11:29

1 forth.

And Alice was also on the blood transfusion

2 committee that was supposed to have the 3 responsibility of overseeing blood transfusions in 4 the organization. 5 Q. Okay. But you don't have any -- you didn't Page 74

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-2
A0819rfa (2)

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 75 of 85

11:11:31 11:11:35 11:11:39 11:11:39

6 actually see or hear of Dr. Jadwin receiving the 7 audit reports directly from Ms. Hevle? 8 9 A. MR. WASSER: MR. LEE: What do you mean?

11:11:40 10

You're just assuming based upon

11:11:42 11 their work relationship their rolls? 11:11:47 12 A. Well, the fact that I dough to shore sure is

11:11:49 13 she was a member of blood transfusion committee 11:11:52 14 that -- that I believe he was supposed to chair and 11:11:59 15 that she worked with his office to get audit 11:12:07 16 information. 11:12:08 17 11:12:09 18 11:12:12 19 Q. A. Q. Okay. For the blood transfusion audit. It just seems a little odd that Dr. Jadwin

11:12:15 20 went ahead and did an independent audit when 11:12:18 21 Ms. Hevle was already doing her own audit and if he 11:12:21 22 knew about that why would he want to spend all that 11:12:23 23 time to worth on a separate audit. 11:12:26 24 him about that? 11:12:27 25


Did you ever ask

A.

I think that was at this point -- never ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT 85

11:12:29 11:12:29 11:12:32 11:12:33 11:12:34 11:12:36 11:12:38 11:12:42

1 mind. 2 3 4 5 MR. WASSER: THE WITNESS: MR. WASSER: THE WITNESS: You can say that. That you? You can say that. I think that was a typical

6 reaction from Dr. Jadwin to do his own thing and not 7 pay attention to what someone else was doing and -8 or not want to know what someone else was doing or Page 75

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-2

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 76 of 85

11:12:45

A0819rfa (2) 9 want to know the information, especially since he He only in this case would

11:12:50 10 hadn't done it himself.

11:12:55 11 only believe the information that he was able to 11:12:57 12 ascertain. 11:13:01 13 BY MR. LEE: 11:13:01 14 11:13:02 15 Q. A. Okay. And we all agreed with you that it was -- it

11:13:07 16 was strange behavior. 11:13:08 17 Q. Okay. Well, I don't know if I -- I was

11:13:12 18 posing it but if you want to agree with me, that's 11:13:15 19 fine. 11:13:19 20 What were your -- your job duties as the

11:13:23 21 chief nursing officer? 11:13:24 22 11:13:26 23 MR. WASSER: MR. LEE: What were they. You're currently the

Are they.

11:13:28 24 chief nursing officer. 11:13:30 25


Right?

A.

That's correct. ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT 86

11:13:30 11:13:33 11:13:39 11:13:42 11:13:46 11:13:50 11:13:54 11:13:59 11:14:01

1

Q.

Okay.

So what are and have been your job

2 duties as the CMO C /TPH-FPL O? 3 A. I guess my main job duty is to oversee

4 nursing practice at Kern Medical Center, assuring 5 that nurses are practicing within their scope, which 6 to me is my most important responsibility. 7 ( C N O.) Aside from that, certainly making

8 sure that we as a department of nursing are working 9 /KHRAB rat I have will I to assure the best patient

11:14:04 10 care possible. 11:14:05 11 Q. /KHRAB rat live with each other and with the Right? Page 76

11:14:08 12 doctors.

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-2
A0819rfa (2)

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 77 of 85

11:14:09 13

A.

And with the lab and with radiology and with

11:14:13 14 the pharmacy and with the patients. 11:14:17 15 11:14:20 16 11:14:22 17 11:14:23 18 Q. A. Q. ( /KHRAB rat I have /PWREPB Mr. And to whom do you report? The CEO. Back then it was Peter Bryan shall currently Right?

11:14:25 19 it's Paul hence letter. 11:14:28 20 11:14:28 21 A. Q. Correct. /S*.

And do you interact as the C N O do you

11:14:33 22 interact with chair besides the department of 11:14:35 23 pathology's chair? 11:14:37 24 11:14:37 25


A. Q.

Yes, sir. Okay. All of the department chairs? ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT 87

11:14:40 11:14:42 11:14:47 11:14:54 11:14:57 11:15:00 11:15:02 11:15:04 11:15:07

1 2

A. Q.

At various times, yes. Okay. And what were your job duties with

3 respect to the blood -- the transfusion committee? 4 Were there any? 5 6 7 A. Q. A. I was a member. And -Wait just a minute. I'm sorry about that. I was We

8 I was not a member of transfusion committee.

9 thinking medical records many I was not a member.

11:15:10 10 had Alice Hevle was appointed to be the 11:15:13 11 representative on that committee from the quality 11:15:16 12 department. I don't believe there was -- I don't

11:15:20 13 know whether that was a nursing member on the 11:15:22 14 committee or not. 11:15:23 15 Q. Okay. And how -- have you had -- so you've Page 77

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-2

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 78 of 85

A0819rfa (2) 11:15:26 16 had interactions with Royce Johnson, for instance. 11:15:30 17 Correct? 11:15:30 18 11:15:31 19 A. Q. Yes, sir. How were your interactions with Royce

11:15:33 20 Johnson? 11:15:34 21 A. Actually Dr. Johnson and I have a very -- I

11:15:38 22 would consider it an excellent relationship. 11:15:41 23 Q. Okay. So you've never -- are you aware of

11:15:47 24 any complaints about Dr. Johnson's behavior or 11:15:50 25 conduct? ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT


88

11:15:51 11:15:53 11:15:55 11:16:01 11:16:05 11:16:12 11:16:15 11:16:17 11:16:19

1

A.

Yeah.

I've heard that there have been

2 complaints about his conduct. 3 4 Q. A. Okay. Can you describe some?

I'm trying to think of any specifics that I guess -- I guess I -- I have heard

5 I've heard. 6 that he is. 7 8 9 Q. Q. A. Q.

Times has a temper problem. Anger management issues? (Witness nods head.) And do you -- are you aware of anybody

11:16:20 10

11:16:24 11 actually making a complaint against him or was this 11:16:27 12 just, you know, chatter? 11:16:31 13 11:16:33 14 11:16:40 15 A. Q. A. I'm thinking very hard. Sure. I to?

I know person -- I'm just trying to think if

11:16:42 16 I know personally by name anybody who's made a 11:16:45 17 complaint and, you know, if I did it's history. 11:16:49 18 can't remember anyone now. 11:16:50 19 Q. Let me ask you something: Page 78 Is Mr. Wasser I

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-2
A0819rfa (2)

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 79 of 85

11:16:54 20 tapping your foot for a reason?

I just heard a tap.

11:16:57 21 I just looked under the table and I see his foot's 11:17:03 22 right next to yours. 11:17:03 23 have worked out? 11:17:06 24 11:17:06 25


Is there a system that you guys

A. Q.

A tap? Yeah.

No -ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT 89

11:17:06 11:17:06 11:17:06 11:17:07 11:17:09 11:17:11 11:17:12 11:17:14 11:17:15

1 2 hers.

MR. WASSER:

My feet aren't even close to

3 BY MR. LEE: 4 Q. I heard a tap, Ms. Smith. Is there a system

5 that you've worked out of signals with Mr. Wasser? 6 7 A. Q. No, sir. Absolutely not

You're not being signalled answers by your

8 attorney, are you? 9 A. Q. No, sir. I see. Okay.

11:17:15 10 11:17:16 11 11:17:17 12 11:17:19 13

Well, I'm -A. Q. Adamantly not. I'm looking under the table right now, and I

11:17:21 14 see Mr. Wasser's foot is very -- was much closer than 11:17:23 15 it is now to your feet. 11:17:24 16 MR. WASSER: I haven't moved my feet in

11:17:26 17 maybe ten minutes. 11:17:27 18 11:17:29 19 table. 11:17:29 20 MR. WASSER: Yeah. I heard a tap, too. MR. LEE: I definitely heard a tap under the

11:17:31 21 What did you do? 11:17:34 22 THE WITNESS: Is that the tap that you're Page 79

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-2
A0819rfa (2)

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 80 of 85

11:17:35 23 hearing her -24 BY MR. LEE: 11:17:36 25


Q.

No.

I heard a tap of feet. ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT 90

11:17:37 11:17:39 11:17:41 11:17:43 11:17:44 11:17:46 11:17:47 11:17:47 11:17:48

1

So you're under oath, Ms. Smith.

Are you

2 sure you have not worked out a system of foot taps 3 with Mr. Wasser, your attorney, to feed you answers 4 or suggest them? 5 6 life. 7 8 9 Q. A. Q. Okay. It's an adamant no. Okay. Okay. Good. That's good to hear. A. I have never been so sure of anything in my

11:17:52 10

I do note that Mr. Wasser's leg and

11:17:55 11 foot continue to remain very close to Ms. Smith. 11:17:57 12 MR. WASSER: My feet are not close to

11:17:59 13 Ms. Smith. 11:18:00 14 them. 11:18:01 15 11:18:02 16

Why don't you come over here and look at

MR. LEE:

Yeah.

I see it's --

MR. WASSER:

Why don't you bring the camera.

11:18:04 17 Here, let's take the camera -11:18:05 18 11:18:06 19 me. 11:18:08 20 MR. LEE: I see it's about -- no. Excuse

You're going to damage my camera. MR. WASSER: That's where I'm sitting. Okay? So we got on that

11:18:09 21 That's where I'm sitting. 11:18:10 22 tape. 11:18:12 23 this. 11:18:12 24 MR. LEE:

We're going to leave it like this, just like

Can you please let go of my

11:18:14 25 camera, please.

That's my equipment, Mr. Wasser. ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT Page 80

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-2
A0819rfa (2)

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 81 of 85



91

11:18:16 11:18:17 11:18:20 11:18:23 11:18:24 11:18:25 11:18:28 11:18:30 11:18:31

1

MR. WASSER:

Well, but it's videotaping the And that's how they've been

2 situation of my feet.

3 for -- my feet have been in a situation they're in 4 right now for maybe the last five minutes. 5 MR. LEE: Mr. Wasser, I'm going to have to

6 warn you that you if you touch my equipment again 7 that you're not going to like what happens. 8 9 MR. WASSER: MR. LEE: Well, don't threaten me but -I'm just

I'm not threatening you.

11:18:32 10 telling you, you're not going to like what happens 11:18:33 11 next. 11:18:33 12 MR. WASSER: You're not going to make

11:18:35 13 misstatements about something like that without me 11:18:36 14 verifying the facts. You have the camera here.

11:18:38 15 We're going to use it. 11:18:40 16 MR. LEE: Mr. Wasser, you're not to touch my Do you understand? I will touch the camera.

11:18:41 17 equipment again. 11:18:41 18

MR. WASSER:

11:18:42 19 Anytime you misstate the facts, counsel, we will put 11:18:45 20 it on the record, which I just did. 11:18:46 21 11:18:48 22 Now, continue, please. MR. LEE: Mr. Wasser, I'm just going to tell

11:18:49 23 you again if you touch my camera again you're not 11:18:51 24 going to like what happens. 11:18:52 25


MR. WASSER:

Why don't you finish the ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT 92

11:18:52

1 threat, sir.

What are you going to do to me? Page 81

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-2

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 82 of 85

11:18:55 11:18:55 11:18:56 11:18:58 11:19:00 11:19:02 11:19:04 11:19:05

2

MR. LEE:

A0819rfa (2) I'm just telling you, Mr. Wasser,

3 don't touch my equipment again. 4 MR. WASSER: I will touch your camera

5 anytime I need to verify the conditions in the room 6 to counter your misstatements. 7 MR. LEE: Now please continue.

Mr. Wasser, I'm just telling you

8 not to touch it again. 9 MR. WASSER: MR. LEE: I've heard you. Continue.

11:19:07 10

Touch it again, and you're going

11:19:08 11 to regret it. 11:19:09 12 MR. WASSER: Thank you, counsel. I'll do

11:19:10 13 whatever I want to verify the conditions in the room 14 that -11:19:12 15 MR. LEE: You can do that with your camera. You're not to

11:19:13 16 You can do it with your equipment. 11:19:16 17 touch my equipment again. 11:19:16 18 11:19:17 19 11:19:17 20 11:19:17 21 11:19:18 22 MR. WASSER: MR. LEE:

I will if I --

Do you understand? -- need to.

MR. WASSER: No.

Continue. No. You're not going to touch my Do you understand?

MR. LEE:

23 equipment if you need to. 24 11:19:19 25


MR. WASSER: MR. LEE:

No.

You don't understand. ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT 93

1 11:19:20 11:19:20 11:19:20 11:19:21 2 3 next? 4 5 Counsel.

MR. WASSER: MR. LEE:

Continue with the deposition.

Are you going to touch my computer

MR. WASSER:

Continue with the deposition, Page 82

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-2
A0819rfa (2)

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 83 of 85

11:19:27 11:19:28 11:19:29 11:19:31

6

MR. LEE:

Am I permitted to touch your phone

7 if I need to make a call, Mr. Wasser? 8 9 MR. WASSER: MR. LEE: Do you want to borrow my phone? Can I do that?

Yeah.

11:19:32 10 11 11:19:33 12 13 11:19:34 14 11:19:35 15

MR. WASSER: MR. LEE:

Here.

Yeah. Well, thank you very much. Make the call.

MR. WASSER: MR. WASSER: MR. LEE:

I'll be holding on to this, then. No. Give it back if you're not

MR. WASSER:

11:19:37 16 going to make a call. 11:19:38 17 MR. LEE: No. I'm going to be -- I do need

11:19:39 18 to verify -- I've got to take a picture. 11:19:42 19 MR. WASSER: Is that what we're going to do? If you want to borrow it,

11:19:43 20 Give me my phone back. 11:19:45 21 I'll give it to you. 11:19:46 22 11:19:47 23 back. 11:19:47 24 11:19:50 25


MR. LEE:

Okay.

