'

. .

-

.

(' (- -;.

. _

1 IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF.THE UNITED STATES

2 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO @ g

.N'^ 's^e "~

EASTERN DIVISION ,e

.Y.\-

*

C JUL y 73-. , g'. i3,

}-

.l

, _.

CITY OF CLEVELAND, ) b- '- '''" h '

) ' k ._, A' /Plaintiff, ) h'6

). Civil Actionvs. ) No. c 75-560

,

,')

CLEVELAND ELECTRIC ILLUMINATING )8 COMPANY, et al., )

9 Defendants. )

10_,,,__

. . - ..

II - ,

,_,

12 TRANSCRIPT OF DISQUALIFICATION PROCEEDINGS

13 BEFORE THE HON, ROBERT B. KRUPANSKY, JUDGE

14 OF SAID COURT, COW 4ENCING MONDAY, JUNE 14,

15 1976, At 9:20 0' CLOCK A.M.

16

, .

17 -----

18 .

19

20.

I

950m

700'

; n

u-

hM/8//::5I

|-.

__ _. _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

.

. (. (.

'

-

.

'

1 O'Laughlin - cross 2

2 A I believe since 1970.

3 Q Now, have you recently received a subpoena in connec-

4 tion with this case to produce certain documents?

5 A Yes, sir, I accepted service this afternoon.

Q Prior to this afternoon you were aware, were you not,-6

that this was coming and there was indeed a discussion7

with your counsel, Mr. Gallagher, about the fact it8

was coming?9

A Yes, sir, I was.10

Q Do you have that document with you, or a copy of $t?g

A I left it on the desk.. gg

MR. DAVIS: May I?33

Q May I ask, do you or have you with you any of the

documents or things called for by that subpoena?

MR. GALLAGHER: May it please the Court.

THE COURT: Yes?17 s

MR, GALLAGHER: As I look et this --'

18

and I have not had a chance to study it, since we

just got it this afternoon -- it appears to cover

substantially the same material, with the addendum21

on it, of the subpoena that had been served at.La

the time the depositions of the four lawyers at; 23

Squire, Sanders & Dempsy w3re taken. And at that24 j

time we moved the Court, as you will recall, ta !*

051

i 6

e

.

. .

. .'

8 (. (. .

'

1 O'Laughlin - crocs 8

2 quash the duces tecum feature of it, and that

3 was granted.

4 And it seems to me the same reasonitig,

5 comparative reasoning, would apply in this

6 instance. And 1 would object to a discovery

7 type thing taking place right in the midst of

8 the courtroom of this magnitude.

THE COURT: Well, is that the --9

let me see it. Is that the document that has10

been before me on two separate occasions?11

MR. GALLAGHER: Yes, your Honor.g

THE COURT: That I have ruled on on33

two separate occasions?g

MR. GALLAGHER: I believe that is, yourg

Honor. .

THE COURT: 'Well,'if that is the

, . .

same document, I will conform to my two previous

rulings. Sustained.

MR. GALLAGHER: Thank you, your Honor.

MR DAVIS: May I be heard, your

. Honor?12

THE COURT: I have sustained -23

Mr. Davis, you have L1 ready argued that motion to

produce documents on two separate occasions, and. _ _ - . |

I

_

.

~. .

'

( (t

.

.

I O'Laughlin.- cross 2:

2 1 have received rather lengthy briefs and I have

3 reviewed each one of those documents. So let us

4 proceed. I don't want to waste any more time on

5 11 . Proceed.

6 MR. DAVIS: You are saying that you

7 will not entertain any. argument or discussion at

8 this time, your Honor?

9 THE COURT: Well, what did I say to

10 you, sir?

11 MR.. DAVIS: All right.

'12 THE COURT: Do you have a hearing

13 impediment?

MR. DAVIS: I have no hearing impedi-14

15 ment, your Honor. I --

THE COURT: Youcan proceed, then,16

MR.' DAVIS: I do have some observa-17

tion that I think --18

THE COURT: Mr. Davis, would you39

kindly proceed? I have ruled. I do not wish to20

arg- these points beyond a certain point.g

MR. DAVIS: Well, I understand that,

your Honor.

| THE COURT: Proceed,.please.g

MR. DAVIS: May I make a point, your3

!I

|,

- - -___ _ --__-_ . _ _ _ .__ _

.

*.

( ._.1 . _ _ _ _ _ _ _

.

1 O'Laughlin - cross 2)-

2 Honor?

3 THE COURT: Mr. Davis, will you

4 kindly proceed with the examination of this

5 witness?

MR. DAVIS: My point is, your Honor,6

that the subpoena is not precisely the same as7

it was before.8

THE COURT: In what manner does it9

differ?10

MR. DAVIS: It certainly calls, in11

Section 15, for precise files dealing with the .

12

municipal electric light plant.13

THE COURT: Mr. Kainski, would youg

kindly. go through the file of this matter and3

find the previous rulings and the attachment here?

