Professional Documents
Culture Documents
WTNNTE
(68048)
COTINTYCOUNSEL
2 COUNTY OF ALAMEDA
a
J zuCHARDS,WATSON & GERSHON
A Professional
Corporation
4 T. PETERPTERCE (160408)
SAYREWEAVER (r169s7)
5 355SouthGrandAvenue.40'hFloor
LosAngeles,CA 90071
6 Telephone: Q.I3) 626-8484
,7
Facsimile:(213) 626-0078
ppierce@rwgiaw.corn
8 Attorneysfor Defendants,
MARY V. KING, et al.
9
10
2l DEPT.: 11
JUDGE: HonorableMartin J. Jenkins
22 DATE: October3,2006
TIME: 9:30a.m.
23
24
25
26
27
28
2
a
J The County agreesthat for purposesof its summaryjudgment motion only, all of the facts
4 containedin the Joint Statementof Undisputed Facts are assumedto be true. Nevertheless,some
5 of those facts are irrelevant and immaterial becausethey have no bearing on the outcome of the
6 caseunder the governing substantivelaw. "Material facts which would preclude entry of
n summaryjudgment are those which, under applicable substantivelaw, may affect the outcome of
8 the case. The substantivelaw will identify which facts are matenal." Baccarat Fremont Dev. v.
10 The following facts in the Joint Statementof Undisputed Facts are irrelevant and
11 immaterial:
z = T2
O =
- #
(/)P
fy. &. 13 Fact Nos.3. 43. 44"49. 50 and 85- theCountyneednot showthatplaintiffs'shows
u J 8
t 9 ¿
2.2 14 were sourcesof violent activityor crime. Therefore,whetherplaintiffs' activities
themselves
oti
ú f E
' < E 15 wereassociated
with violenceor crimeis irrelevant
-== i T6
vt3
a E
É , q
< È t7 Fact No. 7 - the particularzoningdistrictin which the CountyFairgroundsarelocatedis
T Z
L J 9
t8 irrelevantto the constitutionalissuesbeforethe Court.
.!g
1,'
'"-.Å{4. t9
20 Fact Nos. 9 through 11 - the viewsof a singlelegislatorareirrelevantto determiningthe
22 event.
23
25 theconstitutionalissuesbeforethe Court.
26
4 Fact Nos. l7 and 31 - the fact that the ScottishGamesoperatorswere not requiredto
5 submit a written plan is irrelevant to whether the Scottish Gamesand plaintifß were similarly
6 situatedand to whether the County had a rational basis for distinguishing betweenthe two.
n
8 Fact No. 20 - the fact that Alameda County Counsel sent a letter to the Board of
26 (i.e.possessing
guns).
27
28 Fact Nos.51 through 57 - CaliforniaPenalCodesection12071,4is irrelevantto the
-)-
DEFENDANTS' RELEVANCE OBJECTIONSAND EVIDENTIARY OBJECTIONS
12061\0002\916965.
I
1 constitutionalissuesbefore the Court becauseso long as the Ordinanceis not preemptedby state
2 law (and the California SupremeCourt concludedit is not), state law requirementshave no
4 law.
5
6 Fact Nos. 58 through 74; 79: 81 through 83 - evidenceof what messages
maybe
communicatedthrough gun possession,or of whether others may understandthosemessages,is
l0
11 Fact Nos. 76 through 78. and 84 - the subjectivereasonswhy peoplemay or may not
z.= t2 attenda gun show are irrelevant to the constitutional validity of the Ordinance.
O =
L ñ P
r v a
LL¡ 3
T3
c 9 ¿
2.2 t4 Fact No. 80 - how other countiesregulate gun shows is irrelevant to the constitutional
O :{i
(/, *-
l - = 15 validity of Alameda County's Ordinance.
< À
- = i
=
T6
vrA
Õ ä
É,ø
< ì l7 Fact No. 86 - Californialaw regardinggun showsis irrelevantto the constitutional
T Z
( J e
æ . E 18 validityof the Ordinanceandis a questionof law.
i ' ç
"."-,-{¿. t9
20 Fact Nos. 89. 90 - whetheranyonehas,andwho may have,the authorityto exemptan
2l eventfrom the Ordinanceis irrelevantto the constitutionalvalidity of the Ordinance.
22
23 Accordingly,the only factswhicharerelevantto themotionareFactNos. l; 2;4ttro:ugh
24 6; 8; 13through16(secondsentence);
18; 19;21 through27;30;32 through37;39tfuo¡$t42;
25 46;47;and75.
26
27
28
-J-
DEFENDANTS'RELEVANCEOBJECTIOìTS
AND EVIDENTIARY OBJECTIONS
1206r
\0002\91
696s.
I
1 EVIDENTIARY OBJECTIONS
2
a
J Pursuantto Rule 103(a)(1)of the FederalRulesof Evidenceand Rule 7-5(b) of the Local
4 Rules of the United StatesDistrict Court for the Northern District of California, DefendantsMary
5 V. King, Gail Steele,V/ilma Chen, Keith Carson,Scott Haggerty, the County of Alameda, and
8 Donald Kilmer (and the exhibits attachedthereto); Daryl Davis; Duane Darr (and the exhibits
10 Fournier (and the exhibits attachedthereto); Russell Nordyke and Sallie Nordyke (and the
23 discretion in the court's exclusion of testimony that was simply cumulative to proof suppliedby
24 stipulation'") Additionally, "Rule 403 permits the court to exclude evidence if its probative
25 value is substantially outweighed by the dangerof unfair prejudice, confusion of the issues,
27 Industries,Inc.,922F.2d1426,1430(gth
Cir. 1991).Sinceitisuncontestedthatgunpossession
28 may in some casesconstitute expressiveconduct, the Court should exclude all testimony in the
-4-
DEFENDANTS'RELEVANCEOBJECTIONSAND EVIDENTIARY OBJECTIONS
r206I \0002\9I 6965.I
1 ExpertReportanddeclarations
regardingthis issue.Noneof the testimonymakestheissueany
2 moreor lessprobablethanit wouldbe withoutthetestimony.