Mr. Wasser, put my cameras

MR. WASSER: MR. LEE:

Give me my phone back.

Thank you. ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT 94

11:19:56 11:19:57 11:20:03 11:20:08 11:20:09 11:20:11 11:20:12 11:20:13

1

You know, when lawyers go to law school that

2 they regress a little bit in maturity, I guess. 3 Mr. Wasser has regressed in his age here. 4 I'm going to ask you again not to touch my It's not your equipment.

5 camera, Mr. Wasser. 6 BY MR. LEE: 7 Q. Okay.

Ms. Smith, you are under oath and you

8 do understand that if your attorney is signaling Page 83

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-2

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 84 of 85

11:20:15

A0819rfa (2) 9 under the table to suggest answers to you that's not

11:20:17 10 appropriate. 11:20:18 11 11:20:18 12 11:20:20 13 Do you understand that? MR. WASSER: MR. LEE: No signaling going on, Counsel. You know what? We're

Okay.

11:20:21 14 adjourning this deposition.

I've asked you not to You continue to

11:20:22 15 touch my equipment multiple times. 11:20:25 16 touch my camera. 11:20:27 17 11:20:28 18

Let me just tell you right now -Don't make misstatements.

MR. WASSER: MR. LEE:

Let the record reflect that The

11:20:29 19 Mr. Wasser has grabbed my camera by the stalk.

11:20:31 20 instructions on the camera specifically state you're 11:20:33 21 only to grab it by the base. If you've damaged that

11:20:35 22 camera, I'm going to ask for -- you to pay for that. 23 11:20:38 24 11:20:38 25


MR. WASSER: MR. LEE:

Don't make --

Do you understand?

MR. WASSER:

Don't make misstatements -ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT 95

11:20:38 11:20:39 11:20:43 11:20:47

1

MR. LEE:

Mr. Wasser, we're adjourning this

2 deposition. 3 camera. 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12

You've -- I suspect you've damaged my

It's not working. It's 11:21. We are off the record.

Page 84

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-2
A0819rfa (2)

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 85 of 85

13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT

Page 85

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-3
A081908rfb

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 1 of 59

1

1 2 3 4 5

WOOD & RANDALL Certified Shorthand Reporters Bakersfield and Fresno Offices 800.322.4595 or randall@bakersfieldcourtreporter.com

6 (BE ADVISED THAT ALL ROUGH DRAFTS WILL BE FOLLOWED BY 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 This realtime draft is unedited and ROUGH DRAFT UNCERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT Excerpt of Deposition of BARBARA ELIZABETH PATRICK Tuesday, August 19, 2008 A CERTIFIED COPY AND BILLED APPROPRIATELY)

16 uncertified and may contain untranslated steno, an 17 occasional reporter's note and/or nonsensical English 18 word combinations. All such entries will be

19 corrected on the final certified transcript upon its 20 delivery to you in accordance with our standard 21 delivery terms. 22 This realtime draft is intended only for the

23 purpose of augmenting counsel's notes and is not 24 intended to be used or cited in any court 13:07:09 25 proceedings. ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT


2

13:07:09

1

MR. LEE:

Before we even begin, I would Page 1

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-3

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 2 of 59

13:07:11 13:07:14 13:07:18 13:07:21 13:07:25 13:07:27 13:07:27 13:07:29

A081908rfb 2 like -- there was a bit of an episode in the last 3 deposition where one of my cameras was damaged by 4 Mr. Wasser who grabbed it. So we are going to be

5 seeking a protective record with the Court that my 6 equipment shall not be touched by Mr. Wasser without 7 my permission. 8 And we're going to -Are we on the record? We need

MR. WASSER:

9 to be on the record. MR. LEE: We are on the record, actually. We are.

13:07:30 10 13:07:32 11 12 13:07:32 13 13:07:33 14 record. 13:07:34 15 13:07:34 16

MR. WASSER: MR. LEE:

We are on the record, yeah. You didn't put us on the

MR. WASSER:

MR. LEE:

What do you mean? For your video. You didn't put

MR. WASSER:

13:07:36 17 us on the record. 13:07:38 18 13:07:39 19 MR. LEE:

You didn't recite your -You want me to go through the -Never mind. I mean, if we're

MR. WASSER:

13:07:40 20 on record -- so long as we're on the record is all I 13:07:42 21 care about. 13:07:43 22 MR. LEE: The point is is that we are

13:07:45 23 willing to proceed with today's deposition, but we 13:07:47 24 would like an assurance that Mr. Wasser will not be 13:07:49 25 touching my equipment without my permission. ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT


3

13:07:51 13:07:53 13:07:55 13:07:58 13:08:01

1 2

Can we get an assurance like that? MR. WASSER: If you will assure us that

3 you're not going to make false, unsubstantiated 4 allegations that can only be verified by photographic 5 evidence. Page 2

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-3
A081908rfb

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 3 of 59

13:08:03 13:08:05 13:08:05 13:08:07

6 7 won't. 8 9

MR. LEE:

I never have and I certainly

You have that promise. Is that okay with you, Mr. Wasser? MR. WASSER: Let's proceed with the

13:08:08 10 deposition, please. 13:08:08 11 MR. LEE: Again, Mr. Wasser, seriously, if

13:08:10 12 you are going -- I'm down to one camera now and if 13:08:14 13 you destroy that one we really can't proceed. 13:08:16 14 Actually, we cannot proceed unless I get assurance 13:08:18 15 you're not going to be grabbing my equipment. 13:08:20 16 13:08:23 17 not? Are you going to give us that assurance or That's the only condition we have to have. We are

13:08:24 18 Otherwise we can't proceed with today's depo.

13:08:26 19 seeking a protective order from the court, but we're 13:08:29 20 willing to go forward with this deposition if you 13:08:31 21 give us that assurance. 13:08:32 22 MR. WASSER: If you do not make allegations

13:08:35 23 that can only be verified by photographic evidence, 13:08:38 24 then there's no need to do that. But if you make

13:08:42 25 another allegation that's unsubstantiated that can ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT


4

13:08:45 13:08:49 13:08:50 13:08:52 13:08:54 13:08:57 13:08:58 13:09:00

1 only be corroborated by -- and I appreciate you 2 control the record. It's your camera. So there's

3 really not a lot of comfort that comes from using 4 that because you could -- you could falsify the 5 record as you've falsified the allegations. 6 hoping that you don't do that again. 7 MR. LEE: Mr. Wasser, I'm going to ask you But I'm

8 again, are you going to give us an assurance you're Page 3

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-3

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 4 of 59

13:09:01

A081908rfb 9 not going to be touching my equipment without my

13:09:03 10 permission? 13:09:04 11 MR. WASSER: If I touch your equipment, I'll

13:09:05 12 tell you beforehand. 13:09:06 13 MR. LEE: Well -- no. I'm sorry. We're

13:09:11 14 going to have to not proceed with today's depo 13:09:14 15 because I need an assurance -- you've already broken 13:09:15 16 one of my cameras just an hour ago and I need an 13:09:18 17 assurance you're not going to break my second camera. 13:09:20 18 MR. WASSER: I do not have any basis to Okay? I would

13:09:21 19 believe that your camera was damaged.

13:09:24 20 like you to continue with the deposition -13:09:25 21 13:09:26 22 13:09:27 23 MR. LEE: Mr. Wasser --- please.

MR. WASSER: MR. LEE:

-- I need an assurance that you're

13:09:28 24 not going to touch my equipment without my 13:09:31 25 permission.


I need that assurance. Are you saying ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT 5

13:09:32 13:09:34 13:09:35 13:09:36 13:09:37 13:09:38 13:09:39 13:09:40 13:09:40

1 that you're going to touch my equipment without my 2 permission? 3 MR. WASSER: I have no plans to touch your

4 equipment, Counsel. 5 6 then? 7 MR. WASSER: I have no plans to touch your MR. LEE: Okay. So we have your assurance,

8 equipment. 9 MR. LEE: So we have your assurances then? Counsel, let's continue with

13:09:43 10

MR. WASSER:

13:09:44 11 the deposition. 13:09:44 12 MR. LEE: We're not going to continue with Page 4

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-3
A081908rfb

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 5 of 59

13:09:46 13 the deposition until we get an assurance from you. 13:09:48 14 It's just that simple. Yes or no. Will you assure

13:09:49 15 me that you're not going to touch my equipment 13:09:51 16 without my permission. 13:09:52 17 MR. WASSER: I have no intention of

13:09:53 18 touching -- plans or intention of touching your 13:09:56 19 equipment. 13:09:56 20 13:09:58 21 Correct? 13:09:59 22 13:10:00 23 MR. WASSER: MR. LEE: Please continue. MR. LEE: Okay. So the answer's yes, then.

Do we have your assurance then?

13:10:06 24 It's the only -- I'm not going to proceed -- then I 13:10:08 25 guess we're going to have to stop today's depo. ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT


It's

6

13:10:11 13:10:12 13:10:15 13:10:17 13:10:19 13:10:21 13:10:23 13:10:26 13:10:28

1 unfortunate for Ms. Patrick.

It's a waste of her I'm not

2 time, but I've already lost one camera.

3 going to let a second camera be destroyed, Mark. 4 MR. WASSER: There's no risk to your camera.

5 Please continue with the deposition. 6 MR. LEE: So you -- give me your assurance

7 you're not going to touch equipment without my 8 permission. 9 Correct? Please commence and continue

MR. WASSER:

13:10:30 10 with the deposition. 13:10:31 11 MR. LEE: Okay. Then we're stopping this

13:10:32 12 deposition. 13:10:35 13 you. 13:10:36 14 13:10:36 15

I'm sorry, Mark, I tried to accommodate

I tried to accommodate -MR. WASSER: MR. LEE: There is no -Let me finish. Page 5

No.

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-3

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 6 of 59

13:10:36 16

A081908rfb I tried to accommodate Ms. Patrick.

We are

13:10:39 17 seeking a protective order from the court because you 13:10:42 18 have grabbed my equipment and you destroyed one of my 13:10:43 19 cameras. 13:10:44 20 13:10:45 21 MR. WASSER: MR. LEE: I don't -If you want to talk

Okay.

13:10:46 22 please -13:10:46 23 24 25


MR. WASSER: MR. LEE:

Are you done yet?

I'm done.

MR. WASSER:

Please finish. ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT 7

13:10:48 13:10:49 13:10:51 13:10:54 13:10:57 13:10:59 13:11:00 13:11:02 13:11:05

1 2

MR. LEE:

No.

Go ahead, please.

MR. WASSER:

There's no evidence that your There's no intention

3 camera's damaged, first of all.

4 or risk or threat or anticipation of touching your 5 equipment, as you put it. Your camera's operating.

6 Let's start the deposition. 7 MR. LEE: Mr. Wasser, then we're not going I am offering to proceed

8 to proceed with this depo.

9 with this depo if you assure me you're not going to

13:11:07 10 touch my equipment without my permission. 13:11:08 11 13:11:10 12 MR. WASSER: MR. LEE: I've told you that.

If you cannot give me that

13:11:11 13 assurance yes or no, if you can't do it, then we will 13:11:13 14 just have to wait for a protective order. In fact,

13:11:16 15 we are not going to proceed with any depos till we 13:11:18 16 get a protective order from the court. I'm sorry. But

13:11:20 17 I'm trying to accommodate everybody right now.

13:11:22 18 if you're not willing to give me -- if you're saying 13:11:22 19 that there's a chance you're going to touch my Page 6

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-3
A081908rfb

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 7 of 59

13:11:24 20 equipment without my permission -13:11:25 21 MR. WASSER: I'm not saying that, Counsel. I don't see any risk that

13:11:26 22 You're saying that.

13:11:31 23 you're -- that -- any risk to your equipment. 13:11:32 24 MR. LEE: Okay. So then if there's no risk,

13:11:34 25 then you'll have no problem giving me your assurance ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT


8

13:11:36 13:11:37 13:11:39 13:11:40 13:11:42 13:11:44 13:11:47 13:11:47 13:11:48

1 that you're not going to do it. 2 MR. WASSER:

Right?

There's no risk to your

3 equipment at all. 4 deposition. 5 MR. LEE:

Please continue with the

Mark, you've proven just at the

6 last deposition when you broke my camera there is a 7 risk. 8 MR. WASSER: I did not break your camera.

9 Please continue with the deposition. MR. LEE: Mark, yes or no. Are you going to

13:11:49 10

13:11:50 11 give me your assurance? 13:11:51 12 MR. WASSER: Counsel, I'm not going to go

13:11:52 13 back and forth with you. 13:11:53 14 15 13:11:54 16 MR. LEE: Okay. Then we're stopping.

MR. WASSER: MR. LEE:

Your equipment -We're not going to We did it as an

Sorry.

13:11:56 17 continue with this deposition.

13:11:59 18 attempt to accommodate Ms. Patrick and everyone else 13:12:01 19 and we're not going to proceed until we get a 13:12:02 20 protective order. 13:12:02 21 MR. WASSER: Do not adjourn this deposition. Your equipment is

13:12:04 22 Please commence it and continue. Page 7

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-3
A081908rfb

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 8 of 59

13:12:07 23 not at risk. 13:12:08 24 MR. LEE: Mr. Wasser, you've demonstrated

13:12:10 25 that to be false at the last deposition. My camera ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT


9

13:12:12 13:12:14 13:12:15 13:12:15 13:12:17 13:12:17 13:12:18 13:12:19 13:12:20

1 is not working. 2 3 working? 4 5 not. 6

And -This camera on the table is not

MR. WASSER:

MR. LEE:

This one is.

