Preview
IN THE DISTRICT COURT IN AND FOR PAYNE COUNTY
STATE OF OKLAHOMA NTH Disrp
MAM ee ero
BRAD J. KASTL, COLOR mee
#10502535046% L 39
Petitioner, ) By, “OR, Alte
) Case No. rn 291430 tod
vs. ) Judge R.L. HERT
) “
LORI J. KASTL, )
)
)
Respondent. )
PETITIONER’S MOTION TO QUASH SUBPOENA AND NOTICE OF
DEPOSITION
COMES NOW, the Petitioner, BRAD J. KASTL, and moves this Court to quash the
Respondent's SUBPOENA AND NOTICE OF DEPOSITION, which states “that pursuant to 12
Okla. Stat. Ann. § 3230, the Respondent, Lori J. Kastl, shall take a deposition of Petitioner, Brad
J. Kastl”. Respondent has no good faith reason and failed to follow Oklahoma Law in requesting
leave of this Honorable Court, in order to secure or demand that Petitioner submit to yet another
deposition. Petitioner respectfully asks this Court to quash their Notice of Deposition for the
following reasons:
12 Ok. St. 3230, reads as follows:
A. WHEN DEPOSITIONS MAY BE TAKEN; WHEN LEAVE REQUIRED.
1. A party may take the testimony of any person, including a party, by
deposition upon oral examination without leave of court except as
provided in paragraph 2 of this subsection. The attendance of
witnesses may be compelled by subpoena as provided in Section 2004.1
of this title.
2, a. A party shall obtain leave of court, if the person to be
examined is confined in prison, or if, without the written stipulation
of the parties:
(1) the person to be examined already has been deposed in the case, or
(2) a party seeks to take a deposition prior to the expiration of
thirty (30) days after service of the summons and petition upon any
1defendant unless the notice contains a certification, with supporting
facts, that the person to be examined is expected to leave this state
and will be unavailable for examination in this state unless deposed
before that time.
b. A request for leave of court shall include a statement that the
requesting party has in good faith conferred or attempted to confer
either in person or by telephone with the opposing parties to obtain a
written stipulati:
3. Unless otherwise agreed by the parties or ordered by the court, a
deposition upon oral examination shall not last more than six (6)
hours and shall be taken only between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00
p- m. on a day other than a Saturday or Sunday and on a date other than
a holiday designated in Section 82.1 of Title 25 of the Oklahoma
Statutes. The court may grant an extension of these time limits if the
court finds that the witness or counsel has been obstructive or
uncooperative or if the court finds it toe be in the interest of
justice.
On June 10" and June 11", 2015, a Trial was held before the Honorable R.L. Hert regarding
pending Motions to modify child custody and child support. Both the Petitioner and Respondent
testified and submitted themselves to cross-examination at that time. Additionally, both Petitioner
and Respondent submitted themselves to depositions that were held in the office of Melissa
DeLacerda prior to the trial date. At the time of trial both the Petitioner and Respondent rested and
made argument to the Court in the form of closing statements and the Court took the issues under
advisement till August 2015. The parties were ordered to make findings of fact and conclusions of
law in regard to child support alone to be filed no later than 5:00 p.m. on July 31", 2015.
At this point and time both parties have rested and the case is not open to present further
evidence to the Court. There has been no motion filed to re-open the case to present additional
evidence to the Court nor an Order by the Court authorizing this. Additionally, under our
Discovery code in Oklahoma it succinctly states that a party is NOT entitled to depose a witness
“without leave of court” if that party has already been deposed in the case. The Respondent has
had two chances to question Petitioner under oath in this matter: (1) A Deposition that was
previously held prior to trial, and (2) through effective cross-examination at Trial. Respondent
must follow the law and seek leave of the court if they wish to depose a party opponent again and
2they have failed to do so. Additionally, there is no right to depose a party witness once the case
has been tried and evidence has been presented to the Court and both sides have rested their cases.
The notice to depose Mr. Kastl is nothing more than attempt to bully and harass him and cost him
additional attorney’s fees and costs.
Also, The Notice of deposition was filed July 24", 2015, (a Friday) and was not received
in Petitioner’s counsel’s office until Monday, the 27", 2015. Respondent's counsel’s office called
on the 24" and requested to take Mr. Kastl’s deposition on July 31%, at 9:00am whereas they were
advised that Petitioner both objected to the deposition based on needing leave of court and the fact
that Petitioner would be unable to attend on that date and time regardless due to work constraints.
It was after this conversation that a Notice was apparently filed with the court. There is no legal
basis or statute that entitles the Respondent to further depose the Petitioner and if Respondent
wishes to file a Motion requesting leave of court, we request a date and time be set so that Petitioner
may be heard regarding this Objection.
All evidence in this matter has been presented to the Court for consideration and the
evidentiary side of the matter is now closed; This notice of deposition is nothing more than
harassment of the Petitioner and the Respondent knows she has no legal ground nor basis for
requesting the same nor did she follow state law and they should thus be quashed. Petitioner should
be entitled to recover his reasonable and necessary attorney fees in defending this matter.
WHEREFORE, Petitioner, Brad J. Kastl prays this Court quash Petitioner's Subpoena and
Notice of deposition.
Respectfully submitted,109 ‘AN. Division St.