a
J Second,the ExpertReportdoesnot containanyspecializedknowledgeto helpthetrier of
4 fact understand
the evidenceor determinea factin issue.FRE 702requiresthat an expert
5 witnesshave"scientific,technical,or otherspecializedknowledge[that] will assistthetrier of
6 fact to understand
the evidenceor to determinea factin issue." SeealsoDaubertv. Merrell Dow
Pharmaceuticals,
Inc., 509u.s. 579,591,113s.ct. 2786,rzs L.Ed.2d,469
(lgg3) (..Rule702
I furtherrequiresthat the evidenceor testimonyassistthe trier of fact to understand
the evidence
9 or to determinea fact in issue. This conditiongoesprimarily to relevance.Experttestimony
10 which doesnot relateto anyissuein the fact is not relevantand,ergo,non-helpful")(internal
t1 quotations
omitted);U.S.v. Hønna,293F.3d1080,108619thCir. 2002)(',Experttestimonyis
z.=
o = T2 admissible anissue'beyondthe commonknowledgeof the
under[FRE] 702if it addresses
(.r)P
rv.
u.l I
ê. t3 average
layperson."')
t 9 ¿
z,? I4 The ExpertReportis simply a recountingof interviewsconductedwith lalpersonswhom
O Y i
Lrt E
t5 Dr' Kohn hascloakedin pseudonyms.SeeExpertReport,page15 (interviewswith "Keith" and
ä E
-== i 16 "Paula");pagel6(interviewwith "Elliott"); page17(interviewswith "Manuel"andReginald
(n=
o ä
É
< ò
, q
t7 Halloway);pagel8(interviewwith "Bob");pagelg(interviewswith "Lewis,""Jane,"and
T , =
L J Þ
É. 4. 18 "Louise"); page20 (interviewswith RichardHudnutand"Harold"); and page2l (interviewwith
'ç2
i''.
\.-iØ. 79 "Marcus"). The ExpertReportshouldbe strickenin its entirety.
20 The Countynow turnsto the specificevidentiaryproblemsptaguingthe ExpertReport
2l andall of Plaintiffs'declarations.
22
23 A. OBJECTIONSTO PLAINTIF'F'S EXPERT REPORT
24 1. Objectionable
Portion: EntireDeclaration.
25 Groundsfor Objection: In additionto theparticularrelevanceandlack of specialized
26 knowledgegroundssetforth above,the ExpertReportis irrelevantalsobecauseit probes
6 Groundsfor Objection:Speculation.(FRE602.)
9 interviewed, I use pseudonymsfor all of the people and placesI describe." Expert's Report,
10 Page4, footnote5.
11 Grounds for Objection: The Expert's Report, to the extent that it makes use of these
z,= t2 interviews,constitutesinadmissiblehearsay(FRE 801(c),802) and lacks foundation.
O =
ø ) P
e . a 13
U J 3
t 9 ¿
2.9 t4 4. Objectionable Portion: "to addressa seriesof questionsrelevant to the suit that have
OY1
Ø F
15 beenaskedof me by Donald Kilmer." Expert's Report,Page5.
< È
-== i I6 Groundsfor Objection: Improperopinion testimony. (FRE 701(b).) Lack of personal
tJ, =
Õ k
É,ø l7 knowledge. (FRE 602.) Lacks foundation. Legal conclusion.
<
T Z
ì
L J 9
É. 4. 18
'!!2
l'''
¿&. l9 5. Ob-iectionable
Portion: The bullet-pointquestionsposedon Page5 of theExpert's
20 Report,beginningwith thewords"In the contextof a gunshow" andendingwith thewords
24 6. Objectionable
Portion:Thewords"SanFrancisco
Bay Area,"and'.WhenI conducted
25 my research,therewerebetweensix andten gun shopsin themetropolitan area(depending
on
2 and time.
5 Grounds for Objection: Relevance,becausea study of the "issues and conceptsfthat] are
6 most important to gun enthusiasts"doesnot have anytendencyto make the existenceof any fact
that is of consequenceto the determinationof this action more probable or less probable than it
9
10 8. ObjectionablePortion: The sentence"So while the 37 shootersI interviewedarenot
2.2 l4 important to recognize" and ending with the words "gun owners from acrossthe US."
O ø
( , E
15 Groundsfor Objection: Relevance. (FRE 401,402.) Additionally, Dr. Kohn's own
k x
-E= i l6 admission that the 37 shootersthat she interviewed"ate not 'representative'in the sensethat they
vrs
ô k
É,Ø t7
<z ì can and should all gun owners or enthusiastson a national scale" establishesthat Dr. Kohn's
-
L
- ' r9
M. 4. 18 testimonyis not basedon sufficient facts or data. (FRE 702(l).) Dr. Kohn's admissionalso
i ' ,4Ø.
llz
T9 shows that her report is not the product of reliable principles and methods in that she did not aim
2t
24 gun culture."
26
2
a
J 11. ObjectionablePortion: Page8, footnote 14, the sentence"IVhile I did seepeopleof
4 different ethnicities and backgrounds,the majority of the shootersin the Bay Area appearedto be
5 of Europeandescent."
6 Grounds for Objection: Speculation. (FRE 602.) Improper opinion testimony. (FRE
4 17. Objectionable
Portion:Page13first parugraphafter
bulletpointsbeginningwith the
5 words"The shootersI interviewed"andendingwith the words"are still relevantin2006.,,
6 Groundsfor Objection:Inadmissible
hearsay(FRE801(c),802);Relevance
(FRE401,
7 402); Lacksfoundation.
8
9 18' Objectionable
Portion:Page13,paragraph
1 beginningwith thewords"If anything,
10 shootersin NorthernCalifornia"andendingwith the words"winnoweddown legalaccessto
11 firearms."
z,= T2 Groundsfor Obiection: Inadmissible
O = hearsay(FRE801(c),802).Lackofpersonal
L O 9
e. ê. 13 knowledge'(FRE602.) Improperopiniontestimony.(FRE701(b).)Lacksfoundation.Legal
u r 8
t 9 ¿
2 . 2 L4 conclusion.