The other one is

MR. WASSER:

Fine.

Please continue with the

7 deposition. 8 MR. LEE: Yes, we will, with your assurance

9 you're not going to touch any of my equipment without

13:12:23 10 my permission. 13:12:23 11 13:12:25 12 13:12:29 13 sorry. 13:12:30 14 Okay. I don't know if Mr. Wasser is going MR. WASSER: MR. LEE: I've told you there is no -Mark, no. I'm

Forget it, Mark.

13:12:32 15 to agree to it, but we're going -- I'm turning my 13:12:34 16 camera off. 13:12:35 17 MR. WASSER: We object to your terminating

13:12:38 18 this deposition. 13:12:38 19 MR. LEE: We're adjourning the deposition. We're adjourning and we're

13:12:40 20 We're not terminating.

13:12:44 21 going to be -- pending a protective order from the 13:12:45 22 court. 13:12:47 23 I'm sorry. The time is now 1:13, and we're

13:12:50 24 adjourning to seek a protective order with the court. 13:12:52 25 Mark, whether you like it or not, you broke ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT Page 8

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-3
A081908rfb

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 9 of 59



10

13:12:56 13:12:57

1 my camera. 2 3

I'm sorry.

You touched it --

MR. WASSER: MR. LEE:

I don't believe that.

-- you grabbed it. I'm not going to -- this is

13:12:59 13:13:01

4

MR. WASSER:

5 infantile. 6 7 we? 8 MR. LEE: Yes, we are. Sorry. THE REPORTER: We're off the record, aren't

13:13:08

9

MR. WASSER:

Are we off the record,

13:13:09 10 Mr. Wasser? 13:13:09 11 13:27:14 12 13:27:14 13 MR. WASSER: I guess we're off the record.

(Recess taken.) MR. LEE: Today is Tuesday, August 19, 2008.

13:27:17 14 This is the deposition by plaintiff of deponent 13:27:21 15 Barbara Patrick in the matter of David F. Jadwin 13:27:25 16 versus County of Kern, et al., U.S. District Court 13:27:28 17 for Eastern District of California, Case Number 13:27:32 18 1:07-cv-26. 13:27:33 19 My name's Eugene Lee, and I am an employee

13:27:36 20 of Law Office of Eugene Lee, counsel of record for 13:27:39 21 the plaintiff, located at 555 West Fifth Street, 13:27:43 22 Suite 3100, Los Angeles, California, 90013. 13:27:48 23 I am videotaping this deposition on behalf This deposition is taking place at the

13:27:50 24 of plaintiff.

13:27:53 25 Holiday Inn located at 801 Truxtun Avenue, ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT


11

13:27:56

1 Bakersfield, California, 93301. Page 9

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-3

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 10 of 59

13:28:00 13:28:03 13:28:06 13:28:07 13:28:09 13:28:11 13:28:13 13:28:16

2

A081908rfb The time is now 1:28 p.m.

Will all parties

3 in the room please state their appearances. 4 5 6 MR. WASSER: THE WITNESS: Mark Wasser for the defendants. Barbara Patrick. Joan Herrington, of counsel

MS. HERRINGTON:

7 to the office of Eugene Lee. 8 MR. LEE: And we also have joining us Karen

9 Barnes, Chief Deputy County Counsel for the County of 10 Kern.

13:28:18 11

Please -- well, before we go and swear the

13:28:21 12 deponent, again I'm going to just repeat for the 13:28:24 13 record that we had an incident at the last deposition 13:28:27 14 where Mr. Wasser grabbed both of my web cams and in 13:28:32 15 the process of grabbing them twice damaged one of 13:28:35 16 them. And so we are seeking a motion for protective

13:28:40 17 order from the Court that Mr. Wasser will not be 13:28:41 18 touching my equipment again without my permission. 13:28:44 19 And we are willing to proceed with today's

13:28:46 20 deposition of Barbara Patrick on condition that 13:28:49 21 Mr. Wasser give us his assurance that he will not be 13:28:52 22 touching any of my property without my permission. 13:28:56 23 MR. WASSER: Do you intend to pursue a

13:28:58 24 protective order nevertheless? 13:29:00 25


MR. LEE:

I'm sorry? ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT 12

13:29:01 13:29:03 13:29:04 13:29:07 13:29:07

1

MR. WASSER:

Do you intend to pursue a

2 protective order neverthless? 3 MR. LEE: Mark, if you give us a stip in

4 order right now -5 MR. WASSER: A stip in order? Page 10 I can't give

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-3
A081908rfb

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 11 of 59

13:29:09 13:29:10 13:29:12 13:29:15

6 you an order, Counsel. 7 MR. LEE: Well, I mean, a stip would have to It would be a

8 be followed by an order, wouldn't it?

9 stipulation in order that you and I would agree to Correct?

13:29:17 10 and submit to the court for signing. 13:29:19 11 MR. WASSER:

We didn't discuss stipulation You asked me to

13:29:22 12 in order in earlier conversations. 13:29:22 13 make a statement. 13:29:23 14 MR. LEE:

Well, I'm just saying for the

13:29:25 15 purpose of today's deposition are you willing to give 13:29:27 16 us your assurance that you're not going to be 13:29:30 17 touching my equipment without my permission? 13:29:31 18 MR. WASSER: And I'm asking, given the

13:29:33 19 statement you made a moment ago, do you intend to 13:29:34 20 pursue a protective order nevertheless? 13:29:36 21 13:29:37 22 issue. 13:29:38 23 13:29:40 24 issue. MR. LEE: Well, that's a whole different

But I have to -MR. WASSER: No, it's not. It's the same

I need to know whether we're going to move

13:29:42 25 forward off this issue or whether we're not. ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT


13

13:29:45 13:29:48 13:29:49 13:29:50 13:29:54 13:29:57 13:29:58 13:30:00

1

MR. LEE:

Well, there is the tiny matter of

2 the cost of the camera. 3 MR. WASSER: That's another issue, which But I'm focused You said

4 we'll deal with that separately.

5 right now in getting this deposition going. 6 you're moving for protective order. 7 understanding.

That was not my

I understood you wanted me to make a

8 certain representation to you in lieu of a protective Page 11

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-3

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 12 of 59

13:30:03

9 order.

A081908rfb I'm asking you what your intention is. MR. LEE: Well, I'm interested in doing a

13:30:05 10

13:30:07 11 stipulation, but it would have to be reduced to an 13:30:10 12 order by the court. 13:30:11 13 13:30:13 14 MR. WASSER: MR. LEE: We didn't discuss that.

Mr. Wasser, this is a discovery It needs to

13:30:15 15 stipulation under Rule 29 of the FRCP.

13:30:18 16 be reduced to an order and approved by the court. 13:30:21 17 You know that. The stipulation is not enforceable

13:30:24 18 without being reduced to an order under Rule 29. 13:30:27 19 MR. WASSER: During the deposition of Toni

13:30:29 20 Smith, Mr. Lee made an unfounded and fabricated 13:30:32 21 allegation regarding interaction between me and 13:30:35 22 Ms. Smith. I picked Mr. Lee's camera up from the

13:30:38 23 table and used -- directed it toward the floor where 13:30:41 24 our feet were for the purpose of making a record as 13:30:44 25 to the location of our feet. ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT


14

13:30:46 13:30:48 13:30:52 13:30:54 13:30:55 13:30:57 13:30:57 13:31:01 13:31:03

1 2 camera.

Mr. Lee contends that that damaged his I disagree with that. But I will not do so

3 again without first requesting permission from 4 Mr. Lee. 5 Now, I would like to move forward with the

6 deposition now. 7 8 MR. LEE: MR. LEE: Okay. Thank you.

Please go ahead and swear in the

9 deponent, Madam Reporter. BARBARA ELIZABETH PATRICK,

13:31:05 10

11 called as a witness by counsel for Plaintiff, being 12 first duly sworn, testified as follows: Page 12

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-3
A081908rfb

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 13 of 59

13 14 BY MR. LEE: 13:31:15 15 13:31:17 16 Q.

EXAMINATION

Thank you, Ms. Patrick. May I ask if -- first of all, can you state

13:31:19 17 your full name for the record just once. 13:31:21 18 13:31:24 19 13:31:26 20 13:31:27 21 A. Q. A. Q. Sure. Barbara Elizabeth Patrick. Correct?

Spelled how it sounds. Yes.

And is this your first deposition or have

13:31:29 22 you had -13:31:29 23 13:31:30 24 13:31:32 25


A. Q. A.

No.

I've been deposed before.

Can you estimate how many times? One -- one other time. ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT 15

13:31:34 13:31:35 13:31:38 13:31:41 13:31:43 13:31:44 13:31:45 13:31:46 13:31:48

1 2

Q.

One other time. And can you remember or recall how recently

3 that deposition was, when did it occur? 4 A. It occurred shortly before Thanksgiving of

5 2007. 6 7 8 Q. A. Q. Relatively recently then? Yes. Okay. And in that deposition were you being

9 deposed as a witness or as a party? A. Q. What do you mean as a party? Were you a plaintiff or a defendant in the

13:31:54 10 13:31:55 11

13:31:57 12 lawsuit in which you were being deposed? 13:31:59 13 13:31:59 14 13:32:02 15 MR. WASSER: THE WITNESS: MR. WASSER: Do you know? What am I here? You're a witness here. Page 13

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-3

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 14 of 59

13:32:03 16

THE WITNESS:

A081908rfb Okay. I'm a witness.

17 BY MR. LEE: 13:32:05 18 13:32:07 19 Q. A. I'm talking about your previous deposition. I know. I assume it's the same thing.

13:32:09 20 Someone is suing the County, and they wanted my take 13:32:13 21 on it. 13:32:14 22 13:32:15 23 Q. I understand. Thank you.

Well, it sounds like you've had a recent

13:32:20 24 experience with a deposition, but I'm just going to 13:32:21 25 refresh your rules again just in case. ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT


16

13:32:24 13:32:27 13:32:30 13:32:33 13:32:35 13:32:38 13:32:40 13:32:44 13:32:47

1

The lady sitting to your right is the court She will be transcribing every written -She'll be transcribing everything that's So she can only record oral

2 reporter. 3 I'm sorry.

4 said orally today. 5 statements.

So please -- when you respond to a

6 question, please refrain from shaking or nodding your 7 head or shrugging your shoulders or saying uh-huh or 8 huh-uh, something of that nature. 9 her to transcribe. A. Q. Okay. So please say yes, no clearly. Also -- also for the reporter's sake, if I'm It's very hard for

13:32:47 10 13:32:48 11 13:32:51 12

13:32:54 13 asking a question I would ask that you refrain from 13:32:56 14 speaking until I am finished speaking. Not only is

13:33:00 15 that a point of courtesy, as I'm sure you're very 13:33:03 16 well aware, but it's also for the reporter's sake. 13:33:06 17 She can't record more than one person talking at a 13:33:09 18 time. 13:33:09 19 It's very important that you understand the Page 14

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-3
A081908rfb

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 15 of 59

13:33:11 20 questions I ask you today before you answer.

If you

13:33:13 21 answer a question it will be presumed that you 13:33:15 22 understood the question. 13:33:18 23 make sure you understand. 13:33:21 24 me to rephrase or restate. 13:33:24 25


So before you answer please If you don't, please ask I'll be happy to do that.

Do you understand? ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT 17

13:33:24 13:33:25 13:33:29 13:33:31 13:33:34 13:33:36 13:33:40 13:33:41 13:33:41

1 2

A. Q.

Yes. Okay. The oath you've been administered is

3 the same -- has the same force and effect as an oath 4 that would be administered to you in a court of law 5 before a judge and/or a jury. It requires you to

6 tell the truth and the whole truth as it would in a 7 court of law. 8 9 A. Q. Do you understand that? Yes. I'm entitled -- we are entitled to your best If I

13:33:43 10

13:33:45 11 estimates but not your guesses or speculation.

13:33:48 12 ask you to estimate the length of this table you 13:33:50 13 could say about 12 feet long, but if I asked you how 13:33:53 14 many cats I have at home, you'd have to say I don't 13:33:55 15 know, it would be a guess. We would only be

13:33:57 16 interested and are entitled to your estimates. 13:34:00 17 13:34:00 18 13:34:01 19 A. Q. Do you understand? Yes. Okay. Is there anything that prevents or

13:34:04 20 restricts you from giving your -- giving your fullest 13:34:08 21 and best testimony today? 13:34:09 22 A. No. Page 15

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-3

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 16 of 59

13:34:10 23

Q.

A081908rfb Is there anything that you're aware that

13:34:12 24 have would prevent today's deposition from 13:34:14 25 proceeding? ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT


18

13:34:14 13:34:16 13:34:18 13:34:20 13:34:22 13:34:23 13:34:26 13:34:28 13:34:28

1 2

A. Q.

No. Have you -- without specifying what it was,

3 can you -- have you taken any medication, drugs, or 4 alcohol in the last 24 hours? 5 6 A. Q. Yes. Okay. Is it anything that you -- that would

7 potentially affect your testimony today? 8 9 A. Q. No. Ms. Patrick, did you discuss today's

13:34:33 10 deposition with anybody besides your attorney? 13:34:37 11 13:34:40 12 A. Q. Huh-uh. Have you reviewed any documents in

13:34:40 13 preparation for today's deposition? 13:34:43 14 13:34:43 15 13:34:44 16 13:34:47 17 about? 13:34:48 18 13:34:49 19 A. Q. I believe so. Okay. Can you say in your own words what A. Q. No, I have not. No. Do you understand what this litigation is

13:34:51 20 you think it's about? 13:34:52 21 13:34:55 22 A. Q. Dr. Jadwin is suing the County. Okay. But do you know the basis of the

13:34:59 23 lawsuit or not? 13:35:01 24 A. I believe it has something to do with when

13:35:05 25 he left -- left the County. ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT Page 16

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-3
A081908rfb

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 17 of 59



19

13:35:08 13:35:15 13:35:17 13:35:17 13:35:18 13:35:20 13:35:22 13:35:26 13:35:32

1

Q.