Find it for me, will you?'

The city in this case insists on wasting-

time and duplicating all of these efforts, and !

this has been the pattern that the city has *!

followed throughout ther.e proceedings from the-

very inception, Mr. Davis, as the Court hasS2

brought to your attention on so many occasions.

We will take the necessary time at this,

point to go over my previous rulings and examine jy .

|.

' |- - - - - .. ... , _ _ _ . . _ .

I ,

1.

|. .

*- |x ,

|-. .

I O'Laughlin - cross-

,

2,

point by point and compare the two prev 3ous

3 motions with this one.

4 MR. DAVIS: Well, may I, while the

5 Court is waiting for the Clerk to bring some

6 documents, state that what we have here is a

7 situation where a cl$ ent is seeking to obtain

8 from its own lawyers those materials and files

9 furnished by the client to the lawyer so t' hat it

10 may properly discover under circumstances where

11 it would be very difficult to do otherwise what_

12 the lawyers learned from the client over a

13 pe'riod of years with regard to the issues in the

. 14 case.

15 THE COURT: Mr. Davis, if my

16 recollection serves me correctly, that is the

- 17 same argument you advanced previously, which I

overruled for the reasons set forth in the18.

order.19

MR. DAVIS: Well, I believe your20

Honor dealt with the question prior to this time.33

The items called for were not done with specific --,;,

or sufficient particu~arity. We have tried --3

THE COURT: Why don't we just wait2. ,3

25 and see what my order says and what you really!

__

t

- - . . _ _ - - -.

. _ - _ _ . - _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ .

.

I' ( (.

I O'Laughlin - cross 2:

2 asked for at this time, rather than rely on what

3 you tell me at this time. I would prefer to

4 examine and compare the documents.

5 Are you desirous of pursuing examination of

6 this gentleman while these documents are being

7 found, in other areas? We are going to probably

8 go to 7: 00, 7:30 this evening, gentlemen.

9 By Mr. Davis:

10 Q Will you tell us briefly, in narrative form, your'

11 occupational history as a lawyer?

12 A Yes. My first employment was as a miscellaneous

13 investigator for the City of Cleveland in 1952. I |

14 was subsequently appointed Assistant Director of

15 Law. At a later date-I became chief counsel of the

16 City of Cleveland.

17 In the interim -- my employment with the City

of Cleveland was from 1952 until 1963. In 1962IS

I resigned and accepted employment at the Weston,ID

Hurd firm. I was there for approximately a year and20

a half.23

I returned to the city in '64 as chief counsel .,

I was chief counsel from 1964 to 1968. ,33

'

21 I resigned from my position with the city in

i |'

the latter part of '67 or the early part of '68,25-- - . . _ . _ _ _ _ . _ _ ___. _. _ _._ ..-__..__._ . _ _ . - q

___ - ____ -____________________ _______

.

\ |8 (. '

|.

1 O'Laughlin - cross 2*

2 I am not quite certain, and I started almost immedi-

ately my employment with Squire, Sanders.& Dempsey, i3

l

~

(Pause.) |4 \

THE COURT: Mr. Davis, the Court has |5 1

examined and compared, line by line, your sub-6

poena duces tecum dated June.14th, 1976, at 9:307

'c1 ok A.M., to Daniel J. O'Laughlin, with a8

similar subpoena duces tecum that was filed on,

,a 30."" ' ""E " " #""## ,

10-

And contrary to your representation to this'

Court, Mr. Davis, I find that the subpoena

issued on the 14th of June, today, is identical13

with the subpoena issued in February, with the14

exception of minor deletions.15

As to your subpoena issued today, number 1 -

16

is identical, number 2 is identical, 3 is iden-17

tical, with the subpoena of February lith,1976. -18

4 is identical.-

ID5 is a transposition from that subpoena. .

-

*20 .

6, as it appears here, appears later on and~

.

. 21*

is not numbered 6.L2

Then 7 on today's subpoena is 8 on the23

previous subpoena. .

I24 .

!8 on today's subpoena is number 12 on the

25:~~ . .. . - __ , _ . _ . . ._

t

.

. .

# g,.

s s.

'

l O'Laughlin - cross 22~ '

0 former subpoena.

3 9 in your present subpoena is 13 in the

4 former subpoena.

10 is number 9 in the former subpoena.5

ll'today is number 20 on the former subpoena.6

12 is number 11.7

13, although it does not appear in the8

O'Laughlin subpoena of February, appeared in 'the3

Lansdale subpoena for that.samo date.10

.

10 18 1N'11

15 in today's sub'poena is the same as 15 in12

the former subpcena.i3

16 is the same.g

17 is the same.g~

18 is the same.

19 is the same -- no, wait a minute. 20 in

todhy's subpoena is number 19, and 21 refers to

the list of attachments. And in examining the19

list of attachments, with a few deletions, you*

20

are requesting the same documents that you re- .