O r{i
(/) ^E
h v 15
< -
-== i 16 19. ObjectionablePortion: Page13, bottom pnagraphbeginningwith the words .,Based
vr=
â k
É.ø
< ò l7 on the researchdescribedabove" through Page 14, first full parugraphendingwith the words
'*i
T Z
L J P
æ . < "believe their gun ownershipembodiesthoseideals.',
-"r
. ,{1 tnl Grounds for Objection: Relevance. (FRE 401,402.) Plaintifß are making an as-applied
,ol First Amendment argument;therefore,the opinions of anyoneother than Plaintiffs are irrelevant
::l
to Plaintiffs' main issue.
--l
,tl 20. Obiectionable
Portion:Pagel4,paragraph1, thewords"thepoliticalideals
24ll inherentin theU.S. Constitution."
Legalconclusion.
10 402.) Additionally, these quotations are laypersonquotes. They are not "scientific, technical,
or
11 other specializedknowledge" fhatwill assistthe trier of fact to understandthe evidence
or
^z , == T2 determinea fact in issue through Dr. Kohn's testimony. In fact, theseinterview quotations
echo
ø ) P
r v ê 13 the ideas generatedfrom interviews conductedby attomey Donald Kilmer. (FRE 702.)
r¿J 3 And as
t 9 ¿
z.? I4 noted above, these quotations are attributed to personswhose nameshave been changedfor
O t{Í
ú ) E
15 pu{posesof the Expert's Report.
k x
_= = i t6
r¡t 5
ô E
M , ø
< à t7 23. ObjectionablePortion: Page15,the quotationbeginningwith thewords,.'Whydid
7 z
L J 9
É, ã.
-'ü
18 Independence
Day comeabout?"throughthewords"that's what madeAmerica."
25 Groundsfor Objection:Inadmissible
hearsay.(FRE801(c),802.) Relevance.(FRE401,
26 402.) Speculation.(FRE 602.) Improperopiniontestimony.(FRE 701(b).) Lacksfoundation.
27 Vague.
28
-10-
DEFENDANTS'RELEVANCEOBJECTIONSAND EVIDENTIARY O¡¡¡CNONS
I 206I \0002\9I 6965.I
1 25. Objectionable
Portion: Page16,thequotationbeginningwith thewords"I felt that
2 themostimportantthing" throughthe words"to haveabortionsif theywant..."
a
J Groundsfor Objection:Inadmissible
hearsay.(FRE801(c),802.) Relevance,
(FRE401,
4 402') Speculation.(FRE602.) Improperopiniontestimony.
(FRE701(b).)Lacksfoundarion.
) Vague.Legalconclusion.
6
11 Vague.
z,= T2
o =
(/)P
É. ¿. l3 27. Obiectionable Portion: Page 17, the quotation beginning with the words "It means- I
LrJ g
c 9 ¿
2.2 t4 was going to say''through the words "I could defendmyself with it, and do it safely."
O Y i '
Lrt E
+ Y 15 Groundsfor Objection: Inadmissiblehearsay.(FRE 801(c), 802.) Relevance.
< d çFRE401,
-== i t6 402.) Speculation. (FRE 60D.) Improperopinion testimony. (FRE 701(b).) Lacks foundation.
vt5
ô k 'Vague.
É,
< à
vj
17 Legalconclusion.
T Z
(-t
_ r I
É . Q 18
-'!l
i',,.J9.
t9 28. Obiectionable
Portion:Page17,beginningwith the words"'WhenDonald
20 interviewedReginaldHalloway''throughthe top of Page18, endingwith thewords"taking a
2l politicalstand."
22 Groundsfor Objection:Inadmissible
hearsay.(FRE801(c),802.) Relevance.(FRE401,
402') Improperopiniontestimony.(FRE701(b).) Lacksfoundation. Vague. Legalconclusion.
24
25 29. Objectionable
Portion:Page18,paragraph
2 beginningwith thewords"Themost
26 commonvaluethat gunssymbolize"throughthetop of Page19 endingwith the words"variet5r
27 of thing."
28 Groundsfor Obiection:Inadmissible
hearsay.(FRE801(c),802.) Relevance.(FRE401,
'
- L1 -
2 Vague.Legalconclusion.
a
J
5 man in his forties" through pageZl ending with the words "romanticized freedommaybe."
t0 "Marcus' vision of what guns" throughthe last completesentenceat the bottom ofPage22
20
2l 33. Objectionable Portion: Page24, at the top beginning with the words "I have
22 described" through Page 25, end of first full paragraphending with the word "convey political
23 messages."
26
22 1. Objectionable
Portion: EntireDeclaration.
26 (FRE 401,402.)
27
4 messagesthey may be tryrng to convey through gun possessionare irrelevant. Only messages
6 plaintffi.
11 declarationhas any tendencyto make the existenceof any fact that is of consequenceto the
z.= t2 determination of the action more probable or lessprobable than it would be without the evidence.
O =
ø ) P
É. ë.
uJ3
13 (FRE401,402.)
r_" ¿
2,2 T4
O-n
crt E
t - v
i < À
15 2. ObjectionablePortion: Page2,line 16 beginningwith the words "the NRA'S" through
_= = i T6 page2r line 18 ending with the words "fundamental'right to keep and bear arms."'
tJ, 5
ô k
É , ø
< È l7 G¡ounds for Objection: Inadmissible hearsay. (FRE 801(c) and 802.) Lack of personal
= =
U õ
'!s 1 8
É. ã. knowledge. (FRE 602.)
{-
'',.-¿t¿, t 9
20 3. Objectionable
Portion: Page2,line 19beginningwith thewords"giventhecurrent"
2I throughpage2,line20 endingwith thewords"Ninth Circuitjudicial opinions."
28 throughpage2,line26endingwith thewords'þossession
of firearmsat a gunshow."
_14_
DEFENDANTS'RELEVANCE OBJECTIONSAND EVIDENTIARY OBJECTIONS
1206l\0002\9I 6965.I
I Groundsfor Objection: Improperopiniontestimony.(FRE 701(b).) Legalconclusion.
2
a
J 6. Objectionable
Portion: Page2,line27 beginringwith thewords"Basedon my
4 readingof history,"throughpage3,line 5 endingwith thewords"enforcedonly against rucial
5 minorities."
6 Groundsfor Objection:Improperopiniontestimony.(FRE701(b).)Lackof personal
knowledge.(FRE602.) Lacksfoundation.