Okay.

You were -- you were a member of the

2 Board of Supervisors for the County of Kern. 3 Correct? 4 5 A. Q. Yes. Can you tell us for what -- the dates of

6 your term was or -7 A. Sure. I was elected in '94, I took office

8 in '95, and I was in office through -- I believe it 9 was noon January 8th of 2007. Q. A. Q. A. Q. A. So about a three-year term, then? No. Or two years? No. It was 12 years. I must have misheard. Did I misstate? '94 to 2008. '94 to 2007. Seven.

13:35:35 10 13:35:38 11 13:35:39 12 13:35:41 13 13:35:41 14 13:35:44 15 13:35:44 16 13:35:46 17 18

12 years? I'm sorry.

MR. WASSER: THE WITNESS: MR. WASSER:

19 BY MR. LEE: 13:35:49 20 13:35:53 21 Q. I think I misheard. Thank you.

And were you at any point the chair of the

13:35:55 22 Board of Supervisors. 13:35:56 23 13:35:59 24 A. Q. Yes, I was. Three times.

Can you tell us the terms of your

13:36:01 25 chairmanship of the board? ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT


20

13:36:04

1

A.

Sure.

It would have been in 1996, 2001, and Page 17

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-3
A081908rfb

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 18 of 59

13:36:09 13:36:11 13:36:13 13:36:18 13:36:20 13:36:26 13:36:32 13:36:37

2 2006. 3 4 5 6 Q. A. Q. And these are, what, two-year terms? Just one year. One-year term. What -- how would you describe your -- the

7 job functions of your position as County supervisor? 8 A. How much time do you have? We did budgets,

9 we did meetings, we had committees that we served on.

13:36:41 10 I also represented the board on the valley air 13:36:44 11 district and also represented the valley on the 13:36:47 12 California air resources board. 13:36:53 13 of responsibility. 13:36:56 14 Q. What were your job functions with respect So I -- I had a lot

13:37:01 15 to -- bless you -- strike that. 13:37:01 16 What were your job functions as a member of

13:37:04 17 the Board of Supervisors with respect to Kern Medical 13:37:06 18 Center? 13:37:08 19 A. Oh, gosh. Approving the budget and

13:37:15 20 approving contracts with employees and making 13:37:22 21 decisions about ITS systems and telephone systems and 13:37:28 22 systems for medical records and so forth. 13:37:36 23 13:37:38 24 13:37:40 25


Q. A. Q.

Okay.

You said employee contracts.

Um-hmm. What were your job functions as a board of ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT 21

13:37:43 13:37:46 13:37:50 13:37:57 13:38:00

1 supervisor member with respect to employee contracts? 2 A. There were some physicians, especially -- it

3 wasn't just contracts with the run of the mill 4 employee, so to speak, but we did have contracts with 5 physicians that we would approve. Page 18

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-3
A081908rfb

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 19 of 59

13:38:02 13:38:05 13:38:08 13:38:11

6

Q.

And what was your job function as a

7 supervisor -- member -- as a supervisor with respect 8 to employee -- a particular employee contract at Kern 9 Medical Center? Was it to review the contract? Was

13:38:13 10 it -13:38:14 11 A. Um-hmm. And to vote to approve the

13:38:17 12 contract. 13:38:18 13 Q. And what about amendments to those

13:38:20 14 contracts? 13:38:20 15 13:38:23 16 A. Q. I'm sure there were amendments as well. So your job function as a supervisor

13:38:25 17 included approving and reviewing amendments to 13:38:29 18 employment contracts of, what, key personnel at KMC? 13:38:34 19 13:38:36 20 A. Q. Primarily physicians. But upper-level physicians and executives, I Correct?

13:38:41 21 would imagine. 13:38:44 22 13:38:47 23 A. Q.

Physicians are the ones that I remember. Okay. And what -- what were the distinct

13:38:54 24 job functions associated with being a chair of the 13:38:56 25 Board of Supervisors, distinct from being just a ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT


22

13:39:00 13:39:01 13:39:03 13:39:06 13:39:25 13:39:30 13:39:33 13:39:34

1 regular supervisor? 2 A. Primarily running the meeting and also there

3 was more committee work that was assigned to the 4 members -- to the chairmen in any given year. 5 Q. As part -- did your job duties as a

6 supervisor include attending regularly meetings of 7 joint conference committee -8 A. Yes. Page 19

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-3

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 20 of 59

13:39:35

9

Q.

A081908rfb -- at Kern Medical Center? Yes?

13:39:36 10 13:39:36 11 13:39:40 12 A. Q.

Yes. Did you regularly vote at the joint

13:39:42 13 conference committee meetings at Kern Medical Center? 13:39:47 14 A. I would say we usually voted for sure on the There may or may not be

13:39:50 15 minutes of the last meeting.

13:39:53 16 things that we actually voted on during the joint 13:39:56 17 conference meeting. 13:39:57 18 Q. But when there was something up for a vote

13:40:00 19 at the joint conference committee meetings at Kern 13:40:03 20 Medical Center you did, in fact, vote? 13:40:04 21 13:40:09 22 A. Q. If I was in attendance, yes. If you could -- well, how often does the

13:40:13 23 joint conference committee meet at Kern Medical 13:40:15 24 Center? 13:40:17 25


Is it once a month? Pretty much once a month. Occasionally they ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT 23

A.

13:40:20 13:40:22 13:40:25 13:40:33 13:40:35 13:40:38 13:40:40 13:40:41 13:40:41

1 had trouble getting a quorum and we did not meet, but 2 I believe it's a Jake owe requirement that we meet on 3 a monthly basis. 4 Q. So you were attending joint conference

5 committee meetings on a monthly basis throughout your 6 tenure as a supervisor? 7 8 9 A. Q. A. No. No? Just when I was one of two board members

13:40:45 10 that was appointed to join the conference. 13:40:51 11 Q. Okay. How were these two board members

13:40:53 12 appointed to attend the joint conference committee Page 20

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-3
A081908rfb

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 21 of 59

13:40:55 13 meetings? 13:40:56 14 A. Typically it was the chairman and vice

13:41:01 15 chairman of the board but there were times when 13:41:01 16 another member relinquished that and asked me or 13:41:05 17 another member to serve in their place. 13:41:09 18 Q. But typically it was the chair and the vice

13:41:11 19 chair of the Board of Supervisors? 13:41:13 20 13:41:14 21 A. Q. Typically, yes. So in 2006 when you were the chair of the

13:41:19 22 Board of Supervisors you were attending the joint 13:41:23 23 conference committees in your role as a chair of the 13:41:25 24 Board of Supervisors? 13:41:27 25


A.

I'm sure I attended most of them. ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT 24

13:41:32 13:41:37 13:41:39 13:41:43 13:41:46 13:41:49 13:41:52 13:41:54 13:41:56

1

Q.

Okay.

Do you recall at a joint -- do you

2 recall the joint conference committee meeting 3 occurring on July 10, 2006, at which Dr. Jadwin's 4 removal from chairmanship of the pathology department 5 was considered and voted upon by the JCC? 6 A. I couldn't verify that it was on that date,

7 but I do remember the discussion, yes. 8 Q. Well, I'll represent to you that the joint

9 conference committee met on July 10, 2000 -- did I I meant six -- 2006 to vote to consider

13:41:59 10 say eight?

13:42:03 11 and to approve removal of Dr. Jadwin from chair of 13:42:06 12 the department of pathology at Kern Medical Center. 13:42:11 13 13:42:15 14 chair? 13:42:15 15 A. I imagine that I did. Page 21 Did you vote on Dr. Jadwin's removal from

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-3

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 22 of 59

13:42:17 16

Q.

A081908rfb You have no reason to believe you did not.

13:42:19 17 Right? 13:42:19 18 13:42:21 19 A. Q. I have no reason to believe I did not. Okay. Do you recall how you voted? Did you -Was it

13:42:25 20 for, against? 13:42:27 21 13:42:29 22 13:42:30 23 A. Q.

I imagine I would have voted in favor of it. Favor of it. Okay. What I'm interested in knowing today

13:42:33 24 is the basis for your decision to approve or to vote 13:42:36 25 in favor of removal of Dr. Jadwin. ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT


25

13:42:39 13:42:41 13:42:46 13:42:49 13:42:52 13:42:56 13:43:01 13:43:04 13:43:07

1 2

What did you base that decision on? MR. WASSER: As an elected County

3 supervisor, Supervisor Patrick has a legislative 4 immunity which extends to the rationale for votes 5 that she cast in her capacity as supervisor. 6 immunity is based upon separation of powers. That So it

7 is Ms. Patrick's -- I mention this as a privilege 8 that she holds, it's personal to her as a local 9 legislator. If she wishes to waive that privilege

13:43:11 10 and answer the questions it is a privilege she holds 13:43:14 11 herself. If she wishes to assert the privilege, she

13:43:18 12 can assert the privilege and can decline to answer 13:43:23 13 questions regarding the reasons she had in her mind 13:43:27 14 for votes that she cast in her capacity as a local 13:43:30 15 legislator. 13:43:31 16 13:43:33 17 MR. LEE: Okay. I'm going to state that --

MR. WASSER:

And that is the separation of

13:43:35 18 powers privilege.

It's not based upon state statute.

13:43:40 19 It's based upon the constitution. Page 22

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-3
A081908rfb

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 23 of 59

13:43:42 20

MR. LEE:

I'm going to state that that's --

13:43:44 21 that is correct, that it's an immunity from liability 13:43:47 22 but -13:43:47 23 MR. WASSER: No. It's a liabil- -- it's I'm not talking about

13:43:49 24 privilege from testimony. 13:43:51 25 liability, counsel.


We're talking about it's a ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT 26

13:43:54 13:43:59 13:44:01 13:44:04 13:44:06 13:44:09 13:44:12 13:44:15 13:44:16

1 testimonial privilege. 2 liability.

It's not an immunity from It's based upon

That's different.

3 separation of power. 4 and federal courts.

It's been recognized by state It's a privilege that

5 Ms. Patrick holds that's personal to her, and she's 6 able to waive it or assert it based upon her choice 7 as a local legislator. 8 MR. LEE: So if I understand you correctly,

9 you're not citing to any statutes; you're citing to

13:44:19 10 the U.S. Constitution? 13:44:20 11 MR. WASSER: This is a court-created

13:44:22 12 privilege.

It's not based upon state law, counsel. It's not an

13:44:26 13 It's call the legislative privilege. 13:44:30 14 immunity from liability. 13:44:33 15 powers.

It's a separation of

The judiciary does not have the power to

13:44:37 16 inquire into the motives or reasons that legislators 13:44:42 17 vote in certain ways. 13:44:44 18 Again, the privilege is personal to She may assert it or she may waive it. You've asked her to state the

13:44:46 19 Ms. Patrick.

13:44:49 20 It is up to her.

13:44:53 21 reasons for a vote she cast in her capacity as a 13:44:57 22 County supervisor, hence, the privilege is at issue. Page 23

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-3

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 24 of 59

13:45:00 23

MR. LEE:

A081908rfb Okay. I'm just going to state

13:45:01 24 that I would understand that there is a legislative 13:45:04 25 privilege, but there's no legislation occurring here. ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT


27

13:45:06 13:45:08 13:45:10 13:45:15 13:45:18 13:45:21 13:45:23 13:45:32 13:45:32

1 There's no law being passed. 2 MR. WASSER: She is a legislator. She was

3 on the JCC by virtue of her election to office as a 4 local legislator, Counsel. 5 it. You don't need to debate She holds

I'm simply stating that's the law.

6 the privilege. 7 chooses. 8

She can answer or not, if she

(Attorney Karen Barnes not present.)

9 BY MR. LEE: Q. Ms. Patrick, so we've had this colloquy

13:45:32 10

13:45:35 11 between myself and Mr. Wasser and suffice it to say 13:45:38 12 we don't agree with his position, but we respect his 13:45:40 13 opinion. 13:45:42 14 Do you want the question read back to you

13:45:44 15 again, Ms. Patrick? 13:45:45 16 13:45:45 17 A. Please. MR. LEE: Madam Reporter, would you repeat

13:45:48 18 the question. 13:45:48 19 13:46:14 20 (Requested portion of record read.) THE WITNESS: He wasn't there.

13:46:20 21 BY MR. LEE: 13:46:21 22 Q. So simply physical unavailability from the Is that correct?

13:46:25 23 workplace at Kern Medical Center. 13:46:27 24 13:46:33 25 A. Q.

Over an extended period of time. Okay. You've stated physical ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT Page 24

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-3
A081908rfb

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 25 of 59



28

13:46:34 13:46:41 13:46:43 13:46:45 13:46:52 13:46:54 13:46:56 13:46:58 13:46:59

1 unavailability.

He wasn't there.