,

quested at that time.u

On February 18th, 1976, I issued a rather23

lengthy opinion concerning that, a five-p -*

24' opinion concerning that particular subpoena u y.as

.%

-- . - . - . . - _ . ..

h

_

--__- _ -____ __________-____

. .

. .

( ('

.

.

1 O'.Laughlin - cross 2:.

2 tecumi.

Then, Mr. Davis, I don't know if you -- do you3

take the time to review these documents --4

MR. DAVIS: Yes, I do, your Honor.5

THE COURT: -- and corapare them?6

MR. DAVIS: Yes, I do.7

THE COURT: And how is it that you3

can make the representation to me that there areg

differences?10

MR. DAVIS: Well, certainly thereg

are some differences. But the main point, your

Honor, however --

THE COURT: Mr. Davis, there are no14

differences.15

MR. DAVIS: Well, I --16

THE COURT: You are misrepresenting17

'

to the Court, and I think you should know that I18

consider you misrepresenting to the Court.10

Now, do you recall the February 23rd,20

197 6 memorandum that this Court issued?21

MR. DAVIS: In general.

32

THE COURT: Do you recall what it

23

concerned?'*

21-

MR. DAVIS: These were rulings of'

M,

. . _ _ . . _ . . . _ _ _ . _ . . _ . _ _ .

. - _ _.

.

. .

:.- ( z ,

.

1 O'Laughlin - cross 2

2 the Court on subpoenas, I believe, at the time.

3 I trust that is what we are talking about.

4 Your Honor, what I am --

5 THE COURT: If rf recollection

6 serves me correctly, there was a ruling that~

was issued overruling certain discoveries sought7

by the city, and it was only issued as a result8

,

of the Court admonishing counsel at that time9

for its failure to timely press its discovery.g,,

Am I correct in that?13 .

MR. DAVIS: Well, without th's docu-12

ment in front of me -- and I don't have it in13

.

front of me at the moment -- I would accept theg

Court's characterization.1

THE COURT: I would suggest that i

16

during the recess you reexamine these documents i

'

and reexamine the Court's rulings and please I

stop wasting the Court's time.30

MR. DAVIS: Well --20

THE COURT: Now, I have taken a half21

hour to review these documents on the representa-i

'S2

tion.from you that there were substantial differ-23

ences. And you may use my records to compare them,,,

if you are desirous of so doing, if yours are not -,

25,

_ . . . _ = _ . . _ . . _ . _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ . - - . . __ _

I,

1 , .

.

l . ,

( ('

; . .

1 .

! 1 O'Laughlin - cross 8.

,

2 available. And in the event that I am inaccurate,

3 I will be pleased to entertain any' corrections.

4 So, now, let us proceed with the examination

5 of Mr. O'Laughlin.

MR'. DAVIS: May I simply address a-

6

few arguments to the Court on the question of7

this subpoena?8

THE COURT: Mr. Davis --9

MR. DAVIS: All I am attempting to10

~~

11 -

THE COURT: Mr. Davis, we have already12

- gone over this. Please proceed with the examina-13-

tion of Mr. O'Laughlin. Now, let's not rehash

it again, Mr. Davis, please.-

15 ,,

MR. DAVIS: Withou't' rehashing it,16

- -. your ruling is on the subpoena? .

'

18.' THE COURT: I am quashing it.

MR. DAVIS: I'n its entirety? .f10 . " .

* THE COURT: That's correct, for the l20

--

same reasons that I have heretofore set forth I,

21 ;

on two.different occasions, as I have already22

indicated'to you, Mr. Davis. I

23

And for your benefit -- Mr Kainski, may24

I have that memorandum?,

25_ . - __ _. _ ..- . . . . . -_ . . _ _

1

1

- _ _ _ _ . - _ _

e .

. .

( ('

O'Laughlin - cross &* '

MR. DAVIS: Very well, your Honor.2

Please note my exception to that. ruling.3

THE COURT: The memorandum of4

February 18th and the subsequent memorandum of5

February 23rd of 1976.6

Thank you, Mr. Davis, Would you kindly'

7proceed?

MR. DAVIS: You did hear my excep- )

9 ,

tion to the Court 's ruling.?

10THE COURT: Yes, pleaso note an

11 .

exception.

12. By Mr. Davis: e-

,

13 'Q All right, Mr. O'Laughlin, going back to our question,

14during the time that you have been an attorney with

15 .

Squire, Sanders & Dempsey what has been your area of16

practice or specialization?

17A Generally, public law.

18Q And by "public law" what in general does that mean,

0as you view it?

.

', A In my view of it, it is representation of public|

1

*I bodies as a predominant feature of the practice.

"Q And in what areas do you represent them?

6}. A Myself?-

.

Q Yes. What would be the 6eneral kinds of legal problems

i 3 -

*

:.. .. . . . . . . _ . . . . . .

--

;.