8
9 7' ObjectionablePortion: Page3, line 16 beginningwith the words "Before the Turks
10 could engage"through Page 3, line 20 ending with the words "The Soviet Union, Uganda and
11 Rwanda."
z.= t2 Groundsfor Obiection: Improperopinion testimony. (FRE 701(b).) tack ofpersonal
O =
L ô P
e. ê.
¡¿¡ 3
l3 knowledge. (FRE 602.) Lacks foundarion.
c9¿
z.? t4
O Y i
ú)E
t - =
(<t 15 8' Obiectionable
Portion: Page4, line 9 beginningwith thewords"I agreewith
_= = i t6 Defendant"throughPage4,line 10endingwith thewords"gunsare'iconsof patriotism.,,,
¡tl f
â ä
É,ø
< ñ t7 Groundsfor objection: Inadmissible
hearsay.(FREg0l(c) andg02.)
T , =
L J õ
É. Q. 18
'ú.
'',;-{4, t9 9. Obiectionable
Portion: Page4,line 12beginningwith thewords"As a safety
20 instructor"throughPage ,line 15 endingwith thewords"rights haveconcomitant
2l responsibilities."
22 Groundsfor Objection:Relevance.(FRE 401,402.)
23
24 10. Objectionable
Portion: Page4,line 17beginningwith thewords"wheretheyarein
25 dangerof becomingextinct" throughPage4,line 20 endingwith the words"interpretationof the
26 'right to keep
andbeararms."'
27 Groundsfor Objection:Inadmissible
hearsay.(FRES01(c)and802.) Lackofpersonal
28 knowledge.(FRE602.)
-15-
DEFENDANTS'RELEVANCEOBJECTIONSAND EVIDENTIARY OÈ¡NCTTONS
1206r\0002\9
I 696s.
I
1 11. ObjectionablePortion: Page5, line 1, which reads"I am creatingallies in my
2 politicalbeliefs."
a
J Groundsfor Objection: Lack of personalknowledge. (FRE 602.) Speculation.(FRE
4 602.)
9
10 13. ObjectionablePortion: Page5, line 7 beginningwith the words "I am remindedthat"
11 through Page 5, line 9 ending with the words "religion, genderor national origin."
z.= t2 Groundsfor Objection: Improper opinion testimony. (FRE 701(b).) Legal conclusion.
O =
( , P
É. ¿.
|.|-l3
13
t 9 ¿
z.? t4 14. Objectionable
Portion: Page5, line 16beginningwith thewords"thattheyintend"
O r{ì
Lr.) *-
t - v 15 throughPage5, line 17 endingwith the words"they hateguns.',
< ù
- = i
=
t6 Groundsfor Objection:Speculation.(FRE602.)
vr=
Õ E
& ø
< õ t7
T Z
( J p
- -
É. i. 18 15. ObjectionablePortion: Page5, line 20 beginningwith the words "he wantedto
'fg
r'
t'-,:& t9 convey" through Page 5, line 2l ending with the words " hunters and gun owners."
2l
24 Nevada."
26
27 17. ObjectionablePortion: Page6, line 3 beginningwith thewords "Gun showshave
2
J 18. ObiectionablePortion: Page6, line 11 begiruringwith the words "the ordinance
10
2l
22 2. ObiectionablePortion:ExhibitsA throughD to Declarationof DuaneDarr.
23 Groundsfor Objection:Inadmissible
hearsay.(FRE801(c)and802.) Relevance.(FRE
24 401,402.)
25
26 3. Obiectionable
Portion: Page2,line 12beginningwith thewords"theNRA'5
27 interpretation"throughPage2,line 14 endingwith thewords',andbeararms."
2
J 4. ObiectionablePortion: Page2,line 15 beginningwith the words "given the current
5 Grounds for Ob.iection: Improper opinion testimony. (FRE 701(b).) Lacks foundation.
5. Obj ectionablePortion: Page2, line 17, the phrase"the 'right to keep and bear arms' is
8 a corepolitical right."
10 Lacks foundation.
11
z.= l2 6, ObjectionablePortion: Page2,line 21 beginningwith the words "Before the Turks"
O =
(/)P
É . 4 T3 through Page2,line25 ending with the words "The Soviet Union, Uganda and Rwanda."
L¡.r 3
u ¿
2,2 T4 Grounds for Ob.iection: Improper opinion testimony. (FRE 701(b).) Lack of personal
() r{i
Ø E
i<È
15 knowledge. (FRE 602.) Lacks foundation.
-=È i I6
vrs
ê k
É,ø t7
< ZÈ 7. ObiectionablePortion: Page3, line 10 beginningwith the words "mypossessionof
T
L J 9
É- -< 18 guns" throughPage3, line 11 endingwith the words "opposedto my views."
i'' ¿ !Ì!2
¿ t9 Groundsfor Objection: Speculation.(FRE 602.)
20
2T 8. Objectionable
Portion: Page3, line 14beginningwith thewords"I agreewith
22 Defendant"throughPage3,line 15endingwith thewords"gunsare'iconsof patriotism.
"'
23 Grorurds
for Objection:Inadmissible
hearsay.(FRE801(c)and802.)
24
26 Association's?'
throughPage3, line 2I endingwith thewords"'rrght to keepandbeararms."'
4
) 11. ObjectionablePortion: Page4, line 6 beginningwith the words "the United Statesis"
9
10 12. ObiectionablePortion:Page4,Iine l5beginningwiththewords"theyintend"
20 Nevada."
25
2 through Page5, line 12 endingwith the words "acknowledgedby the Bill of Rights."
5
6 18. ObjectionablePortion: Page5, line 18 beginningwith the words "Every time
someonecommits a crime" through Page5, line 20 ending with the words "tough new gun laws
8 arepassed."
11
z.= t2 19. ObjectionablePortion: Page5, Iine 20 beginningwith the words "This kind of
O =
ø ) P
e . æ 13 reactionaq¡/'throughPage5, line22 endingwith the words "as criminals."
r ! 3
t 9 ¿
2.2 T4 Groundsfor Objection: Improperopinion testimony. (FRE 701(b).) Lack of personal
()Yi
Lr1 *
t - v 15 knowledge. (FRE 602.) Lacks foundation.