What other bases

2 did you base your decision on? 3 A. Well, it was my feeling that we needed to

4 have a chair in place, and he was not there and had 5 not been there for an extended period of time. 6 Q. I understand. So physical unavailability

7 for an extended period of time. 8 9 A. Q. Yes. Is that the sole reason then that you based

13:47:00 10 your vote on or are there others? 13:47:02 11 13:47:03 12 13:47:04 13 A. Q. Yes. Yes. Okay. Now, regarding the physical

13:47:06 14 unavailability of Dr. Jadwin, are you aware of the 13:47:11 15 reasons for Dr. Jadwin's physical unavailability at 13:47:14 16 Kern Medical Center? 13:47:16 17 13:47:18 18 A. Q. Why don't you refresh my memory. Well, I mean, actually, it's -- I'm just

13:47:20 19 asking whether you have any recollection of knowing 13:47:22 20 why Dr. Jadwin was physically absent from the 13:47:25 21 hospital. 13:47:27 22 13:47:29 23 13:47:31 24 13:47:34 25


If you don't recall --

A. Q. A. Q.

He was taking leave. Medical leave. Yes. And how did you come into this knowledge ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT 29 Isn't that correct?

13:47:37

1 that -- of Dr. Jadwin's physical unavailability? Page 25

How

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-3
A081908rfb

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 26 of 59

13:47:40 13:47:42 13:47:47 13:47:49 13:47:51 13:47:55 13:47:57 13:47:59

2 did you learn this? 3 A. Oh, I'm certain that I was apprised of it at

4 joint conference if not elsewhere. 5 Q. Besides joint conference committee where

6 else do you recall learning about Dr. Jadwin's 7 physical unavailability at Kern Medical Center? 8 9 A. Q. A. I don't actually have a recollection. Okay. But I can't take it back to a specific

13:48:00 10

13:48:04 11 instance at joint conference. 13:48:07 12 Q. Okay. But as far as you can recall, you

13:48:09 13 first learned of Dr. Jadwin's -- well, you learned of 13:48:12 14 Dr. Jadwin's physical unavailability at KMC through 13:48:15 15 some contact at the joint conference? 13:48:17 16 13:48:21 17 A. That would be my assumption. (Attorney Karen Barnes now present.)

13:48:21 18 BY MR. LEE: 13:48:22 19 13:48:30 20 13:48:32 21 Q. Okay. And is that -- I'm sorry.

Go ahead. MR. LEE: Mark, do you want to get that for

13:48:33 22 her, please? 13:48:44 23 THE WITNESS: Let the record show I have not

13:48:46 24 had one today so -13:48:48 25


MR. LEE:

We won't tell your doctor. ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT 30

13:48:51 13:48:52 13:48:54 13:48:58 13:49:00

1 BY MR. LEE: 2 Q. Okay. Ms. Patrick, so you say you assume

3 you learned of Dr. Jadwin's unavailability for 4 medical leave. Is that correct? That you learned of

5 his unavailability of medical leave through the joint Page 26

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-3
A081908rfb

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 27 of 59

13:49:03 13:49:04 13:49:05 13:49:06

6 conference committee? 7 8 9 A. Q. Most likely. Most likely. But you don't have a specific recollection

13:49:07 10 one way or another? 13:49:08 11 13:49:09 12 A. Q. No, I do not. Okay. And you recall at all who told you or

13:49:15 13 where you learned this -- who you learned this from, 13:49:17 14 the circumstances of Dr. Jadwin's unavailability from 13:49:23 15 medical leave? 13:49:24 16 13:49:26 17 13:49:27 18 A. Q. I probably learned it from Peter Bryan. Okay. MR. WASSER: Don't guess.

13:49:32 19 BY MR. LEE: 13:49:33 20 Q. Okay. But again when you say probably,

13:49:36 21 that's not based on any specific recollection? 13:49:37 22 13:49:38 23 A. Q. No. You're just thinking back and saying who

13:49:41 24 would have been the likely person to tell me most 13:49:43 25 likely -ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT


31

1 13:49:43 13:49:44 13:49:45 13:49:47 13:49:47 13:49:50 13:49:53 2 3 4 5 6

A. Q. A. Q. A. Q.

Yes. -- would have been Peter Bryan? Yes. But you don't recall a conversation? Absolutely not. Okay. Okay. Well, I imagine you must be You can't remember every Right?

7 very busy as a supervisor.

8 conversation you've ever had.

Page 27

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-3

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 28 of 59

13:49:55

9

A.

That's right.

A081908rfb And it was quite some time

13:49:56 10 ago. 13:49:57 11 13:49:58 12 Q. Sure. Sure. Understandable.

Now, are you aware of what the California

13:50:05 13 Family Rights Act is? 13:50:06 14 13:50:08 15 A. Q. No. Are you aware of what the Family & Medical

13:50:10 16 Leave Act is? 13:50:14 17 A. I've heard of it. I could not tell you

13:50:16 18 exactly what it -- we have attorneys in the County 13:50:20 19 who tell us exactly what it means and does. 13:50:25 20 Q. So in terms of ensuring that Dr. Jadwin's

13:50:28 21 removal from chair for medical leave -- for 13:50:32 22 absence -- let me rephrase that. 13:50:35 23 Strike that.

In terms of Dr. Jadwin's removal for

13:50:38 24 physical unavailability due to medical leave, how did 13:50:42 25 you go about ensuring that that removal would comply ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT


32

13:50:45 13:50:47 13:50:52 13:50:53 13:50:57 13:50:58

1 with applicable law? 2 A. Again, we have attorneys who advise us on

3 things like that. 4 Q. Okay. Now, do you recall whether Karen

5 Barnes was present at the -6 7 A. Q. I do not. Do not. Do you recall whether any legal counsel was

13:50:58 13:51:00

8

9 typically present at JCC meetings? A. Q. Typically, yes. Okay. So at the removal -- just for the

13:51:03 10 13:51:04 11

13:51:08 12 sake of brevity, if you don't mind, I'm just going to Page 28

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-3
A081908rfb

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 29 of 59

13:51:11 13 call the July 10, 2006, joint conference committee 13:51:14 14 meeting at which Dr. Jadwin removal was considered, 13:51:18 15 voted on, and approved, I'm going to call that the 13:51:20 16 removal meeting. 13:51:21 17 13:51:23 18 13:51:23 19 13:51:25 20 A. Q. Is that okay with you? That's fine. That will just speed things along. Now, at the removal meeting do you recall

13:51:28 21 whether any legal counsel was present? 13:51:30 22 A. I do not recall that. That was over two

13:51:32 23 years ago or more. 13:51:34 24 Q. But you would imagine -- you would

13:51:37 25 believe -- well, strike that. ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT


33

13:51:38 13:51:40 13:51:45 13:51:51 13:51:54 13:51:55 13:51:59 13:52:04 13:52:06

1

Okay.

Now, do you recall any discussion at

2 the removal meeting occurring regarding the issue of 3 Dr. Jadwin's removal complying with applicable law? 4 5 6 A. Q. I do not recall. Don't recall. Do you recall ever seeking out advice of

7 legal counsel to inquire about compliance with 8 applicable law in connection with Dr. Jadwin's 9 removal? A. Q. I do not recall. Don't recall. When a chair is being removed -- well, how

13:52:07 10 13:52:09 11 13:52:10 12

13:52:13 13 often is that -- how often in your tenure have you 13:52:16 14 voted on removal of a department chair at Kern 13:52:19 15 Medical Center? Is that a common occurrence? Page 29

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-3
A081908rfb

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 30 of 59

13:52:22 16 13:52:22 17

A. Q.

No. So would you say it's, to your recollection,

13:52:26 18 it's only happened once, Dr. Jadwin's case? 13:52:26 19 A. There have been other chairmen who left, but

13:52:30 20 I don't remember the circumstances. 13:52:33 21 Q. Okay. Well, I'm talking about not people

13:52:35 22 leaving.

I'm talking about removal of a sitting

13:52:38 23 chair from a department at Kern Medical Center. 13:52:39 24 13:52:40 25


A. Q.

Um-hmm. To your recollection, how many have you ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT 34

13:52:43 13:52:48 13:52:50 13:52:51 13:52:53 13:52:55 13:52:56 13:52:59 13:53:03

1 become aware of during your tenure as supervisor? 2 MR. WASSER: Who were removed as opposed to

3 retiring? 4 5 MR. LEE: Removed. I don't remember any.

THE WITNESS:

6 BY MR. LEE: 7 Q. So to your recollection Dr. Jadwin's the

8 only case where you became aware of a department 9 chair of Kern Medical Center actually being removed Correct?

13:53:06 10 from chairmanship. 13:53:09 11 A.

You know, I was on that board for 12 years

13:53:12 12 and I've been off the board now for a year and a 13 half. 14 13:53:15 15 13:53:18 16 13:53:20 17 Q. A. Q. A. Um-hmm. So we're going pretty far back into history. Um-hmm. And so it's difficult for me to say

13:53:22 18 absolutely that that is -- that he is the only 13:53:24 19 individual -Page 30

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-3
A081908rfb

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 31 of 59

13:53:24 20 13:53:25 21 13:53:26 22

Q. A. Q.

Sure. -- that that happened with. But to your recollection you can't think of

13:53:28 23 any other cases? 13:53:29 24 13:53:31 25


A. Q.

At this moment, no. Are there any documents you can think that ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT 35

13:53:33 13:53:36 13:53:37 13:53:37 13:53:40 13:53:40 13:53:52 13:53:55 13:53:57

1 have would help -- help you to remember if there were 2 any other cases -3 4 A. Q. No. -- of department chairs at KMC being

5 removed? 6 7 A. Q. No. Ms. -- I don't know if I should refer to you

8 as Supervisor Patrick or Ms. Patrick. 9 A. Q. You can call me anything you want. Okay. Ms. Patrick is probably easier for

13:53:59 10 13:54:02 11 me? 13:54:02 12 13:54:03 13

A. Q.

That's just fine. Ms. Patrick, I just wanted to remind you

13:54:06 14 that we're not asking for you to testify beyond 13:54:08 15 anything you recall. If you don't recall it, please That's not

13:54:10 16 don't feel pressure to provide an answer. 13:54:13 17 what our aim is.

Certainly not to -- we're not here

13:54:15 18 to put words in your mouth or to force you to say 13:54:18 19 something you don't want to. 20 13:54:19 21 A. Q. Um-hmm. If you don't remember it, just say I don't Okay? I just want to reassure you Page 31

13:54:20 22 remember it.

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-3
A081908rfb

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 32 of 59

13:54:23 23 about that. 13:54:23 24 13:54:32 25


A. Q.

Um-hmm. So do you have any understanding about ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT 36

13:54:34 13:54:39 13:54:41 13:54:43 13:54:45 13:54:48 13:54:48 13:54:50 13:54:54

1 medical leave rights in California? 2 3 A. Q. I think I have some understanding of it. Okay. Everyone's got different

4 recollection -- or understanding of what it is. 5 What's your understanding of medical leave laws in 6 California? 7 8 9 MR. WASSER: MR. LEE: All of them in one question?

There's only one, I believe. That's debatable. I -- I'm not an attorney and I

MR. WASSER: THE WITNESS:

13:54:56 10

13:55:01 11 don't think I do a very good job of explaining. 13:55:08 12 BY MR. LEE: 13:55:09 13 13:55:10 14 Q. Sure. That's fine.

Now, did you ever -- you say you based your

13:55:14 15 decision -- at the removal meeting you based your 13:55:19 16 vote based upon Dr. Jadwin's unavailability and you 13:55:21 17 say -- well, you can't remember exactly how you 13:55:24 18 learned about Dr. Jadwin's unavailability due to 13:55:27 19 medical leave. 13:55:28 20 Do you recall Mr. Bryan presenting the issue

13:55:32 21 of Dr. Jadwin's removal at the removal meeting? 13:55:37 22 13:55:38 23 13:55:39 24 A. Q. Yes, I do. Yes, you do. Okay. Mr. Bryan at the time was the CEO of Correct? ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT Page 32

13:55:42 25 Kern Medical Center.

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-3
A081908rfb

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 33 of 59



37

13:55:43 13:55:45 13:55:48 13:55:51 13:55:52 13:55:54 13:55:57 13:55:58 13:56:01

1 2

A. Q.

Correct. Do you recall how Mr. Bryan communicated the

3 issue of Dr. Jadwin's removal to the JCC at the 4 removal meeting? 5 A. Not specifically, but I do remember that he

6 introduced the topic. 7 8 Q. Introduced the topic. Okay. And was Mr. Bryan seeking -- it

9 was -- Dr. Jadwin was -- his removal was being voted

13:56:05 10 upon based pursuant to Mr. Bryan's recommendation as 13:56:09 11 the COO of Kern Medical Center. 13:56:12 12 13:56:14 13 A. Q. Yes. Are you -- do you have any knowledge of the Is that correct?

13:56:15 14 bylaws of Kern Medical Center? 13:56:17 15 13:56:18 16 A. Q. Yes. Now, the bylaws of the Kern Medical Center,

13:56:21 17 they are approved and ratified by the Board of 13:56:24 18 Supervisors. 13:56:25 19 13:56:27 20 A. Q. Is that correct?

I believe so. So do you have any recollection of the

13:56:30 21 bylaws for Kern Medical Center ever coming up for 13:56:32 22 ratification vote before the Board of Supervisors? 13:56:38 23 13:56:39 24 13:56:41 25


A. Q.

I believe they did. They did. No other body that you can think of is ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT 38

13:56:42

1 responsible for ratifying or approving the bylaws for Page 33

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-3

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 34 of 59

13:56:46 13:56:48 13:56:51 13:56:52 13:56:55 13:56:57 13:56:58 13:56:59

A081908rfb 2 KMC, are there -- is there? 3 4 5 A. Q. I actually -- well, I shouldn't guess. Do not guess. Thank you.

So to your recollection or understanding the

6 answer is no? 7 8 9 A. Q. Repeat the question. Sure. To your understanding and knowledge --

13:57:02 10 and/or knowledge, was the Board of Supervisors the 13:57:05 11 only body responsible for ratifying and approving 13:57:09 12 bylaws for Kern Medical Center? 13:57:11 13 A. I don't know. And the reason I say that is

13:57:14 14 I don't know if the medical staff was part of that 13:57:19 15 decision as well, if they recommended the bylaws to 13:57:23 16 the board. 13:57:27 17 Q. I don't remember the exact process.