Guthrie, OK 73044
(405) 293.6634 (Phone)
(405) 282-0440 (Fax)
Attorney for Petitioner, Brad Kast]CERTIFICATE OF MAILING
I certify that on the f A } day of , 2015, I mailed a true and correct
copy of this Motion to Quash, with proper ppptage PI aid thereon, to:
Melissa DeLacerda
Law Office of Melissa DeLacerda
301 S. Duck
Stillwater, Oklahoma 74076
Preview
IN THE DISTRICT COURT IN AND FOR PAYNE COUNTY STATE OF OKLAHOMA NTH Disrp MAM ee ero BRAD J. KASTL, COLOR mee #10502535046% L 39 Petitioner, ) By, “OR, Alte ) Case No. rn 291430 tod vs. ) Judge R.L. HERT ) “ LORI J. KASTL, ) ) ) Respondent. ) PETITIONER’S MOTION TO QUASH SUBPOENA AND NOTICE OF DEPOSITION COMES NOW, the Petitioner, BRAD J. KASTL, and moves this Court to quash the Respondent's SUBPOENA AND NOTICE OF DEPOSITION, which states “that pursuant to 12 Okla. Stat. Ann. § 3230, the Respondent, Lori J. Kastl, shall take a deposition of Petitioner, Brad J. Kastl”. Respondent has no good faith reason and failed to follow Oklahoma Law in requesting leave of this Honorable Court, in order to secure or demand that Petitioner submit to yet another deposition. Petitioner respectfully asks this Court to quash their Notice of Deposition for the following reasons: 12 Ok. St. 3230, reads as follows: A. WHEN DEPOSITIONS MAY BE TAKEN; WHEN LEAVE REQUIRED. 1. A party may take the testimony of any person, including a party, by deposition upon oral examination without leave of court except as provided in paragraph 2 of this subsection. The attendance of witnesses may be compelled by subpoena as provided in Section 2004.1 of this title. 2, a. A party shall obtain leave of court, if the person to be examined is confined in prison, or if, without the written stipulation of the parties: (1) the person to be examined already has been deposed in the case, or (2) a party seeks to take a deposition prior to the expiration of thirty (30) days after service of the summons and petition upon any 1defendant unless the notice contains a certification, with supporting facts, that the person to be examined is expected to leave this state and will be unavailable for examination in this state unless deposed before that time. b. A request for leave of court shall include a statement that the requesting party has in good faith conferred or attempted to confer either in person or by telephone with the opposing parties to obtain a written stipulati: 3. Unless otherwise agreed by the parties or ordered by the court, a deposition upon oral examination shall not last more than six (6) hours and shall be taken only between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p- m. on a day other than a Saturday or Sunday and on a date other than a holiday designated in Section 82.1 of Title 25 of the Oklahoma Statutes. The court may grant an extension of these time limits if the court finds that the witness or counsel has been obstructive or uncooperative or if the court finds it toe be in the interest of justice. On June 10" and June 11", 2015, a Trial was held before the Honorable R.L. Hert regarding pending Motions to modify child custody and child support. Both the Petitioner and Respondent testified and submitted themselves to cross-examination at that time. Additionally, both Petitioner and Respondent submitted themselves to depositions that were held in the office of Melissa DeLacerda prior to the trial date. At the time of trial both the Petitioner and Respondent rested and made argument to the Court in the form of closing statements and the Court took the issues under advisement till August 2015. The parties were ordered to make findings of fact and conclusions of law in regard to child support alone to be filed no later than 5:00 p.m. on July 31", 2015. At this point and time both parties have rested and the case is not open to present further evidence to the Court. There has been no motion filed to re-open the case to present additional evidence to the Court nor an Order by the Court authorizing this. Additionally, under our Discovery code in Oklahoma it succinctly states that a party is NOT entitled to depose a witness “without leave of court” if that party has already been deposed in the case. The Respondent has had two chances to question Petitioner under oath in this matter: (1) A Deposition that was previously held prior to trial, and (2) through effective cross-examination at Trial. Respondent must follow the law and seek leave of the court if they wish to depose a party opponent again and 2they have failed to do so. Additionally, there is no right to depose a party witness once the case has been tried and evidence has been presented to the Court and both sides have rested their cases. The notice to depose Mr. Kastl is nothing more than attempt to bully and harass him and cost him additional attorney’s fees and costs. Also, The Notice of deposition was filed July 24", 2015, (a Friday) and was not received in Petitioner’s counsel’s office until Monday, the 27", 2015. Respondent's counsel’s office called on the 24" and requested to take Mr. Kastl’s deposition on July 31%, at 9:00am whereas they were advised that Petitioner both objected to the deposition based on needing leave of court and the fact that Petitioner would be unable to attend on that date and time regardless due to work constraints. It was after this conversation that a Notice was apparently filed with the court. There is no legal basis or statute that entitles the Respondent to further depose the Petitioner and if Respondent wishes to file a Motion requesting leave of court, we request a date and time be set so that Petitioner may be heard regarding this Objection. All evidence in this matter has been presented to the Court for consideration and the evidentiary side of the matter is now closed; This notice of deposition is nothing more than harassment of the Petitioner and the Respondent knows she has no legal ground nor basis for requesting the same nor did she follow state law and they should thus be quashed. Petitioner should be entitled to recover his reasonable and necessary attorney fees in defending this matter. WHEREFORE, Petitioner, Brad J. Kastl prays this Court quash Petitioner's Subpoena and Notice of deposition. Respectfully submitted,109 ‘AN. Division St. Guthrie, OK 73044 (405) 293.6634 (Phone) (405) 282-0440 (Fax) Attorney for Petitioner, Brad Kast]CERTIFICATE OF MAILING I certify that on the f A } day of , 2015, I mailed a true and correct copy of this Motion to Quash, with proper ppptage PI aid thereon, to: Melissa DeLacerda Law Office of Melissa DeLacerda 301 S. Duck Stillwater, Oklahoma 74076