< È
-== i t6
vt5
ô k
É,ø
< à t7 20. ObjectionablePortion: Page5, line 24beginningwith thewords"seeingthe
=.=
U Þ
w a 18 legitimate"throughPage5, line 26 endingwith the words"stereotypes,
biasesandprejudices."
l!u
tþ t9 Groundsfor Objection:Speculation.(FRE602.)
20
24
28 wordso'AlamedaCountv."
-20-
DEFENDANTS'RELEVANCEOBJECTIONSAND EVIDENTIARY OBJECTIONS
r 206I \0002\9I 6965.I
1 Groundsfor Objection:Improperopiniontestimony.(FRE701(b).)Lackof personal
2 knowledge.(FRE602.) Legalconclusion.
a
J
9
10 24. objectionablePortion: page6, line 10,thephrase,,abridges
my right."
11 Groundsfor Objection: Improperopiniontestimony.(FRE701(b).) Legalconclusion.
z.= l2
O =
ø ) P
É. a,
l.J.l3
l3 25' ObjectionablePortion:Page6, line 12beginningwith thewords"I am deniedthe
t 9 ¿
2.2 t4 opportunity"throughPage9,line 4 endingwith thewords,,thistypeof firearm,"
O r/i
Ø E
l - v 15 : Relevance.(FRE 401,402).
< ù
-== i t6
vr=
ô k
É,ø
< ì t7 26. Objectionable
Portion:Page7,line 28 beginningwith thewords"someof the
T Z
L J 9
É. <. 18 artifacts"throughPage8, line 1 endingwith the words"maintainits freedom.,,
i': 19
T9
" .-;!3. Groundsfor Obiection:Improperopiniontestimony.(FRE701(b).)Lackof personal
20 knowledge.(FRE 602.)
2l
22 27' Objectionable
Portion:Page8, line 11beginningwith thewords"the ordinance
23 baruring"throughPage8, line 13 endingwith the words"commercialspeechactivities.,'
24 Groundsfor Obiection:Improperopiniontestimony.(FRE701(b).)Legalconclusion.
25
26 28. ObiectionablePortion: Page9, line 5 beginningwith the words"I would assert"
4 declarationhas any tendencyto make the existenceof any factthat is of consequenceto the
5 determination of the action more probable or less probable than it would be without the evidence.
6 ( F R E4 0 1 , 4 0 2 . )
8 2. Objectionable
Portion: ExhibitsA throughS to Declarationof JessB. Guy.
9 GroundsforObjection:Relevance.(FRE 401,402.)Lackof authentication.
(FRE
10 e01(a).)
11
z.= t2 3. ObjectionablePortion: Page3, line 23 beginningwith the words"I believethatthe
O =
L O P
É. ê. 13 'nght"' throughPage
rJ.J 3
3,line 24 endingwith the words"firearmsat a ganshow."
c 9 ¿
2 . 2 t4 Groundsfor Objection: Improperopiniontestimony.(FRE 701(b).) Lack of personal
() rli
Ø E
:<À 15 knowledge.(FRE 602.) Lacksfoundation.
-=i
=
T6
v t =
ô k
É
<
q
ù l7 4. ObiectionablePortion: Page3, line 27 begiwtingwith thewords"Beforethe Turks"
T Z
L ) p
É. q. 18 throughPage4,line 3 endingwith thewords"The SovietUnion, UgandaandRwanda."
'ú.
!
t'¿'Y1 t9 Groundsfor Objectipq: Improperopiniontestimony.(FRE701(b).) Lack of personal
20 knowledge.(FRE 602.) Lacksfoundation.
2l
'
22 5. Objectionable
Portion:Page ,Iine 17beginningwith the words"mypossession
of
23 guns"throughPage4,line 18endingwith thewords"opposedto my views."
24 Groundsfor Obiection:Speculation.(FRE602.)
25
26 6. ObjectionablePortion: Page4,line27 beginringwith the words "Byprohibiting"
4
5 7. ObjectionablePortion: Page5, line 2 beginningwith the words "Gun showsprovide"
9 8. ObjectionablePortion: Page5, lines 18-19,the words "my ovm statusas a bona fide
10 expert in firearms."
2l 11. Objectionable
Portion: Page6, line 20 beginningwith thewords"Markingson
22 similar" throughPage6, line 23 endingwith thewords"avoidanceof legalsanctions."
4a
¿J Groundsfor Objection: Improperopiniontestimony.(FRE 701(b).) Legalconclusion.
24
25 12. ObjectionablePortion: Page6, line 24begirning with the words"IJndercurrent
26 federalandstatelaw" throughPage6, line 25 endingwiththe words"law enforcement
27 agencies."
2
a
J 13. ObjectionablePortion: Page6, line 26begiwring with the words "There would be"
11 Grounds for Obiection: lmproper opinion testimony. (FRE 701(b).) Lacks foundation.
z = T2
o =
L,I P
e . ê 13 15. Objectionable
Portion:Page7,line 14,thesentence
"This is usuallyunlawful
t¿J 3
u 3
2.2 l4 (felony)underfederalandstatelaw. .
oii
U I E
15 Groundsfor Objection: Improperopiniontestimony.(FRE701(b).) Legalconclusion.
k Ë
-== i T6
v t 5
Õ k
É
< ò
q
I7 16. ObjectionablePortion: PageT, line 26,begiwringwith the words"If firearmsarenot
T Z
L) 9
É. ã. 18 allowed"throughPageT,line28 endingwith thewords"risk of fireaÍns accidents."
!tt
' -t{¿ t9 (FRE602.)
Groundsfor Objection:Speculation.
20
24
25 18. ObjectionablePortion: Page8, line Tbegiruringwith thewords"the NationalRifle
28
-24-
DEFENDANTS'RELEVANCEOBJECTIONSAND EVIDENTIARY OBJECTIONS
r 2061\0002\9
16965.
I
1 19' ObjectionablePortion: Page8, line 19, the phrase"I amcreatingalliesin my
2 politicalbeliefs."
ô
J Groundsfor Objection: Speculation.(FRE 602.)