But the Board of Supervisors ultimate

13:57:33 18 authority for almost -- actually every decision at 13:57:35 19 Kern Medical Center actually resides with the Board 13:57:40 20 of Supervisors. 13:57:40 21 13:57:40 22 A. Q. Yes. The Board of Supervisors may delegate Correct?

13:57:42 23 certain decision-making functions and tasks to 13:57:45 24 subordinate bodies within Kern Medical Center, but 13:57:47 25 they all ultimately answer to the Board of ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT


39

13:57:50 13:57:50 13:57:51 13:57:57 13:57:57

1 Supervisors. 2 3 A. Q.

Correct?

Correct. The joint conference committee at Kern

4 Medical Center was one of those subordinate bodies 5 that ultimately answer to the Board of Supervisors. Page 34

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-3
A081908rfb

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 35 of 59

13:58:00 13:58:05 13:58:08 13:58:11

6 Correct? 7 8 9 A. Q. A. Q. I'm sorry. Is that a yes, Ms. Patrick?

I'm not certain. You're not certain? Repeat the question. Sure. Sure.

13:58:12 10 13:58:15 11 13:58:18 12

Did the joint conference committee, to your

13:58:20 13 knowledge and understanding, ultimately answer to the 13:58:23 14 Board of Supervisors? 13:58:26 15 13:58:28 16 MR. WASSER: THE WITNESS: As a body? I truly do not know exactly

13:58:32 17 what you mean by that. 13:58:33 18 BY MR. LEE: 13:58:34 19 13:58:34 20 Q. Sure. Sure.

Now, the joint conference committee's

13:58:38 21 decision-making authority, was it delegated to it by 13:58:43 22 the Board of Supervisors at some point? 13:58:45 23 A. I think it's a Jake owe requirement that

13:58:48 24 there be a joint conference committee. 13:58:51 25


Q.

I see. ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT 40

13:58:51 13:58:57 13:59:00 13:59:01 13:59:02 13:59:06 13:59:08 13:59:12

1

A.

So I'm a little bit uncertain of where Jake

2 owe enters into it and where the Board of Supervisors 3 enters into it. 4 5 Q. I understand. So would it be fair to say or accurate to

6 say -- and if you don't agree just don't agree -- but 7 is it fair to say that the joint conference committee 8 was set up under the board of supervisor's authority Page 35

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-3

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 36 of 59

13:59:16

A081908rfb 9 and auspices in order to comply with Jake owe

13:59:20 10 requirements? 13:59:23 11 MR. WASSER: Don't guess.

13:59:24 12 BY MR. LEE: 13:59:24 13 13:59:26 14 13:59:28 15 Q. A. Q. If you don't know you don't know. I truly don't know. I understand. Probably most of these are

13:59:29 16 very lawyerly questions so I understand that. 13:59:30 17 13:59:31 18 13:59:33 19 13:59:40 20 13:59:40 21 A. Q. A. Q. They're very what? Very lawyerly questions. Lawyerly. Okay. Sounds that way right now. Yes.

That's fine.

But ultimately it was the Board of

13:59:42 22 Supervisors that was responsible for -- I mean, the 13:59:47 23 Board of Supervisors owns and administers and 13:59:49 24 operates the Kern Medical Center. 13:59:51 25


Is that correct?

A.

Yes. ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT 41

13:59:58 14:00:01 14:00:05 14:00:12 14:00:13 14:00:14 14:00:18 14:00:19 14:00:20

1

Q.

And do you recall -- when Kern Medical

2 Center's bylaws were being approved and ratified, do 3 you recall any discussion occurring regarding due 4 process? 5 6 A. Q. I don't recall. Are you familiar with the term due process,

7 procedural due process? 8 9 A. Q. Yes. Okay. Well, I'll submit to you that

14:00:21 10 procedural due process basically means notice and an 14:00:25 11 opportunity to be heard. That's about the shortest

14:00:28 12 definition I can think of for due process. Page 36

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-3
A081908rfb

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 37 of 59

14:00:32 13

So if someone is going to be subject to some

14:00:34 14 kind of deprivation of a right under the constitution 14:00:37 15 they have -- they have a right to be -- to have 14:00:39 16 notice and an opportunity to be heard on that 14:00:41 17 deprivation. 14:00:43 18 Do you recall this issue coming up at all

14:00:46 19 with respect to Dr. Jadwin's removal at the removal 14:00:49 20 meeting? 14:00:59 21 14:01:03 22 A. Q. I do not remember specifics of a discussion. So no recollection one way or the other

14:01:05 23 then? 14:01:05 24 14:01:09 25


A. Q.

That's correct. Now, Dr. Jadwin's removal from chairmanship, ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT 42

14:01:11 14:01:16 14:01:22 14:01:25 14:01:26 14:01:27 14:01:31 14:01:31 14:01:33

1 sitting here today, do you believe that -- that that 2 removal would have entitled Dr. Jadwin to a notice of 3 meeting and an opportunity to be heard prior to -- or 4 after the meeting? 5 MR. WASSER: That calls for a legal

6 conclusion which is beyond the witness' expertise. 7 BY MR. LEE: 8 Q. Your attorney's objected but you can still

9 answer it. A. Well, no, I would have to -- I would have to

14:01:34 10

14:01:36 11 agree with what he has said. 14:01:39 12 Q. So you don't have any opinion one way or the

14:01:41 13 other as to whether you feel someone who's being 14:01:46 14 removed from department chair is entitled to some 14:01:48 15 kind of notice and opportunity to be heard either Page 37

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-3

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 38 of 59

A081908rfb 14:01:51 16 before or after the removal? 14:01:52 17 MR. WASSER: That's a different question You asked

14:01:53 18 from the one you asked her a moment ago. 14:01:56 19 her whether he was entitled.

That presupposes law.

14:01:59 20 Now you're asking her about personal preference. 14:02:01 21 That's a different question. 14:02:01 22 BY MR. LEE: 14:02:02 23 14:02:06 24 Q. A. Do you understand the question, Ms. Patrick? Not really. Why don't you ask me that

14:02:08 25 question again. ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT


43

14:02:09 14:02:10 14:02:12 14:02:34 14:02:37 14:02:40

1

Q.

Sure.

Actually, I'm going to have the court

2 reporter read it back, if you don't mind. 3 4 (Requested portion of record read.) THE WITNESS: I don't remember at what point Either before or

5 Dr. Jadwin was informed of this. 6 after I couldn't tell you. 7 BY MR. LEE:

14:02:42 14:02:43

8 9

Q.

Um-hmm. Well, the question I'm asking is a little Did you think he should be told

14:02:45 10 bit different.

14:02:47 11 before or after -- well, actually before. 14:02:50 12 Do you think Dr. Jadwin should have been

14:02:51 13 told before the removal meeting that it was a vote 14:02:56 14 that was going to occur to remove Dr. Jadwin from 14:03:00 15 chairmanship? 14:03:01 16 MR. WASSER: That's vague. Your use of the

14:03:02 17 word should is vague.

First of all, it presupposes

14:03:05 18 that he wasn't, which there's no foundation for, and 14:03:07 19 second of all, it's ambiguous as to whether using Page 38

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-3
A081908rfb

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 39 of 59

14:03:11 20 should as asking the witness for a personal 14:03:14 21 preference or whether you're intending it to infer 14:03:16 22 some kind of legal requirement. 14:03:19 23 Q. The attorney's just objected. Do you

14:03:21 24 understand the question or do you want it read back? 14:03:23 25


A.

I have no idea. I do not recall what the -ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT 44

14:03:33 14:03:37 14:03:39 14:03:40 14:03:42 14:03:45 14:03:49 14:03:52 14:03:54

1 the continuum was as this was occurring. 2 Q. Okay. Actually, I guess it was more of a

3 yes or no question. 4 Do you want me to ask the question again,

5 Ms. Patrick? 6 A. Your question implies to me that he was not

7 informed, and I don't know that to be accurate. 8 Q. Okay. No. Actually, that's not correct.

9 But I can restate the question, if you'd like. Okay. Regardless of whether he was informed

14:03:58 10

14:03:58 11 or not, my question is, Ms. Patrick, do you think 14:04:01 12 Dr. Jadwin should have been notified of the removal 14:04:04 13 meeting vote to remove him from chairmanship of 14:04:08 14 pathology before the removal meeting? 14:04:09 15 MR. WASSER: And same objection. Your use

14:04:11 16 of the word should is ambiguous.

Are you asking her

14:04:14 17 to express a personal preference as to what she 14:04:17 18 thinks ought to happen in an ideal world or are you 14:04:19 19 asking her whether the law requires it? 14:04:21 20 MR. LEE: I'm going to have to state that

14:04:22 21 Mr. Wasser's engaging in speaking objections and that 14:04:24 22 he's coaching the witness. Page 39

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-3

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 40 of 59

14:04:25 23 14:04:26 24 Counsel. 14:04:26 25


MR. WASSER:

A081908rfb I'm not coaching the witness,

I'm objecting. MR. LEE: You are engaging in speaking ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT 45

14:04:28 14:04:30 14:04:33 14:04:34 14:04:36 14:04:39 14:04:41 14:04:42 14:04:43

1 objections.

You're entitled under FRCP 34 to just You're engaging in

2 state your objections briefly. 3 long dialogue. 4 MR. WASSER:

I am explaining the purpose,

5 the point of ambiguity in the question is your use of 6 the word should. 7 interpretations. 8 MR. LEE: All you need to do is say It's amenable to two

9 objection, ambiguous, and leave it at that. MR. WASSER: It wouldn't help you if I just

14:04:44 10

14:04:46 11 said that. 14:04:48 12 problem. 14:04:48 13

Your use of the word should is the

MR. LEE:

Mr. Wasser, I certainly don't need

14:04:50 14 your help, but I appreciate your offer. 14:04:52 15 I'm going to ask again that Mr. Wasser not

14:04:53 16 engage in speaking objections and that if this 14:04:55 17 continues we will have to adjourn the deposition for 14:04:58 18 the third or fourth time today. 14:04:59 19 MR. WASSER: The word should is still

14:05:01 20 amenable to two interpretations, counsel. 14:05:03 21 MR. LEE: Yet again you engage in speaking

14:05:06 22 objections. 23 14:05:06 24

You're coaching the witness. I'm not coaching the witness. You

MR. WASSER: MR. LEE:

You can state your objection.

14:05:08 25 can state objection ambiguous, and leave it at that. ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT Page 40

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-3
A081908rfb

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 41 of 59



46

14:05:10 14:05:12 14:05:14 14:05:15 14:05:17 14:05:18 14:05:22 14:05:24 14:05:26

1 Mr. Wasser, are you going to continue with speaking 2 objections or not? 3 4 counsel. 5 BY MR. LEE: 6 Q. Okay. Ms. Patrick, I'm going to ask you the I guess -- I'm not sure it's the You're coaching the witness. I'm not coaching the witness,

MR. WASSER:

7 question again.

8 third or fourth time now. 9 But in your opinion, to your understanding,

14:05:28 10 regardless of whether Dr. Jadwin was told or not, do 14:05:31 11 you think Dr. Jadwin should have been told -- should 14:05:33 12 have been given notice -14:05:35 13 14:05:36 14 14:05:36 15 A. Q. I think -Can I just finish? -- should have been given notice of the

14:05:38 16 removal meeting vote to remove him from chairmanship 14:05:42 17 of pathology prior to the removal meeting? 14:05:44 18 14:05:47 19 A. Q. I think the law should be followed. What does that mean in the context of this

14:05:49 20 question? 14:05:50 21 A. I think that whatever is the appropriate And whether it is a

14:05:55 22 law, that should be followed.

14:05:58 23 requirement to notify him ahead of time, I do not 14:06:01 24 know. 14:06:02 25


Q.

You do not know? ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT 47

14:06:03

1

A.

And I don't know that he wasn't notified at Page 41

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-3

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 42 of 59

14:06:06 14:06:07 14:06:11 14:06:15 14:06:17 14:06:19 14:06:23 14:06:26

2 the time. 3 Q.

A081908rfb I couldn't tell you that.

Well, would it surprise you if I told you

4 that Dr. Jadwin was not notified of the removal -5 I'm not saying it's true or not. I'm just saying

6 would it surprise you if I told you that Dr. Jadwin 7 was not informed of the removal meeting vote prior to 8 his removal from chairmanship? 9 you? MR. WASSER: Do not suggest things to the Would that surprise

14:06:26 10

14:06:27 11 witness that are not true, Counsel. 14:06:29 12 BY MR. LEE: 14:06:29 13 14:06:31 14 14:06:34 15 Q. A. Q. Would that surprise you? I don't know if he was informed or not. Okay. Ms. Patrick, that's not the answer -I'll ask the

14:06:37 16 that's not my question, actually. 14:06:39 17 question again. 14:06:39 18 14:06:40 19 A. Q. Okay.

The question is would it surprise you if

14:06:43 20 Dr. Jad- -- if you learned -- if I told you right now 14:06:46 21 that Dr. Jadwin was not actually informed of the JCC 14:06:50 22 removal meeting vote to remove him from chairmanship 14:06:54 23 prior to the removal meeting? 14:06:56 24 A. It would surprise me if the law was not ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT


14:07:00 25 followed.

48

14:07:02 14:07:04 14:07:05 14:07:07 14:07:09

1

Q.

Ms. Patrick that's not an answer to my

2 question. 3 4 A. Q. That's the answer you're going to get. Ms. Patrick, are you refusing to answer my Page 42

5 question?

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-3
A081908rfb

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 43 of 59

14:07:09 14:07:10 14:07:12 14:07:14

6 7

MR. WASSER: THE WITNESS:

She's answered. I've answered your question.

8 BY MR. LEE: 9 Q. No, Ms. Patrick. You're stating that it

14:07:16 10 would surprise you if the law were not followed. 14:07:18 11 That's not the -- I wasn't asking you if the law were 14:07:20 12 followed or were not followed. 14:07:22 13 different question. 14:07:23 14 14:07:25 15 again? 14:07:25 16 17 MR. WASSER: THE WITNESS: She's answered it, Counsel. I've answered the question. Do you want me to restate the question I'm asking a

18 BY MR. LEE: 14:07:26 19 14:07:28 20 Q. No, you have not. I'm sorry, Ms. Patrick. I'm going to have

14:07:29 21 to admonish you. 14:07:32 22 question? 14:07:32 23 14:07:33 24

Are you refusing to answer my

MR. WASSER: THE WITNESS:

Do not -I am not refusing to answer

14:07:34 25 your question.


I have answered your question. ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT 49

14:07:36 14:07:38

1 2 counsel.

MR. WASSER:

Do not intimidate the witness,

Ask your next question and move on.

3 BY MR. LEE: 14:07:41 14:07:42 14:07:46 14:07:49 14:07:52 4 Q. Well, I'm going to have to give you the I don't feel you've

5 admonition then, Ms. Patrick.

6 answered my question, actually, and plaintiff is 7 entitled in this litigation and in this deposition to 8 answers to their -- to his questions. Page 43 If you don't

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-3

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 44 of 59

14:07:57

A081908rfb 9 answer my question, we will go to the court with a

14:08:00 10 motion to compel for a reconvening of this deposition 14:08:03 11 so we can get an answer to our questions. And we

14:08:05 12 will also possibly seek imposition of sanctions on 14:08:09 13 you and/or Mr. Wasser. 14:08:10 14 Are you going to answer my question or not,

14:08:13 15 Ms. Patrick? 14:08:13 16 14:08:14 17 counsel. MR. WASSER: She has answered your question

Do not attempt to intimidate the witness by Ask your next question.

14:08:17 18 making threats against her. 14:08:19 19 MR. LEE:

Mr. Wasser, you are again -- I

14:08:21 20 don't even know what objection you're stating right 14:08:23 21 now. You're again engaging in speaking objections.

14:08:25 22 BY MR. LEE: 14:08:26 23 Q. Ms. Patrick, do you understand the

14:08:28 24 admonition I've given you? 14:08:32 25


A.

Yes. ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT 50

14:08:41 14:08:41 14:08:41 14:08:41 14:08:41 14:08:41 14:08:42 14:08:45 14:08:45

1 2 3

Q.

Okay.

Will you answer my question? She's answered. I answered your question.

MR. WASSER: THE WITNESS:

4 BY MR. LEE: 5 Q. Okay. We're going to be -- well, we'll seek

6 a motion to compel on that. 7 8 counsel. 9 MR. LEE: Mr. Wasser, I really have to ask That's MR. WASSER: Ask your next question,

14:08:47 10 you to stop engaging in speaking objections. 14:08:51 11 the, what, second time I'm telling that you. 14:08:52 12 MR. WASSER:

Asking you to ask a question is Page 44

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-3
A081908rfb

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 45 of 59

14:08:54 13 not a speaking objection. 14:08:54 14 MR. LEE: Mr. Wasser, you're entitled only You're not

14:08:56 15 to state objections at this deposition.

14:08:58 16 entitled to tell me to do whatever -- this is my 14:09:01 17 deposition. 14:09:06 18 BY MR. LEE: 14:09:10 19 Q. Did you -- did you ever hear from Dr. Jadwin So -- but thank you, Mr. Wasser.

14:09:16 20 his side of the story either prior to or after the 14:09:22 21 removal meeting? 14:09:23 22 14:09:26 23 A. Q. No. Did you think it was important to hear from

14:09:28 24 Dr. Jadwin his side of the story either prior to or 14:09:30 25 after the removal meeting? ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT


51

14:09:35 14:09:42 14:09:43 14:09:45 14:09:47 14:09:49 14:09:52 14:09:57 14:09:57

1

A.

I don't know that -- I don't know that I

2 considered that. 3 Q. Okay. But I guess the answer is not -- the I'm asking

4 question is not whether you considered. 5 now did you think it was important. 6 7 A. Q.

And I'm saying I didn't consider it. So is the answer no, you did not think it

8 was important? 9 A. I'm saying I did not consider that when the

14:10:01 10 discussion took place, nor was I ever contacted by 14:10:07 11 Dr. Jadwin about this. 14:10:09 12 Q. Okay. Ms. Patrick, I'm going to ask you the

14:10:12 13 question again because I didn't ask you whether you 14:10:13 14 considered it. 14:10:16 15 I'm asking you a different question.

The question is did you think it was Page 45

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-3

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 46 of 59

A081908rfb 14:10:17 16 important to hear from Dr. Jadwin his side of the 14:10:21 17 story either before or after the removal meeting with 14:10:24 18 respect to his removal from chairmanship from the 14:10:26 19 department of pathology? 14:10:28 20 A. I did not consider that question. I don't

14:10:32 21 know how else -- I don't know how else to answer. 14:10:35 22 Because you're asking me to go back two and a half 14:10:39 23 years and say didn't you think it was. 14:10:41 24 telling you I did not consider that. 14:10:44 25


And I'm

Q.

Actually, Ms. Patrick, I'm not -- I'm not ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT 52

14:10:48 14:10:49 14:10:53 14:10:54 14:10:57 14:10:59 14:11:01 14:11:03

1 meaning to say -- I'm not saying didn't you think it 2 was. I wasn't meaning to suggest an answer one way I was just asking did you think it was

3 or the other. 4 important.

And if you don't know the answer, all you

5 have to say is I don't remember. 6 MR. WASSER: She's told you the honest She's answered the

7 answer, Counsel, three times. 8 question. 9 BY MR. LEE:

14:11:05 10

Q.

Ms. Patrick, I'm going to ask you the

14:11:06 11 question again. 14:11:09 12 Did you consider it important to hear from

14:11:11 13 Dr. Jadwin his side of the story either prior to or 14:11:14 14 after the removal meeting vote to remove Dr. Jadwin 14:11:18 15 from chairmanship of pathology? 14:11:21 16 A. I don't know how I can be more clear to say I'm saying I

14:11:23 17 you're asking me if I considered it. 14:11:27 18 did not consider it. 14:11:30 19 Q. No, Ms. Patrick.

I'm not asking if you Page 46

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-3
A081908rfb

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 47 of 59

14:11:31 20 considered it.

Do you want me to have the reporter Because I don't think I --

14:11:34 21 read the question back? 14:11:35 22 MR. WASSER:

Counsel, you are -- you're

14:11:37 23 badgering the witness with the question she's 14:11:39 24 answered. Move on to your next question. ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT


25 BY MR. LEE:

53

14:11:41 14:11:43 14:11:45 14:11:46 14:11:48 14:11:52 14:11:54 14:11:56 14:11:57

1

Q.

Okay.

Actually I don't think I asked you I'm asking if you thought

2 whether you considered it. 3 it was important. 4 A.

You asked me if I did consider it.

That was

5 your last -- the last time you phrased the question 6 you asked me if I considered it. 7 MR. LEE: Madam Reporter, would you read

8 back my last question, please. 9 (Requested portion of record read.) THE WITNESS: And I did not consider that.

14:12:31 10

14:12:33 11 BY MR. LEE: 14:12:34 12 Q. So you did not consider it important, then.

14:12:36 13 Correct? 14:12:36 14 A. I didn't say I didn't consider it. I'm

14:12:38 15 saying I -- I did not consider that question. 14:12:42 16 MR. WASSER: That is an answer to your

14:12:43 17 question, Counsel. 14:12:47 18 BY MR. LEE: 14:12:50 19 Q. Sitting here today, do you believe it was

14:12:52 20 important for Dr. Jadwin to tell his side of the 14:12:55 21 story either prior to or after the vote at the JCC to 14:13:00 22 remove him from chairmanship? Page 47

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-3

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 48 of 59

14:13:04 23

A.

A081908rfb Sitting here two and a half years later, do

14:13:07 24 I consider it important? 14:13:10 25


Q.

No.

No.

I'm sorry. Do you want me to have ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT 54

14:13:11 14:13:13 14:13:14 14:13:16 14:13:18 14:13:20

1 the question read back again? 2 3 MR. WASSER: MR. LEE: You said today, counsel.

Actually, I didn't say consider it

4 because that seems to be a point of confusion. 5 THE WITNESS: Okay. Why don't you rephrase

6 that then. 7 MR. LEE: No. Why don't you read that again.

14:13:20 14:13:23

8 9

THE WITNESS: MR. LEE:

Madam Reporter, would you read

14:13:24 10 back the last question, please. 14:13:25 11 14:13:45 12 (Requested portion of record read.) THE WITNESS: I was never contacted by

14:13:47 13 Dr. Jadwin to hear his side of the story. 14:13:50 14 BY MR. LEE: 14:13:51 15 Q. Okay. That's actually not the question I The question I asked is

14:13:52 16 asked, Ms. Patrick. 14:13:54 17 different. 14:13:55 18

Do you want it read back to you again,

14:13:56 19 Ms. Patrick? 14:13:59 20 A. I believe that I heard the question just

14:14:02 21 as -- as you answered it and as she -- or as you 14:14:05 22 asked it and as she read it. And you're saying now

14:14:10 23 two and a half years later do I -- did I -- was that 14:14:16 24 an important thing to do? 14:14:17 25 Q. Yes. ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT Page 48

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-3
A081908rfb

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 49 of 59



55

14:14:18 14:14:22 14:14:26 14:14:28 14:14:29 14:14:31 14:14:35 14:14:38 14:14:40

1

A.

And I'm saying I had not considered that

2 previously as part of my decision and I was never 3 contacted by Dr. Jadwin. 4 5 Q. Um-hmm. But the question, sitting here today, do you

6 believe it was important to hear from Dr. Jadwin his 7 side of the story either prior to or after the JCC 8 removal vote? 9 MR. WASSER: Ms. Patrick's state of mind

14:14:43 10 today, Counsel, has absolutely nothing to do with her 14:14:48 11 vote two and a half years ago. 14:14:52 12 BY MR. LEE: 14:14:52 13 14:14:52 14 Q. You can answer. MR. WASSER: Regardless of what her state of

14:14:54 15 mind might be. 14:14:55 16 MR. LEE: Mr. Wasser, you're continuing to Just note that for

14:14:58 17 engage in speaking objections. 14:15:00 18 the record. 14:15:00 19 BY MR. LEE: 14:15:00 20 Q.

Do you want the question read back to you

14:15:02 21 again, Ms. Patrick? 14:15:03 22 14:15:03 23 A. No, I don't. Had Dr. Jadwin contacted me I would have

14:15:06 24 spoken to him. 14:15:07 25


Q.

That's not the question I asked, ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT 56

14:15:08

1 Ms. Patrick.

That's a hypothetical. Page 49

I didn't pose

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-3

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 50 of 59

14:15:11 14:15:12 14:15:14

2 it. 3

A081908rfb I'm asking a different question. MR. WASSER: Your question's hypothetical

4 also, Counsel. 5 BY MR. LEE:

14:15:15 14:15:17 14:15:20 14:15:21

6

Q.

Do you want me to have the question read

7 back again, Ms. Patrick? 8 9 A. Q. No. Okay. So can you give me an answer then? She's answered it. I believe that I did. I did

14:15:24 10 14:15:25 11

MR. WASSER: THE WITNESS:

14:15:27 12 not consider it as part of my decision and I would 14:15:30 13 have spoken to him had he contacted me. 14:15:32 14 BY MR. LEE: 14:15:33 15 Q. Okay. That's not the question I asked,

14:15:35 16 Ms. Patrick.

The question I asked you for -- I'm

14:15:38 17 going to have to repeat it now probably for the fifth 14:15:40 18 or sixth time now -- is sitting here today do you 14:15:42 19 believe it was important to hear from Dr. Jadwin his 14:15:45 20 side of the story either prior to or after the JCC 14:15:49 21 removal meeting vote to remove him from chairmanship? 14:15:52 22 14:15:54 23 A. I believe that I've answered that question. MR. WASSER: She's answered it. The

14:15:55 24 question is not reasonably calculated to lead to any 14:15:58 25 admissible evidence because Ms. Patrick's state of ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT


57

14:16:01 14:16:03 14:16:05 14:16:05 14:16:06

1 mind today has nothing to do with what -2 3 noted. 4 5 MR. LEE: Mr. Wasser, your objection is duly

You can just limit it to the objection. MR. WASSER: MR. LEE: Don't interrupt me, Counsel.

Please refrain from speaking Page 50

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-3
A081908rfb

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 51 of 59

14:16:09 14:16:11 14:16:12 14:16:15

6 objections. 7

This is the fourth time I've asked you. Her state of -- I'm giving my Her state

MR. WASSER:

8 objection without interruption this time.