5 20' ObiectionablePortion: Page8, line 21 beginningwith the words "f am not alone"
9 21' Ob-iectionable
Portion: Page9, line 2 beginningwith the words "they intendto
6 through Page 10, line 17 ending with the words "gun shows in pleasanton."
8 602.\
9
10 28. ObjectionablePortion: Page10, line 20 beginningwith the words "The conventional
11 wisdom" through Page 10, line22 endingwith the words "and gun violence."
z.= l2 Grounds for Ob-iection: Improper opinion testimony. (FRE 701(b).) Speculation. (FRE
O =
: E *
v t9
e. a, t3 602.) Lack of personalknowledge. (FRE 602.)
U J 3
r*9 ¿
2 , 9 t4
o i'i
u1 E
i < d
15 29. ObjectionablePortion: Page10, line 28 beginningwith the words "Both kinds of
_= = i t6 containers"through Page 11, line 1 ending with the words "storage and transportationof
v\s
â k
M ø
< ò T7 firearms."
T Z
( J 9
É. 4. 18 Groundsfor Objection: Improperopinion testimony. (FRE 701(b).) Legal conclusion.
| ]t2
",, 4 ? . t9 Lacks foundation.
20
2T 30. Objectionable
Portion:Page11,line 3 beginningwith thewords"Manyof these
22 vendors"throughPage11,line 6 endingwith thewords"conducttheirownbusiness."
4 course." The photograph does not establishthat this venrdoroffers that safetv course.
8 Grounds for Objection: Improper opinion testimony. (FRE 701(b).) Legal conclusion.
9 Lacks foundation:
10
11 33' Objectionable
Portion:Page11,line 26beginningwith thewords"Thiswouldbe
z.= t2 another"throughPage11, line 28 endingwith the words"bannedfrom countyproperty."
O Ë
ú ) P
e. &. 13 Groundsfor Objection:Improperopiniontestimony.(FRE701(b).)Speculation.
(FRE
|lr3
c2;
= 2 t4 602.) Legalconclusion.
O Y i
(/)E
- <Y À
F 15
-== i 16 34' Ob-iectionable
uta Portion:Page12,lines2-3, thesentence
"Gunpartsarenotregulated
ê k
É ø
< à 17 by theOrdinance."
T Z
L ' 9
É . 4 18 Groundsfor Objection: Improperopiniontestimony.(FRE 701(b).) Legalconclusion.
r \ 9
"..-¿Y4. t 9
20 35. ObiectionablePortion: Page12,line 3 beginningwith the words "However this
24
25 36. Objectionable
Portion:Pagel2,line 14beginningwith thewords"collectibleand
26 historicallysignificantmilitary frrearms"throughPageI2,Iine 17 endingwith the words
27 "soldiersduringW'WII."
28 GrourCds
for Objection: Improperopiniontestimony. (FRE 701(b).) Lack of personal
-27-
DEFENDANTS'RELEVANCEOBJECTTONS
AND EVIDENTIARY OBJECTIONS
12061\0002\91
6965.I
1 knowledge. (FRE 602.) Lacks foundation.
2
a
J 37. ObjectionablePortion: Page12,line 20 beginningwith the words "There
[sic]
4 foundationalphilosophy is" through Pagel2,line2l endingwith the words "'Right to Keep and
5 BearArms."'
10 political" through Page 12,line 28 ending with the words "acquisition of firearms."
23
24 41. Obiectionable
Portion: Page13,line 25 beginningwith thewords"In my opinion"
25 throughPage14,line 4 endingwith thewords"AlamedaCountyfor that matter."
28
-28-
DEFENDANTS' RELEVANCEOBJECTIONSAND EVIDENTIARY OBJECTIONS
1206r\0002\9
I 6965.1
I F. OBJECTIONS TO DECLARATION OF VIRGIL McVICKER
4 declarationhas any tendencyto make the existenceof any factthat is of consequenceto the
5 determinationof the action more probable or less probable than it would be without the evidence.
6 (FRE 401, 402.) ^dditionally, declaranthasnot signedhis declaration(at leastnot on the service
1 copy).
24 602.\
25
7 general."
9
10 9. ObiectionablePortion: Page5, line 9 beginningwith the words "has had a chilling
11 effect" through Page 5, line 12 ending with the words "attheAlameda County Fairgrounds."
= = l2 Groundsfor Objection: Speculation.(FRE 602.)
O =
- #
( , P
É. æ. 13
ur3
t 9 ¿
z.? l4 10. Objectionable Portion: Page 5, line 13 beginning with the words "This ordinance
O r4i
L.ì E
15 would" through Page 5, line 14 ending with the words "as apizedrawing."
< i l
-== i t6 Groundsfor Objection: Improperopinion testimony. (FRE 701(b).) Speculation.(FRE
çrt 5
Õ E
É , q
< È t7 602.) Legal conclusion.
T Z
L J 9
É. 4. 18
i ! t
'-Jg, t9 Portion: Page5, line 20 beginningwith thewords"it would appeaÌ'
11. Objectionable
20 throughPage5, Iine 26 endingwith the words"fulfilling our charter."
22 602.) Legalconclusion.
23
24 12. Objectionable
Portion: Page6, line I beginningwith thewords'how seemintent"
27 602.)
28
-30-
DEFENDANTS' RELEVANCEOBJECTIONSAND EVIDENTIARY OBJECTIONS
12061\0002\91
6965.1
1 13. ObjectionablePortion: Page6, line 4 beginningwith the words "Firearms,especially
5
6 14. ObjectionablePortion: Page6, line 9 begiruringwith the words "Those aÍns were
- tools" throughPage6,1ine 12 endingwith the words "fall of the Berlin Wall."
10
11 15. ObjectionablePortion: Page6, line 12 the words "my 'right to keep andbear arms."'
z.= l2 Groundsfor Objection: Legal conclusion.
O =
E S
(.fIP
É . & T3
LLl3
t 9 ¿
z.= T4 G. OBJECTIONS TO DECLARATION OF'MIKE FOURNIER
O n i
L ô E
t - = 15 1. ObjectionablePortion: Entire Declaration.
< d
-== i T6 Grounds for Objection: Relevance,becausenone of the evidencecontainedin this
¡¡t 3
ô k
É , q
< õ t7 declarationhas any tendencyto make the existenceof any fact that is of consequenceto the
T Z
(-l p
É . E 18 determinationof the action more probable or less probable than it would be without the evidence.
i' 4l 9g
t9 (FRE 401,402.)
20
22 a corepoliticalright."
24
25 3. Objectionable
Portion: Page2,line 15beginningwith thewords"my possession
of
26 guns"throughPage2,line 16 endingwith thewords"opposedto my vie\ás."
27 Groundsfor Objection:Speculation.(FRE602.)
28
-31-
DEFENDANTS'RELEVANCEOBJECTIONSAND EVIDENTIARY OBJECTIONS
I 2061\0002\9
r 6965.I
1 4. ObjectionablePortion: Page2,line 26,the words "I am creatingallies in my political
¿ beliefs."
a
J Groundsfor Objection: Speculation.(FRE 602.)
22
25 Groundsfor Objection:Speculation.(FRE602.)
26
2
a
J I 1. ObjectionablePortion: Page4,line 15 beginningwith the words "with tongue
4 planted firmly in cheek" through Page4,line 18 ending with the words "under their ordinance."
9 ordinancein question" through Page4,line 23 ending with the words "Cal Penal Code $ 12050.-
11
z = T2 13. ObjectionablePortion: Page4, line 24begiwing with the words "the ordinance
O =
ú t P
e , ê I3 banning" through Page4,line 25 ending with the words "my right to engagein pure speech
r¿J I
c 9 ¿
2.2 t4 activities" (emphasisin original),
O
(/) r *i
15 Groundsfor Objection: Improperopinion testimony. (FRE 701(b).) Legal conclusion.
k F
-== i t6
v'¡ a
ôts
É ø
< È t7 14. ObjectionablePortion: Page4,line27 beginring with the words *We aredenied"
- =
L
- J-Þ
É. 4. 18 through Page 5, line 23 ending with the word "decl aration.,,
''
'' ltz
. /{.. t9 Groundsfor objection: Relevance.(FRE 401,402.) Legalconclusion.
20
2l 15. Obiectionable
Portion: Page5, line 24 beginningwith thewords"the ordinance
22 banningpossession"
throughPage5, line26 endingwith the words "tradingof firearms."
23 Groundsfor Objection: Improperopiniontestimony.(FRE 701(b).) Speculation.(FRE
24 602.) Lack of personalknowledge.(FRE 602.) Legalconclusion.
25
26 16. Objectionable
Portion:Page6, line 2 beginningwith thewords"Query:How is a
27 contract"throughPage6,line 4 endingwith thewords"of that contract?"
2 following" through Page 7,line 9 ending with the words "at a ' guÍrless gun show."'
8 declarationhas any tendencyto make the existenceof any fact that is of consequenceto the
9 determinationof the action more probable or lessprobable than it would be without the evidence.
10 (FRE401,402.)
11
z.= t2 2. Objectionable
Portion: ExhibitsA, B, C, D, E, andF.
o =
ø t P
É.¿ 13 hearsay.(FRE801(c)and802.) Relevance.(FRE
Groundsfor Objection:Inadmissible
LLr 3
r.9 i
z.= l4 401,402.)
()Yl
(/) *
t - v 15
< ù
-== i t6 3. ObjectionablePortion: Page3, line 11 begirrningwith the words "the ban on gun
vta
Õ t
É . q
< Zñ I7 shows" through Page3,line 12 endingwith the words "of Northern California."
T
L J 9
æ . 8 18 Grounds for Ob.iection: lmproper opinion testimony. (FRE 701(b).) Legal conclusion.
'.'-E
){¿ t9
20 4. ObjectionablePortion: Page3, line 23,the words "the 'right to keep andbear arms' as
22 Grounds for Objection: Improper opinion testimony. (FRE 701(b).) Legal conclusion.
23
27 testimony.(FRE701(b).)Legalconclusion.
28
-34-
DEFENDANTS'RELEVANCEOBJECTIONSAND EVIDENTIARY OBJECTIONS
r206l\0002\9
r 6965.1
1 Portion: Page3, line 28 beginningwith the words "our 'right to keep"'
6. Ob.iectionable
4
5 7. ObjçctionablePortion: Page4, lines 8-9, the words "possessionof guns at a gun show
8
9 8. Objectionable Portion: Page4, lines 24-25, the words "(currently bannedby an
20 Grounds for Objection: Inadmissible hearsay. (FRE 801(c) and 802.) Improper opinion
22
23 1i. Objectionable
Portion:Page5, line 13,thewords"committhe fraud."
25
26 12. Obìectionable
Portion: Page5, line 17beginningwith the words"The Alameda
28 hYPerbole''
-35-
DEFENDANTS'RELEVANCEOBJECTIONSAND EVIDENTIARY OBJECTIONS
I 2061\0002\9
I 6965.I
1 Groundsfor Obiection: Improperopinion testimony. (FRE 701(b).) Legal conclusion.
2 Argumentative.
5 County's charadefurther" through Page6,line 6 ending with the words "mocking the law."
8
9 14. ObiectionablePortion: Page6, line 7 beginningwith the words "For a practical
10 example" through Page 8, line 4 ending with the words "commencing the transaction."
20
2t 17. Objectionable
Portion: Page7,line 6 beginningwith thewords"Perhaps
with good
22 cauSe"throughPage7,line 13 endingwith the words"(andpossiblycriminal)firearm
23 transactions."
25
2 Code" through Page 8, line 1 ending with the words "any frteaÍm."
a
J Groundsfor Objection: Improperopinion testimony. (FRE 701(b).) Legal conclusion.
5 20. ObjectionablePortion: Page8, line 5 beginningwith the words "We have all the"
9 21. ObjectionablePortion: Page8, line 13 beginningwith the words "That can only be
10 accountedfor" through Page 8, line 14 ending with the words "to those shows."
-L ) -9
É . 4 18 23. ObjectionablePortion: Page8, line 27 beginringwith the words"But with the
' , , 4:sl
i'' &. I9 extinction"throughPage9,line2 endingwith thewords"from theseNevadaShows[sic]."
20 (FRE602.)
Groundsfor Objection:Speculation.
2T
24 in Nevada."