9 of mind two and a half years after she cast her vote

14:16:19 10 is not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery 14:16:22 11 of any admissible evidence. 14:16:24 12 BY MR. LEE: 14:16:26 13 Q. Okay. So Ms. Patrick, I'm going to give you

14:16:28 14 the admonition again unless Mr. Wasser is willing to 14:16:31 15 stipulate -14:16:31 16 14:16:34 17 move on. 18 BY MR. LEE: 14:16:35 19 Q. It's the same stipulation -- same admonition MR. WASSER: We'll stipulate to it. Please

14:16:37 20 I gave you before if you refuse to answer my -14:16:40 21 regarding refusals to answer. 14:16:41 22 14:16:43 23 counsel. 14:16:45 24 MR. WASSER: We understand the admonition,

We're stipulating to it. MR. LEE: Mr. Wasser, now you're

14:16:46 25 interrupting me on the record. ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT


58

14:16:47 14:16:48 14:16:50 14:16:52 14:16:54 14:16:56 14:16:58 14:17:01

1

MR. WASSER:

Because we just stipulated to Let's move on.

2 it and you want to do it anyway. 3 MR. LEE:

Mr. Wasser, you're now

4 interrupting me on the record and you just did it 5 again. I ask that you let me finish speaking on the

6 record before you interrupt and start speaking. 7 Can you do that? If you do it again, I've warned you multiple

8 Mr. Wasser, I will adjourn.

Page 51

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-3
A081908rfb

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 52 of 59

14:17:04

9 times today.

14:17:05 10 BY MR. LEE: 14:17:06 11 Q. Okay, Ms. Patrick. It's been stipulated

14:17:08 12 that you've been -- you're being administered the 14:17:11 13 admonition again. 14:17:13 14 14:17:14 15 14:17:16 16 14:17:17 17 A. Q. Are you not going to answer my question? I did answer your question. No, you have not, Ms. Patrick. MR. WASSER: Counsel, move on. You've given

14:17:19 18 her the admonition. 14:17:21 19 Move on. 14:17:23 20 MR. LEE:

You're still going over it.

Okay.

Mr. Wasser, if you continue

14:17:25 21 with these objections, I will adjourn the deposition. 14:17:28 22 You're not objecting. 14:17:30 23 obstructing. 14:17:33 24 even proper. 14:17:34 25


You're badgering and you're

Whatever you're saying right now is not

What's your basis for what you're saying ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT 59

14:17:36 14:17:45 14:17:51 14:17:57 14:18:01 14:18:06 14:18:12 14:18:15 14:18:18

1 right now, Mr. Wasser? 2 BY MR. LEE: 3 Q.

There is none.

Ms. Patrick, do you understand that it is --

4 it is wrong to punish somebody for having taken 5 medical leave under medical leave laws? 6 A. If -- if all things are considered, I'm

7 certain that it is, but you have to make certain that 8 the person has done the appropriate things under the 9 law and that the employer has done the appropriate

14:18:20 10 things under the law. 14:18:22 11 Q. You mean proper procedure has been followed Page 52

14:18:27 12 by all parties?

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-3
A081908rfb

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 53 of 59

14:18:28 13 14:18:29 14

A. Q.

Yes. Well, assuming proper procedure has been

14:18:32 15 followed by all parties do you think it's wrong to 14:18:34 16 punish somebody for taking medical leave, an 14:18:38 17 employee -- let me strike that. 14:18:39 18 Assuming proper procedure has been followed

14:18:42 19 is it wrong for an employer in California it punish 14:18:45 20 an employee for taking medical leave? 14:18:48 21 A. I think the question you're asking is it

14:18:50 22 illegal to do that. 14:18:53 23 14:18:54 24 14:18:54 25


Q. A. Q.

You can take it that way if you wish. Is that correct? You can take it that way. ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT 60

14:18:56 14:19:04 14:19:07 14:19:11 14:19:14 14:19:16 14:19:17 14:19:20 14:19:23

1

A.

I think that both parties have to follow the

2 appropriate procedures and if the appropriate 3 procedures have not been followed there is the chance 4 that something illegal on one side or the other has 5 occurred. 6 Q. Okay. That's not my -- that's actually not The question I So

7 the question I asked, Ms. Patrick.

8 asked is assuming procedure has been followed. 9 we've taken care of the procedure.

That's not an

14:19:25 10 issue. 14:19:25 11 14:19:26 12 14:19:27 13 A. Q. A. Okay. We don't need to go there. Assuming the proper procedure has been

14:19:29 14 followed, is it wrong for an employer in California 14:19:32 15 or actually anywhere in the country to punish an Page 53

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-3

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 54 of 59

A081908rfb 14:19:34 16 employee for taking medical leave? 14:19:36 17 A. Well, you're asking if it's wrong. That's

14:19:38 18 kind of a value judgment. 14:19:40 19 wrong to illegal.

I'm changing the word

If all proper procedure has been

14:19:46 20 followed, then there may be a legal basis for one 14:19:52 21 side or the other to object. 14:19:55 22 14:19:55 23 14:19:59 24 Q. A. Q. To object? Yes. Okay. That's actually -- I'm going to ask

14:20:03 25 you to answer the question as I asked it and not to ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT


61

14:20:03 14:20:03 14:20:05 14:20:07 14:20:10 14:20:10 14:20:15 14:20:15 14:20:16

1 change it. 2 Do you want me to repeat the question for

3 the third time? 4 5 6 A. Q. A. Well, you're asking me if it's wrong or not. Yes. How do you define wrong? Is wrong a legal

7 term? 8 9 Q. A. No. I thought illegal -- I thought legal and

14:20:20 10 illegal and the -- the proving back and forth is 14:20:25 11 either legal or illegal. 14:20:26 12 Q. Okay. Let me ask you a few questions. Do

14:20:28 13 you think it's wrong to lie on the record? 14:20:30 14 14:20:31 15 14:20:34 16 A. Q. Yes. So you understand that. Okay. It's wrong.

Do you think it's wrong to hit somebody out

14:20:36 17 of anger? 14:20:37 18 14:20:38 19 A. Q. Yes. Do you think it's wrong to steal from Page 54

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-3
A081908rfb

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 55 of 59

14:20:40 20 somebody? 14:20:41 21 14:20:42 22 A. Q. Yes. Okay. So I'm going to ask you now a Do you think

14:20:44 23 question along the same vein is wrong.

14:20:47 24 it's wrong to -- for an employer to punish an 14:20:51 25 employee for taking medical leave? ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT


62

14:20:52 14:20:53 14:20:57 14:21:04 14:21:08 14:21:13 14:21:16 14:21:21 14:21:23

1

MR. WASSER:

Counsel, your questions are

2 objectionable on innumerable bases, but among the 3 examples you gave are not analogous to the statutory 4 violations. There's the difference in the criminal

5 law between malum in se and malum prohibitive and 6 you're trying to make a distinction for the witness 7 that she's having trouble with. 8 MR. LEE: Mr. Wasser, what objection are you

9 stating right now? MR. WASSER: MR. LEE: It's an objection of vagueness.

14:21:24 10 14:21:26 11 14:21:27 12

You can just -Your use of the word wrong.

MR. WASSER:

14:21:29 13 The witness has explained to you she doesn't 14:21:31 14 understand it. 14:21:31 15 MR. LEE: Mr. Wasser, you are well aware

14:21:34 16 under Rule 34 that all you need is say is objection, 14:21:37 17 vague and ambiguous and leave it at that. You're

14:21:39 18 engaging in speaking objections for I don't know how 14:21:41 19 many times now. Are you going to continue to engage

14:21:43 20 in speaking objections throughout this deposition? 14:21:45 21 MR. WASSER: Please ask the question.

14:21:46 22 Please ask the question. Page 55

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-3

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 56 of 59

14:21:46 23

MR. LEE:

A081908rfb Mr. Wasser, I'm going to ask you

14:21:48 24 again to limit your objections to make -- to the 14:21:51 25 short -- to short objections stating the ground and ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT


63

14:21:54 14:21:57 14:21:58 14:22:00 14:22:01 14:22:02 14:22:09 14:22:11 14:22:15

1 that's it and not to engage in a speaking objection. 2 BY MR. LEE: 3 Q. Ms. Patrick, do you want me to repeat the

4 question or do you understand the question or 5 remember it? 6 A. I thought what we were talking about was are

7 things legal or not. 8 Q. Actually, we're not. You understand -- you

9 understand what the term wrong means, Ms. Patrick,

14:22:18 10 right and wrong? 14:22:19 11 14:22:20 12 A. Q. I do. Do you want me to ask the question again

14:22:23 13 then? 14:22:23 14 MR. WASSER: Counsel, if we're not talking

14:22:24 15 about statutory claims based upon the statutes or 14:22:27 16 laws, then we're clearly outside the scope of 14:22:30 17 discoverable -- what's properly discoverable. 14:22:33 18 MR. LEE: Mr. Wasser, you're stating a So noteed. Thank you so much.

14:22:35 19 relevancy objection. 14:22:37 20 MR. WASSER:

I'm stating an objection that

21 the witness is not going to engage in a philosophical 14:22:40 22 discussion with you about values. 14:22:43 23 MR. LEE: Are you instructing the deponent

14:22:45 24 not to answer, then, Mr. Wasser? 14:22:46 25 MR. WASSER: She has answered, counsel. ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT Page 56

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-3
A081908rfb

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 57 of 59



64

14:22:47 14:22:49 14:22:49 14:22:51 14:22:53 14:22:54 14:22:55 14:22:56 14:22:57

1

MR. LEE:

Are you instructing the deponent

2 not to answer? 3 MR. WASSER: She has already answered. I've

4 given the deponent no instructions. 5 MR. LEE: Mr. Wasser, are you stating an

6 objection or are you instructing not to answer? 7 MR. WASSER: The witness has answered the

8 question. 9 MR. LEE: That's not an objection and that's Which are you

14:22:59 10 not an instruction not to answer. 14:23:01 11 doing, Mr. Wasser? 14:23:02 12 MR. WASSER:

Ask a question, please.

13 BY MR. LEE: 14:23:04 14 Q. Ms. Patrick, do you want me to repeat the

14:23:06 15 question? 14:23:08 16 A. I believe I'll give you the same answer that What you're asking is a value

14:23:10 17 I did before. 14:23:13 18 judgment. 14:23:13 19 14:23:14 20 Q. A.

Correct.

That's correct.

And I think what we're talking about today

14:23:17 21 is legality. 14:23:18 22 Q. That's not correct. No. We are talking

14:23:20 23 about value judgements, Ms. Patrick. 14:23:22 24 14:23:24 25


MR. WASSER: THE WITNESS:

Not in this lawsuit we're not.

No. I -- I.... ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT 65

14:23:27

1

MR. WASSER:

Public agencies operate by Page 57

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-3
A081908rfb

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 58 of 59

14:23:30 14:23:31 14:23:32 14:23:34 14:23:36 14:23:37 14:23:40 14:23:42

2 statute, counsel. 3 MR. LEE: Mr. Wasser, you're engaging in Just state objection

4 speaking objections again.

5 relevance and leave it at that. 6 MR. WASSER: If you're not satisfied with

7 the witness' answer we'll stipulate you've given the 8 admonition. 9 Move to your next question, please. Are you instructing not to answer? No. She has answered. We'll

MR. LEE:

14:23:43 10

MR. WASSER:

14:23:45 11 stipulate you've given her the admonition that you 14:23:47 12 find her answer responsive and move on, please. 13 BY MR. LEE: 14:23:50 14 Q. The admonition is being given again. It's

14:23:52 15 been stipulated regarding your refusal to answer my 14:23:55 16 question. 14:23:57 17 Are you going to answer my -- are you going

14:23:58 18 to refuse to answer my question? 14:24:01 19 14:24:02 20 A. Q. I answered your question. No, Ms. Patrick. You've answered a

14:24:03 21 different question. 14:24:03 22 MR. WASSER: Counsel, admonish her. We've

14:24:05 23 stipulated to the admonition. 24 BY MR. LEE: 14:24:08 25


Move on, please.

Q.

Ms. Patrick, are you going to answer my ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT 66

14:24:10 14:24:11 14:24:12 14:24:16 14:24:21

1 question or not? 2 3 4 A. Q. I answered your question. Okay. Let's move on.

If we continue to get these kinds of

5 nonresponses, we are going to have to adjourn this Page 58

Case 1:07-cv-00026-OWW-TAG

Document 202-3
A081908rfb

Filed 08/21/2008

Page 59 of 59

14:24:24 14:24:52 14:24:54 14:24:57

6 deposition and seek reconvening of this deposition. 7 Do you recall who else spoke at the removal

8 meeting besides Mr. Bryan? 9 A. Q. I'm sorry. I don't.

14:24:58 10 14:25:00 11

It was just Mr. Bryan, to your recollection? MR. WASSER: She said she didn't recall,

14:25:02 12 counsel. 14:25:02 13 THE WITNESS: No. I -- I -- I can't say it

14:25:04 14 was just him.

I don't remember if anyone else spoke

14:25:11 15 or who that was. 14:25:14 16 BY MR. LEE: 14:25:14 17 Q. . Okay. So in other words you don't recall Correct?

14:25:14 18 one way or the other. 14:25:15 19 14:25:16 20 A. Q.

That's correct. Okay. Do you recall any -- being handed and

14:25:21 21 reviewing any documents in connection with the vote 14:25:24 22 to remove Dr. Jadwin at the removal meeting? 14:25:27 23 14:25:31 24 A. Q. I don't. Do you recall yourself asking any questions

14:25:34 25 at the removal meeting regarding the removal of ROUGH DRAFT NOT A CERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT

Page 59


				
DOCUMENT INFO
Description: David F. Jadwin v. Kern County: 1:07-cv-26 in the United Stated District Court for the Eastern District of California, Fresno Division before Judge Oliver W. Wanger. This was a 2009 federal employment lawsuit that went to a bench and jury trial resulting in a unanimous verdict and significant judgment for the plaintiff employee. Issues involved violations of medical leave and disability discrimination laws, as well as 42 U.S.C. 1983 procedural due process violation. Plaintiff was represented by Eugene Lee, a Los Angeles, California employment lawyer.