26 701(b).)Legalconclusion
27
12061\0002\91
6965.1
1 as criminalsor the causeof crime."
,)
2 Grounds for Obiection: Speculatioq. (FRE 602.) Lacks foundation.
a
J
4 26. ObjectionablePortion: Page 10, lines I7-L8, the sentence"Even Mary V. King had
5 to admit that the County has no evidenceof illegal activity at our shows."
8 27. ObiectionablePortion: Page 10, line 22beginningwith the words "the Second
9 Amendment protects" through Page 10, line28 ending with the words 'þermission of the
10 governmentof California."
11 Grounds for Objection: Improper opinion testimony. (FRE 701(b).) Legal conclusion.
z 7 T2 Argumentative.
o Ë
: E S
(/)P
e. &. 13
t¡¡ 3
( , d
z.= t4 28. ObjectionablePortion: Page l l, line 1, the words "gun shows are evenmore
O r/i
c¡t E
i<õ
15 important here and now than they are in those states."
-== i t6
<¿na ry:Speculation'(FRE602.)Improperopiniontestimony.(FRE
Õ k
É ø L7
< ñ 701(b).)
T Z
L
- J- P
rv a. 18
\' llt
"'.'-¿Ø, t9 29. ObiectionablePortion: Page11, line 5, the words "gun showswere bannedin county
20 after county in Northern Califomia;" Page 11, line 6, the words "the Alameda showswere
2T banned;" and Page 11, lines 8-9, the words "We have been banned from the fairgroundsin
24
25 30. Objectionable
Portion: Page11,lines10-11,thewords"this caseis a goodexample
26 of how prejudiceandignorancecandrivebadpublicpolicy."
2 admits" through Page 11, line 17 endingwith the words "county taxes."
a
J Groundsfor Objection: Lack of personalknowledge. (FRE 602.) Speculation.
4 Argumentative.
10
11 33. ObiectionablePortion: Page11, line 22beginning with the words "'We know that
z,= T2 they did this" through Page 11, line 23 endingwith the words "Alameda Fairgrounds."
O =
( , P
É. æ. 13 Grounds for Obiection: Relevance. (FRE 40I,402.) Improper opinion testimony. (FRE
|ll 3
1 9 ;
z.? 1 4 ì 701(b).) Lack of personalknowledge. (FRE 602.) Lacks foundation.
o
( , E
i.;,
t - v
i < q
15
-== i 16 34. ObjectionablePortion: Page 12,line 1 beginningwith the words "The Defendants'
tJ,, 5
Õ t
É
< ZÈ
q
17 pretextfor this law" through Page12,line4 endingwith the words .,(i.e.,gun sales).,,
T
L J 9
É. 4. 18 G¡ounds for Objection: Improper opinion testimony. (FRE 701(b).) Lack of personal
,',lg
' u3. 19 knowledge. (FRE 602.) Speculation.(FRE 602.) Legal conclusion.
20
22 showswere suing them" through Pagel2,line 13 endingwith the words'þrimary targetof the
23 ordinance.
24 Grounds for Objection: Improper opinion testimony. (FRE 701(b).) Lack of personal
26
27 36. ObjectionablePortion:
Page12,linel4beginningwiththewords"WiththeCounty
28 attemptingto maintainthe fiction" throughPagel2,line 18 endingwith the words"gun shows
-39-
DEFENDANTS' RELEVANCEOBJECTIONSAND EVIDENTIARY OBJECTIONS
12061\0002\9
16965.1
1 on county property."
5 DATED: September
19.2006 zuCHARD E. V/INNIE
COUNTY COLTNSEL
6 COTINTYOF ALAMEDA
7 RICHARDS,WATSON& GERSHON
A ProfessionalCorporation
8 T. PETERPIERCE
SAYRE V/EAVER
9
10
11
T ||^P**
T. PETERPIERCE
Attorneysfor Defendants
z.= t2 MARY V. KING. ET AL.
O =
- s
LA P
e , ¿ 13
r¡J 3
c 9 ¿
2 . 2
l4
C)Yi
L ô K
È
: < =õ 15
-== i T6
un5
ô t
É.ø
< Zò T7
T
L J 9
æ . < 18
i'. p
_:þ. T9
20
21
22
^t
¿)
24
25
26
27
28
-40-
DEFENDANTS'RELEVANCEOBJECTIONSAND EVIDENTIARY OBJECTIONS
1206l\0002\916965.
I
1 PROOF OF SERVICE
2 I, Irina Berman,declare:
a
J I xn aresidentof the Stateof Califomiaandoverthe ageof eighteenyears,
' and
not aparty to the within action;my businessaddressis Richards,'Watson& Gãrshon,++
4 Montg_omery Street,.S_uite3800,
SanFrancisco, Califomiag4l04-4811.On Septemúer19,
2006,I servedthe within documents:
5
DEFENDANTS' RELEVANCE OBJECTIONSTO UNDISPUTEDF'ACTS;
6 Al[D EVIDENTIARY OBJECTIONS TO AND MOTION TO STRIKE: (1)
PLAINTIFFS' EXPERT REPORT; AND (2) DECLARATIONS OF
DON-ALD KILME& DARYL DAVIS, DUANE DARR" JESSB. G[IY,
VIRGIL McVICKER, MIKE FOURIIIER, AND RUSSELL AND SALLIE
8 NORDYKE
9
I by placingthe dqc¡me$g listedabovein a sealedFederalExpressenvelopeand
10 affixing a pre-paidair bill, andcausingthe envelopeto be deliveredto a Feãeral
Expressageî! fo¡ oye_rmght delivery ór depositelin a box or otherfacility
11 r-egularlymaintainedby FederalExpress,iñ an envelopeor packagedesigirated by
-
the expressservicecarrier,with deliveryfeespaid or providedfor, addreËsed to
12 the person(s)at the address(es) setforth below.
13
t4 DonaldE.J.Kilmer, Esq.
Law Officesof DonaldKilmer
15 1645V/illow Street,Suite150
SanJose,CA95125
'ul
t t l aboveis true and
I declareunderpenaltyof pe{ury underthe laws of the Stateof Californiathat the
correct.
:il
,rl
kinaBerman
:'^l
-tl
"ll
,ull
:"ll
12061